So it's okay that onegoodmove readers agree with me on most things.

Be careful what you ask for ;-}

yeah, who is this devils advocate, anyway?

about the video: what was the point of making that a video? video is a visual medium and this particular attempt is glaringly lacking in visuals. as far as what is actually said, in a nutshell: i agree. and i think it was well said. but this would have been better, imo, in the form of text with a few illustrative graphs. that way i wouldn't have to sit there, drumming my fingers on the table, waiting for the guy to make his next point, with nothing interesting to look at.

yeah, who is this devils advocate, anyway?

about the video: what was the point of making that a video? video is a visual medium and this particular attempt is glaringly lacking in visuals. as far as what is actually said, in a nutshell: i agree. and i think it was well said. but this would have been better, imo, in the form of text with a few illustrative graphs. that way i wouldn't have to sit there, drumming my fingers on the table, waiting for the guy to make his next point, with nothing interesting to look at.

But surely this is self evident from the words of the expression 'preaching to the converted'. This is something which goes on ALL THE TIME. This is something which every single world religion (to use just one cultural example) is built upon. Preaching to the converted. If it wasn't worth doing for some reason then people wouldn't do it. You have even more reason to believe that if you don't believe that a particular religion is god-given and the preaching and communal practices of the religion are demanded by a higher power. If you don't believe that of any religion then you should believe that the religion evolved based on pressure to conform to a social dynamic which was useful. If you believe this about one religion you'd have to either believe that other religion were (a) also true, (b) copying yours or (c) had socially evolved to fit their present pattern. Either way most people should look at the example of religion and figure that whatever preaching to the converted does, it must be doing something.

Memetic reinforcement I think needs to be added to the list. The video relies heavily on a rationalistic account of human behaviour (preaching to the converted involves seeking better arguments for my own positions) but of course there are many aspects of reinforcement involved in preaching to the converted as we ordinarily witness it which aren't simply cognitive; they can be ritualistic, they can be value-reinforcement, they can be reinforcing of a particular set of in-group/out-group definitions.

Those who would set themselves up as opponents to or critics of religion would do well to take seriously the social dynamics evidenced by religion and reflect on how these dynamics feature in their own presentation. Is it true that Dawkins puts people off, as had been claimed, by presenting an almost tribalist framework for his Atheism. This might be true of the God Delusion, it isn't true of The Greatest Show on Earth and it certainly isn't true of Dennett's Breaking the Spell though Dennett is frequently tarred with the same brush.