The end of faith.

Originally Posted by Free.User

Telling a religioius person to give up everything they beleive in is impossible. Faith is just that; faith.

Although I'm definitely not arguing with that, I think the point was to not take away faith, but the structures that it currently uses.
I'm probably wrong, but that's how I interpreted it...
I agree, though. As fascinating and appealing as the idea is, it's all theoretical. Plus of course there's the point that it's not religion that starts wars so much as overzealous fanatics who do; and I'm sure you'll get those whether there's structured religion or not. Can't get rid of crazy people!

Jam it back in, in the dark.

Originally Posted by FallDragon

Did you read the book too?

No, just interpreting from what you've written. I may read it now it's been suggested, it looks interesting...

Originally Posted by FallDragon

Back during WW2, we were fighting the atrocities of atheists. The foundation of faith, however, was still there.

In a way, atheism has always seemed like a religion to me, in that most of the people who are atheists believe in it as strongly as Christians do in God. I know I do; I put as much faith in science as I ever could in a religion. Although I have to admit I've never considered WW2 a question of atheism (which is worded badly but it's late night and can't be bothered to phrase it well), I can see where you're coming from.

There's nowhere I can't reach.

Originally Posted by FallDragon

Well, putting faith in science isn't the same as putting faith in there not being a God. Atheism at it's root is the belief/faith that there is no God.

-nods- By saying I put my faith in science, I meant, as you say, I'm putting faith in there being no God. Sorry about the poor wording there. This takes in its own way as much blind trust as believing that there is a God, considering that there's no proof to say there's not and that human nature seems to need something beyond itself.

Originally Posted by FallDragon

And I don't particularly have faith in science either - I'm only going to believe in science if science can produce facts and strong correlations. My belief in it is dependent upon it's provable reality, not upon my concept of the word "science."

As for trusting the reliability and provability of science, in a philosophical sense that's as much of a belief in that we're trusting our senses and the appearance of the world to be true. But that would be going offtopic, so for the sake of arguement let's assume that everything we percieve exists and not turn this into an empirical arguement

This thing is sticky, and I don't like it. I don't appreciate it.

Woah. Can I ask where you got the figures from, out of curiosity?
That's frightening...

Edit:
Ah sorry being slow. Noticed the Harris reference above it -blushes

I am a dolphin, do you want me on your body?

Originally Posted by Duo Maxwell

So, basically, Sam Harris wrote a book about something that everyone should already be aware of.

I'm not anti-religion, I'm just saying that anyone with eyes and the ability to string two ideas together, should already be aware of what the situation is.

ah, but you're missing the point. He probably used really long words to explain it.

I was speaking idiomatically.

Also, that depends on what kind of behavious people think their god expects from them.

What kind of toxic man-thing is happening now?