Like most people I like to think of myself as a skeptical thinker, willing to test my own biases. So naturally I listen to The Skeptics Guide to the Universe from time to time. When it comes to religion they focus on dangerous teachings: people who promote faith healing instead of medicine, that kind of thing.
Such dangerous beliefs are a natural byproduct of supernatural thinking. On the basis of that they attack supernatural thinking in general. But is that rational?
Most skeptics will accept that the supernatural can have benefits: fanatical believers will put in extra effort for the good of the group. So it may harm the individual but benefits the group. But I have never seen a skeptic try to quantify this. That is my problem with skeptical community.
My approach is different. I attack supernatural religion by showing that a non-supernatural religion can do everything a supernatural religion does, but better. This solves the problem of quantifying the good. Maybe you will find a fault in my logic, but at least I am trying to be rational.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.