Dawkins' Atheist Bus
- Thread starter IdleRich
- Start date
nomadthethird
more issues than Time mag
Read this if you want to see what becomes of a country that allows the evangelical right to take control of political discourse:
http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1830590,00.html
The fact that this article even has to exist is bothersome enough...
http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1830590,00.html
The fact that this article even has to exist is bothersome enough...
It is very odd that Dawkins (not just in this ad campaign, but also in his recent TV series <i>The Genius of Darwin</i> and before that with his book <i>The God Delusion</i>) should have such an obsessive emotional investment in 'exposing' his supposed theological enemies when he long ago amply demonstrated - and demolished - their erroneous arguments by the more rational means of evolutionary theory. The problem for Dawkins of course is that he has himself seemingly unknowingly sucumbed to the 'evolution as teleology' fallacy, of believing evolution as having some positive <i>purpose</i>, which couldn't be further from Darwin's fundamental findings, so presenting it as a more 'intelligent' and 'rational' alternative to religion.
The relation of religion and politics shouldn't be underestimated either: in the US since Carter's Democratic Presidency in the late 1970s, when he was largely elected because of his 'born again' rhetoric, every US presidential candidate who has ignored religion did so at his peril. Every subsequent president who has milked the 'religion factor' (whether disingenuously and cynically - like Reagan, Clinton, Bush II - or otherwise) has hugely benefited, which is why Obama - with his preaching of 'Redemption' - will have a landslide victory next month (McCain destroyed his chances by initially campaigning on an anti-religion ticket, then in a desperation-induced panic roped in the seriously consumerist-crazed Palin as a band-aid quick fix solution, but which fizzled away as quickly as it had been introduced). And in Britain everyone knew even before his election in 1997 that Tony Blair was a born-again looney, which was just as much the reason he won power as for any secular socio-economic strategies (I'm surprised the Tories via Cameron haven't yet copped on to this).
Coincidentally, two recent docs on these topics were broadcast on British TV, one on the US experience, the other on the British one.
[1] On BBC2 (aired earlier this evening): The American History, A Future
<i>While the 2008 presidential campaign is in full swing, Simon Schama travels through America to dig deep into the conflicts of its history to understand what is at stake right now.
Simon explores the ways in which faith has shaped American political life. His starting point is a remarkable fact about the coming election: for the first time in a generation it is the Democrats who claim to be the party of God. It is Barak Obama, not John McCain, who has been talking about his faith. In Britain we have always thought of American religion as a largely conservative force, yet Simon shows how throughout American history it has played a crucial role in the fight for freedom.
Faith helped create America - it was the search for religious freedom that led thousands to make the dangerous journey to the colonies in the 1600s. After independence was won, that religious freedom was enshrined in the constitution; America was the first country in the world to do so. Simon also looks at the remarkable role the black church has played, first in the liberation of the slaves in the 1800s, and again in the civil rights movement of the 1960s; neither would have happened without its religious activists. It is this very church that has been the inspiration for Barak Obama, who traces the roots of his political inspiration to his faith.</i>
[2] Channel 4's Dispatches doc on Christian Fundamentalism in the UK (from some months ago).
The relation of religion and politics shouldn't be underestimated either: in the US since Carter's Democratic Presidency in the late 1970s, when he was largely elected because of his 'born again' rhetoric, every US presidential candidate who has ignored religion did so at his peril. Every subsequent president who has milked the 'religion factor' (whether disingenuously and cynically - like Reagan, Clinton, Bush II - or otherwise) has hugely benefited, which is why Obama - with his preaching of 'Redemption' - will have a landslide victory next month (McCain destroyed his chances by initially campaigning on an anti-religion ticket, then in a desperation-induced panic roped in the seriously consumerist-crazed Palin as a band-aid quick fix solution, but which fizzled away as quickly as it had been introduced). And in Britain everyone knew even before his election in 1997 that Tony Blair was a born-again looney, which was just as much the reason he won power as for any secular socio-economic strategies (I'm surprised the Tories via Cameron haven't yet copped on to this).
Coincidentally, two recent docs on these topics were broadcast on British TV, one on the US experience, the other on the British one.
[1] On BBC2 (aired earlier this evening): The American History, A Future
<i>While the 2008 presidential campaign is in full swing, Simon Schama travels through America to dig deep into the conflicts of its history to understand what is at stake right now.
Simon explores the ways in which faith has shaped American political life. His starting point is a remarkable fact about the coming election: for the first time in a generation it is the Democrats who claim to be the party of God. It is Barak Obama, not John McCain, who has been talking about his faith. In Britain we have always thought of American religion as a largely conservative force, yet Simon shows how throughout American history it has played a crucial role in the fight for freedom.
Faith helped create America - it was the search for religious freedom that led thousands to make the dangerous journey to the colonies in the 1600s. After independence was won, that religious freedom was enshrined in the constitution; America was the first country in the world to do so. Simon also looks at the remarkable role the black church has played, first in the liberation of the slaves in the 1800s, and again in the civil rights movement of the 1960s; neither would have happened without its religious activists. It is this very church that has been the inspiration for Barak Obama, who traces the roots of his political inspiration to his faith.</i>
[2] Channel 4's Dispatches doc on Christian Fundamentalism in the UK (from some months ago).
crackerjack
Well-known member
Rubbish. Blair's speeches always had a certain Messianic fervour about them which lent them rhetorical power. But he was elected in spite of his Christianity, not because of it. Which is why his spin doctor gave the simple message: "we don't do God."
You really do admire your confidence in spin burgers.
Mr. Tea
Let's Talk About Ceps
I think Crackerjack's right (and it's a bit childish to make out that he's been brainwashed by eeevil spin-Doktors for having an opinion different from yours (waffle's), tbh) that Blair's Christianity was very much downplayed, by him and his 'team', at least to start with. Admittedly it did seem to come more to the fore as his term went on, perhaps at least in part due to Bush's election and/or (given Blair's Catholicism) a new Pope. Or maybe it's just that (what with the ID debate in the States, Islamic unrest in this country/Islamophobia, faith schools, stem cells, who knows....) it was given more media attention later on.
Last edited:
He was deferring to their authority, T.
But this is all peripheral to the original point being made: Dawkins is not an 'atheist' (at least not in any serious or convincing way). On the contrary, he believes evolution has a purpose (rather than being chaotic and random), is an appropriate and more civilized substitute for divine beliefs.
But this is all peripheral to the original point being made: Dawkins is not an 'atheist' (at least not in any serious or convincing way). On the contrary, he believes evolution has a purpose (rather than being chaotic and random), is an appropriate and more civilized substitute for divine beliefs.
The full text of the ads I've seen reads: "<i>There's probably no God. Now Stop Worrying. And Enjoy Your Life.</i>"
Apart from the consumerist banality of borrowing from a 1970s beer ad (Carlsberg), reducing/replacing long-standing metaphysical and theological concerns to an infantilist 'lifestyle choice', the ad is shamelessly ideological, substituting a humanistic theism for a divine one: slavishly obey the superegoic injunction of contemporary neoliberal capitalism - "NO MATTER WHAT, ENJOY YOURSELF!!! It is your duty to obey this command!"
Can we expect a follow-up campaign? Might I suggest "<i>There's probably no Market God, no Financial System, no Jobs, no Housing, no Future. Now Stop Worrying. And Enjoy Your Life.</i>"
Apart from the consumerist banality of borrowing from a 1970s beer ad (Carlsberg), reducing/replacing long-standing metaphysical and theological concerns to an infantilist 'lifestyle choice', the ad is shamelessly ideological, substituting a humanistic theism for a divine one: slavishly obey the superegoic injunction of contemporary neoliberal capitalism - "NO MATTER WHAT, ENJOY YOURSELF!!! It is your duty to obey this command!"
Can we expect a follow-up campaign? Might I suggest "<i>There's probably no Market God, no Financial System, no Jobs, no Housing, no Future. Now Stop Worrying. And Enjoy Your Life.</i>"
Mr. Tea
Let's Talk About Ceps
Meaning it privileges beings that undoubtedly exist and have feelings and whatnot over one that almost certainly doesn't exist, and would seem to have no direct bearing on the material world even if it did? Oh dear, how hatefully irrational.
So we'd all be a lot happier if we stopped trying to enjoy ourselves? Hold on, I've just got to cancel that party I was thinking about next weekend, apparently it'd be much more beneficial to my immortal soul to spend the time in pious contemplation of How Utterly Fucking Awful Everything Is...
Last edited:
You're rehashing Dawkin's unreconstructed, reactionary empiricism and 'self-evident' ontological certainties. We were talking about <i>beliefs</i> (humanistic vs divine theistic fetishes), not brute physical realities. The belief that humans are at the libidinal centre of the universe and that it is there primarily if not exclusively for their narcissistic 'enjoyment' is equally irrational to the belief that some (personal, supernatural) God has a plan for them. It paradoxically appears you don't actually believe in 'beliefs' because they're not physical (there is no metaphysics in your world), can't be detected with appropriate measurement devices? That they have no effects on the material world, whether true or false? That beliefs - and ideas and thoughts - therefore don't exist? Einstein's E=mc*2 equation does not 'exist' because you failed to detect it's presence in the physical world, couldn't find it hidden under some rock?
Has there been some direct and unambiguous correlation established between the two, or is this yet another unexamined assumption of your's about the world? Why, then, are so many pleasure freaks so miserable? The problem with your maternal consumer Law is that unhappyness can indeed coincide with what is otherwise very pleasurable (as any addict might inform you).
On the other side of the evangelical debate, this one seems to have shot itself in the foot
http://uk.alpha.org/
http://uk.alpha.org/
slim jenkins
El Hombre Invisible
Sounds good to me. An ad featuring someone smoking would appear very radical nowadays....if it were allowed to appear.
Mr. Tea
Let's Talk About Ceps
Eh? Of course I "believe in beliefs", what are you talking about? It's religious belief, which lots of people have, that's under discussion here. I don't know why you had to muddy the waters with a load of confused guff about libidinal centres and theistic fetishes...I happen to believe that people are important, that they are important to people. Do you deny that? Is it a bit too square, a bit modernist, a touch unreconstructed-Enlightenment-values for your sophisticated po-mo tastes? Would we be better off convinced of our own miserable insignificance? Have you been reading just a teensy bit too much Lovecraft lately?
So what are you saying - that we'd all be better off psychically regulated under religions that equate pleasure with sin? To be honest I feel sad for you that when someone mentions 'happiness' all you can think of is either mindless consumerism or self-destructive drug abuse. Does Dawkins' bus say "Buy stuff and shoot up to make yourself happy"? Of course it doesn't; you're constructing a straw man.
To be honest, it's not often I see someone on here with a username as appropriate as yours...
Last edited:
crackerjack
Well-known member
Only in as much as you suggested Blair's piety was a major factor in his popularity. In this respect, the words of the bloke in charge of shaping his image and delivering his political 'message' are relevant. It's not deferment, it's paying attention.
Can you imagine Scott McClellan saying "we don't do God"?
bassnation
the abyss
its all around you mate. the government signalled the other week they are channelling more cash into faith schools. the god lobby, whether that is in the form of sikhs, muslims, christians, whatever, have got plays shut down, leant on publishers so that books are not released - in massively high profile media stories. in northern ireland the government watered down the abortion reforms to please bigots of all stripes in an obscene horse trading arrangement for getting other, unrelated bills passed. they are out of their box and they are getting bolder each time. do you actually read the papers?
Last edited:
bassnation
the abyss
what on earth is wrong with enjoying your life? i suppose this falls foul of marx or something does it?
bassnation
the abyss
on the money.
bassnation
the abyss
speak for yourself son. i have no idea what your life is like, but i'm actually pretty well adjusted, love my family and friends, am an unreconstructed hedonist, don't believe in supernatural beings - and while life is not, and will never be perfect, i'm happy. gasp - how could that be????
crackerjack
Well-known member
bassnation
the abyss
well, yeah, i guess i should qualify my earlier statement by saying theres lots of things i'm unhappy about in the world, but i don't feel guilty about the good times that life throws at you from time to time. don't want to be glib or smug.