For Pat Condell fans

[Moochie]

For those who have enjoyed and continue to enjoy Mr. Condell's videos on YouTube, the Richard Dawkins site has launched a DVD of 35 of Mr. Condell's videos, with a special introduction by Mr. Condell.

http://richarddawkins.net/store/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=3&products_id=58

If you are a fan, you might like to visit Mr. Condell's site:

http://patcondell.net/

if you haven't already. I love his opening greeting:


"Hi, I'm Pat Condell.
I don't respect your beliefs
and I don't care if you're offended.

Cheers."

That'd be a good line to give the Mormons when next they invade your domicile. :)


M.

[dglas]

Doh! Condell had to defend spiritualism. Now I have to part company with him...and I was enjoying Condell's stuff so much, too. :(

[articulett]

He defended spiritualism? What kind? When?

[articulett]

duplicate

[Silentknight]

I'm guessing dglas was referring to Pat Condell's latest video.

EPG3-1gogXU

There are some atheists who dislike using the word "spirituality" because of its frequent association with religiosity, or rather, because of the frequency with which religion has tried to claim a monopoly on it. I actually agree with the distinction Condell draws here, which is the same thing Sam Harris has often said, although I'm aware that this puts me at odds with a number of atheists on JREF. I weighed in with my views on the matter in the previous threads on spirituality vs. atheism.

[dglas]

He defended spiritualism? What kind? When?

Oops. My bad. Spiriituality. Not spiritualism. Just in case some see a difference in these.

Episode entitled: "The Curse of Faith" in which he divides faith into spirituality and religion, proclaiming one "good" and the other "evil."

[articulett]

I see the point... theists seem to think that atheists don't have deep or poignant feelings... that they aren't moved in the way theists are... and this is because theists attribute those feelings to "god"-- but we all have those feelings. God is just the label some have been programmed to attach.

Many theists seem to see atheism as depressing nihilism... but none of the atheists I know fit that description at all.

[dglas]

I see the point... theists seem to think that atheists don't have deep or poignant feelings... that they aren't moved in the way theists are... and this is because theists attribute those feelings to "god"-- but we all have those feelings. God is just the label some have been programmed to attach.

Many theists seem to see atheism as depressing nihilism... but none of the atheists I know fit that description at all.

For my own part, I don't have a problem referring to deep and poignant feelings as deep and poignant feelings or even emotions. Why introduce supernatural elements (spirits) into it at all. Deep and poignant feelings are perfectly natural human, quite secular functions/phenomena. Or is it a case of having to remove the knives (as a practical matter) before we work on the compulsion to use them. Or, perhaps it is a case of Condell offering those who like the emotional side of things the opportunity to leave religion aside and still keep what they like.

I guess no free thinkers are ever 100% in agreement with each other.. ;)

[Olowkow]

This reminds me of the story Bob Price tells about an atheist woman who inadvertently bought some paper towels with "Bless this house" written on them. She called the store and complained. Sheesh! Let's fight the battles that need to be fought...not the petty and silly ones. Pat Condell's comments are right on the mark in my opinion. Words are subject to a range of meanings.

[schlitt]

He brings up some good points, and has fairly cogent arguments. However i find his tone a little condescending.

[articulett]

I'm in agreement with you, Dglas, in that I, personally, don't use language that can be mistaken for religious language or feelings. It sounds like Pat may be somewhat of a deist. I don't care about what he believes or doesn't believe... I just agree with the what he says and the way he says it when it comes to religion. The same with Hitchens and Harris... though some of the stuff that Hitchens says regarding politics I strongly disagree with... and sometimes I don't agree with Harris either.

I'm a biologist... I think I almost always agree with Dawkins. I think he's added so much information and wonder to others in this incredible science. I'm a big, big fan of Randi too.

I don't need to worship someone or agree with everything they say to be a fan--although the apologists like to refer to the atheist orthodoxy. And it's a good thing too-- because some people who like me don't agree with everything I say.

It's fine to have a difference of opinion... it sucks when someone declares their opinion as fact, can't tell the difference between and opinion or fact, or tries to force their opinion onto you or your life without caring about your opinion on the topic. It really sucks when people insist that you have an opinion you don't have and attack that (straw man).

But I agree, I'd like him to own and wear the atheist label proudly like I do. But I'm glad to let people have whatever beliefs they want as long as they keep them private... once they've bleated them at me, I exercise my right to opine back.

[dglas]

Okay, I'll let it go in this case, but you don't mind if I continue to argue against spirituality in these threads, do you? ;)

[articulett]

As a fellow league member in the "atheist orthodoxy" I demand that you do. ;)

[Olowkow]

Interesting...when I heard "spirituality" being put in counterpoint to "religion", it had the meaning for me of a "sense of wonder". This struck me as somehow making sense, but then I started looking up the meaning of "spirituality" thinking it would have some special accepted meaning distinct from "spiritualism". But it would seem that there is no such distinction, but for me somehow there is in my mind a subtle difference in meaning. Now, I'm wondering why. Maybe because I grew up in a religious setting. Semantics...bites you in the ass every time!

Now I'm wondering what Condell really meant.

[dglas]

Interesting...when I heard "spirituality" being put in counterpoint to "religion", it had the meaning for me of a "sense of wonder". This struck me as somehow making sense, but then I started looking up the meaning of "spirituality" thinking it would have some special accepted meaning distinct from "spiritualism". But it would seem that there is no such distinction, but for me somehow there is in my mind a subtle difference in meaning. Now, I'm wondering why. Maybe because I grew up in a religious setting. Semantics...bites you in the ass every time!

Now I'm wondering what Condell really meant.

Reviewing it again, I suspect Condell is trying to clearly delineate between privately held beliefs and publically enforced religious dogma.

[Beerina]

This reminds me of the story Bob Price tells about an atheist woman who inadvertently bought some paper towels with "Bless this house" written on them. She called the store and complained. Sheesh! Let's fight the battles that need to be fought...not the petty and silly ones.

Well, in (a follow up issue to) the big skeptic rags' issues a few years ago with the prayer studies, someone wrote in a letter complaining about the studies, which had not pre-notified or gotten permission of those being prayed for because it was pointless.

The letter mockingly pointed out that, given how God has treated people like Job and others of high faith, one could not presume that being prayed for would, at worst, have no effect. It could have a negative effect, and thus it was unethical to not get the permission of the prayed-for in advance.

Another letter writer pointed out how, if they had prayed to the wrong god, or in the wrong way, it might also have gone badly for the prayed-for.

[Moochie]

This reminds me of the story Bob Price tells about an atheist woman who inadvertently bought some paper towels with "Bless this house" written on them. She called the store and complained. Sheesh! Let's fight the battles that need to be fought...not the petty and silly ones. Pat Condell's comments are right on the mark in my opinion. Words are subject to a range of meanings.

Yeah, it's unfortunate that fanaticism rears its ugly head in the oddest places. I'm not a believer in gods I can't see, but neither am I a "card-carrying" -ist of any kind, and that includes atheist.

I had to reassess my thinking when I found myself deliberately saying "gesundheit" instead of "bless you" when kitty sneezed. I mean, I was letting the cat know that here stood a nonbeliever. The shame! The shame!

I think it's perfectly all right for nonbelievers to say "bless you" when an occasion calls for it. After all, it's our language, too. And while I'm at it, I assert the right to use the word "gay" in it's earlier, prettier sense. :)

M.

[Moochie]

Okay, I'll let it go in this case, but you don't mind if I continue to argue against spirituality in these threads, do you? ;)

Arguing against spirituality can get awfully sticky, though. I mean, I doubt any two people hold the same definition for the word spirit, for starters. I certainly have no problem with anyone using the word, unless they're trying to sell me something, in which case it had better be a liquid in a bottle.

M.