Last Post for a Bit: Criticisms of an angry Spanish guy

[BuffaloMax17 (Friend of science and God)]

Why did the figs have it coming?

[EastwoodDC (Dan Eastwood)]

@1Cor15.54

Yeah I guess so. But I’d also guess that philosophical naturalism is inherently dogmatic in nature. What do you think about this? I mean do you believe that philosophical naturalism might be compatible with a more “open minded” view, namely a view that doesn’t rule out the supernatural in principle?

Methodological Naturalism might rule out the supernatural in principle, but in practice it does not; You can test hypotheses about the supernatural, but it does require material evidence and cooperation from the supernatural. Mostly MN doesn’t have much to say about the supernatural.

I do not see Philosophical Naturalism (atheism) to be dogmatic, and is arguable less so that other beliefs. As previously noted, that doesn’t prevent some people from being dogmatic. It may seem there are a lot of “Angry Atheists” or anti-theists out there, but in my experience they are a fraction of atheists as a whole (not that “as a whole” applies to atheists ITFP ).

To nudge this back on topic, I don’t think that the sort of criticism that Pires and others like him make are helpful. I understand why people get like that though; some people have been through terrible abuse in the name of religion, and they need to vent. Venting is something atheists generally do among themselves; what Pires is doing is simply trolling - I haven’t followed those links, but what @BuffaloMax17 describes is trolling.

If I really need to criticism religion, I can do so constructively, and I find that most religious people share the same concerns. This has the advantage of making friends rather than making enemies.

[1Cor15.54 (Massimiliano)]

@EastwoodDC

I do not see Philosophical Naturalism (atheism) to be dogmatic,

This is interesting but why? I mean I can understand why methodological naturalism may not be dogmatic but philosophical naturalism seems much more like an axiomatic dogma to me, in the sense that the supernatural is ruled out in principle.

@EastwoodDC

It may seem there are a lot of “Angry Atheists” or anti-theists out there, but in my experience they are a fraction of atheists as a whole (not that “as a whole” applies to atheists ITFP ).

There are a lot of apatheists today, also. Ironically I find them more dangerous than hardcore atheists, as they don’t even seem to think that the so-called big questions are worth the time of day. I believe that apatheism is a far bigger threat to spirituality than common atheism. Apatheism really represents “the last man” that Nietzsche talked about, imho.

@EastwoodDC

I understand why people get like that though; some people have been through terrible abuse in the name of religion, and they need to vent. Venting is something atheists generally do among themselves; what Pires is doing is simply trolling - I haven’t followed those links, but what @BuffaloMax17 describes is trolling.

Agreed fully.

@EastwoodDC

If I really need to criticism religion, I can do so constructively, and I find that most religious people share the same concerns. This has the advantage of making friends rather than making enemies.

Same as above.