I have myself said that Gnu Atheists, in some sociology-type ways, show a mindset similar to fundamentalist-type Christians, and have thus called them atheist fundamentalists. But, I've never claimed that they, let alone non-Gnus, are religious.
He then followed with teh stupidz of claiming religion is in our genes.
Neither one is close to true, in reality. The fact that Sully is arguably a very good representative of the Peter Principle in mainstream media, especially thought and opinion media, on the other hand, is almost ironclad as an argument now.
But, I couldn't let such arrogant, arrant nonsense go unchecked.
Here's a few thoughts I posted on Twitter, with interspersed comment:
Nope on both points— @realDonaldTrump 🌻🚩 (@SocraticGadfly) December 7, 2018
On A., Gnu Atheists are quasi-religious, sociologically, but not metaphysically religious
On B., no, certain genetic-driven tendencies toward imputing agency, or over-imputing agency, is FAR from being in our genes.
In short, per his Bell Curve love, on B, Sully seems to be doubling down on the pseudoscience of Ev Psych. A Scott Atran or Pascal Boyer will easily steer clear of this while offering much more plausible theories about the origins of what eventually became religious belief mindsets.
Of course, the second point, that religion is in our genes, is not far different from the "intelligence is in our racial heredity" that .@SullyDish claimed as part of fellating The Bell Curve.— @realDonaldTrump 🌻🚩 (@SocraticGadfly) December 7, 2018
From there, it's off to the land of false analogies, refuted by this:
But Andrew Sullivan, .@sullydish, has yet more teh stupidz.— @realDonaldTrump 🌻🚩 (@SocraticGadfly) December 7, 2018
Claiming that a denial of god is the same as belief in god? That's like claiming that evolutionary biologists who deny creationism are the same as creationists.
The real problem is Sully's willful ignorance on a fair amount of philosophy. I note that here
And, MORE Andrew Sullivan stupidity. .@SullyDish practices #scientism when he claims science can't replace religion because it's not abt "meaning." Hey, Sully? Way to prove you're willfully ignorant of #philosophy. It can indeed discuss meaning where science doesn't .@mpigliucci— @realDonaldTrump 🌻🚩 (@SocraticGadfly) December 7, 2018
and here:
Sullivan gets even worse, himself using the word "scientism" later on after having strawmanned science for not being scientism. And, on issues of "meaning" and philosophy, he misappropriates John Gray while ignoring likes of Hume and Camus from philosophical greats— @realDonaldTrump 🌻🚩 (@SocraticGadfly) December 7, 2018
Finally, Sullivan shows his misunderstanding of the political movement he claims to represent.
.@mpigliucci Sullivan gets worse from there. (And, you need to pass this part on to Dan Kaufman.) He goes into "classical liberal" mode and claims that politics without religion is illiberal. https://t.co/vcclblD88m— @realDonaldTrump 🌻🚩 (@SocraticGadfly) December 7, 2018
Tosh. Both here and in Europe (and the Anglosphere across the world), many politicians and political thinkers are both classical liberals and irreligious.
