The review at https://philosophycompass.wordpress.com/2012/03/12/the-atheists-guide-to-reality/ of Rosenberg's book is very unsettling to me in some respects. Some of what it says are ideas I have read elsewhere, but other ideas it says go beyond what I have elsewhere. As a result, I might not would have liked reading Rosenburg's book. As to whether some of the most unsettling ideas are true or false, I don't know which is the case.
Disillusioned JW
JoinedPosts by Disillusioned JW
-
99
If not the WT/JW relgion where else are 'we' to go? Why not atheistic/scientific philosophical naturalism?
by Disillusioned JW insometimes jws wonder if the wt/jw is not the truth, 'then where else are we to go?
' i say 'why not atheistic/scientific philosophical naturalism and why not a secular philosophy which teaches a way of life?
' what do you folks say?.
-
-
Disillusioned JW
-
99
If not the WT/JW relgion where else are 'we' to go? Why not atheistic/scientific philosophical naturalism?
by Disillusioned JW insometimes jws wonder if the wt/jw is not the truth, 'then where else are we to go?
' i say 'why not atheistic/scientific philosophical naturalism and why not a secular philosophy which teaches a way of life?
' what do you folks say?.
-
-
Disillusioned JW
Folks at the book sale at the local library where I purchased the science book by Krauss and the science book by Simpson I also purchased the following two books which are quite informative and beneficial for those embracing an atheistic secular way of life.
- Living the Secular Life: New Answers To Old Questions, by Phil Zuckerman. The book is copyright 2014. The dust jacket says the author "is a professor of sociology and secular studies" and the author of Faith No More and Society Without God.
- The Happy Atheist, by PZ Myers. The book is copyright 2013. The outside back cover of the paperback says the following. "On his popular science blog, Pharyngula, PZ Meyers has entertained millions of readers with his infectious love of evolutionary science and his equally infectious disdain for creationism, biblical literalism, intelligent design theory, and other products of godly illogic. This funny and fearless book collects and expands on some of his most popular writings, giving the religious fanaticism of our times the gleeful disrespect it deserves by skewering the apocalyptic fantasies, magical thinking, hypocrisies, an pseudoscientific theories advanced by religious fundamentalists of all stripes."
In the chapter "One Nation Free of Gods" Meyers says that if people do not question God, do not question America, and they mix the two ideas together, then "you've got a lovely recipe for blind obedience." He then says the following two paragraphs.
'I usually complain about religion, but I have to add another target: patriotism. It's the same thing, opening a door to unthinking authoritarianism, and it always leads to oppression. Quite contrary to the claims of fanatical Christians, the heart of a thriving democracy has to be constant questioning of the operation of the government. To marry religion to our government would be antithetical to its founding principles, and even to regard those founding principles as inviolate and somehow imbued with godly authority would be a betrayal.
When I was growing up in the 1960s and 1970s, defenders of the status quo threw around a common slogan: "My country, right or wrong." Even at my young age, that always seemed insane. If my country is wrong, shouldn't I want to change it?'
Those stated ideas of PZ Meyers are definitely true! That is well said, PZ Meyers!
Also at the book sale was the atheistic book called The Atheist's Guide to Reality: Enjoying Life Without Illusions, by Alexander Rosenberg. I didn't notice that book until a beautiful female (of about age 18-20) picked it up in order to buy it. I wished I had found it first since the book seems (based upon its tile) very good. I think she said she found it in the self-help section; it was not in the religious section. An atheistic approach to thinking and to life can be thrilling and joyful!
A moment ago I found the following description (on Amazon's website) about the book.
'A book for nonbelievers who embrace the reality-driven life.
We can't avoid the persistent questions about the meaning of life-and the nature of reality. Philosopher Alex Rosenberg maintains that science is the only thing that can really answer them--all of them. His bracing and ultimately upbeat book takes physics seriously as the complete description of reality and accepts all its consequences. He shows how physics makes Darwinian natural selection the only way life can emerge, and how that deprives nature of purpose, and human action of meaning, while it exposes conscious illusions such as free will and the self. The science that makes us nonbelievers provides the insight into the real difference between right and wrong, the nature of the mind, even the direction of human history. The Atheist's Guide to Reality draws powerful implications for the ethical and political issues that roil contemporary life. The result is nice nihilism, a surprisingly sanguine perspective atheists can happily embrace.' -
99
If not the WT/JW relgion where else are 'we' to go? Why not atheistic/scientific philosophical naturalism?
by Disillusioned JW insometimes jws wonder if the wt/jw is not the truth, 'then where else are we to go?
' i say 'why not atheistic/scientific philosophical naturalism and why not a secular philosophy which teaches a way of life?
' what do you folks say?.
-
-
Disillusioned JW
There is a very fascinating recent science news article called "Dead fish breathes new life into the evolutionary origin of fins and limbs" located at https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2022/09/220928113007.htm . It says in part the following.
'Corresponding author Professor Donoghue said: "Tujiaaspis breathes new life into a century old hypothesis for the evolution of paired fins, through differentiation of pectoral (arms) and pelvic (legs) fins over evolutionary time from a continuous head-to-tail fin precursor.
"This 'fin-fold' hypothesis has been very popular but it has lacked any supporting evidence until now. The discovery to Tujiaaspis resurrects the fin-fold hypothesis and reconciles it with contemporary data on the genetic controls on the embryonic development of fins in living vertebrates."
Corresponding author Min Zhu of VPP, Beijing, added "Tujiaaspis shows the primitive condition for paired fins first evolved. Later groups, like the jawless osteostracans show the first evidence for the separation of muscular pectoral fins, retaining long pelvic fins that reduced to the short muscular fins in jawed vertebrates, such as in groups like placoderms and sharks. Nevertheless, we can see vestiges of elongate fin-folds in the embryos of living jawed fishes, which can be experimentally manipulated to reproduce them. The key question is why did fins first evolve in this way?" '
The recent science news article called "Revealing the genome of the common ancestor of all mammals" located at https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2022/09/220928094821.htm says in part the following.
'Every modern mammal, from a platypus to a blue whale, is descended from a common ancestor that lived about 180 million years ago. We don't know a great deal about this animal, but the organization of its genome has now been computationally reconstructed by an international team of scientists.
... The scientists found nine whole chromosomes, or chromosome fragments in the mammal ancestor whose order of genes is the same in modern birds' chromosomes.
"This remarkable finding shows the evolutionary stability of the order and orientation of genes on chromosomes over an extended evolutionary timeframe of more than 320 million years," Lewin says. In contrast, regions between these conserved blocks contained more repetitive sequences and were more prone to breakages, rearrangements and sequence duplications, which are major drivers of genome evolution.'
-
99
If not the WT/JW relgion where else are 'we' to go? Why not atheistic/scientific philosophical naturalism?
by Disillusioned JW insometimes jws wonder if the wt/jw is not the truth, 'then where else are we to go?
' i say 'why not atheistic/scientific philosophical naturalism and why not a secular philosophy which teaches a way of life?
' what do you folks say?.
-
-
Disillusioned JW
Regarding Sea Breeze's comment of "science that disproves evolution" there is no such science. There is no science which disproves evolution. There is some science which has disproved some specific former hypotheses of evolution, but evolution itself has not been disproved. Some web sites and books of creationists (including of intelligent design) have articles which purport to disprove evolution (and Sea Breeze quotes from a number of them) but none of them actually disprove evolution. At best, they point out a flaws with some specific claim made by some evolutionist scientists about some aspect of evolution (such as some interpretations of some specific fossils).
If there actually were some "science which disproves evolution" great attention to it would be proclaimed by the mainstream media, and there would be articles in mainstream science journals and popular magazines of science which would proclaim such. But such has not been proclaimed in such sources. -
24
'In Search of Christian Freedom'
by riblah ini cross-posted this on reddit:.
i would love to have a hard copy of this book.
does anyone know about how to go about persuading the person who has the rights to print a batch?.
-
-
Disillusioned JW
Thanks Beth Sarim for clarifying. I obtained a copy of the Finished Mystery about 15 years ago and from eBay auctions I obtained copies of two different editions the Harp of God. After I analyzed them I decided I had no further need for them. I thus later sold them on eBay at a profit. I do however still have a copy of the book called Deliverance.
-
99
If not the WT/JW relgion where else are 'we' to go? Why not atheistic/scientific philosophical naturalism?
by Disillusioned JW insometimes jws wonder if the wt/jw is not the truth, 'then where else are we to go?
' i say 'why not atheistic/scientific philosophical naturalism and why not a secular philosophy which teaches a way of life?
' what do you folks say?.
-
-
Disillusioned JW
How can people see numerous fossils (including of skulls) of multiple species of Australopithecus and numerous fossils (especially of skulls) of more than one species of Homo and not see definite proof of evolution of Homo sapiens from a prior species of humans and from earlier non-human hominids? I can understand how people might not conclude such proof back in the year 1980 when the fossil collection of such was much smaller than now, but now the collection is very large and diverse. We now have a range of hominid skulls which show transitional features. The skulls of Homo ergaster and Homo erectus have features intermediate between early Australopithecines and of Homo sapiens. Likewise, some skulls have features which are intermediate between that of early Australopithecines and that of both Homo ergaster and Homo erectus.
-
99
If not the WT/JW relgion where else are 'we' to go? Why not atheistic/scientific philosophical naturalism?
by Disillusioned JW insometimes jws wonder if the wt/jw is not the truth, 'then where else are we to go?
' i say 'why not atheistic/scientific philosophical naturalism and why not a secular philosophy which teaches a way of life?
' what do you folks say?.
-
-
Disillusioned JW
I notice that Sea Breeze said the following. "I think a lot of folks are opposed to science that disproves evolution based upon principle, not the evidence. They then segregate their thinking according to their a priori commitment to atheism. I think that is what you are doing." I am astonished that Sea Breeze would think that about me (and about so many others who are convinced of evolution). Becoming convinced of evolution due to the scientific evidence for it is what has convinced a great many Christians to become atheists. For a great many people their atheism did not come before the conviction of evolution. Furthermore, a great many liberal Christians are convinced of evolution (believing that God played a role in it, such as in starting the process).
In a number of posts I mentioned that even before I became baptized as a JW (I got baptized while I was a teenager) there were points in time when I thought that evolution might be true. I even sometimes thought such before I was a teenager as a result of scientific literature about evolution which I read, and likewise even years later while I was ministerial servant. It was also because I knew that most scientists (including Christian ones) were convinced of evolution. Shortly before I got baptized I began a subscription to the magazine called "Science 80" (of which the magazine in subsequent years was called "Science 81", "Science 82", etc.). Reading some of the articles (including ones about punctuated equilibrium and about the fossil called "Lucy") in those issues made me think that biological evolution might be true. Those articles made me think there was a strong possibility evolution was true. Likewise there was an article in the Science 80 magazine about chemical evolution, including about life evolving from non-life. That article made me think that life might have evolved from non-living chemicals. For years I saved my copy of those articles. But sadly, the WT's young biosphere creationist literature led me astray from becoming convinced of evolution (and even from seeking out books about evolution) until much later in life.
While I was an independent minded Christian (after I "faded" from being a JW) I learned about the idea of theistic evolution and I learned more about evolution (from science shows on PBS television and from news articles on the internet about evolution). One of the shows I watched (after I stopped regular attendance at JW meetings in the Kingdom Hall) was a documentary miniseries called "Evolution" which first aired in the year 2001 [see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_(TV_series) ]. I thus concluded that maybe Jehovah God used evolution to create various kinds of life. years later while I was still a Christian (but no longer a believing JW) who believed in the Bible and Jehovah God and Jesus Christ I learned some information about geology which convinced me that the Genesis chapter one creation account is false. That then convinced me that the creation account is thus uninspired of Jehovah God, since I learned that geology very clearly reveals (without any doubt) that the earliest birds came after the earliest land animals (even if birds did not evolve from non-avian dinosaurs) - the opposite as Genesis says. After I learned that and that geology shows that the account in Genesis account of the flood of 'Noah's day' (whether viewed as a global flood or a local flood) is false, I thus stopped believing in Jehovah and then I no longer had any reason to reject evolution. Notice that it was the learning of scientific evidence which caused me to stop believing in Jehovah God (and also Jesus Christ, for that matter) and the Bible as inspired by God. Beginning a few years later (and lasting for several years) I began looking up a great number of quotes (and their contexts) which the WT made of scientists pertaining to evolution. I also now own books by scientists which which both prove evolution and also disprove the claims of so-called "scientific creationists"! I also read books by scientists (including Christian ones) who disproved conclusively the claims of intelligent design. I now own some of those books as well. As a result of that great amount of research I saw enormous evidence of proof of biological evolution and I thus concluded that there is no way at all that non-evolutionary creationism could be true.
-
99
If not the WT/JW relgion where else are 'we' to go? Why not atheistic/scientific philosophical naturalism?
by Disillusioned JW insometimes jws wonder if the wt/jw is not the truth, 'then where else are we to go?
' i say 'why not atheistic/scientific philosophical naturalism and why not a secular philosophy which teaches a way of life?
' what do you folks say?.
-
-
Disillusioned JW
What secular forms of philosophy of how to live one's life are the best? Is one of the various forms of humanism the best? Atheists, is secular humanism too liberal in some respects? By what principles, including ethical principles, should we atheists and agnostics live our lives? By what means can we atheists and agnostics determine which possible actions are moral or immoral, just of unjust, wise or foolish? What do you think about what Friedrich Nietzsche said about morality?
-
99
If not the WT/JW relgion where else are 'we' to go? Why not atheistic/scientific philosophical naturalism?
by Disillusioned JW insometimes jws wonder if the wt/jw is not the truth, 'then where else are we to go?
' i say 'why not atheistic/scientific philosophical naturalism and why not a secular philosophy which teaches a way of life?
' what do you folks say?.
-
-
Disillusioned JW
https://www.simonandschuster.com/books/The-Physics-of-Climate-Change/Lawrence-M-Krauss/9781642938166 has rave reviews of Krauss' Climate Change book. it says in part the following.
'The first book to briefly and clearly present the science of climate change in a way that is accessible to laypeople, providing the perspective needed to understand and assess the foundations and predictions of climate change.
“Brilliant and fundamental, this is the necessary book about our prime global emergency. Here you’ll find the facts, the processes, the physics of our complex and changing climate, but delivered with eloquence and urgency. Lawrence Krauss writes with a clarity that transcends mere politics. Prose and poetry were never better bedfellows.” —Ian McEwan, Booker Prize-winning author of Solar and Machines Like Me...“The distinguished scientist Lawrence Krauss turns his penetrating gaze on the most pressing existential threat facing our world: climate change. It is brimming with information lucidly analysed. Such hope as there is lies in science, and a physicist of Dr. Krauss’s imaginative versatility is unusually qualified to offer it.” —Richard Dawkins, author of The Blind Watchmaker and Science in the Soul
“Lucid and gripping, this study of the most severe challenge humans have ever faced leads the reader from the basic physics of climate change to recognition of the damage that humans have already caused and on to the prospects that lie ahead if we do not change course soon.” —Noam Chomsky, Laureate Professor, University of Arizona, author of Internationalism or Extinction?
... “Lawrence Krauss is a fine physicist, a talented writer, and a scientist deeply engaged with public affairs. His book deserves wide readership. The book’s eloquent exposition of the science and the threats should enlighten all readers and motivate them to an urgent concern about our planet’s future.” —Lord Martin Rees, Astronomer Royal, former president of the Royal Society, author of On the Future: Prospects for Humanity' -
99
If not the WT/JW relgion where else are 'we' to go? Why not atheistic/scientific philosophical naturalism?
by Disillusioned JW insometimes jws wonder if the wt/jw is not the truth, 'then where else are we to go?
' i say 'why not atheistic/scientific philosophical naturalism and why not a secular philosophy which teaches a way of life?
' what do you folks say?.
-
-
Disillusioned JW
The same day I purchased Krauss' science book I also purchased a classic vintage book by George Gaylord Simpson called The Meaning of Evolution: Revised Edition. Page 315 of my paperback copy of that book says the following [I have added boldface for emphasis].
"It is a social requirement that there be specialists in each field whose profession it is to examine and to test such truths as pertain to it. ... the moral duty of the nonspecialist is to choose the judgments of that authority whose qualifications are greatest in the pertinent field and whose submitted evidence is the best." Page 316 of the same book says the following. "The important point is responsibility for using the right method of choice. The right method is evaluation of evidence and avoidance of pure intuition and of authoritarian dogma. Recourse to authority, in this context, demands judgement that the accepted opinion is based on rational consideration of known evidence."
Lawrence Maxwell Krauss is one such expert in the scientific fields of theoretical physics and cosmology. As a result his science book is worth reading (despite Krauss' apparent actions of sexual harassment) if one wishes to learn more about the science of cosmology and of its implications. As Wikipedia states he is also an anti-theist who "seeks to reduce the influence of what he regards as superstition and religious dogma in popular culture." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawrence_Krauss#cite_note-6 also says the following. "As a result of his appearance in 2002 before the state school board of Ohio, his opposition to intelligent design has gained national prominence.[15] ... A Universe from Nothing—with an afterword by Richard Dawkins—was released in January 2012, and became a New York Times bestseller within a week. ...
With the publication of his newest book, The Physics of Climate Change (2021), Krauss is urging the use of science, and not politics, ideology, or emotion, to steer the public debate on how to address climate change.[45]"