From: madhaus@netcom.com (Maddi Hausmann)
Subject: Re: Why I became an Athiest (was: frustrations with christianity)
Organization: Society for Putting Things on Top of Other Things
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 23:21:15 GMT

shimoff@umbc4.umbc.edu (Eliot Shimoff) writes: >
madhaus@netcom.com (Maddi Hausmann) writes: >>
shimoff@umbc4.umbc.edu (Eliot Shimoff) writes: >>>

>The issue is not _whether_ you studied, but _how much_.  Very few
>people who have studied Judaism intensely (i.e., spending many
>years studying and practicing intensely) turn away.  Similarly,
>very few people who study atheism intensely (i.e., spending many
>years studying and practicing intensely) turn away from atheism.

Um, one does not study atheism intensely, not does one "practice"
atheism extensively.  This is why I later corrected you about
your treating atheism as a religion.  It isn't.  It's an
lack of belief due to lack of supporting evidence, 
not a belief that something doesn't exist.

As to studying/practicing Judaism intensively, might I suggest
that this can apply to any religion, not just Judaism?  Thus it
isn't an argument for Judaism's rightness, merely proof that
it is successful at indoctrination, since other religions exist
with the same results for those who study/practice heavily,
and these religions have different conclusions that Judaism.

>I wrote:
>>>Imagine what convinced atheists would say if I entered alt.atheism
>>>with some weak arguments against it based on what had happened to
>>>me when I was 6 or 10 or 15 years old; they would -- with justification --
>>>tell me to go back and study atheism first.  (Read the alt.atheism
>>>FAQ; that is exactly what they assert.)
>
>Maddi responded:
>>This is a false dichotomy.  It takes about 30 minutes to read all
>>five a.a. FAQ files.  I have spent years studying Judaism, and yet
>>you say it is not enough.  This is an unfair comparison.  How much
>>study is "enough" for you to believe that I have enough information
>>to choose fairly?
>>
>>Incidently, what "weak arguments" did you have in mind for a
>>posting to a.a.?  I think you are mistakenly implying that atheism
>>is a religion.  It is not.
>
>I did not imply that atheism was a religion.  What did I mean by a 
>weak argument.  Either the blind watchmaker or Pascal's wager strike
>me as weak arguments I have often heard that "prove the bankruptcy of
>atheism."

Um, what do these have to do with experiences you had at 6 or
10 or 15?  These are intellectual, not experiential views.
The a.a. FAQ file addresses these arguments, by the way.
You earlier gave an analogy of appearing on a.a. and sharing
experiences at these ages, posting wak arguments based on
them.

>Since I have not studied atheism, I cannot respond with much
>authority.  But I do not understand how objections to sexism,
>authoritarianism, or ritualism imply atheism.  Responses to 
>those objections have molded all branches of modern Judaism.

This is true, but the central tenets of Judaism still do not
"feel right" to me, even in the Reform or Reconstructionist
branches.  As I have said repeatedly, these objections started
my journey of questioning.  Please stop asking how they got
me to the finish line!  I did that by thinking and living!

-- 
Maddi Hausmann                madhaus@netcom.com
Humorist, Satirist, Tech Writer.  Take your pick.

Centigram Communications Corp, San Jose California  408/428-3553
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish