GGPViper wrote:
Hopper wrote:
All atheism is, is a disbelief in God. It doesn't suggest any other political leaning.
Well, several prominent individuals in the so-called atheist "movement" (since when is not collecting stamps a hobby?) seem to be involved in some sort of dispute around sex and gender.
Michael Shermer and PZ Myers (They are apparently "big shots" in the not-collecting stamps club, although I never heard about them before arriving on WP) have clashed over the issue of rape.
On a more fundamental level, the world's most famous atheist - Professor Richard Dawkins - has nothing but extreme contempt for feminism, as demonstrated in his comments on the "rape manual" otherwise known as
Philosophiæ Naturalis Principia Mathematica:
http://www.physics.nyu.edu/sokal/dawkins.htmlAnother way to look at it: Natural Scientists are more likely to be atheists than the general population. Feminists are more likely to be atheists than the general population.
Yet the two tend to be opposing forces in this great battle:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science_warsConflict, it would seem, is inevitable...
But what is the conflict here? I'm sorry if it should be obvious, but it isn't to me. I mean, I can see conflict, but I'm not sure what the disagreement is.
My understanding (well, guess): The Scientists have done their sciencing, and are saying 'this is the way the world is, including men and women, and we've done the science to prove it, so there'. And The Feminists are responding with some notion of how, what, scientific enquiry is inherently sexist? Present understandings of scientific enquiry are, etc?
Is that anything like it?
19 Mar 2014, 12:26 am
