What Book Changed Your Mind?

[Immanuel Can]

A great many people who would superficially call themselves Christians have never taken the trouble to subject this label to any serious scrutiny and are in fact agnostic. They honestly couldn't give a shit one way or the other because the notion of a god is simply irrelevant to them.

I couldn't agree more. It is, what I would call "Nietzschean Christianity," that is, the kind he describes the villagers in his "Madman's Speech" as having...God is, for all intents and purposes, "dead" to them in the sense that his existence would really have no part of their real lives, but they do not yet realize it.

They're nominally Christians, but functionally Atheists.

[Dalek Prime]

In many places and ways, it still is, which is both unfair and scary to freethinkers.

It is unfair and scary to Christians too, but for a different reason. It's not fair when people who have only a nominal commitment to something to which you are deeply and profoundly committed are regarded as one with you. It means that whatever irrelevant, hypocritical or just plain bad things they do get associated with you in the general imagination. Thus, even for Christians, nominalism has been a very bad thing.

I'm not sure, however, how much Freethinkers really have to fear from the nominalists. It's true they're unlikely to become Freethinkers, but I've also found that their commitment to *anything* is likely to be purely instrumental, for social approval and convenience, and not more than skin deep. (And real Christians are supposed to "love your enemies," as Christ said: so from them, the Freethinker can hardly find any cause for fear.)

However, we seem to have found something upon which we entirely agree when we say the socially-approved practice of labelling just anyone "respectable" as a "Christian" is a bad thing.

But back to books...

Let me relate a personal experience. Before I joined the regular army, I joined the Reserves. Whilst I was filling out forms, I was asked to state my religion. I said Atheist, to which the officer, concerned, asked "Are you certain you want me to put that down?" I said yes, and that response followed me in a subtly negative way throughout my service. What I'm getting at is, it is still dangerous to admit to disbelief in an otherwise free, but culturally Christian (or other religious) society. And that is what is scary and unfair.

[Obvious Leo]

Until quite recently one had to state one's religion on hospital admission forms in Australia. Unfortunately I've seen the inside of hospitals more often than is strictly desirable and I always told them to put Not Applicable. I was often asked "do you mean atheist or agnostic?" but I was adamant. I mean Not Applicable.

[Dalek Prime]

Until quite recently one had to state one's religion on hospital admission forms in Australia. Unfortunately I've seen the inside of hospitals more often than is strictly desirable and I always told them to put Not Applicable. I was often asked "do you mean atheist or agnostic?" but I was adamant. I mean Not Applicable.

Sometimes it seems there's no right answer except what they want to hear....

[Immanuel Can]

What I'm getting at is, it is still dangerous to admit to disbelief in an otherwise free, but culturally Christian (or other religious) society. And that is what is scary and unfair.

Yes, it is. And if that's what's happening where you are, then you're right about nominal "Christianity" being a problem to Atheists. Interesting.

Where I am, the roles are reversed. To be secular or Atheistic, or agnostic is never a stroke against one there. To be indifferent is the norm. To be any religion but "Christian" is considered positively meritorious, and guarantees one special treatment and privileges. To be merely nominally "Christian" is considered odd, but acceptable...like a man who insists on talking about his underwear: it's not appreciated, but it's weird within acceptable bounds. But to be a real Christian, well that's not considered Politically Correct: and it's pretty much open season on anyone who's not PC. You can pretty much be excluded, denied promotion, dismissed, shut down, ignored, sidelined and insulted with impunity, so far as the public is concerned.

[Obvious Leo]

But to be a real Christian, well that's not considered Politically Correct:

Would you elaborate on what you mean by this term? In my country it is not regarded as culturally acceptable for anybody to speak about their religious beliefs under any circumstances other than in the company of consenting adults of like mind. Evangelical Christians are the only group I know of who persistently violate this societal norm, although thankfully they are but a minority cult in Australia.

[Hobbes' Choice]

Most Victorican intellectuals were privately agnostic/atheistic. I don't see why you should be surprised.

Not so, actually. A good many weren't, and plenty of them were intellectuals. Indeed, the politesse of the day almost demanded that a person call himself a "Christian," just to avoid being regarded as pagan or uncivilized.

However, let all that be. It's not of the moment.

I wasn't surprised by Hardy's agnosticism. I was refreshed by his candour and existential frankness (not to mention much taken with his extraordinary linguistic legerdemain).

So you were; then you were not. Oh hum. Make up your mind.

Yes, there was a lot of pressure to be a "good" Christian, and lots of moral censure against those that did not express the appropriate obeisance to god; does not change the fact that most intellectuals were agnostic/atheistic.

As for Hardy's writing skill - it was pretty much par for the course amongst this peers. And so - unremarkable for his period.
Modern fiction is much dumbed down. So much so that I often find myself having to wade through much populist shite, with thoughtless grammar, historical novels chocka-block with absurd anachronisms; and even bad spellings, just to find an occasional gem.

[Immanuel Can]

As for Hardy's writing skill - it was pretty much par for the course amongst this peers. And so - unremarkable for his period.

Wow. Hardy is "par" eh? Well, you have your opinion, I guess. In truth, I can't figure out whether you're trolling or you can actually believe such a thing.

Trolling, I'll have to guess: it's the charitable interpretation. The alternative isn't particularly flattering.

Trolling it is, then. But talking to people who are trolling is a massive waste of time. So you'll have to excuse me.

Okay. Be well. Be happy. Have a nice day.

[Immanuel Can]

But to be a real Christian, well that's not considered Politically Correct:

Would you elaborate on what you mean by this term?

"Politically Correct" where I live generally means causes like multiculturalism, moral relativism, special pleading, historical guilt, gender politics, social welfare, historical revisionism, post-colonialism and so forth...the whole Leftist locker load. Christianity is considered as "outside" of all that, except for the nominal kind, which is considered an acceptably weak flavouring on what is essentially a secular lifestyle. To take being a Christian any more seriously is simply considered as stepping outside of the acceptable political spectrum.

[Obvious Leo]

But to be a real Christian, well that's not considered Politically Correct:

Would you elaborate on what you mean by this term?

"Politically Correct" where I live generally means causes like multiculturalism, moral relativism, special pleading, historical guilt, gender politics, social welfare, historical revisionism, post-colonialism and so forth...the whole Leftist locker load. Christianity is considered as "outside" of all that, except for the nominal kind, which is considered an acceptably weak flavouring on what is essentially a secular lifestyle. To take being a Christian any more seriously is simply considered as stepping outside of the acceptable political spectrum.

I know perfectly well what "politically correct" means but that wasn't what I was asking. I was actually asking what you meant by the term "a real Christian". Is "a real Christian" a person who regards himself as morally superior to those who don't share his beliefs and then doesn't hesitate to say so, whether people are interested in hearing it or not. In my country that sort of behaviour is just called bad manners and contains no political nuance.

[Immanuel Can]

Is "a real Christian" a person who regards himself as morally superior to those who don't share his beliefs and then doesn't hesitate to say so, whether people are interested in hearing it or not. In my country that sort of behaviour is just called bad manners and contains no political nuance.

Well, in theory, in my country speech is supposed to be free. And that means that whether or not we agree with a person. In fact, it means especially when we do not.

We don't regard it as necessary that he or she should ask if we are "interested" or not, on the assumption that people are quite free to choose what they decide to believe, and a free exchange of ideas is very valuable --- especially with those we initially find offensive or different. And even if we may interpret a person's speech as "bad manners," we're supposed to believe firmly in his right to say it, and defend that to the death.

Sounds a little like Voltaire, actually.

Sadly, that theory is being undermined by the PC crowd.

[Obvious Leo]

In other words you reckon that pestering people with your religious beliefs is perfectly acceptable social conduct. I'd advise you not to do it Australia, mate, because in this country that is absolutely taboo.

[Hobbes' Choice]

As for Hardy's writing skill - it was pretty much par for the course amongst this peers. And so - unremarkable for his period.

Wow. Hardy is "par" eh? Well, you have your opinion, I guess. In truth, I can't figure out whether you're trolling or you can actually believe such a thing.

Trolling, I'll have to guess: it's the charitable interpretation. The alternative isn't particularly flattering.

Trolling it is, then. But talking to people who are trolling is a massive waste of time. So you'll have to excuse me.

Okay. Be well. Be happy. Have a nice day.

`Okay, if you think you are so clever then furnish details of a contemporary writer who is below par.

[Hobbes' Choice]

But to be a real Christian, well that's not considered Politically Correct:

Would you elaborate on what you mean by this term?

"Politically Correct" where I live generally means causes like multiculturalism, moral relativism, special pleading, historical guilt, gender politics, social welfare, historical revisionism, post-colonialism and so forth...the whole Leftist locker load. Christianity is considered as "outside" of all that, except for the nominal kind, which is considered an acceptably weak flavouring on what is essentially a secular lifestyle. To take being a Christian any more seriously is simply considered as stepping outside of the acceptable political spectrum.

"Outside" by whom, in what way?
Christians might think themselves outside of historical guilt but any justice would have their creed at the centre of that abuse.

[Hobbes' Choice]

...supposed to believe firmly in his right to say it, and defend that to the death.

Sounds a little like Voltaire, actually.

Sadly, that theory is being undermined by the PC crowd.

... except that they (whomever you think "they" are), have a right to speak their minds as you do.

In mist cases the "PC" attitude is saving bigots and morons from their own stupidity.