Come to the
Centre for Inquiry's lecture by David Hitchcock tomorrow night. I'm really looking forward to this 'cause I've often confronted theists who claim that atheism is a relatively new phenomenon. Many of them think it's caused by modern science.
Starts
Friday, May 2nd at 7:00 pm
Ends
Friday, May 2nd at 9:00 pm
Location
Centre for Inquiry Ontario, 216 Beverley St, Toronto ON (1 minute south of College St at St. George St)
Summary
Agnosticism, atheism and religious scepticism have a longer history in western thought than is often recognized. I survey the history of such thinking in the ancient Greek philosophical tradition from the 5th century BCE to the 2nd century CE. The views surveyed include arguments against the anthopomorphism of popular religion, explicit agnosticism, naturalistic explanations of the origin of religion, arguments that truly divine beings would be indifferent to human doings and sufferings, and sceptical attacks on the most common arguments for the existence of gods.
Brief biography of David Hitchcock
David Hitchcock is professor of philosophy at McMaster University in Hamilton, Canada. Born in 1942 in England, he was brought by his parents to Hamilton at the age of 5 and has lived there ever since, except for a year in England as a child and four years in California as a graduate student. His research falls into three main areas: the philosophy of argument, ancient philosophy, and the history of logic. He is the author of a textbook on critical thinking, as well as co-author of a textbook on logic and critical thinking in medicine. He has also co-edited a volume of original papers on the use of the "Toulmin model" for the analysis and evaluation of arguments. He is the author of dozens of book chapters, journal articles and conference proceedings papers. They deal with such topics as the evaluation of inferences, the concept of relevance, practical reasoning, the effectiveness of computer-assisted instruction in critical thinking, Plato's conception of the good, the relation between fallacies and formal logic in Aristotle's thought, Aristotle's theory of argument evaluation, the reconstruction of Stoic propositional logic, and the Polish version of Alfred Tarski's classic paper on the concept of logical consequence.
Dr. Hitchcock received his B.A. in Honours Philosophy in 1964 from McMaster University and his Ph.D. in philosophy in 1974 from Claremont Graduate School in Claremont, California. His Ph.D. dissertation dealt with the role of myth in Plato's dialogues and its relation to rational argument. He has been a full-time faculty member at McMaster since July 1968.
Dr. Hitchcock was the founding president (1983-85) of the Association for Informal Logic and Critical Thinking, an international scholarly association, and is currently serving a two-year term (2007-09) on its board.
Dr. Hitchcock has been a member of the New Democratic Party of Canada since 1963. He was the NDP candidate for Member of Parliament in the constituency of Hamilton -Wentworth in three federal elections, in 1979, 1980 and 1984. He is currently membership organizer in the Ancaster -Dundas -Flamborough -Westdale New Democratic Party Provincial Riding Association. He is also the official agent of Gordon Guyatt, who has been nominated as the NDP candidate in the constituency of Ancaster -Dundas -Flamborough -Westdale in the next federal election.
He is married and has two daughters, one stepson and four granddaughters.
$5 regular, $4 general, FREE for Friends of the Centre
Come to the Centre for Inquiry's lecture by David Hitchcock tomorrow night. I'm really looking forward to this 'cause I've often confronted theists who claim that atheism is a relatively new phenomenon. Many of them think it's caused by modern science.
10 comments :
I survey the history of such thinking in the ancient Greek philosophical tradition from the 5th century BCE...
I believe the Carvaka tradition in India started even earlier.
Alas, neither tradition survived the theist interventions in their home territories: the Greek atheists were actually a kind of deist (Epicureans and Stoics), and the Cavarkist tradition was squelched by the Vedic theists. Modern atheism is a recent phenomenon.
Yes, it's good to see that science has nothing to do with atheism.
Samuel Skinner
Actually with the expansion of science and education atheism has spread.
Mostly because it directly contradicts holy writ.
In addition there really isn't an atheist "tradition". Epicureans for example hold certain identical beliefs that modern atheists do today (there is no reason to believe in the god(s)). Hey- it is what happens when you have an idea that can be summed up in a sentance!
Obviously, science offers no help for atheistic fairytales (quite the opposite, actually).
However, the general acceptance by the scientific comunity of naturalism/materialism did help increase the level of atheism.
I think one has to distinguish between traditions and the general phenomena here. Though I have no data what so ever, it is likely that parts of a population is atheistic.
The interesting thing would be to have a history of atheism. For example, Hobbes was earlier than Newton. Of course it is simplistic to regard Newton as the inaugurator of science, but he arguably made the first example of a recognizable theory. In any case it seems more likely that a more recent public exposure of atheism is codependent on the same changes in society that science was.
The area seems confused, as for example what is called "New Atheism" is IMHO much a response to new societal pathways suitable for communication in non-organized groupings.
Mats, if atheism isn't supported by science you should be able to give an example where a valid scientific theory hasn't been natural.
Torbjorn,
Mats, if atheism isn't supported by science you should be able to give an example where a valid scientific theory hasn't been natural.
The fact that scientific theories are "natural" (whatever that means in your parlance) doesn't mean that God doesn't exist. God sustains the universe by the natural laws He created. Your job, as an atheist, is to say where do those natural regularities come from in the first place. I, as a CHristian, have an answer. YOu, as an atheist, have a guess.
God sustains the universe by the natural laws He created. ... I, as a CHristian, have an answer. YOu, as an atheist, have a guess.
I missed the part where you explained why your view gets to be called an "answer" while your opponent's view is termed a "guess." You know, the part that explains why your view should be considered more reliable and all.
Blessed are the humble, for they shall inherit the Earth.
@ mats:
The fact that scientific theories are "natural" (whatever that means in your parlance) doesn't mean that God doesn't exist.
I wasn't discussing whether gods are impossible or not. I was asking how science finding natural theories can avoid being a support for the view that the world is natural.
Post a Comment