|Just wouldn't happen
||[Mar. 12th, 2010|04:33 pm]
Apparently Richard Dawkins had some interview on Australian TV. There was one part that was just too good for me to ignore:|
Is there a logical pathway that leads from religious faith to doing bad things? Sure as hell there is. Is there a logical pathway that leads from atheism to doing bad things? No, you cannot make a logical pathway that way. Nobody would ever say, “Because I’m an atheist I’m going to kill somebody.” You could very well say, “Because I am a Christian I’m going to go and kills Muslims.” “Because I’m a Muslim I’m going to go to kill Christians.” This is something that’s happened throughout history. Nobody has ever said, “Because I’m an atheist, I’m going to go and kill somebody.”I suppose there's truth to this. Historically, atheists seem to prefer the more plural "Because I'm an atheist, I'm going to kill millions of people."
Also, to further advance Dawkins' point, I think I should add that an atheist would never say "Because I'm an atheist I'm going to try to force private religious schools to teach atheism"
For his part, Dawkins has said he would remove all financial support from Christian, Jewish, and Muslim schools and make them teach atheism;And they'd certainly never say "Because I'm an atheist, I'm going to try to disbar chaplains from comforting the sick".
prohibit hospital chaplains from solacing the ill;And surely they wouldn't think that just because they were atheists, it followed that there ought to be some big militant campaign to combat the beliefs of everyone who disagreed with them (especially since that would be disturbingly violent-sounding, and might detract from the already-established fact that an atheist would never kill someone because they were an atheist).
and undertake other measures to combat the "infantile regression" of religious beliefAnd they certainly wouldn't, under any conditions, say "Because I'm an atheist, I think that the state should hold religious families under suspicion and prevent parents from teaching their own children".
It's probably too strong to say the state should have the right to take children away from their parents," Dawkins told an interviewer. "But I think we have got to look very carefully at the rights of parents-and whether they should have the right to indoctrinate their children."And, most of all, an atheist would never ever EVER say that, because he's an atheist, he advocates some sort of insane totalitarian scheme in which some designated group of utilitarian philosophers dictates to us what our morality shall be and who shall live and die.
According to Dawkins, morality is "biologically determined," and all moral questions, from the prohibition of incest to the allocation of kidney machines, should be decided by "utilitarian moral philosophers" trained to assess the "balance of suffering and happiness" such questions address. "This is a very different way of doing morality than the absolutist way, which supposes some things are absolutely wrong," Dawkins has argued.See? None of those things follow from atheism in a strictly logical manner, and therefore an atheist would never, ever say them EVER!