I've given up...

Eglinton

...arguing and debating with religious people. I'm tired of it. Not so long ago I posted a quote in this forum

"It's impossible to reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into"

It's held true for me. I may come across as arrogant to these people but I do think that I am intellectually superior to devout muslims, christians etc. From the documentaries I've watched and the books I've read, a lot of atheists seem to experience this feeling. Now I don't mind educating those for whom it has never occurred that there may not be a god or whatever. It's amazing to see their faces light up when they, I suppose, become enlightened.

It's the right wing, impossible to convince nuts that drive me demented. So now I simply laugh at them. Mean, but.

I'm not saying I mock nuns or rabbis to their faces but equally I'm not going to show them any more respect than anyone else. If they asked if I go to church etc. I'd simply reply "Nah sorry I don't believe in that rubbish"

It's just a bit of a rant but I'd be interested in hearing what others think, especially religious folks that may frequent the forum.

Pompey Magnus

I try to steer clear of debates about creationism, I mean if a person believes that I honestly think it is next to impossible to change their minds. When I read threads about Creationism I just feel uninterested. They might as well be debating about how many angels can fit on the head of a pin. I find the historical aspect to the debates interesting though and I do learn stuff that I didn't already know from them.

Red Hand

Well, OP, God still loves you!:p

Eglinton

Jeremiah 16:1 wrote: »

Well, OP, God still loves you!:p

Who? A secret admirer? Well if you see him, wish him the best for Valentine's day. I'm flattered but I'll have to disappoint him as I'm not gay.

Dades

Eglinton wrote: »

I'm flattered but I'll have to disappoint him as I'm not gay.

That's why God still loves you!

Popinjay

Sometimes giving up does really seem to be the only option. I regularly read the Creationism thread (And yes, I was lurking long enough to read the WHOLE thing... Oh boy:D:rolleyes:;):D:p... WHAT a THREAD:eek::eek:!!!!! and so on) but I can't think of any bribe or threat that would make me ever want to get involved.

The discussion in that thread has gone around in circles to such an extent that I almost find myself doubling back to see where I last read whatever 'reasoning' our faithful friends have just made us suffer through almost word for word.

On the other hand, I think of the wonderful effect that thread may be having on someone with a strong faith who's heard enough creationist rot to start to think it may have some validity. Nobody is ever going to convinve JC or Wolfsbane that they're wrong but the pages of common sense from Scofflaw, Robin et al would probably convince a whole pile of fence-sitters.

I think they deserve huge kudos for their grit and determination.

Popinjay

Dades wrote: »

That's why God still loves you!

Sorry for the double post, this came in as I was typing but... ROFL

eoin5

Eglinton wrote: »

Who? A secret admirer? Well if you see him, wish him the best for Valentine's day. I'm flattered but I'll have to disappoint him as I'm not gay.

God could probably make you gay if he wanted to

Gurgle

Eglinton wrote: »

Who? A secret admirer? Well if you see him, wish him the best for Valentine's day. I'm flattered but I'll have to disappoint him as I'm not gay.

Surely this hypothetical supreme being would not be limited to one gender.

2Scoops

I think the main reason I carry on is that if you stop responding to their posts, they (creationists) think they've won the debate through sheer persistence! I mean, just look at the creation thread and see how J C thinks he's somehow scored a point with the 'Guidestones' issue when people, rightfully, ignore it. :rolleyes:

Scofflaw

2Scoops wrote: »

I think the main reason I carry on is that if you stop responding to their posts, they (creationists) think they've won the debate through sheer persistence! I mean, just look at the creation thread and see how J C thinks he's somehow scored a point with the 'Guidestones' issue when people, rightfully, ignore it. :rolleyes:

I enjoyed that, though.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Zillah

I once went into a church to look at the architecture. On my way out an old lady approached me and asked with an eager concerned face if I found prayer to be useful in my life. I told her I was an atheist and had blasphemed against the holy spirit, thanked her and left.

More on topic, I recently came to a similar conclusion. Though a more broad one. People don't care about whats true, fair or logically consistent. Even if they claim to. Even if they believe they do. Most of them just want to stay in their stupid little shells. It hit me very hard a while ago. About their talents, their lot in life, their achievements, friends, family, everything and anything that I could explain rationally and with an objective perspective, they don't want to hear. They don't care.

I'll still argue with the religious if they're spouting pure lies to trick other people, but my days of showing people the respect of being honest, of giving them the benefit of the doubt intellectually, are over.

Eglinton

Dades wrote: »

That's why God still loves you!

LOL

eoin5 wrote: »

God could probably make you gay if he wanted to

LMAO

Gurgle wrote: »

Surely this hypothetical supreme being would not be limited to one gender.

ROTFL

Zillah wrote: »

I'll still argue with the religious if they're spouting pure lies to trick other people, but my days of showing people the respect of being honest, of giving them the benefit of the doubt intellectually, are over.

Yes, I think that that's a similar take on my opinion. One other thing that actually boils my blood are scientists and engineers here at work who claim to be religious. I had to hold in the laughter when one woman, who claims to have a degree in physics, said she baptised her child for protection.

Rev Hellfire

Zillah wrote: »

I once went into a church to look at the architecture. On my way out an old lady approached me and asked with an eager concerned face if I found prayer to be useful in my life. I told her I was an atheist and had blasphemed against the holy spirit, thanked her and left.

While I'd certainly applaud your honesty I'm not sure why you feel the need to rub their nose in it.
Surely a courteous answer to what I assume was a courteous question would have sufficed ?

Dades

I made this post in the Creationism thread over two years ago, and don't remember posting since.

I've read some of the interesting science stuff but firmly believe the creationist crew have a cross so far up their arses as to make arguing a frustrating waste of time.

Though I'll still debate all day with most other believers!

Zombrex

Dades wrote: »

That's why God still loves you!

ROFL :eek::D

Eglinton

Rev Hellfire wrote: »

While I'd certainly applaud your honesty I'm not sure why you feel the need to rub their nose in it.
Surely a courteous answer to what I assume was a courteous question would have sufficed ?

Hmm, I don't know about that. I think that religious folk have managed to put themselves in a position where they expect respect. Why should they be respected for those beliefs? I'll respect them as human beings in the same way as everyone else but that's it.

Rev Hellfire

Eglinton wrote: »

Hmm, I don't know about that. I think that religious folk have managed to put themselves in a position where they expect respect. Why should they be respected for those beliefs? I'll respect them as human beings in the same way as everyone else but that's it.

It has nothing to do with respecting their beliefs but rather dealing with each other in a civilized manner. You can tell someone you disagree with their belief in a given deity (or all deities) without resorting to childish retorts.

It all smacks of 'huh, I showed her'.

calahans

Your not intellectually superior to some of them, you are others. Just like any other set of people in life. For me atheism is a step too far. When you look at the beauty of the world and the complexity of the laws of physics, its hard not to wonder is there some kind of architect behind it all. I prefer agnosticism

BurnsCarpenter

Eglinton wrote: »

.It's the right wing, impossible to convince nuts that drive me demented. So now I simply laugh at them. Mean, but.

I'm not saying I mock nuns or rabbis to their faces but equally I'm not going to show them any more respect than anyone else. If they asked if I go to church etc. I'd simply reply "Nah sorry I don't believe in that rubbish"

Isn't that just disrespectful? What's wrong with "I don't believe in that"?
I'm not talking about respecting them more than the average joe, but that seems a little antagonistic.

CerebralCortex

BurnsCarpenter wrote: »

Isn't that just disrespectful? What's wrong with "I don't believe in that"?
I'm not talking about respecting them more than the average joe, but that seems a little antagonistic.

I think its everyones duty to antagonise others beliefs to constantly question and get them to question, I think its healthy actually.
Humbly
CC

Rev Hellfire

CerebralCortex wrote: »

I think its everyones duty to antagonise others beliefs to constantly question and get them to question, I think its healthy actually.
Humbly
CC

I'd disagree, it may be your duty to challenge their beliefs. But there's no need to adopt an antagonistic approach.

BurnsCarpenter

CerebralCortex wrote: »

I think its everyones duty to antagonise others beliefs to constantly question and get them to question, I think its healthy actually.
Humbly
CC

I'd have to respectfully disagree. Some people take a lot of comfort from their faith. I don't think anyone should undermine that.

I'd imagine that this has been argued in great detail already, so apologies.

Whispered

Just for the sake of arguement (you'd think I'd have learned by now :rolleyes:): I will in no way argue with the fact that most athiests have thought through their stance on religion in an intelligent way. I have learned a lot through talking with athiests here, some posts really make you think.

However there is another type of athiest who resorts to insults "theres no proof so you are stupid etc" type comments. (Same with the fanatical theists BTW but I'm just commenting on athiests here) This to me shows a huge lack of intelligence, anybody can bull headedly say what they believe or don't believe - but it's the people who can explain why, without resorting to childishness and one-up-man-ship who show the real intelligence. No matter what side of the debate they are on.

eoin5

BurnsCarpenter wrote: »

I'd have to respectfully disagree. Some people take a lot of comfort from their faith. I don't think anyone should undermine that.

I'd imagine that this has been argued in great detail already, so apologies.

Do you really think taboo is a good thing :eek: ?!

CerebralCortex

BurnsCarpenter wrote: »

I'd have to respectfully disagree. Some people take a lot of comfort from their faith. I don't think anyone should undermine that.

I'd imagine that this has been argued in great detail already, so apologies.

Yes and no, sometimes you just don't want to rock the boat, but if the bespoke people took for granted that you should believe what they believe even and especially if they believe it for comforts sake then you should fight/flag them on it.

brow_601

CerebralCortex wrote: »

Yes and no, sometimes you just don't want to rock the boat, but if the bespoke people took for granted that you should believe what they believe even and especially if they believe it for comforts sake then you should fight them on it.

exactly, don't rock the boat unless they do it first.i don't want to get into a sort of "they started it" argument, but i don't think religous people can equally respect the fact that athiests don't believe the way athiest accept the religous folk do believe...
that may be a generalisation, but its just from my own experience

Rev Hellfire

I can see CerebralCortex going door to door soon telling people about the word of Dawkins

Zillah

Rev Hellfire wrote: »

While I'd certainly applaud your honesty I'm not sure why you feel the need to rub their nose in it.
Surely a courteous answer to what I assume was a courteous question would have sufficed ?

If someone asks a polite question, I will give a polite answer, or will not deign to answer. I was courteous towards that lady. I explained my position, thanked her and left. I wasn't overly polite or condescending. She was imposing on me, asking about something I find truly ridiculous. My natural reaction would be to laugh my ass off at her, but I compromised on a some what curt response. With other situations it can be different. If they demonstrate an all too common seemingly deliberate stupidity I will decide they are no longer worth my time.

Observe, I shall begin by politely pointing out why this fellow makes a patently awful argument. If he responds with idiocy or obstinacy I will lose patience with him.

calahans wrote: »

For me atheism is a step too far. When you look at the beauty of the world and the complexity of the laws of physics, its hard not to wonder is there some kind of architect behind it all. I prefer agnosticism

1 - Beauty is a subjective phenomenon caused by the human brain. The human brain has been shown conclusively to be a product of evolution. The existence of beauty is not an argument for God.

2 - The "complexity" or "fine tuned" quality of the laws of physics is not noteworthy. Any universe capable of resulting in intelligent life must have consistent laws of physics, hence your argument is circular and meaningless.

3 - Furthermore, any architect capable of creating a finely tuned universe is himself even harder to explain than said universe, hence by your own logic such an entity requires an even greater designer.

4 - Agnosticism is a technically tenable but ultimately useless position. Do you remain agnostic about the following concepts: Unicorns, vampires, invisible marshmallow tanks that shoot bees out the turret and bring me invisible cake on Tuesday, Flying Spaghetti Monsters, x, where x represents anything ridiculous that has no evidence for its existence. If you admit to me that you don't believe that the afformentioned invisible bee marshmallow cake tanks don't exist then you're admitting that you are not consistent (and therefore irrational) in your beliefs. Both God and the tanks are wild claims with no evidence, the rational response is to discount their existence until further evidence is forthcoming.

Agnosticism is the exemplar of intellectual stagnation.

Dades

Zillah wrote: »

She was imposing on me, asking about something I find truly ridiculous. My natural reaction would be to laugh my ass off at her, but I compromised on a some what curt response.

ffs Zillah it was an old woman and you were in a church!

CerebralCortex

Rev Hellfire wrote: »

I can see CerebralCortex going door to door soon telling people about the word of Dawkins

No I think you've missed my point. If someone were to suggest I go to mass on Sunday I'd say no if they then asked why not I'd I don't believe if they then said why I would say because its ridiculous to me.

BurnsCarpenter

CerebralCortex wrote: »

No I think you've missed my point. If someone were to suggest I go to mass on Sunday I'd say no if they then asked why not I'd I don't believe if they then said why I would say because its ridiculous to me.

See, again that's heading into the area of rudeness.
Surely the civil response would be 'I don't believe in God' or 'I'm not religious'.
You're jumping from a polite conversation into attacking somebody's beliefs.

CerebralCortex

BurnsCarpenter wrote: »

See, again that's heading into the area of rudeness.
Surely the civil response would be 'I don't believe in God' or 'I'm not religious'.
You're jumping from a polite conversation into attacking somebody's beliefs.

No I'm asserting mine [beliefs], as they are asserting theirs by assuming everybody needs to be asked or reminded to worship, like their doing you a favour. Its the same when a preacher on his soap box demands your accept the "word of God". Its rude.

eoin5

BurnsCarpenter wrote: »

See, again that's heading into the area of rudeness.
Surely the civil response would be 'I don't believe in God' or 'I'm not religious'.
You're jumping from a polite conversation into attacking somebody's beliefs.

I think the taboo surrounding religion is one of the largest problems society has to deal with. Priests, the christian brothers and the nuns were unquestionable in the eyes of society years ago and look at what happened. Protecting someones religious feelings can come at a very high price to society. If I get into a religious discussion I wont hold back unless I feel like someones gonna try to beat me up over it . Discussion and openness is the way forward.

eoin5

Rev Hellfire wrote: »

I can see CerebralCortex going door to door soon telling people about the word of Dawkins

Well maybe not dawkins but Darwin is close enough.

Zillah

Dades wrote: »

ffs Zillah it was an old woman and you were in a church!

She wasn't that old, and I was outside a church. Anyway, I was polite to her ffs. If you get your head bitten off for failing to be over-the-top friendly towards other people then something weird has happened.

Dades

It's seems to me more like you were over the the top unfriendly.

Zillah wrote: »

I told her I was an atheist and had blasphemed against the holy spirit, thanked her and left.

Meh!

CerebralCortex

eoin5 wrote: »

Well maybe not dawkins but Darwin is close enough.

ROFLMAO!!!

Galvasean

I stopped reading the Creationist thread a long time ago, (for the good of my mental health) but my signiture references one particular argument I had with J C. Some of you may remember that one

edit: NOOOOO!!!! I posted in the forsaken thread again!

Parsley

I got banned from christianity for calling one of the guys in the creationism thread (i think it was JC) a dumbass.

Gurgle

Parsley wrote: »

I got banned from christianity for calling one of the guys in the creationism thread (i think it was JC) a dumbass.

lol, what were you expecting to happen?

Galvasean

Parsley wrote: »

I got banned from christianity for calling one of the guys in the creationism thread (i think it was JC) a dumbass.

That sounds about right.

karen3212

Apparently, so I've heard recently, initially what you believe is a gut instinct thing, and then one finds all the reasons to support - what they just know - to be right. So and I'm not sure at all that the gut instinct thing is even true for my own lack of belief, cognitive behavioural therapy is one of the ways to reason yourself out of a belief you just know to be true. Now does anyone know anything about CBT - cause I don't.

Now I don't want to convert the world, but I would like people to talk about religion/god etc.

But you will never find me trying to snatch belief in a God from people who are starving or whose country is being bombed to destruction, or people in similar desperate circumstances.

lookinforpicnic

calahans wrote: »

Your not intellectually superior to some of them, you are others. Just like any other set of people in life. For me atheism is a step too far. When you look at the beauty of the world and the complexity of the laws of physics, its hard not to wonder is there some kind of architect behind it all. I prefer agnosticism

In my opinion, he is clearly more intellectually superior than you... architect behind it all, atheism a step to far, agnosticism what a lot of rubbish.

philologos

Eglinton wrote: »

It's held true for me. I may come across as arrogant to these people but I do think that I am intellectually superior to devout muslims, christians etc. From the documentaries I've watched and the books I've read, a lot of atheists seem to experience this feeling. Now I don't mind educating those for whom it has never occurred that there may not be a god or whatever. It's amazing to see their faces light up when they, I suppose, become enlightened.

Some of the most intelligent people of all time have rationalized their Christianity. Take people like C.S Lewis for example. Yes, I would consider you arrogant because you consider yourself intellectually superior to (let me test if I've got this right), about every major religious group on the planet. It seems to me that some people are actually ignorant to the level of study that rabbis, imams and trained priests have to do to be prepared for their role in ministry in this country.

I don't think "lighting up" or "enlightenment" ever happen when you rid someones religious beliefs from them.

I have to say I urge you to continue arguing with religious people. Debating with atheists has merely improved my apologetics, particularly on this forum but also outside.

im_invisible

Zillah wrote: »

If someone asks a polite question, I will give a polite answer... My natural reaction would be to laugh my ass off at her, but I compromised on a some what curt response. With other situations it can be different. If they demonstrate an all too common seemingly deliberate stupidity I will decide they are no longer worth my time.

Observe, I shall begin by politely pointing out why this fellow makes a patently awful argument. If he responds with idiocy or obstinacy I will lose patience with him.

1...
2...
3... [so tempted to start another debate on this one, and the next..]
4... Unicorns, vampires, invisible marshmallow tanks, Flying Spaghetti Monsters....

you forgot the teapot orbiting pluto

seriously, some of you people come across as 'high and mighty' and seriously arrogant, you could do with believing that there's something more in the universe, besides your egos

used to lurk in this and the christianity forum about a year ago, but it just annoys my head, one side as much as the other

ill just throw in a quote from dawkins' TGD, which i think explains why i (and people in general) believe in God, and why others dont

'A dualist acknowledges a fundamental distinction between matter and mind. a monist, by contrast, belives that mind is a manifestation of matter... and cannot exist apart from matter'
'Our innate dualism prepares us to believe in a 'soul' which inhabits the body rather than being integrally part of the body. Such a disembodied spirit can easily be imagined to move on somewhere else after the death of the body. We can also easily imagine the existence of a deity as pure spirit, not an emergent property of complex matter but existing independently of matter.'

now can we all just try and get along?

eoin5

karen3212 wrote: »

Apparently, so I've heard recently, initially what you believe is a gut instinct thing, and then one finds all the reasons to support - what they just know - to be right. So and I'm not sure at all that the gut instinct thing is even true for my own lack of belief, cognitive behavioural therapy is one of the ways to reason yourself out of a belief you just know to be true. Now does anyone know anything about CBT - cause I don't.

Now I don't want to convert the world, but I would like people to talk about religion/god etc.

But you will never find me trying to snatch belief in a God from people who are starving or whose country is being bombed to destruction, or people in similar desperate circumstances.

A bit of an aside but I learned a bit about the way the brain rationalises thingsin college. Weve learned a lot from people with mental disorders and brain damage. Heres a few good paragraphs on it:

http://www.abc.net.au/rn/science/ockham/stories/s18058.htm wrote:

When unable easily to make sense of a situation, we tend to confabulate; confabulation is not deliberate lying, but rationalisation. A dementing patient with Alzheimer's disease forgets daily encounters with her neighbours, and when questioned may reply that everyone has sold up and left the neighbourhood. Someone instructed under hypnosis to open a window at a certain point in time may do so, and when asked afterwards why she did it, may reply, 'It was getting stuffy in here.'

It's possible via certain techniques to present a picture of, say, a chicken claw exclusively to the left hemisphere of a commissurotomy patient, where language is elaborated, and a snow scene exclusively to the nonverbal right side. When such a patient had to choose from an array of alternative related pictures, one by each hand, the left hand appropriately chose a shovel, and the right a chicken. When asked why, the verbal left hemisphere, oblivious of the snow scene perceived by the nonverbal right hemisphere, confabulated and replied, 'A chicken claw goes with chicken, and you need a shovel to clean out the chookshed.' Thus each hemisphere may be privy after commissurotomy, to its own discrete information, when that information is fed exclusively to one side.

We essentially do the same thing but we have full mental capabilities so we can hide our rationalisation a bit better. We need to do it as we cant explain everything fully but yet we need to hold at least a somewhat stable view of the world in order to function properly. The blanks are better filled in even if the answers are wrong .

Zillah

im_invisible wrote: »

seriously, some of you people come across as 'high and mighty' and seriously arrogant, you could do with believing that there's something more in the universe, besides your egos

I could be burning puppies in your garden while quoting Mein Kampf but it doesn't make my argument wrong.

ill just throw in a quote from dawkins' TGD, which i think explains why i (and people in general) believe in God, and why others dont

No, that explains what you believe, not why. Its interesting that you got them confused, considering the why of a puzzle is usually evidence of some sort. Which you have none of. All we get is a priori nonesense like the above quote.

now can we all just try and get along?

Of course we can get along! You're still wrong though.

Doctor DooM

Getting back to the original OP....

The film American Beauty contained a line which I will paraphrase here:

"The worst thing that anyone can be is completely normal."

I sometimes think that about 95% of people cling to their religious beliefs because of the fear of being just that- normal, average, the same as everyone else. You go about your everyday life wanting to be something more. What better. less quantifiable way than religion?

The belief that you are saved- that you talk to a higher being- that you have a message to share- is obviously an amazingly powerful belief.

What could be worse than looking around at all the other people in the world and realising you are just the same, not as rich as some, not as pretty as some, knowing you will die in the dirt like them, that you are no better than them in some way?

If you had convinced yourself that you are one of the chosen, the saved, the few, and believed in creation science, how would you feel when the likes of the OP turns up and says "You're wrong. And stop being so silly, it's not big and clever."?


Of course the atheists could be wrong, it's a probability thing.

Red Hand

Well, equally SDoom, atheists used to have the same reputation-doing a bit of protest against religion to be different.

I read before that it fashionable for young upper middle class "atheist" men in Paris to go into church and turn their backs on the priest as he gave his sermon at the end of the 19th centuary. Attention seeking ain't confined to religious people!:p

Marcus.Aurelius

Zillah wrote: »

Of course we can get along! You're still wrong though.

That does sound extremely arrogant. Surely any of us who are atheist can only describe our atheism as a belief, no matter how strongly held these beliefs are?

I imagine, like evolution, the existence of a God cannot be completely disproved/proved, and thus, we have to put up with one another for a while yet, although the drop in church numbers etc are encouraging!