Living Without Religion 
 > Table of Contents 
 > >  Repertory   en français 
 Previous page Next page

The Repertory  I

A   B   C   D   E   F   G   H   I   J   K   L   M   N   O   P   Q   R   S   T   U   V   W   X   Y   Z



* An Illusion of Harmony ; EDIS, Taner

* In God We Trust, But Which One? ; HAYES, Judith

* infidel

* The Influence of Natural Religion on the Temporal Happiness of Mankind ; BENTHAM, Jeremy

* INGERSOLL, Robert Green

* intelligent design

* invisible pink unicorn

* Irreligion ; PAULOS, John Allen

* Islam

* Islamolatry

* Islamophilia

* Islamophobia

* IAFT (acronym)

French acronym: AILP

Web site: IAFT

* ILCAF (acronym)

French acronym: CILALP

Web site: ILCAF

* An Illusion of Harmony
Science and Religion in Islam
EDIS, Taner
Keywords: creationism Islam religion science
Prometheus Books, Amherst, NY, USA

This is an extremely depressing book for any secularist. Edis, born and raised in Turkey, is a physicist living and working in the USA. In this book he analyses the relationship between religion and science in the Islamic world and in Turkey in particular.

Edis is himself a secularist and materialist and he argues that Islam and modern science are essentially incompatible. But he limits his reflexions on the future of science among Muslims to a long, frustrating and ultimately unsatisfying -- even painful -- list of suggestions for how Muslims might eventually be persuaded to accept a scientific wordview without jettisoning their fundamental religious beliefs. He does not even mention the option of rejecting Islam in order to embrace a fully scientific and materialist worldview, apparently because he is convinced -- based on his extensive knowledge of his native country -- that such a development is impossible. Apparently he assumes it can never happen. Islam itself cannot be questioned!

The theory of intelligent design is completely mainstream in the Muslim world, at least in Turkey. It definitively trumps Darwinism in the minds of the vast majority of Turks and, based on Edis' analysis, that situation cannot be expected to change in the foreseeable future.

* In God We Trust, But Which One?
A fresh, new look at the fatal flaws in religious belief
HAYES, Judith
Keywords: Christianity religion
Freedom from Religion Foundation

* infidel (n. and adj.)

* The Influence of Natural Religion on the Temporal Happiness of Mankind
Keywords: philosophy religion
Prometheus Books, Amherst, NY, USA
Originally published in 1822, under the pseudonym Philip Beauchamp, by the great English philosopher Jeremy Bentham, originator of utilitarianism.

Natural Religion and The Despotic Deity

Following the usage of his day, Bentham uses the term "natural religion" as an approximate synonym of deism or natural theology, that is, a theology which purports to rest its case on reason instead of revelation. Bentham disregards the question of the truthfulness or falsehood of such religion; rather, he considers and criticizes its effects on the happiness of believers in the here and now.

"By the term religion is meant the belief in the existence of an almighty Being, by whom pains and pleasures will be dispensed to mankind, during an infinite and future state of existence. And religion is called natural, when there exists no written and acknowledged declaration, from which an acquaintance with the will and attributes of the almightly Being may be gathered.
My object is therefore to ascertain, whether the belief of posthumous pains and pleasures, then to be administered by an omnipotent Being, is useful to mankind—that is, productive of happiness or misery in the present life."

p. 30-31

Bentham observes that the deity in such a system must necessarily be a capricious despot, and the praise which the deity elicits from the faithful is reminiscent of the cowering obsequiousness which characterizes the behaviour of the downtrodden in the presence of a powerful tyrant.

"The first place in the esteem of the Deity will, in pursuance of this analogy, be allotted to those who disseminate his influence among men—who are most effectually employed in rendering his name dreaded and reverenced, and enforcing the necessity of perpetual subjection to him. Priests, therefore, whose lives are devoted to this object, will be regarded as the most favoured class.
The largest measure of his hate will in like manner be supposed to devolve on those, who attempt to efface these apprehensions, and to render mankind independent of him, by removing the motives for this subjection. The most decisive way of effecting this is by presuming to call in question his existence—an affront of peculiar poignancy, to which the material despot is not exposed. Atheists, therefore, will be the person whom he is imagined to view with the most signal abomination."

p. 57-58

* INGERSOLL, Robert Green


Reason, Tolerance, and Christianity

Superstition and Other Essays

See also:


* intelligent design

"Intelligent design" is essentially creationism in pseudo-scientific drag. It is an attempt to make theism or deism (since the intelligent agent is some variety of god) look like science.

See also creationism.

* invisible pink unicorn

The invisible pink unicorn is a divinity whose inexistence cannot be proven!

See the site

See also the Wikipedia page "Invisible Pink Unicorn".

* Irreligion
A Mathematician Explains Why the Arguments for God Just Don't Add Up
PAULOS, John Allen
Keywords: atheism religion science
Hill and Wang

An Excerpt

"An atheist or agnostic who acts morally simply because it is the right thing to do is, in a sense, more moral than someone who is trying to avoid everlasting torment or, as is the case with martyrs, to achieve eternal bliss. He or she is making the moral choice without benefit of Pascal's divine bribe. This choice is all the more impressive when an atheist or agnostic sacrifices his or her life, for example, to rescue a drowning child, aware that there'll be no heavenly reward for this lifesaving valor. The contrast with acts motivated by calculated expected value or uncalculated unexpected fear (or, worse, fearlessness) is stark.
Still, people do often vigorously insist that religious beliefs are necessary to ensure moral behavior. Though the claim is quite clearly false of people in general, there is a sense in which it might be true if one has been brought up in a very religious environment. ...religious injunctions and rewards promised to children for being good might, if repudiated in later life, drastically reduce the time people spend playing the "being good" game. This is another reason not to base ethics on religious teachings."

pp. 140-141


A quote from the above-mentioned review:

Paulos lays out, seriatim, most of the classical philosophical arguments for the existence of a deity, and immediately refutes them as they arise. Thus we find the ontological argument, the argument from First Cause, the argument from design, the argument from the seeming existence of moral universals, and so forth, laid out one by one and just as soon demolished. It will be noted that these chapters are as brief as they are easygoing.

Some of Paulos’s critics, noting this brevity, complain that he is too brisk and thoughtless in giving such cavalier treatment to arguments so ancient and weighty, over which so many sages have wracked their brains in ages past. But this misses Paulos’s larger and more important point: The hypothesis that a deity created the universe and somehow still intervenes in it is, on the face of it, an extravagant, inelegant, and superfluous supposition. It lacks any support from our direct experience of the world, nor even from the subtle and indirect inferences of modern science. Therefore, in order to make it plausible, let alone convincing, requires arguments that are clear, direct, and compelling. An enormous burden of proof lies heavy on the proponents of theism; atheism is really the default position. Paulos finds that the classical arguments cited are at best verbally dexterous, and that typically, they head into muddy and confusing ground before they get too far. In large measure, they reduce to arguments from the deployment of pompous but vacuous terminology. Therefore, there is no reason to take them all that seriously, since they flounder early and often, and are riddled with self-contradiction when picked apart by a relentlessly logical mind.

* Islam (n.)

Founded in Arabia by Muhammad in the 7th century, this religion was at its beginnings greatly influenced by Judaism and Christianity, both of which Muhammad envied. It also has some pagan elements. Islam spread rapidly by war and conquest.

Relevant Books:

An Illusion of Harmony -- EDIS, Taner

Leaving Islam -- WARRAQ, Ibn

Why I Am Not a Muslim -- WARRAQ, Ibn

Relevant Articles:

DiaHumanism Institute for Studies in Freethought

Relevant Links:

* Islamolatry (n.)

Giving preferential treatment to one religion, Islam, by absolving it of all criticism.

Near synonym: Islamophilia

* Islamophilia (n.)

The habit of selectively refusing to criticize, or censoring criticism of, Islam or of its variants such as Islamism, when this habit is applied only to Islam and not to any other religions such as Christianity or Hinduism or others. In other words, Islamophilia implies giving preferential treatment to one particular religion, Islam, by making it immune to all criticism.

I.e. giving preferential treatment to one religion, Islam, by absolving it of all criticism.

Near synonym: Islamolatry

* Islamophobia (n.)

This term is highly problematic and should be avoided, for the following reasons:

"We refuse to renounce our critical faculties out of fear of encouraging “islamophobia,” an unfortunate concept which confuses criticism of Islam as a religion with stigmatization of believers."

— Manifesto of the Twelve

Articles on "Islamophobia"

A word created by FASCISTS and used by COWARDS to manipulate MORONS."

— Andrew Cummins

Videos about "Islamophobia"

Salman Rushdie on “Islamophobia”
Salman Rushdie on “Islamophobia”
Islam is not a race.Criticising Islam is NOT RACIST.
Islam is not a race.
Criticising Islam is NOT RACIST.