this post was submitted on
1,155 points (61% like it)
3,138 up votes 1,983 down votes

atheism

subscribe1,114,527 readers

2,822 users here now

a community for

reddit is a source for what's new and popular online. vote on links that you like or dislike and help decide what's popular, or submit your own! learn more ›

all 72 comments

[–]cssafc 33 points34 points ago

Despite all the idiots who seem to think something can only be posted once or reddit law has been broken, thanks, I forgot about this quote. (People aren't online all the time, and if something is good, people will repost it, who fucking cares?).

[–][deleted] ago

[deleted]

[–]ZorkFox 13 points14 points ago

I've never seen it, and I'm not going to do a search of the subreddit for Dawkins quotes. I'm glad it was posted.

[–]Neonkid109 5 points6 points ago

I agree with this human being

[–]blows 19 points20 points ago

"We must question the story logic of having an all-knowing all-powerful God, who creates faulty Humans, and then blames them for his own mistakes." - Gene Roddenberry

"I condemn false prophets, I condemn the effort to take away the power of rational decision, to drain people of their free will -- and a hell of a lot of money in the bargain. Religions vary in their degree of idiocy, but I reject them all. For most people, religion is nothing more than a substitute for a malfunctioning brain." - Gene Roddenberry

[–]weagle11 4 points5 points ago

wow, that's awesome! who is this richard guy? I wonder if he has any other opinions on religion?

[–]Qubit103 -3 points-2 points ago

He's a British physicist I believe and he doesn't look to kindly on religion. Of course he's not a historian so he doesn't understand that religion allowed him to be where he is today

[–]Red1123 1 point2 points ago

wow what a FANTASTIC POINT

[–]Qubit103 -1 points0 points ago

Yeah well its true.

[–]Red1123 1 point2 points ago

You think it's true, it isn't.

[–]Qubit103 0 points1 point ago

Sure it is. Ancient Greeks developed many of the concepts that modern math and science are based on (such as pi), and their society was strongly influenced by their polytheistic belief system

[–]Red1123 0 points1 point ago

oh lord it's THIS point you're making?

[–]Qubit103 0 points1 point ago

Yes, yes it is. It's a valid point, he's just making a huge generalization

[–]cssafc 0 points1 point ago

Oh my.

[–]hrgilbert 6 points7 points ago

I actually don't think that this quote rings very true. As some others have stated, while some religious fundamentalists may be okay with not understanding the world, or looking for truth, or whatever — I don't think any religion in and of itself would ever teach that people shouldn't try and understand the world around them.

[–]BUT_OP_WILL_DELIVER 3 points4 points ago

Ultimately there will be a conflict between reality and their own dogma. If one interprets their scripture so loosely that there is no conflict, one must wonder why they bother being religious at all.

[–]hrgilbert 0 points1 point ago

I personally think that religion has less to do with ideology or dogma than it does with a certain way of life, attitude, community, etc. There is much more to the religious lifestyle than "interpreting scripture", for e.g., going to church, temple, etc. on a weekly basis, fund-raising for charities, meditating, praying, etc. on a daily basis, understanding that, while we can comprehend most of the world around us, there is still that mystical element, having certain kinds of weddings, having certain kinds of funerals, etc., etc.

What I'm trying to say here is that there is lots of reasons one may "bother" to be religious at all, if one loosely interprets scripture (if, even, at all!)

P.S. I think dogma of any kind; religious, scientific, artistic, etc. is always a bad thing. Dogma to me, is the bane of philosophical insight.

[–]smacktaix -2 points-1 points ago

Ultimately there will be a conflict between reality and their own dogma.

Unless their dogma reflects reality.

[–]BUT_OP_WILL_DELIVER 5 points6 points ago

Show me a religion who's entire dogma reflects reality and I will concede that point.

[–]smacktaix -2 points-1 points ago

[–]BUT_OP_WILL_DELIVER 3 points4 points ago

Nigga please.

[–]Tunis1jp 0 points1 point ago

No, but I think having the comforting fall back of God in your back pocket may put you falsely at ease about some things. Ascribing God to what we don't understand yet is not productive and can lead someone to false conclusions.

[–]hrgilbert 1 point2 points ago

Now that — I can agree with. At that point however, I think we must look at these people at a case-by-case standard. Its up to the religious agent to decide whether he or she will lazily apply "God" as an answer to some more difficult questions. These people, I think, are ultimately fearful or lazy — they don't use religion in a positive way, but in a way that is peculiar to them, in that it benefits them. The "fall back" on God, allows them to get by without fearing (death, life, tragedy, etc.) and without working (using "God" as an explanation for things without actually looking for other answers).

[–]Tunis1jp 0 points1 point ago

I agree. Someone's personally held beliefs I can tolerate as long as it doesn't influence their behavior or decision making in that respect. An analogy I could draw would be a politician that holds religious beliefs that I disagree with, but that person does not allow them to inform his decision making in regards to policy.

Though I must pause and ask the question, if a person's belief in a god is this nebulous entity that doesn't impact their life, then why propose the concept in the first place? If the view of God is that of a detached entity from the physical world, why then hold onto the belief at all? I suppose one could hold solace in the idea that there is life after death, and that ultimately may be the driving force behind their belief.

[–]comeboxwithme 16 points17 points ago

My first time seeing this. Thanks for the repost.

Edit: Not being sarcastic.

[–][deleted] ago

[deleted]

[–]wigum998 0 points1 point ago

Very well put.

[–]kwsi 0 points1 point ago

Have you read any of Dawkins books? What he 'offers' is a little more clear there.

Philosophical equivalents of what they rail against?

Could you expand on this?

[–]Red1123 0 points1 point ago

oh you don't like Dawkins or Harris. SO BRAVE

[–]khoker 1 point2 points ago

As an aside, it seems like this is a reddit post with a title of "Great Quote" with an imgur link taking you to a picture taken of said quote written on a board of some sort -- when the quote, itself, could have fit entirely in the title of the post. Does that seem weird to anyone else?

[–]LisFORlace[S] 0 points1 point ago

Why didn't I think of that?! Epic fail :(

[–]BinLadenCheekySmile 1 point2 points ago

Why is it a bad thing to be satisfied with not understanding the world? It's teaching us how to be satisfied. Ain't that a good thing?

[–]thateenageatheist 1 point2 points ago

That's what brought me to where I am today. I was not satisfied. I sought the answers. And I am much happier now.

[–]thesorrow312[!] 1 point2 points ago

Bertrand Russel on Pascals wager - If he met god in judgement and was asked why he didn't believe - " Oh lord, you didn't provide enough evidence".

[–]AwakeningtoLove 2 points3 points ago

Kindof an untrue, biased quote. True for some of religion, but mainly fundamentalism.

My entire life and education through college I have never, ever heard the dozens of priests I've listened to, teachers and classes taken, books, etc. make any sort of claim that we should not study, learn about science and philosophy, and try to better understand our world. Quite the opposite, actually.

At least, this Catholicism I've experienced above has never had problems with science, and actually strongly discourages absolute certainty and blind faith.

Sorry, atheists, but Dawkins can be pretty biased and distort the truth sometimes. Or he just doesn't know...?

[–]LisFORlace[S] 3 points4 points ago

I have actually experienced quite the opposite. As a child I was required to attend church with my mother where we were instructed by the pastor numerous times to ignore science and it's evil-doings. Fucked!

[–]IRequirePants 5 points6 points ago

So religion can not be generalized as such. Some encourage learning and others don't. It also depends on your religious leader.

[–]QuantumPotato 2 points3 points ago

Sorry your getting downvoted, I agree with you. I'm an atheist but I believe that most religion is pretty open about science and not blindly following. I don't think most of the people here can see that most religion just gives people good morals and only the extremists follow blindly.

[–]chender4 0 points1 point ago

I too have experienced what you speak of. When I was young and was forced to attend church by my parents, I learned mostly how to be a good person, and to treat people how you would want to be treated yourself.

But then I grew up and realized that morality is not derived from a great invisible bearded wizard, but rather that it comes from yourself. Some people need religion, but frankly its usually those same people that refuse to ask why things are the way they are. Religion at its core serves as an end to answer questions that require slightly more justification than 2000 year old wise men can answer. Only a sith-lord deals in absolutes.

[–]4realthistime 1 point2 points ago

Let's see, do you believe God created the universe?

Do you believe in heaven?

Do you believe that you will be judged and condemned in the day or reckoning?

Have you been told that any event in your life pertained to gods wil or was part of gods plan?

if you've answered yes to any of these questions, this quote pertains to you. When god is the go to source, this kills the curiosity.

[–]LibertarianDoc 4 points5 points ago

Yes, but I'd still like to know how

Yes, and that is in no way related to any kind of worldly science

Same as above

Same

God is just as much of an enigma as any other kind of discussion of morality.

[–]highasdick 0 points1 point ago

Morality is just a social construction that changes with circumstance. e.g. Killing is bad, but execution is okay, soldiers aren't considered immoral for killing, etc.

[–]LibertarianDoc 0 points1 point ago

That's true, but it doesn't nullify the concept. Also that is quite irrelevant. Morality can be explored in or out of a religious framework.

[–]serioush 0 points1 point ago

Hidden message: "IR BtB Wut?"

[–]coyote1284 0 points1 point ago

WHAT DOES THIS HAVE TO DO WITH ATHEISM?

(That's the cool thing to do now, right?)

[–]toodrunktofuck 0 points1 point ago

Well, he disrespects the roots of modern institutionalized experimental science in my opinion. Guys like Robert Boyle only pursued science to discover the secrets of creation. They where inspired by the notion that it made more sense the closer they looked. For them doing science was more like worshiping the temple that is the Cosmos.

[–]Aeroneer 0 points1 point ago

I know a lot about the universe, and I am still a Christian. I mean, I know at least 5 space physicists at my school (out of like, 50) who are Christian as well.

[–]llamaman27 -2 points-1 points ago

also great big repost

[–]kent_eh 1 point2 points ago

So what?

[–]AlwayzFree -1 points0 points ago

happy cake day

[–]LisFORlace[S] -1 points0 points ago

Thank you!

[–]Fleshgod -1 points0 points ago

This damn quote gets posted every day.

[–]evolsteve 7 points8 points ago

As it should.

[–]pilchowskinator 0 points1 point ago

Nope.

[–]evolsteve 0 points1 point ago

Contradiction, my favorite type of argument.

[–]pilchowskinator 0 points1 point ago

[–]evolsteve 0 points1 point ago

[–][deleted] ago

[deleted]

[–]LisFORlace[S] -1 points0 points ago

Thanks!

[–]OJSamson 0 points1 point ago

Not a fan of this quote. Planet of the apes makes an interesting counter argument to it.

[–][deleted] -3 points-2 points ago

Text; now in image form, for your karma!

[–]jukeboxsavage -1 points0 points ago

Exactly. That's the truth. Dont know why you got downvoted.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point ago

"I am against downvotes because it teaches us to be satisfied with not knowing the truth."

-Abraham C.K. Hitlerstein

[–]All_Up_In_This_Jerk -1 points0 points ago

Oh mah gerd, Richard Drakrins

[–]sentinelse7en -5 points-4 points ago

I really like this quote. I think I'll reword it and claim it as my own. (puts on douche bag hat)

[–]Jejoisland -2 points-1 points ago

I have to disagree I now understand the world more then ever after I became a theist.

[–]jukeboxsavage -5 points-4 points ago

Christ, how many times do I have to see this? And with a thousand upvotes, too... People, if you rarely check out reddit, or you are new, don't post. We only end up seeing the same shit over, and over, and over again.

[–]dnick 2 points3 points ago

You have to see it as many times as you check a site where people upvote it, apparently.

If the people that upvoted agreed with you, they wouldn't have upvoted...but they don't, so they did. You're just going to have to deal with it.

[–]jukeboxsavage -1 points0 points ago

I have, but I still would like my opinion to be heard.

[–]dnick 0 points1 point ago

Fair enough. Though so would everyone else, including 'reposters'.

[–]jukeboxsavage 0 points1 point ago

I think the correct term is "karma whores."