Return to main page (Spam from God)
I like this comparison very much!
We could break out in a chorus of LOL! Atheism with some wit about it makes its point much more convincingly than the likes of Chris Hitchens and Richard Dawkins.
Brilliant. I am going to spend a bit of time seeing if I can get some blogging atheists to see this post. Nicely done.
concerning "the likes of Chris Hitchens and Richards Dawkins": I think their voices may have ironically allow those with more measure to find ears. And I don't think anyone could accuse Dawkins and certainly not Hitchens of lacking in wit. Many outspoken, bold, caustive atheists have made a safer playground for nontheists & non-eternalists to exercise their less exaggerated and more constrained voices.
[Hope I am reading your right]
@Sabio Thank you very much!
I'll have quite a lot more to say about atheism in this book. It will be from an unusual perspective, though. I take atheism for granted, and won't be making any arguments in favor of it. (I am in favor of it, but lots of other people are doing good work on that, including of course yourself.)
Rather, I look at atheism as a special case of the rejection of eternalism. There are non-theistic eternalisms, which are dangerous and wrong in some of the same ways as theistic religions, and in some other ways as well. I hope to make more people aware of these dangers. Atheists are, naturally, particularly likely to be receptive.
This page ("Spam from God") is fun, I hope, and perhaps a little offensive in a helpful way. I hope some atheists will enjoy it. It's not meant as an argument for atheism, though. I wrote it actually as a preface to the next page ("Wavering nihilism: emotional dynamics").
These emotional dynamics are ones that atheists can fall into. Atheism is not necessarily nihilist, but unless you have a clear understanding of the third alternative to eternalism and nihilism, the nihilist errors are ones atheists are more likely to make.
I am afraid we will probably agree -- how boring. :-)
Eternalism may look like a scam. Nihilism too. But maybe we are eternal. That may be wishfull thinking, but why can't something exist somehow just because we wish it to be that same way, or just because it's confortable for us? Maybe it's a good coincidence, i'm sure there are other's that are not that good. The fact that there is a better option, that causes less suffering doesn't mean that the first ones are fake, or inexistent. Does it? And why should we opt for less suffering?
More information about text formats
This page is in the section Nihilism: the denial of meaning, which is in Meaning and meaninglessness, which is in Doing meaning better.
☞ The next page in this section is The emotional dynamics of nihilism.
☜ The previous page is 190-proof vs. lite nihilism.
This page’s topics are Atheism and Eternalism.
General explanation: Meaningness is a hypertext book (in progress), plus a “metablog” that comments on it. The book begins with an appetizer. Alternatively, you might like to look at its table of contents, or some other starting points. Classification of pages by topics supplements the book and metablog structures. Terms with dotted underlining (example: meaningness) show a definition if you click on them. Pages marked with ⚒ are still under construction. Copyright ©2010–2017 David Chapman.
More email options & info
Follow me on Twitter