X-Message-Number: 29564 From: "Chris Manning" <> References: <> Subject: Re: CryoNet #29559 - #29561 Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2007 06:01:58 +1000 Just to let you know, Richard Dawkins was on TV recently here in Australia. He presented a two-part series about why he believes faith is harmful and religion is the root of all evil. Religion is clearly not the root of *all* evil; however, apart from that I agree with him, although I also agree with you that humans need a sense of identity/meaning. I don't think Dawkins has sufficiently acknowledged/addressed this fact. I am often tempted to join my local Quaker meeting in order to obtain this sense for myself. http://www.abc.net.au/compass/s1928351.htm I am not familiar with Sam Harris and I have never heard of Daniel Dennett. I was a member of the Humanist Society of NSW from the early 70s until I resigned in 1983. ----- Original Message ----- From: "CryoNet" <> To: <> Sent: Sunday, June 17, 2007 7:00 PM Subject: CryoNet #29559 - #29561 > > Message #29559 > References: <> > From: David Stodolsky <> > Subject: Re: Sam Harris is brilliant, one of the finest thinkers of ou... > Date: Sat, 16 Jun 2007 11:33:44 +0200 > > On 14 Jun 2007, at 17:30, wrote: > >> Sam Harris is one of three influential and articulate writers in >> public >> discourse currently. The other two being my other heroes Richard >> Dawkins and >> Daniel Dennett. > > It is not clear that these popular writers are in fact promoting a > more rational view. > > Sam Harris appears to have an irrational acceptance of Buddhism and > his aggressive denunciations of religion may strengthen religion by > making it stronger as a source of identity/meaning. > > Daniel Dennett bases his analysis upon the 'meme' concept, which is > useless from a scientific standpoint. > > Dawkins is the best of the lot, but has done a lot of damage by > promoting 'memes', the 'selfish gene' and other nonsense. > > The efforts of these two also may backfire for the same reason as > Harris's denunciations. > > Any attempt to overcome irrationality in society has to be based upon > an understanding of the reasons for its existence. None of the above > are qualified to do this. They don't have the background in the > social sciences or history of religion required. > > The search for meaning / identity is crucial for human beings. Merely > attacking the dominant sources is most likely to prove counter > productive. Anyone serious about this problem should connect with the > organizations that offer people the benefits of organized religion, > without the irrationality. The American Humanist Association is one > option, the International Ethical and Humanist Union is another. A > good info source: > > http://humaniststudies.org/ > > > As long time readers here will recall, I have suggested that an > effective program for promotion of cryonics would be best integrated > into a comprehensive 'full-service' organization providing all the > services of current churches. Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=29564