[FoRK] At the risk of inflaming JB and others ...
<il.young.son at gmail.com> on
Fri Mar 28 16:24:42 PDT 2008
On Fri, Mar 28, 2008 at 4:22 PM, il-young son <il.young.son at gmail.com> wrote:
> i generally agree with this sentiment. one thing that struck me while
> hearing hedge's interview was his misunderstanding what folks like
> dawkins are arguing with respect to moral systems. or maybe he's
> drawing a straw man intentionally. it's merely the skepticism of the
> idea that the development of a moral system requires something like a
> religious institute to codify. this idea is rather poorly supported,
> and does nothing to explain certain fairly invariant subset of moral
> codes shared by practically all religions - and for that matter most
> people whether religious or not (unless they are truly sociopathic).
> as for hitchens, perhaps labeling him a "neo-con" was hyperbolic, but
> have you read the articles he wrote leading up to iraq war?? (or even
> before then with bosnian war). at the least, his foreign policy views
> are in alignment with those of "neoconservatives". i think he admits
> this himself. maybe you agree or disagree with his foreign policy
> views (he's strongly an interventionist - which is a very prominent
> attribute of those who are labeled "neoconservative") - however, his
> foreign policy views are for the most part in alignment with the
> so-called "neocons". being a prominent atheist mouthpiece doesn't
> exclude one having such views. personally, i suppose i dislike that
> foreign policy position but that's me. perhaps you think otherwise,
> but that has nothing to do with one being an atheist or not.
fuck, i must be drunk, sorry for the grammatical mess.
More information about the FoRK