Is simple, profound and brilliant
I just came to Cafe Society to post about this. Is Randall sick? He was out for a week with some sort of emergency a few weeks ago and had guests fill in.
I think it’s a family member who is ill, but yes, loved today’s strip.
I actually found it kind of preachy, even if I agree with the sentiment.
Yeah, me too. And kind of moribund, instead of funny. But I begrudge nobody of their sources of solace.
Yeah, have to agree.
Also, what’s up with “not really”
Wow, different strokes for different folks, I guess. I found nothing “preachy” about the strip.
“I find my courage where i can, but I take my weapons from science” is an amazing summation of the struggles anyone would go through with an illness that you have no real control over.
Big xkcd fan here, but today’s comic irked me more than anything, as it seems to imply that having faith in religion means not trusting science or being opposed to it. The line about taking courage where he can might suggest otherwise, but when you consider what the speech in the second panel is a response to, it falls apart (for me) as an argument against faith.
I have no issues with atheism nor any desire to convert anyone, but I don’t like the way this argument gets so often framed as “science is better than religion because x, y, z” rather than “no religion is better than religion because x, y, z”. I can be a scientist and be religious at the same time if I so desire, thank you very much.
Electric Warrior, I think that part of the issue is this: in the U.S., when we say “Religious” we very often mean “believes in an Omniscient, Omnipotent, Omnibenevolent God.”
Can one beleive in such a thing and not oppose science? (not a rhetorical question: I’m really asking.)
That comic made me think of Hitchens.
Well, wouldn’t the omnipotence/omnibenevolence of this hypothetical god suggest that any and all scientific discoveries made by humanity are acceptable and part of the great plan?
But in any case I feel that’s a very limiting definition and it wouldn’t describe my own beliefs, nor those of many of my more religious family members.
Yes.
In the U.S. when we say “religious,” we very often mean Christian, or Jewish. And absolutely, of course, 100% one can believe in the Judeo-Christian God and not oppose science; there are and have been lots of scientists (and doctors) who have been devoutly religious people.
I thank folks for the responses. I actually regret the question now. I think it would be better for me to make a thread about my questions on the topic. Sorry about the hijack.
It is both sad and horrifying that anybody has to bother to say this in print. It is both sad and horrifying that anyone would comment on it as if it were brave or controversial or defiant to say. This should be as obvious as breathing.
Even though I agree completely with the overall sentiment, at first I had a reaction similar to yours.
But, in thinking about it more, I decided the key phrase from the comic is:
“So, has this sickness opened you up to looking for answers beyond science?”
This suggests not he’s trying to use science to rebut faith, but rather rebutting the idea that bad things happening are somehow a rebuttal of science. Kind of the old “there’re no atheists in foxholes” tripe.
So it is more a statement of “if I didn’t believe in X before, nothing that’s happened makes a case for why I would now.”
It made me think of this old line:
Exactly. It’s not an argument against faith. It’s an argument against faith that only comes in the face of tragedy or success. It’s simply illogical to be an atheist all your life, then suddenly turn to God when things aren’t all peachy. His belief is that the best way to fight the disease is through science, not faith. You are free to believe otherwise, but don’t expect him to believe as you do.
I took the remark as a response to persons who expect atheists & agnostics to instantly convert to one or another brand of theism when faced with personal hardship. Many theists – well, many Christians – assume that there are no genuine non-believers, that persons who style themselves atheist or agnostic are either denying what they know in their hearts to be true or that they are simply ignorant of religion. Some (not all) do not hesitate to point that out when atheists/agnostics are slding downward in life’s viccissitudes. This can become annoying.
I thought of the old Latino saying that goes like:
“If the patient got better, it was the Virgin [Mary]; if it died, it was the doctor”
I was surprised to hear this adage many times in very catholic countries, it was mostly the medical community that made that observation.