A weedy florilegium

Meet Giordano Bruno (1548–1600), martyr of the Roman Inquisition for his heretical intuitions as to the infinite nature of the homogeneous Universe and his blasphemous concord with heliocentricism. Indeed, he was slayed for his dreams.

“I cleave the heavens, and soar to the infinite. What others see from afar, I leave far behind me.”
— Giordano Bruno

“He is one martyr whose name should lead all the rest. He was not a mere religious sectarian who was caught up in the psychology of some mob hysteria. He was a sensitive, imaginative poet, fired with the enthusiasm of a larger vision of a larger universe … and he fell into the error of heretical belief.”
— John J. Kessler, Ph.D., Ch.E. (The Forgotten Philosopher)

Wikipedia; 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica Entry

Hill County Rebellion: a short history of an incident involving a declaration of martial law by Governor E. J. Davis during Reconstruction in Texas.

During Reconstructionqv Governor E. J. Davisq and the Radical Republican-dominated Twelfth Legislature of 1870 attempted to control crime in the state. In October 1870 Davis threatened Hill County with martial law for its tolerance of criminals.
—Ricky Floyd Dobbs, Handbook of Texas Online

“Freethinkers” Of the Early Texas Hill Country: an essay highlighting a commune of German Freethinkers living in Texas during the mid-19^th century.

Between the years 1845 and 1860, a large contingent of German Freethinkers immigrated to the Texas Hill Country. Unlike the thousands of Adelsverein-sponsored German farmers immigrating to the United States and Texas to escape overpopulation and economic problems, the Freethinkers, being ardent advocates of democracy and freedom from religion, were fleeing primarily from political and religious tyranny. They came to the United States seeking freedom from dictatorial monarchies and clerics.
—Edwin E. Scharf, Freedom from Religion Foundation

There’s no direct connection that I know of. It’s just a funny and educational coincidence.

Series Website – Wiki – Google Video

The history of disbelief continues with the ideas of self-taught philosopher Thomas Paine, the revolutionary studies of geology and the evolutionary theories of Darwin. Jonathan Miller looks at the Freudian view that religion is a ‘thought disorder’. He also examines his motivation behind making the series touching on the issues of death and the religious fanaticism of the 21st century.
–Description of Part Three – The Final Hour

The Final Hour, 58m 8s (originally 530MB)

The final episode of the three part documentary directed by Richard Denton and hosted by Jonathan Miller which goes back through history, bringing us the origins of disbelief in Western civilization.

View previous parts: Part 1 – Part 2

Series Website – Wiki – Google Video

With the domination of Christianity from 500 AD, Jonathan Miller wonders how disbelief began to re-emerge in the 15th and 16th centuries. He discovers that division within the Church played a more powerful role than the scientific discoveries of the period. He also visits Paris, the home of the 18th century atheist, Baron D’Holbach, and shows how politically dangerous it was to undermine the religious faith of the masses.
–Description of Part Two – Noughts and Crosses

Noughts and Crosses, 1h 3s (originally 500MB)

Second part of the three part documentary directed by Richard Denton and hosted by Jonathan Miller which goes back through history, bringing us the origins of disbelief in Western civilization.

I’ve decided to upload part 3 as well. The copy which is provided through Google Video now has terrible video and audio quality. I could barely sit through 2 minutes of it.

View first and third parts: Part 1 – Part 3

Series Website – Wiki – Google Video

Jonathan Miller visits the absent Twin Towers to consider the religious implications of 9/11 and meets Arthur Miller and the philosopher Colin McGinn. He searches for evidence of the first ‘unbelievers’ in Ancient Greece and examines some of the modern theories around why people have always tended to believe in mythology and magic.
–Description of Part One – Shadows of Doubt

Shadows of Doubt, 59m 3s (originally 490MB)

A brilliant introduction to the history of disbelief. Uploaded because this needs to be available as a shining light of the historicity of reason midst the dark depths and oceans of media absurdity and religious propaganda. So few representatives of atheism provide a compelling and earnest account for unbelief, let alone with the lucidity and intellectual vigor of Jonathan Miller. He is sincere and moving in this attempt to explain and understand the origins of disbelief in his own life and for us all.

Should the BBC or the producers find it inappropriate for me to have uploaded this video, I will gladly remove it upon their request. Otherwise, enjoy. I will be uploading part 2, Noughts and Crosses, soon, but not part 3, as part 3 is readily available through Google Video at the moment.

Also, here is a listing of the quotes used throughout the series: Quotations Page

View second and third parts: Part 2 – Part 3

Brief History of Disbelief homepage

“In this first ever television history of disbelief, Jonathan Miller goes on a journey exploring the origins of his own lack of belief and uncovering the hidden story of atheism.”

Also check out: The Atheism Tapes

“Jonathan Miller meets up with some of the key contributors from his three-part Brief History of Disbelief in these half-hour extended conversations.”

List of interviewees: Arthur Miller, Colin McGinn, Steven Weinberg, Richard Dawkins, Denys Turner, Daniel Dennett

“I discovered that it was simply philosophy on its own that had played the very much larger role in the gradual erosion of belief.”
–Director Richard Denton shares his thoughts, link

I’m going to start working to get this special on our local PBS station. The Houston local PBS station is provided through my University so it shouldn’t be too difficult. In the meantime, here is a link to part three of the documentary on Google video.

We must first make note that Epicurus (341-270 BCE) never actually wrote any literature stating the argument, but rather it was formulated as a riddle and passed along through oral tradition. The riddle first appears in De Rerum Natura, a powerful philosophical epic poem written by Roman poet Lucretius Carus (99-55 BCE), a strict disciple of Epicurean philosophy.

What the problem of evil (POE) represents is an atheistic proposition for why an omnipotent, omniscience and omnibenevolent supreme being cannot logically exist. It is an argument stemming from the highlighted contradiction of such a being. Keep in mind that this argument was presented by an ancient Greek philosopher almost 300 years before the establishment of Christian Rome and 300 years, more or less, before Moses began writing the religious text which defined and saw to existence the Abrahamic God of Christianity, Judaism and Islam.

Original proposition:

Either God wants to abolish evil, and cannot; or he can, but does not want to. If he wants to, but cannot, he is impotent. If he can, but does not want to, he is wicked. If God can abolish evil, and God really wants to do it, why is there evil in the world?–Epicurus, as quoted in 2000 Years of Disbelief

David Hume restates the original proposition given by Epicurus in his Dialogues concerning Natural Religion.

Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? then is he impotent.
Is he able, but not willing? then is he malevolent.
Is he both able and willing? whence then is evil?
Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?
–David Hume, quoting Epicurus

Now for the counterargument, with its theological muscle, strengthened under the disciple of theodicy, it supposedly refutes the paradox of problem of evil completely.

Counterargument: http://www.christian-thinktank.com/gr5part1.html

Briefly, the author-theologian restates the Problem of Evil for further analysis.

1. The world is characterized by vast amounts of intensive and extensive suffering and evil.

2. After enduring a life of hardship and pervasive suffering, many (if not most) humans will end up in hell, where they will be actively tortured forever and ever.

3. All of this was known ahead of time by God, before He had even created ANYTHING or ANYONE.

4. For some reason or motive, He “went ahead” with the plan anyway, but could have chosen to not implement it (or to start a different one altogether) or to interrupt it before it “went bad”.

I am posting this now because I will eventually completely read the refutation and provide my own critique of it. I have a few initial ideas of why it is incorrect, but I will let them warm over in my thoughts for now.What is interesting, however, is that the author notes the Logical Problem of Evil (POE) is actually no longer a philosophically tenable argument nor is the Evidential Problem of Evil. Granted, he goes through almost excruciating lengths to disprove these two stances, but more importantly, he notes that contemporary philosophers no longer consider it a viable argument for their arsenal. This means that amongst philosophical circles and amongst debates, it should no longer be considered a sort of trump card against or threat to the theologian. This is important knowledge for any casual atheist or agnostic who enjoys keeping a few argumentative cards in his or her deck. The argument of the problem of evil may not so easily convince many people, and you may find yourself, at worst, succumbing to belief. That is, if the only reason for your atheism is the comfort in knowing that this riddle has gone unmatched and undefeated – it would most definitely be a surprise, if you are persuaded by the argument I’ve provided above.