Popular Posts

Friday, 31 August 2012

R Joseph Hoffmann Frenemy Of Modern Secular Humanism

R Joseph Hoffmann Frenemy Of Modern Secular Humanism
R. Joseph Hoffmann, dutiful scholar, historical head of the Contract for the Technological Investigation of Mysticism, and historical subordinate editor of the journal Free Inquest is a good at all humanist in diverse ways.

He's vulnerable loads about the realities of religion, and informed loads about the history of at all humanism, that Gnu Atheists can't deny upper limit of his claims against their doubter evangelism and the concepts on which it is built.

But, in a blog post flight of the imagination this, "Self-satisfaction and Surplus," he earns the place above: "frenemy of modern at all humanism." I'm not a fan of neologisims that are Internet or amusement derived, but I make an exclusion in this shell.

I've rumored in that Hoffmann's give rise to of humanism is an Enlightenment-era humanism, one from the era one time scientists were tranquil "natural philosophers." I don't know if Free Inquest founder Paul Kurtz was moderately as extreme that way as Hoffmann is, but Hoffmann is in truth that way.

For mold, in a blog post of about a month or two ago, which I blogged about weak spot concerning to, desolately, he went specially criticizing extravagant claims some neuroscientists make for what tools flight of the imagination fMRIs of today sift through about brainpower machinist to, at lowest as I saw it, criticizing the majestic view of effrontery to make too extreme carefully worked-out chart of what the affection is.

The "frenemy" part, and totally unplanned concerns, starts here:"Let me lodge with that closing fabricate for a minute-the belief that only science can tenacity all of our questions."In the role of it's true that diverse Gnus cartel that, not all do. Added to the fabricate of my mature comment, successors to fMRIs, CT scans, single-emission positron scans, etc., may just reveal extreme arrogant of the brain's working, on a slighter fundamental, and in something more rapidly to "real time."

After that comes a "huh" observe flight of the imagination this:"Can the magical collapsing of all empirical dutiful traditions within the word "religion" (tone with to the what mystical collapsing of all carefully worked-out examination within the word "science") be precisely on the basis of a at an earlier time assumption-because that's what it is-that gods don't exist?"I fail with the view defeat the opening partly of the quote. Enlightened Episcopaleanism is secret message flight of the imagination the Place of worship of Christ, for mold. But, the part in departure from the subject is a head-scratcher, at the lowest.Unique of all, one time did "collapsing" become "mystical" in this instance? Further, is Hoffmann confounding "science" with "scientism"? Frame improbable "mystical" and I'd fail with his parenthetical look at IF that is the shell. But, IF that is the shell, after that Hoffmann's friendly in either amateurish verbiage or goalpost changeable.

And there's arrogant that to come, if you'll aspect below the crinkle.After that, there's this:"(D)oes "fatality items" mean a persuaded tolerant of theology? Or does it mean (I hallucinate is regularly does in new doubter harangues) apologetics-which is unnamed in diverse dutiful traditions?"Fix, it IS recognized improbable of Christianity. Islam predictably has an abysmal tradition, albeit less than Christianity. Judaism does to a rank, moreover. Polytheistic traditions are less predictable to do so, perhaps. But, even they do to a rank. And, as their face-to-face come into contact with with Western empiricism grows, their apologetics mettle, too.

Hoffmann knows his Greek, and knows that an "apologia" is simply a "folder." Whether it's a arrogant "sparkling" folder, as on sale snooty all in American Christianity, and comparatively in the rest of the Anglo-Saxon world, or a arrogant immobile folder flight of the imagination Buddhism's moving target about what constitutes the "life command" that is reincarnated, well, that's tranquil apologetics.

But, let's get to the furthermore discrimination quote:"Certainly, I am leaving to say that the best theologians-those who tranquil innocently hallucinate they occupy a "fatality items"-are deliberate of the self-sufficiency of science out of theology in expressions of explaining everything from the construction to material start and rank. And they occupy seen it this way for a yearning time."Drivel.

I hallucinate someone would continue the Dalai Lama a theologian in a rich conscientiousness, stretch allowing for him not believing in a individual spirit, a individual theos (unless he believes in the old, old Tibetan pantheon of gods and demons).

All right, the Dalai Lama, so it is said a resilient ground-mover in reconciling science and religion, is on narration as saying arrogant than just the once if science presents past performance it fervently claims really shows the void of either luck or revival, science goes out the way in.

In the Christian world, I've no doubt the Archbishop of Canterbury, for mold, tranquil believes in some tint of extraneous, metaphysical "human being" and, in the shell of items flight of the imagination teratomas, brain-conjoined Siamese twins, etc., rejects inferences from science about the void of souls, i.e., does the "bit of material" teratoma occupy a "bit of human being" stodgy the full material "soldiers"?

After that comes this fun one, anyplace Hoffmann shows not extreme arrogant sponsor forecast than P.Z. Myers:"Atheists, as overfriendly, weren't moderately closing what to do (about the Iraq War) while stretch diverse out of favor George W. Plant they out of favor Islam arrogant and so-like Christopher Hitchens-they backed the wars. They were, in a period, paralyzed and with the sole purpose unnoticeable."Tosh, or bull, or, per an snooty observe of informer, amateurish.

Is he saying all atheists weren't closing what to do, not just Gnus? He's very discrimination bestow, as I can thoroughly bear out. And, exclamation of P.Z., I don't hallucinate he ever supported the war. I don't know about a Dan Dennett, a Vic Stenger or other leading Gnus, other than to say upper limit of them weren't focused on this, perhaps.

In the last part, Hoffmann makes a simply unsubstantiated remonstrate that a scholar of religion, or at lowest of the sociology of religion, shouldn't have:"Self-satisfaction is what killed European Christianity. The fruits and comforts of the business rejuvenation killed it. Not education and science; not curiosity; not Darwin's deficient view. Decent the creeping rot of not really altruistic a damn about what on earth."Drivel. Western Europe had attractive high church work out tariff, relatively high "religiosity," etc., until Concept War II. Nazism, the Holocaust, and the talent that in diverse countries, particularly Catholic ones, dutiful leaders were at lowest fairly deferential in Nazism's climb, is what killed Christianity in Europe as extreme as what on earth.

As for his paean to Stephen Jay Gould and his "nonoverlapping magisterial," loads of non-Gnu Atheists find it starved. It's really just a science-based riff on the old "god of the gaps," retitled as "religion of the gaps." Over, for Hoffmann to not see that as distinctive what it is leads me to demand an eyebrow.

And why, between this and his outside Enlightenment-era gravitas, he is strictly a frenemy of Modern at all humanism. And, why I optimism that some of my online friends see that stretch he can be a effective A-list ally, he's not straight to a improbable one.

UPDATE: On his new blog post, he spells "favoUrite" the British way, too. For a original American to do this is a bit of arrogance, in my book.

And, per this support, he appears to split his punches on the supply of the historicity of Jesus AND the worthiness of study of whether he existed and who he was, if he did.Here is no god and I am his psychic.

Credit: ceremonial-magic.blogspot.com