| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
==The Boudry test== |
==The Boudry test== |
||
Dr. Maarten Boudry is an [[atheist]] and he wanted to find out how well a conference of theologians can understand the difference between what's sensible and what is meaningless. Below is an example of Boudry's scribbling. |
Dr. Maarten Boudry is an [[atheist]] and he wanted to find out how well a conference of theologians can understand the difference between what's sensible and what is meaningless. Below is an example of Boudry's scribbling. |
||
| − | {{cquote| By narrowly focusing on the disorderly state of present-being, or the “incoherence of a primordial multiplicity”, as John Haught put it, Darwinian materialists lose sense of the ultimate order unfolding in the not-yet-being. Contrary to what Dawkins asserts, if we reframe our sense of locatedness of existence within a the space of radical contingency of spiritual destiny, then absolute order reemerges as an ontological possibility |||<ref>[http://freethoughtblogs.com/dispatches/2012/09/28/philosopher-pulls-a-sokal-on-theology-conferences/ Philosopher Pulls a Sokal on Theology Conferences]</ref>}} |
+ | {{cquote| By narrowly focusing on the disorderly state of present-being, or the “incoherence of a primordial multiplicity”, as John Haught put it, Darwinian materialists lose sense of the ultimate order unfolding in the not-yet-being. Contrary to what Dawkins asserts, if we reframe our sense of locatedness of existence within a the space of radical contingency of spiritual destiny, then absolute order reemerges as an ontological possibility |||<ref>[http://freethoughtblogs.com/dispatches/2012/09/28/philosopher-pulls-a-sokal-on-theology-conferences/ Philosopher Pulls a Sokal on Theology Conferences] [[PZ]] hosted a section of Boudry's hilarious masterpiece on [[pharyngula]]. </ref>}} |
Does that make any sense to you? Maarten Boudry doesn’t think it makes any sense and as the author he should know. |
Does that make any sense to you? Maarten Boudry doesn’t think it makes any sense and as the author he should know. |
||
Revision as of 15:48, 11 October 2012
Sophisticated theologians have spent years at universities or theological colleges and are steeped in hard to understand nonsense truths about God! Sophisticated theologians write complex material with many impressive long words, some even include Latin, New Testament Greek or Hebrew in their texts. To the rest of us theology may look superficially like meaningless drivel but that just shows how uneducated we are. Or does it?
The Boudry test
Dr. Maarten Boudry is an atheist and he wanted to find out how well a conference of theologians can understand the difference between what's sensible and what is meaningless. Below is an example of Boudry's scribbling.
| “ | By narrowly focusing on the disorderly state of present-being, or the “incoherence of a primordial multiplicity”, as John Haught put it, Darwinian materialists lose sense of the ultimate order unfolding in the not-yet-being. Contrary to what Dawkins asserts, if we reframe our sense of locatedness of existence within a the space of radical contingency of spiritual destiny, then absolute order reemerges as an ontological possibility | ” |
—[1] | ||
Does that make any sense to you? Maarten Boudry doesn’t think it makes any sense and as the author he should know.
Anyway sophisticated theologians listened to the word salad (And it isn't even healthy like a real salad). The theologians tried to look intelligent and assumed it must make sense somehow or other.
Deduction
| “ | This shows once again the appeal of religious gibberish to the educated believer, and demonstrates that conference organizers either don’t read what they publish, or do read it and think that if it’s opaque then it must be profound. | ” |
—[2] | ||
Atheist outsiders can no more than guess how much of regular theology is baloney dressed up in impressive words like what Maarten Boudry wrote.
Are theologians sophisticated?
Some academics insist there's no real distinction between sophisticated theology and ordinary theology, there's just theology. Those academics could well be right! All theology looks unsophisticated.
See also
References
- ↑ Philosopher Pulls a Sokal on Theology Conferences PZ hosted a section of Boudry's hilarious masterpiece on pharyngula.
- ↑ A Sokal-style hoax by an anti-religious philosopher