There are some really superb blogs over at Science Blogs, and some of the best ones are required reading here. It's hard to stomach PZ's religious blatherings, but he's a gifted science writer and a skilled commentator on developmental issues in evolution. Laelaps is a treasure trove, and Shelley Batts should have won that scholarship; her neuroscience blog, Retrospectacle, is varied and always sharp. And I'm sure that undiscovered treasures are buried in the many blogs I've never visited.
But there are some blogs over there that are little more than the diaries of atheists. Not that there's anything wrong with that (i.e., godlessness): Larry Moran's Sandwalk is one of my must-reads, as is Abbie Smith's ERV, and like many well-informed bloggers who are evolutionists, both are skeptics. Their blogs are important because they're full of serious science, the kind of analysis that is actually more dangerous to creationism and ID than the newsletter fodder that gets pinned up on the walls of the blogs of less thoughtful commentators. If the bosses at Science Blogs haven't already tried, they should beg Larry Moran to move Sandwalk to Science Blogs. And if they're starting to consider a no-growth policy, then they should let Sandwalk take the place of the surprisingly shallow EvolutionBlog of Jason Rosenhouse.
Early on here at QoD, I had EvolutionBlog on my Blogs of Note list, simply because a prominent blog (as evidenced by its presence at Science Blogs) on "the endless dispute between evolution and creationism" seemed apropos. But it's sadly short on science, and long on anti-faith chest-beating. Ooh, but here's something new: the problem of evil.
There are at least two things that I find odd about much of what passes for atheist commentary on the problem of evil. First, folks like Rosenhouse seem to think that every instance of suffering (by humans or giraffes or echidnas or moths) represents a new instance of the problem of evil, as though the problem is magnified with each new meal by a carnivore. Heaping more dead salmon on the pile, it seems to me, doesn't change the basic problem of suffering in God's world. Second, I'm fascinated by the nearly-ubiquitous implication that the problem of evil is somehow linked to common descent. Huh? Humans, including Christians, were quite well acquainted with suffering and natural evil -- on an apocalyptic scale -- long before Darwin scooped Wallace. The problem of evil, if it's a problem for Christianity, isn't linked in any unique way to evolutionary theory.
But there's not much more for me to say, because Scott Carson does it so much better. I've removed the worthless EvolutionBlog from my blogroll, and replaced it with Carson's An Examined Life. (Thanks to John Farrell for the tips.) His latest post, Notes from the Scorecard Department, is the kind of blog article that should make textbook publishers nervous. If you're a Christian, be warned: you may find harsher words there for yourself than for blissfully ignorant bloggers like Jason Rosenhouse. And if you think the question of suffering is a big deal, start with Carson's claim that the Problem of Evil isn't a problem at all. No matter how you come down on the question, take note of the difference in depth of thought and analysis. Rosenhouse:Philosophy :: Behe:Genetics.
11 comments:
Thanks for the link! As for Larry coming to SB, they asked and he decided to stay at his own spot at the Sandwalk a few months ago.
As for the subject of "atheist diaries" on SB, I think that each writer brings a different expertise to the community, but many posts are in fact about atheism/culture wars. I'm generally not compelled to write on the subject, my own theological leanings being somewhat up in the air at the moment anyway, but you would not be the first person I heard complain about some writers focusing too much on atheism.
There are at least two things that I find odd about much of what passes for atheist commentary on the problem of evil.
In my opinion most of the atheist commentary on the so-called "problem" of evil falls into two categories.
(1) It's similar to questions like how many angels can dance on the head of a pin or where does the tooth fairy put all the teeth? These sorts of questions can be amusing from time to time but they bear no relationship to reality. Mostly we just get a chuckle out of the enormous amount of ink wasted on such silly questions.
(2) The way in which some Christians answer the question is a source of amusement for its detachment from logic. The God of the Old Testament is clearly evil (think of the deluge and the seven plagues—among other things) so what's the problem? There's evil in the world because God likes it. QED
Well, reading things superficially would tend to be amusing, more often than not.
Hey Stephen, thanks for the link and the kind words. Second place and a cool grand isn't anything to complain about either. :)
Nice Article.
I am glad to have found your blog & not just because we use a similar color scheme and layout. It seems like you and I might share a number of perspectives. I will make a point to follow your posts!
By the way, I visited Calvin last summer for the ASA meeting.
Thomas--
Thanks for the kind words! I like your blog a lot, despite your unimaginative use of color :-) Glad you made it to the ASA meeting; I try to go every few years or so.
Scott Carson's "What Problem?" isn't very convincing. God and suffering can be compatible either by making suffering man's problem or, better yet, a non-problem. Neither make much sense to me.
Suffering is caused by human agents -
The suffering caused by parasitic disease? The suffering of an animal as it's being eaten alive? There are many examples of suffering directly related by a human actions, sometimes the intentional acts of evil people. But the world is a big place. If we're going to get God off the hook for suffering, then it's got to be for all suffering, not just the ones directly tied to willful human actions.
Suffering is not real -
It's the soul that counts. The body is just a physical shell. This is just an empty theological point that bears no weight today. For many good reasons, "soul" is now nothing more than a term of art. Our morality is based on what happens to this physical body. Why else would we reject rape, torture and murder as immoral?
Scott just cannot wave away suffering. But the reality of suffering is not so much a threat to God's existence as it is a threat to the notion that a human can have a relationship with God that anyone might consider reciprocal. God could exist and this world before us is his handiwork, but what can you read from this creation? He's wasteful, shoddy, prone to taking short-cuts, has a lack of focus, and pretty indifferent to his handiwork. You might even want to dismiss the notion of a creator based this survey (but then you'd just be an atheist), but if you insist on pulling God in, the indications are that this relationship is going to be one-sided.
Steve, I just discovered your blog. I listened to your and Kelly Clark's Skeptic's Sunday recording from last May. In that, and in a number of your posts here, you seem to adopt a position that lots of these issues (like the problem of evil, evolution, etc) need not be a threat to Christians. My question(s) to you are: So what makes you believe any of Christianity? How do you know whether a theological claim is true (Jesus was the one and only sacrifice, for example)? How do you know what parts if any of the Bible are really true? Do you believe it because you are convinced by some reasoning or does it just resonate with you?
I ask because I used to believe as you seem to now, but I can no longer make myself believe any of it. So I'm curious about what makes a Christian like you tick?
The problem of evil is only a problem for people who think of God as Mr. Incredible , coming to rescue mankind from disaster and tragedy.
God is more like the people who passed by on the other side when the man was attacked on the road to Damascus.
So what problem of evil is there exactly?
Nice blog. I just found it via a post on another blog I read, and have already added it to my blogroll. I'm commenting on this post because I recently made my own post on the "problem" of evil; you may find it interesting. Or at least a semi-fun waste of time. :)
Your post is rather thoughtful and it's great. I think that articles should make people think about things that surround them.
Post a Comment