House Rules Re: [FoRK] The drum beat continues
Dr. Ernie Prabhakar <
drernie at radicalcentrism.org
> on >
Thu Nov 16 15:48:14 PST 2006
On Nov 16, 2006, at 1:03 PM, Stephen D. Williams wrote:
> The ones that I might come closest to despising are those that
> secretly are Atheists but find themselves promulgating religion for
> their own or their group's own gain. Being a hypocrite is just a
> sign of weakness. Being a hypocrite that forces a known error on
> others is one of the ultimate sins.
>> See, from where I sit the immorality and narcissism of religious
>> leaders is indistinguishable from that of Dawkins and his ilk. I'm
>> sure it is very comforting for him -- or them -- to think that all
>> the evil in the world is because of "those other people".
> I can't see that Dawkins benefits like religious leaders benefit.
> I can't really see them as equal but opposite.
> From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narcissism
Um, I think we're talking about different things (and not just
because Dawkins also benefits, in ways important to him <http://
Maybe I'm misreading you, but it sounds like you think that religious
leaders who oppose various are (perhaps like Ted Haggard) pure
hypocrites who pretend belief in order to acquire or retain the
symbols of power.
I disagree. In fact, I think the (shared) problem is quite different
than that, but still within the definition of narcissism:
>> The terms Narcissism, Narcissistic and Narcissist are often used
>> as pejoratives, denoting vanity, conceit, egotism or simple
>> selfishness. Applied to a social group, it is sometimes used to
>> denote elitism or an indifference to the plight of others.
> I fail to see how Dawkins is displaying immorality or narcissism.
> He's speaking out precisely to help people by freeing them from one
> belief through understanding of his belief and the scientific
> method itself.
The sad truth is that most of the most inflammatory and hurtful
statements by Christian leaders are from those who sincerely think
they are "speaking out precisely to help people by freeing them from
one belief through understanding of [their] belief."
You might respond that because Dawkins does it on behalf of "the
scientific method" rather than "God" that makes him "better", but I
really don't see how. From where I sit, they (like me) fall prey to
the elitist assumption that *we* are the ones who think clearly and
understand all truth, and those who disagree with us are immoral,
unenlightened, and need wiser people (like us) to smack them around
until they wake up.
Kinda like House. Yeah, sometimes it is what people need. But
sometimes he uses and abuses people just to satisfy his own ego,
regardless of "truth" or "right." And I don't think he always knows
which is which.
If you don't think House or Dawkins is susceptible to that, I bet you
don't think you are either.
"There is one vice [Pride] of which no man in the world is free;
which every one in the world loathes when he sees it in someone else;
and of which hardly any people, except Christians, ever imagine that
they are guilty themselves. There is no fault which makes a man more
unpopular, and no fault which we are more unconscious of in
ourselves. And the more we have it in ourselves, the more we dislike
it in others.” -- C.S. Lewis, Mere Christianity
-- Ernie "Humble, and Proud of It!" Prabhakar
More information about the FoRK