Sender: -1.6 (spamval) -- NONE
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;         d=gmail.com; s=beta;         h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references;         b=flMyIx2IG6rrBLW2g7RGhuDNoc/v9SkqLqS0a4l/sDteNWI6jPgZxtazSkXLe6bA3enyAsCZfJPBNQ4+HNtpa0dqMj8dUDK1k3cLEmEMD7UkJWWk4BMxmXyKgI+rsgeWzYRATS9q1f8yRkmiR0COxCzNfhCJ9ffqBZccM7adGow=
Message-ID: <fb769dde0710040609m4d58ac7fg2b040a62782489d4 &AElig mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0710031502030.3721 &AElig boston.eecs.umich.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0710031120480.10200 &AElig samba> 	 <Pine.LNX.4.64.0710031502030.3721 &AElig boston.eecs.umich.edu>
Date: Thu, 4 Oct 2007 09:09:40 -0400
To: "Daniel Reeves" <dreeves &AElig umich.edu>
Cc: "Uluc Saranli" <saranli &AElig cs.bilkent.edu.tr>, improvetheworld &AElig umich.edu
From: "Rob Felty" <robfelty &AElig gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Good article (religion vs science)

That was a pretty good article indeed. I thought it was interesting
that it was in Physics Today. One of the more interesting aspects of
the article in my opinion was that the author suggests that the U.S.
is largely at fault for the rise of extremist Islam, by supporting
extremist sects over the last 50 years in Afghanistan, Iran, and
several other countries, who have since turned against us. I think
this is a very plausible argument.

And to Danny the non-atheist, I read that article too, (before I
received this e-mail (it was on reddit)), and I thought it was very
well argued for the most part. However, I think there is one flaw in
Sam Harris's reasoning. He assumes that people believe in reason. The
more I talk to Clare about this (and the more people we meet in rural
southern Indiana), the less I believe this to be the case. While I
agree with Sam Harris that reason is good, and it is easier to argue
for reason than against God, I think that there a number or religious
people who believe more in mystery than in reason, so appeals to
reason will not change these people's minds.

Rob

On 10/3/07, Daniel Reeves <dreeves &AElig umich.edu> wrote:
> Thanks Uluc.  In related news, I'm no longer an atheist.  Sam Harris just
> changed my mind about this.  Or perhaps put into words a conclusion I
> gradually came to over the past couple years:
>
> http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/sam_harris/2007/10/the_problem_with_atheism.html
>
> This reminds me of Steve Levitt's bewilderment at the recent spate of
> anti-God books (Dennett, Dawkins, Hitchens, Harris, Paulos, Stenger) [1].
> It's like writing a book called "Why Bird-Watching is a Waste of Time".
> Who would buy that book?  It's not going to dissuade bird watchers and
> everyone else already agrees and doesn't need to read a book about it!
>
> (I think Levitt is wrong but I found that hilarious.)
>
> Danny
>
>
> [1] By the way, all of those authors (except Stenger; he sounds good too,
> from reviews, but I don't know first-hand) are brilliant and really fun to
> read.
>
>
> > http://ptonline.aip.org/journals/doc/PHTOAD-ft/vol_60/iss_8/49_1.shtml
> >
> > It is titled "Science and the Islamic worldThe quest for rapprochement" by
> > Pervez Amirali Hoodbhoy in the department of physics at Quaid-i-Azam
> > University in Islamabad, Pakistan.
>
> --
> http://ai.eecs.umich.edu/people/dreeves  - -  search://"Daniel Reeves"
>
> A computer, to print out a fact,
> Will divide, multiply, and subtract.
>          But this output can be
>          No more than debris,
> If the input was short of exact.
>                  -- Gigo
>
>