[nekokami]

Wow, this was an interesting way to spend a snowy afternoon! (I don't have a Sony Reader, so I missed this thread for a while.

Unsurprisingly, I'll go with the previously stated opinion (nearly a consensus, I would say) that no intolerance or malice or other agenda was intended by Sony in the inclusion of Dawkins' book. I don't know whether it's a good book or not, because I haven't read it, though I've read other books by Dawkins and thought they were good. (They were books about biology, however, not books about philosophy.)

Originally Posted by ShortNCuddlyAm

Most of the religious adverts I've seen on public transport are a lot more firm in their stance that there is a god (The Quakers are the most memorable exception to this); whereas the atheist advert, by using the word "probably" allows for some doubt.

Now I'm really curious (being a Quaker myself). What kinds of adverts are the Quakers in your area putting on public transport? All we have is a sign out next to the road in front of the Meetinghouse.

Originally Posted by RickyMaveety

However, Buddhism does not embrace (1) a deity, (2) heaven, (3) hell - except for that created by man on earth, and (4) attributes the same type of "soul" to all creatures, man and animals. None of these are concepts that you would find most parish priests teaching to their flock.

I guess I'd use the word "religion" differently than you, Ricky, because #4 would qualify Buddhism as a religion to me. The existence of the soul (human or otherwise) is something I take on faith. I wouldn't require a deity or deities. On the other hand, if you feel that you have fairly compelling evidence of the existence of souls, perhaps for you it's science. (I feel that I have evidence of a sort, but not of a scientific, reproducible kind.)

There is some interesting and lively debate about whether "science" needs to be entirely empirical or whether it's possible to be objective (or even whether there exists any reality outside of what we construct among ourselves). I'm not going there. The world is real enough for me.

Originally Posted by pilotbob

I don't think I am causing any suffering except maybe to those reading the thread. Does buying stuff made in China count?

Well, maybe. And I don't want to drag politics into an already crowded thread, but I think if we're going to talk about a life of "doing no harm," we do need to consider the consequences or prerequisites of our lifestyles to some extent. Ricky's story about the fly is a good one-- we can't take responsibility for all the suffering in the world, or even all the suffering from which we benefit, directly or indirectly. But I think we can make the attempt to try to live a life that doesn't depend on others being miserable.

All that being said, employment conditions in China are quite a mixed bag. Living costs are lower there than here (for the present), and not everyone working in factories is being forced to work excessive hours in unsafe conditions. But the conditions I saw in factories when I was there (and these were workshops that foreigners were allowed to see) did make me rather uncomfortable.