Can 'meaning' trump 'truth'?

The rational atheists can never learn anything from theists while they think that theists are more beholden to 'meaning' than 'truth'.

The whole point of theism is that it is taken as true on the basis of faith. And that perspective of 'theism', 'truth' and 'faith' is internally consistent. In other words, theism has 'meaning' because, for a theist, it is primarily 'true'.

Atheism which claims to be founded on intellectual rationalism can never enjoy such consistency of perspective, because atheism obviously cannot be shown to be true by rationality alone. The more thoughtful atheists (such as Andre Comte-Sponville) rightly see their atheism as a belief. The problem they have is that they are left without 'meaning' and so they are left with 'despair'. So, like Sartre before him, Comte-Sponville says, 'there is no way for a lucid atheist to avoid despair'.

http://www.newstatesman.com/lifestyle/religion/2013/03/god-dead-long-live-our-souls

Listening to an opponent

There is such huge value to listening to an opponent in an argument. It makes me wonder why I don't do it more often!