Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,914 Year: 4,171/9,624 Month: 1,042/974 Week: 1/368 Day: 1/11 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   How Darwin caused atheism
sfs
Member (Idle past 2564 days)
Posts: 464
From: Cambridge, MA USA
Joined: 08-27-2003


Message 7 of 122 (601350)
01-19-2011 10:57 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by ApostateAbe
01-19-2011 7:37 PM


I think the key sentence you quote from Dennett is this:
quote:
I suppose that's a historical question that one should do very careful research on, and I haven't.
He hasn't done the research, and neither have you. You're making a historical argument here, that Darwin caused atheism, and you have presented no historical evidence and done no historical research that I can see. You haven't even made any attempt to correlate the timing of the increase in atheism with the widespread acceptance of Darwinian evolution (which occurred when, exactly?). What you've offered is an opinion rather than an argument.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by ApostateAbe, posted 01-19-2011 7:37 PM ApostateAbe has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 22 by ApostateAbe, posted 01-20-2011 9:56 AM sfs has replied

  
sfs
Member (Idle past 2564 days)
Posts: 464
From: Cambridge, MA USA
Joined: 08-27-2003


Message 23 of 122 (601399)
01-20-2011 10:02 AM
Reply to: Message 22 by ApostateAbe
01-20-2011 9:56 AM


ApostateAbe writes:
Dennett is kinda the authority on the interplay between the theory of evolution and atheism (wrote the book on it), though he is not a historian, and being a historian is what would be required to do "very careful research." I don't know for sure if there was ever a historical study to answer the question on whether or not Darwin "broke the dam" for atheism, though historians really don't do it so differently from how the rest of us do it, except of course they would be a lot more thorough--examining all the evidence available, putting all explanations on the table, and choosing the explanation that fits best.
I have made some specific historical claims, and you can just ask me which of them you would like me to prove if you like.
I'd like you to support the historical claim that Darwin was responsible for a substantial increase in atheism.
quote:
Yeah, I don't go through the trouble of proving every claim and assumption.
But it would be nice if you supported your central claim.
quote:
If you think this is an issue that requires only a thorough historical study by qualified researchers, then never you mind. Such an opinion does not matter so much to me.
I didn't suggest that you needed a degree in history to do the research, just that you actually offer some historical evidence. If Dennett did the research, great, present that. So far, based on what you've given us, I have no idea at all whether Darwin had a great deal to do with increasing atheism or nothing at all.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by ApostateAbe, posted 01-20-2011 9:56 AM ApostateAbe has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 24 by jar, posted 01-20-2011 10:10 AM sfs has not replied
 Message 32 by ApostateAbe, posted 01-20-2011 12:01 PM sfs has replied

  
sfs
Member (Idle past 2564 days)
Posts: 464
From: Cambridge, MA USA
Joined: 08-27-2003


Message 40 of 122 (601435)
01-20-2011 12:43 PM
Reply to: Message 32 by ApostateAbe
01-20-2011 12:01 PM


ApostateAbe writes:
What I need are the specifics of which claim you want me to prove. You see, I made a series of claims which I propose leads to the conclusion that Darwin's theories allowed an increase in atheism. Here is what I said:
quote:
Before Darwin, there was no very good way to explain life except with the gods. This made atheism a seemingly unreasonable position. After Darwin, life had a very good explanation without the gods. Therefore, Darwin's theory allowed atheism to rise, and we see it in the influence and popularity of such figures as Marx, Nietzsche, Ingersoll and Freud, we see it in the coining of the term, "agnostic," by TH Huxley and its widespread acceptance among scientists and the public. Before Darwin, we had belief in deism among philosophers--the belief in a creator God who remains distant from human society. After Darwin, there were no well known deists left. The belief was replaced by atheism.
There are a bunch of claims there, and all of them I take to be common knowledge, but, if there is any single claim that you disagree with, then I would like to know. Maybe you find something wrong with the whole of the argument, and that would also be appropriate to mention. Thanks.
There are quite a few steps in your argument that I would want to see supported, including ones you don't mention above. For example, when did atheism actually start to increase? (Note: this cannot be answered simply by listing atheists or theist, whenever they lived.) How widely accepted was Darwin's theory of natural selection among philosophers during the period you're talking about? Among others? Was belief in God primarily justified by appeal to the argument from design? Was it primarily motivated by that argument? Did Marx and Nietzsche become atheists because of Darwin?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 32 by ApostateAbe, posted 01-20-2011 12:01 PM ApostateAbe has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 42 by ApostateAbe, posted 01-20-2011 1:35 PM sfs has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024