[qsort]

> Much of Western thought traces back to serious work by Church theologians.

The problem I have with this is that it's structurally a motte-and-bailey claim. If I have to take it literally, then it's obviously true and it's simply unserious to deny it: the Church does have a pervasive influence on Western civilization. The way it's often rhetorically used, however, is in opposition and to the exclusion of other strands of thought that are equally foundational: the renaissance, the enlightenment, the revolutions of the 17th and 18th centuries, the scientific enterprise, in a smaller but still real way classical antiquity. To the extent it can be said to exist, Western civilization is a patchwork. It is beautiful and I very much like it, but I don't think any one patch gets to have all the credit.

> In fact I think atheists should make more effort to learn about the vast diversity of other faiths

A better version of myself for sure would make that effort. The problem, of course, is that other faiths are just as deep and complicated as "our own", and it would take a lot of time and effort to do so with any level of seriousness.

[ivm]

The events you mention still took place within the Abrahamic framework of thought. Ideas like a linear timeline progressing from A to B (rather than a cyclical one) or utopian political projects bringing final justice to society are Abrahamic in nature.

So I agree with the grandparent comment: unless one takes the time to study and truly understand other belief systems, it's hard to see how Western "secular" schools of thought remain Christian because we're submerged in them since childhood.

[andrepd]

> The events you mention still took place within the Abrahamic framework of thought. Ideas like a linear timeline progressing from A to B (rather than a cyclical one) or utopian political projects bringing final justice to society are Abrahamic in nature.

This is laughable... Someone needs to read more about classical antiquity! :) Certainly not something banal as "utopian political projects", which is extremely well attested in e.g. Greek philosophy, and indeed relatively absent from Christianity (its message being essentially escathological in nature, especially in its first few centuries)!

[mistrial9]

these ideas need some refinement.. literacy and a written Law come to mind. Basic Catholic teaching purposefully excludes quite a lot of material that is recognized today.

[agnosticmantis]

> Ideas like a linear timeline progressing from A to B (rather than a cyclical one)

Seriously? So we’re either linear Christians or circular Hindus, and nothing else ever existed?

And nobody else believed in linear time?

[ivm]

HN Guidelines: Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize.

[Planktonne]

> The way it's often rhetorically used, however, is in opposition and to the exclusion of other strands of thought

I don't think this is actually true; I think your own bias is colouring the conversation here.

[qsort]

I have almost never seen someone start a sentence with "Christian roots" or "Judeo-Christian values" and not end it with a tirade that uses religion as the fig leaf to justify and authorize their reactionary politics.

The minimalist claim that the West is massively influenced by the Church is true to the point of banality, the maximalist claims those ideas are usually deployed to champion simply do not follow.

If only there were a name for this rhetorical fallacy...

[Terr_]

> The way it's often rhetorically used

Survivorship bias is another issue. Rich past fields of disagreement and mistakes can be hidden behind the currently accepted outcome.

For example, imagine someone said: "Science™ has explained fire, you rely on that, therefore you should also respect this paper asserting X." But how can we be confident that X isn't more phlogiston of the current era? Is the arguer trying to improperly leech off of a past success?

Similarly, our status quo civilization is also defined by religious ideas that are rejected. For example, the idea that a god could/should order you to genocide all the Canaanites is not very popular right now.