Who is your favorite "bringer of science to the masses?"

[SS-18 ICBM]

That's The Daily Show's fault, at least for most Americans.

So he's not Sagan 2.0 then?

 

[Kyriakos]

Dawkins isn't nearly as bad as some would like you to believe. As opposed to a certain book I know which calls anyone that doesn't believe it's stories fools.

He can be an arse, no question about it.

But I have seen him keep his cool and staying polite in interviews where I would have lashed out. If you're going to criticize him for his behaviour, you also have to give him credit when it's due.

I don't doubt this can be the case. I am not out to criticize him out of any sense that he is an enemy of some sort. In so many words in my previous post here i outlined that i think it is quite melancholic that he will be linked to a form of 'kneejerk' atheism, and this will also cause less people to read his work (not just christians, but also others opposed to atheism, and i have to suppose that many thinkers are agnostic).

It is part of a culture of celebrities and icons, which should have never been around. In the end we are all human, and it would have been far better if we actually tried to communicate to the degree we can, and work for the mutual benefit of our world. But polemics are the norm now.

 

[Cheezy the Wiz]

So he's not Sagan 2.0 then?

He will be when the new season of Cosmos begins in a few months!

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

I don't doubt this can be the case. I am not out to criticize him out of any sense that he is an enemy of some sort.

Just to clarify, the "you" in my post was meant to be a universal you. Not saying you (specific you) were guilty of this sentiment.

 

[Farm Boy]

Dawkins isn't nearly as bad as some would like you to believe. As opposed to a certain book I know which calls anyone that doesn't believe it's stories fools.

He can be an arse, no question about it.

But I have seen him keep his cool and staying polite in interviews where I would have lashed out. If you're going to criticize him for his behaviour, you also have to give him credit when it's due.

I suppose he ranks the same sort of credit that massively homophobic protestants usually rate from me. Sure, they might be laudable in the majority of their actions, if I'm constantly forced to be exposed to them, I might even fess up to those merits. But, like Dawkins, I'm far more likely to look at them as yet. one. more. massive. prick. and gladly tune them out for the rest of my life. Since, you know, he's a massive prick.

 

[SS-18 ICBM]

He will be when the new season of Cosmos begins in a few months!

I wonder what the message this time is. More environmentalist as opposed to peacemaking?

 

[timtofly]

Dawkins isn't nearly as bad as some would like you to believe. As opposed to a certain book I know which calls anyone that doesn't believe it's stories fools.

He can be an arse, no question about it.

But I have seen him keep his cool and staying polite in interviews where I would have lashed out. If you're going to criticize him for his behaviour, you also have to give him credit when it's due.

I thought it just said that a fool is one who makes claims that cannot be proven? That seems to happen around here as well, seeing how some posters use the to point out when a poster makes a claim that cannot be proven. It could be a matter of opinion, and not the formulation of a belief system.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

I suppose he ranks the same sort of credit that massively homophobic protestants usually rate from me. Sure, they might be laudable in the majority of their actions, if I'm constantly forced to be exposed to them, I might even fess up to those merits. But, like Dawkins, I'm far more likely to look at them as yet. one. more. massive. prick. and gladly tune them out for the rest of my life. Since, you know, he's a massive prick.

Behind the facade of a docile looking avatar, you're, like, intense man.

I thought it just said that a fool is one who makes claims that cannot be proven?

Nope. The opposite really.

The fool says in his heart,
“There is no God.”
They are corrupt, their deeds are vile;
there is no one who does good.

Footnotes:
a 1 The Hebrew words rendered fool in Psalms denote one who is morally deficient.

It seems a morally deficient fool is one who does not accept claims that cannot and wil not be proven.

That seems to happen around here as well, seeing how some posters use the to point out when a poster makes a claim that cannot be proven. It could be a matter of opinion, and not the formulation of a belief system.

Are you making an effort, or does it come naturally?

 

[Farm Boy]

Behind the facade of a docile looking avatar, you're, like, intense man.

Aw shucks. I aint even mad Zigster. But perhaps I tend to internalize that which I'm exposed to. I have the great and massive luxury of simply culling from my life most of the inputs that I find abrasive and likely to make me a worse man for internalizing. He's simply one of them?

Personal take and explanation time I suppose: Let's just say I wasn't exactly popular growing up. Small towns equal small class sizes. If it's decided by your peers that you're weird in the 3rd grade, you get to keep the same 40 classmates for the next decade, through puberty and coming of age. Happiness, for me, came about largely as a function of learning that I don't have to care what everybody thinks. I can simply cease to value people whose voices and inputs are not valuable.

 

[ParkCungHee]

Behind the facade of a docile looking avatar, you're, like, intense man.
Nope. The opposite really.

The fool says in his heart,
“There is no God.”
They are corrupt, their deeds are vile;
there is no one who does good.

Footnotes:
a 1 The Hebrew words rendered fool in Psalms denote one who is morally deficient.

It seems a morally deficient fool is one who does not accept claims that cannot and wil not be proven.

You should really keep reading that Psalm.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

It doesn't do it's advertising very well with regard to the trailer.

But will do.

Edit: good stuff indeed. Very colourful.

 

[ParkCungHee]

"The Lord looks down from heaven upon the children of men,
to see if there are any that act wisely,
that seek after God.

They have all gone astray, they are all alike corrupt;
there is none that does good,
no, not one."

tl;dr No one is wise, everyone is foolish and godless.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

Except those that seek God right?

 

[ParkCungHee]

Well yes, but the poem also says no one does that.

Psalms is all about the angst.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

I don't know about that.

It reads to me as the "they" is those who say there is no God. But I'll include your take into my interpretation.

 

[timtofly]

Except those that seek God right?

The Calvinist side of humanity would say no, and then try to explain that only the chosen know the answer.

However they got a few points wrong. Election is not guaranteed, justification is not limited, and grace is not irresistible. All of those points take away free will. You asked if there is effort put into my thoughts or does it come naturally? If I had my way, it would be effort and it would not come naturally. If there is obedience involved, then it is effortless and "natural".

Romans 10:14-15:

But how can they call on someone if they haven’t trusted in him? And how can they trust in someone if they haven’t heard about him? And how can they hear about someone if no one is proclaiming him? And how can people proclaim him unless God sends them?

The chosen are the one's who obey the call, not the one's who seek God. If God does not exist, then no one has ever been sent to tell humans that he does exist.

I may be wrong, but there is freedom to choose at each point listed. One can choose to trust. One can choose to listen when they hear. One can chose to proclaim or not. Even God has a choice who he sends. That may not be the most efficient as it seems to be the trickle down effect. But if the Jews had the chance to be the model God on earth, they either did a miserable job, even though the blessings would have outweighed any obstacle, or it never happened, and humans are still on their own which seems to be the way humans have always acted in their role as free moral agents. Even today humans could live in utopia, if all the greedy one's allowed it.

The psalmist would have made a great pre-Calvinist, but Calvinist still do not "get it" even after Christ. But it would be the point of despair, not hope. I still stick to the point that fools make claims that cannot be proven one way or the other. I may not be able to prove to you my point and that does seem foolish, and it does take effort to not look foolish.

 

[classical_hero]

That Psalm just shows how depraved we really are.

 

[El_Machinae]

It calls us depraved, it doesn't show that we're depraved. To be fair

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

I'm not depraved. Just a little naughty.

 

[Traitorfish]

That Psalm just shows how depraved we really are.

Jews do not subscribe to a doctrine of depravity, so that's questionable.