Pages

March 25, 2009

The Atheists vs The Believers - Pre-Game Show (Part 1 of 5)

Alright, here it is. The gauntlet has been thrown down. The debate between believers and atheists has gone on, unresolved, for so long that we here at The Blog Journalists have decided it’s time for a final showdown.

One game, winner takes all, losers are converted.

Hold on, one “game”? Isn’t this a several thousand year old metaphysical question? How will it be solved?

The answer is on the ice.

Over the next four weeks The Blog Journalists will be simulating the first ever (I am going out on a limb here to say I am very sure this has never been done before) metaphysical hockey game. Our worthy opponents are “The Atheists” who will face-off against “The Believers” for eternal glory (or, should we say in light of the unresolvedness of the competition at the current time, mortal glory….but with a chance of eternal glory!)

The match will theoretically be played at the centre of the hockey universe, The Air Canada Centre in Toronto (emphasis on “theoretically”; please don’t show up at the gates an hour and a half prior to game-time) and is being dubbed the most meaningful hockey game to be played in Toronto in a long, long….long time.

This game will differ from your ordinary hockey game as organizers (namely myself) have agreed to play the game one period at a time over the next several Wednesdays in order to fit The Blog Journalist’s schedule.

This week we will be providing a bit of expert analysis as well as revealing the tentative starting line-ups for each ideology. Next week it’s “Game-On!”

First things first, let’s meet the competitors, starting with the high-powered Atheists. The present team captain Richard Dawkins, authour of The God Delusion will play forward, a position that The Believers have called fitting, as they find him quite offensive. Dawkins will be flanked by a couple of Europeans (as if The Atheists needed anything else to get on Don Cherry’s hit-list), one who has earned the nickname “The Greek”, Epicurus, and grinder from Germany, Ludwig Feuerbach. On defence the Atheists had been hoping to secure a pair of top-scientists, but were unable to convince either Charles Darwin or Einstein to join their ranks, as they decided to take this one in from the stands along with the rest of the agnostics. Instead the Atheists will have to settle for the relatively green defender, authour Philip Pullman whose inexperience will be made up for by veteran Sigmund Freud. Rounding out the atheist squad is goaltender Karl Marx, who although is in theory is one of the best goaltenders around, to this point has been ineffective in putting this into practice. One more interesting news-tidbit surrounding Marx, he has also been quoted in the papers saying something about the need for drug-testing and rampant opium-use amongst The Believers, although there has, to this point, been no evidence to support these claims.

Now to take a quick run-through The Believers’ starting lineup.

On forward The Believers will be sending out a line being dubbed the “All-Saints” unit, composed of St. Thomas Aquinas up the middle with St. Anslem of Canterbury on the left and St. Augustine of Hippo on the right. The expectation is that this line will maintain a defensive, dump and chase style to try and neutralize the powerful Atheistic attack. The defense for The Believers will be the more contemporary pair of Oxfordians, Professor of Historical Theology Alistair McGrath, authour of The Dawkins Delusion, and Systems Biologist Denis Noble. This pairing has been known to work very well together historically and give The Believers a much needed youth movement on the blueline. If they prove to be too green, The Believers have “The Rock”, otherwise known as St. Peter, waiting in the wings. Finally, the easiest position of all for The Believers to fill was goaltender as it is well know amongst believers that Jesus saves.

Overall, The Believers have a more experienced team, with a number of their players being several hundred years old. Only time will tell whether this will prove to be a disadvantage and if their metaphysical stick-handling will defeated by the younger, more contemporary Atheists. Either way, their play is regarded by experts as philosophically sound.

There is no doubt in my mind (especially since I am writing this stuff) that this will be a tight game and that it will go down to the wire. If needed, there will be “sudden death” overtime, which as ominous as that sounds in a metaphysical debate, I promise you it does not imply any sort of death, but rather “next goal wins.” But you already knew that…

That about sums up this week’s pre-game festivities here at The Blog Journalists. Please don’t forget to return at 5pm next Wednesday for the first period.

Note: Two things I would like to mention. Number 1: this blog series is intended to work as a fresh look at a subject that is all to often bogged down by reactionaryism. My goal in this work is to present popular arguments, new and old, in an interesting to read format with a neutral view. I do not intend to offend anyone through this series and am in no way trivializing the philosophical importance of the debate or the belief or non-belief of any individual. In fact, I am trying to do quite the opposite. I am trying to promote the subject matter and the validity of both “ideologies.” I realize that I have taken a very Western/Christian approach to the debate and I must say that I regret this as I would have liked to have taken a broader approach, however I choose to stick within my realm of experience so as to not misrepresent any facts or groups of people due to my ignorance of the subject. If you have any questions, please either leave comments on the forum to promote discussion, or for private inquiries, please email: theblogjournalists@gmail.com

4 comments:

Anonymous said...

I'm looking forward to reading how this highly anticipated game plays out. I have a feeling it will be decided in overtime.

History tells us that The Believers will have a strong defensive game whereas The Atheists will be more focused on offense.

Anonymous said...

http://www.philip-pullman.com/q_a.asp

"His Dark Materials seems to be against organised religion. Do you believe in God?"

Follow through on that one and watch that Pullman doesn't become your weakest link!
:)

Anonymous said...

Cool idea Will. I'm interested to see where this is going.
In the meantime, perhaps I can get the ball rolling on some debate:

The ideas of religion, and specifically Christianity, make perfect sense to me 2000 years ago. But as we gained scientific understanding of the world and the universe, religion's relevance begins to fade. I have posted a timeline below of the birth of all the players (from Wikipedia), as well as four simplistic turning points in science: heliocentrism, microbiology, gravity, and evolution.

Of the five competitors born before 1800, four are 'believers'. Five atheists compared to only two believers were alive when The Origin of Species was published. Only one believer was a scientist rather than a theologian. So basically, with the hindsight provided by scientific discovery, religion loses stature.

Thoughts/rebuttal from anyone?

Timeline:
A- Epicurus- 341BCE
B- Jesus- 0(ish)
B- Augustine- 354
B- Anselm- 1033
B- Aquinas- 1225
Copernican Heliocentrism- 1543
Microbiology- 1676
Newton's Principia- 1687
A- Feuerbach- 1804
A- Marx- 1818
A- Freud- 1856
The Origin of Species- 1859
B- Noble- 1936
A- Dawkins- 1941
A- Pullman- 1946
B- McGrath- 1953

Will said...

Just wanted to make a quick comment in advance of tomorrow's post.

Thanks for setting up the dates Russ. I just want to comment on one thing you said.

Alistair McGrath, although the chair of Theology, Religion and Culture at Oxford, has a PhD in molecular biophysics as well and is well respected within both fields. Also an interesting note, McGrath was interviewed for Dawkins well known film "The Root of All Evil?" but the footage was left out of the final production. This fascinating footage can be found, in its entirety, here:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6474278760369344626&hl=en-GB

Also, I would like to mention that the selection of the specific people involved in this "hockey game" was mostly random and it would have been just as easy to select contemportary "Believer" team and pit them against hundred year old atheists.

This is meant to be as even a playing field as possible and the people involved are chosen because of their prominence, as well as partly for comic relief (The All-Saints line for example.) Hopefully this will reveal itself over this next few weeks.

Another other comments or ideas?