Dangerous Talk » Talking to a Wall

disqus_O7Ws2bMRWE

You’re missing the point. In a way you remind me of the creationists because what you are doing is superimposing an extremely limited view on history. The creationist do it by a literalist, and fundamentally very modern, reading of the Bible you do it by missing the fact that, as Reza points out many times, our concept of history is only a couple of hundred years old. Prior to that people used other means to try and describe the world they were living in. This isn’t about agreeing with that view it is about understanding it, because it both was and is extremely influential. I am an atheist by the way. And if atheism is a desire for knowledge we need to get the fundamentals about pre-1700′s worldviews and history writing right. Or else we are pretty much doing the exact same mistake as the religious fundamentalists and losing any sense of historical context. Sacred History is about ideals, values and community and if you try to airbrush that out, ironically, you’re not being very scientific. Sadly this is pretty much a common problem in the neo-atheist community. A complete lack of scientific approach to history and the history of ideas.

http://skepticink.com/dangeroustalk Dangerous Talk

Reza is LYING! As mentioned the corrections & additions section, the concept of history as a written record is not modern. It was not invented in 1700s; it was invented 2500 years ago! There is no way Reza doesn’t know this. So yeah, if you are going to paint me as a fundamentalist because I think history means history, then I guess you got me. No one is arguing that there isn’t value in fictional stories and that telling fictional stories that convey some sort of moral or social meaning didn’t and doesn’t exist. I love Star Wars, but Star Wars is NOT history! To turn around and claim that it is a “Sacred History” and that Luke Skywalker really existed as a Truth, is simply not being honest.

http://skepticink.com/dangeroustalk Dangerous Talk

Okay, I’ll bite. What is “the point” exactly? Because I thought the point was that Reza LIED when he said that the modern conception of history was only 300 years old when he damn well knew (or ought to have known) that it is 2500 years old and that he LIED when he said that people back then wouldn’t have any understanding of history as we understand it.

Again, no one is arguing that people don’t derive meaning and understanding from fictional stories. That doesn’t make those stories true. It just means that we take meaning and understanding from fictional stories. But maybe that isn’t “the point.” So please enlighten me.

disqus_O7Ws2bMRWE

Herodotus aside I think his point about how the people who wrote the bible and who it was written for pretty much stands.

disqus_O7Ws2bMRWE

Also Jedi is a registered Faith. But that’s neither here nor there I suppose.

http://skepticink.com/dangeroustalk Dangerous Talk

Duh, I’m the Master of the Temple of the Balancing Force. But that is neither here nor there I suppose… except that you have no idea what you are talking about, of course. No Jedi believes that Luke Skywalker really existed as Truth.

Resources