28 sept 2011
Bad Arguments-The Courtier's Reply
The "Courtier's Reply" is the argument that a high degree of theological sophistication is required to contest religious belief. Basically, theologians spin self-contradictory and often meaningless arguments that are ignored by the average religious believer. In fact, theology school is often the first step toward atheism, since really, really sophisticated theology is all but indistinguishable from atheism, making no real claims about anything.
Suscribirse a:
Enviar comentarios (Atom)
4 comentarios:
This sent me hunting for earlier discussions of Eagleton on this blog, and indeed there've been several. I must confess I was surprised to read the author of Literary Theory arguing in this vein, but in retrospect I shouldn't have been.
The religions are metaphors for the unknowable. The unknowable is awesomely vast. The belief that there is no god is a belief based on no more evidence than the belief that there is [/are] god[s].
For you, Jonathan, does atheism mean "no belief in god," or, "belief that there is no god." If the latter, I'd call your atheism a faith.
I have disorganized religion -- metaphors for the unknowable, meaningful and powerful to me -- but no faith.
In general, I would observe that atheists tend to value reason and intelligence more highly than I do. I love reason and intelligence as much as the next guy, but I no more trust them than I do God.
I enjoyed reading all my posts on Eagleton. I didn't know there were so many of them. John's comment is answered in a separate post.
Thanks for the link to the Courtier's Reply, which is great fun.
Publicar un comentario