Comments on: Fundamentalism 101

By: andy

andy — Sun, 20 Sep 2009 18:35:47 +0000

There has been much talk about fundamentalism of late. To most people, the word conjures up images of Islamic fundamentalism in the wake of the 9/11 terrorist attacks against the USA, the ongoing war in Iraq, or the suicide bombings in the Middle East, London, Madrid and elsewhere. However, beyond what seems to be a ‘clash of civilizations’, there is another, home-made strain of fundamentalism, right at the heart of Western democratic societies, that is affecting science and its relationship to society in a way that may have dire long-term consequences.

By: Patrick Craig

Patrick Craig — Sun, 04 Mar 2007 04:49:27 +0000

On this issue of “the problem of evil:” I don’t personally see it as the “problem” it’s all cracked up to be. Sure, I suppose for a few minutes it’d be nice to have god give us complete and total relief from evil, but extend that “relief” to a very long time and suddenly I see a bigger difficulty: how do you define “good” without “evil” to compare it to? And that would then be a very big complication for going to EITHER heaven or hell. Eternal torment? Eternal happiness? Horrible or wonderful – for a few days perhaps. Once you forget the “sensation” of that polar opposite that is not present, everything just becomes…what? Boring? Well, even “boring” has a polar opposite, “exciting.” So even “boring” becomes boring. Either destination, then, presents the afterlife traveler with sucky options. Can you IMAGINE residents of heaven begging god to let them have a temporary foray into HELL, just so they can appreciate their “joy” in heaven again?

By: Atheist MD

Atheist MD — Thu, 01 Mar 2007 06:03:10 +0000

The first point in her list reminds me of a quote by Epicurus around 305 BCE.

Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?”