Agnostic.com

2 1

I only know of Dawkins' work, but by interacting here I notice there seems to be a missionary zeal about him, wanting to transform 'religious people'. Some of his rhetoric seems a bit inflamatory. Am I reading this wrongly?

Geoffrey51 8 July 10
Share

Enjoy being online again!

Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.

Create your free account

2 comments

Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.

0

I've responded to a couple requests for recommendations, but I don't generally include him. It isnt that I don't like him (I do), but he can strike a reader as antagonistic, and thus perhaps less persuasive.

That was my thinking also. Glad I'm not alone on that

3

The people who express the most vitriol on this site are the posters who have been victimized by their former religious organizations. They are also the biggest supporters of inflammatory Atheist writers as well. I view both inflammatory Atheists and Religionists as two sides of the same coin. Neither represent the highest form of human thought, but both are experiencing necessary stages toward our highest human expression. Our highest form of expression is that which demonstrates complete and perfect understanding.

Actually, I misspoke slightly. I do view vitriolic Atheists at a higher stage of evolution than vitriolic Religionists. So they wouldn't be on the same coin, they would be on the same side of different level coins.

You can include a link to this post in your posts and comments by including the text q:127247
Agnostic does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.