WHAT CONVINCED YOU?

ChocolateSauce

hairyheretic wrote: »

The choice of who your Gods are .. or even if you choose none at all .. is entirely your own.

Go look at children being brainwashed from the age of 1 and say that again.

Húrin

robindch wrote: »

Yes. That's because ideology-based discovery systems don't work.

Unless the ideology is European?

I'm not saying science is invalid. Why are religious people always presumed to wish to attack science?

I'm saying that the idea that only science can provide knowledge is invalid, for reasons I listed two pages ago.

ChocolateSauce wrote:

Go look at children being brainwashed from the age of 1 and say that again.

A lot of kids are brainwashed to be atheists, indeed most people in my generation were. I was one of them, but then I became a Christian when I was 21. Religion or lack thereof is indeed determined somewhat, but it's not as if there's no place for free will.

CerebralCortex

Húrin wrote: »

I'm not saying science is invalid. Why are religious people always presumed to wish to attack science?

Because of what you say next?

Húrin wrote: »

I'm saying that the idea that only science can provide knowledge is invalid, for reasons I listed two pages ago.

What other ways are there?

Húrin wrote: »

A lot of kids are brainwashed to be atheists, indeed most people in my generation were.

Seriously are we talking Ireland or the magic far away land. I don't mean to be offensive but where did you grow up?

I can imagine brainwashing a child into atheism, first I suppose you'd have to convince them/brainwash them into believing there was a God so you could brainwash them back to being atheists. It also suggests that you would think I(not me specifically) may have been brainwashed into being atheist when I came to the conclusion very much alone whereas Christianity/theism takes organisation.

Húrin wrote: »

I was one of them, but then I became a Christian when I was 21. Religion or lack thereof is indeed determined somewhat, but it's not as if there's no place for free will.

I going to safely say thats purely anecdotal, my parents raised me to be Christian when thought came into it it melted away.

pH

What other ways are there?

Ahh come on, there are plenty of ways. Personal knowledge can be gained from personal experience, and there are all kinds of things that we accept as being true that are not scientifically determined. For instance we all accept that Barack Obama is president of the US, "Who is the US president" is knowledge, "The date of the battle of Hastings" is knowledge, and science has nothing whatsoever to do with how the answers are determined.

CerebralCortex

pH wrote: »

Ahh come on, there are plenty of ways. Personal knowledge can be gained from personal experience, and there are all kinds of things that we accept as being true that are not scientifically determined. For instance we all accept that Barack Obama is president of the US, "Who is the US president" is knowledge, "The date of the battle of Hastings" is knowledge, and science has nothing whatsoever to do with how the answers are determined.

Okay yes I would concede that.

robindch

Húrin wrote: »

Unless the ideology is European?

I'm not quite sure why you're getting hung up on this "european" thing, or continually conflating ideologies and science.

You can either take the world as it is and try to find out how it works (say, like biologists trained in the scientific), or you can take an ideology and fabricate a factscape to support it (say, like the dribblings of creationists or men like Trofim Lysenko).

In the conclusion to the report on the Challenger disaster, Richard Feynman said:

Richard Feynman wrote:

For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for nature cannot be fooled.

sink

Húrin wrote: »

I'm saying that the idea that only science can provide knowledge is invalid, for reasons I listed two pages ago.

Only science can provide knowledge of the fundamentals of reality from the formation of galaxies to the evolution of immune systems. That is after all what religion attempts to hold dominion over. Other forms of knowledge exist but these deal with every day things such as the quickest route to work and who won last nights football match. Trying to equate to the two is an exercise in obfuscation.

Húrin wrote: »

A lot of kids are brainwashed to be atheists, indeed most people in my generation were. I was one of them, but then I became a Christian when I was 21. Religion or lack thereof is indeed determined somewhat, but it's not as if there's no place for free will.

Considering I never picked up a book on atheism until I was in my 20's nor had I any discussions with atheists it would have been pretty difficult for them to brainwash me. On the other hand I was in chapel 6/7 days a week all through secondary school and read the bible daily, said prayers and sang hymns. Yet I can't honestly say there was ever a point in my life when I truly believed there was a god.

eoin5

Húrin wrote: »

A lot of kids are brainwashed to be atheists, indeed most people in my generation were.

By whom and how so? Can you back this up?

mjg

Húrin wrote: »

A lot of kids are brainwashed to be atheists, indeed most people in my generation were. I was one of them, but then I became a Christian when I was 21.

I am also very interested to know if this statement can be backed up.

Surely atheist brainwashing of children would be based on convincing children that they should only believe in scientific evidence, or the hypothesis currently accepted by the majority of scientists in a particular field.

To me, this would be much more benign and beneficial to a child than convincing them that there is a supreme (or trinity of beings) that is:

A)omniscient, but very particular about who he helps to win an Oscar or sporting event,

B)loves us all but will condemn us to an eternity of pain and hell fire if we don't follow his rules or are homosexual,

C)allows millions of people (many of whom follow him) to suffer in disease and opression when he could solve their woes with the flick of an eyelid, just because he has a greater plan for humanity than we can comprehend and

D)the only evidence of whom is a book, written over a thousand years ago by unverifiable sources.

No contest as far as I can see.

Flamed Diving

Húrin wrote: »

A lot of kids are brainwashed to be atheists, indeed most people in my generation were. I was one of them, but then I became a Christian when I was 21

Tee hee! What?

Where did you grow up?

EskimoErased

Re: OP

Well it wasn't that I became convinced that there was no God, I was just never convinced otherwise.

Makes more sense to disbelieve something that there's no proof of than to believe in it.

Goduznt Xzst

Húrin wrote: »

A lot of kids are brainwashed to be atheists, indeed most people in my generation were. I was one of them, but then I became a Christian when I was 21. Religion or lack thereof is indeed determined somewhat, but it's not as if there's no place for free will.

The problem with this statement is that you are trying to say that, even if children are being "brainwashed" into being Atheist (I would imagine you view just not telling a child about God as "brainwashing"?) that it is somewhat equal to the indoctrination that the children of religious people undergo. Which is plainly false.

An Atheist will teach their Child reality (do you view teaching a child about the current ethics of the country they reside in as "brainwashing" also) BUT without the hokum of the supernatural.

Saying "we have no evidence that God exists, and even the ideas that claim there is proof of a God can not ascertain what religion he's tied to" is not the same as saying "God watches you every minute of every day, and if you do not pray when you're bad and ask forgiveness then God will not let you live forever with the rest of us"

The difference is one parent is trying to explain that whether or not a God exists it will have no bearing on how the child will live its life so they shouldn't concern themselves with it, the other parent is trying to change the way the child lives its life by purporting things to be true that they can't possible know are true and promising them an afterlife if they adhere to their religions restrictions that they can't possibly know exists. In some of the more fundamentalist cases, threatening them with torture in hell.

The 2 are not the same. Teaching a child a lie is not the same as teaching them a question.

Lucas10101

What determined me to become an atheist? Realizing that the holy books promote:

1. Hatred of People
2. Inequality
3. War
4. Genital Mutilation
5. Racism
6. Slavery
7. Scapegoating our Sins
8. Original Sin
9. Apocalypse
10. Compulsory Love & Fear of the same God
11. Vicarious Redemption
12. Sexism
13. Believe! or go to Hell...
14. Ridiculous idea of Afterlife
15. Juvenile Miracles
16. Religious Fraudsters who don't even believe it.
17. Genesis Creation Myth
18. Punishment for Sexuality choice.
19. Ridiculous Laws that ban me to work on Sabbath Day
20. Notion of a Celestial North Korea for Heaven - Who wants to praise like a serf?

...and that's just the short-listed version.

fitz0

Lucas10101 wrote: »

What determined me to become an atheist? Realizing that the holy books promote:

1. Hatred of People
2. Inequality
3. War
4. Genital Mutilation
5. Racism
6. Slavery
7. Scapegoating our Sins
8. Original Sin
9. Apocalypse
10. Compulsory Love & Fear of the same God
11. Vicarious Redemption
12. Sexism
13. Believe! or go to Hell...
14. Ridiculous idea of Afterlife
15. Juvenile Miracles
16. Religious Fraudsters who don't even believe it.
17. Genesis Creation Myth
18. Punishment for Sexuality choice.
19. Ridiculous Laws that ban me to work on Sabbath Day
20. Notion of a Celestial North Korea for Heaven - Who wants to praise like a serf?

...and that's just the short-listed version.

So your rejection of a god was based solely on the books? What about Zeus, Wodan, Apollo, Thor etc whose holy books don't exist anymore or don't have holy books? What makes them invalid?

Im not saying you're wrong, just wondering.

PDN

mjg wrote: »

I am also very interested to know if this statement can be backed up.

Surely atheist brainwashing of children would be based on convincing children that they should only believe in scientific evidence, or the hypothesis currently accepted by the majority of scientists in a particular field.

No, not at all, it's got little or nothing to do with scientific evidence.

You just repeatedly tell the child that there's no such thing as God and that it's all made up - same as you brainwash a child into communism, catholicism or any other ideology. That's what happened to me, and it certainly was effective brainwashing. Then, when I was older, I learned to think for myself.

Flamed Diving

PDN wrote: »

No, not at all, it's got little or nothing to do with scientific evidence.

You just repeatedly tell the child that there's no such thing as God and that it's all made up - same as you brainwash a child into communism, catholicism or any other ideology. That's what happened to me, and it certainly was effective brainwashing. Then, when I was older, I learned to think for myself.

I think people should raise a child an agnostic. Surely its the least mind-warping way.

mjg

PDN wrote: »

No, not at all, it's got little or nothing to do with scientific evidence.

You just repeatedly tell the child that there's no such thing as God and that it's all made up - same as you brainwash a child into communism, catholicism or any other ideology. That's what happened to me, and it certainly was effective brainwashing. Then, when I was older, I learned to think for myself.

Because we are coming at this from opposite sides of the faith divide, I naturally consider what you've described as less damaging and easier to de-program than the institutionalised brainwashing that I and many others experienced.

Years of influence from home, school and the church combined to make me unaware that there was an option; that I didn't have to believe. In your case you must have been aware that believing was an option.

While I agree that repeating a mantra to a child without real engagement on the issue is wrong, can you understand why I view what you've described as the lesser of two evils, if you like?

TheInquisitor

I can honestly say i never believed in god. Never prayed even when i was young. I always thought god was something like santa or the tooth fairly...something for young kids to believe... Then if you actually go through some of the stuff in the bible...you realise what a load of crap it is. If God only created adam and eve...did their kids have incest to keep the population growing...i know its a gritty example but that is every story and fable in a jar!

Mickeroo

PDN wrote: »

No, not at all, it's got little or nothing to do with scientific evidence.

You just repeatedly tell the child that there's no such thing as God and that it's all made up - same as you brainwash a child into communism, catholicism or any other ideology. That's what happened to me, and it certainly was effective brainwashing. Then, when I was older, I learned to think for myself.

I think most atheists(maybe its wishful thinking,i dont know) would raise there children to always question things,use there minds and decide for themselves what makes sense. For me being an atheist is not about just not believing in god but about the freedom to think for yourself in all aspects of life.

Húrin

Goduznt Xzst wrote: »

The problem with this statement is that you are trying to say that, even if children are being "brainwashed" into being Atheist (I would imagine you view just not telling a child about God as "brainwashing"?) that it is somewhat equal to the indoctrination that the children of religious people undergo.

No, it's the empiricist brainwashing that results in children ignoring the evidence that God exists, so that they simply claim that no such evidence exists.

The posts made by TheInquisitor and EskimoErased are exemplary.

An Atheist will teach their Child reality (do you view teaching a child about the current ethics of the country they reside in as "brainwashing" also) BUT without the hokum of the supernatural.

To claim that natural knowledge is the total sum of reality is indeed of the same kind of "indoctrination" (if that's what it is) as teaching that life has natural and supernatural elements.

Saying "we have no evidence that God exists, and even the ideas that claim there is proof of a God can not ascertain what religion he's tied to" is not the same as saying "God watches you every minute of every day, and if you do not pray when you're bad and ask forgiveness then God will not let you live forever with the rest of us"

The former is no more objective than the latter.

The difference is one parent is trying to explain that whether or not a God exists it will have no bearing on how the child will live its life so they shouldn't concern themselves with it

That is dictating a theology. It also assumes that there are no cultural influences on behaviour that might conflict with God's will, if that exists. The parent who teaches this wishes the child to either follow his/her will, or the social pressures that exist in the culture they live in.

the other parent is trying to change the way the child lives its life by purporting things to be true that they can't possible know are true and promising them an afterlife if they adhere to their religions restrictions that they can't possibly know exists.

The atheist parent can't possibly know that their worldview is true, and thus, that the child's beliefs do not matter, any more than the Christian parent knows that the child's beliefs do matter.

And what makes you think that the main purpose of raising a child a Christian is to impose behavioural restrictions on them?

The 2 are not the same. Teaching a child a lie is not the same as teaching them a question.

If you are not willing to even try to see things from another person's point of view what is the point of the discussion? Nobody who raises their child a Christian is knowingly raising them to live a lie.

What you suggested - that they shouldn't concern themselves with it - (i.e. don't dare ask questions) is exactly the opposite of teaching a child a question.

See, your problem is that you assume yourself to be judging from an objective "base" of reality, when in fact you are just as subjective as anyone else. Your language reveals this (e.g. "Which is plainly false."). The only moral difference between your prejudice and mine is that yours is more popular in western society.

Húrin

sink wrote: »

Only science can provide knowledge of the fundamentals of reality from the formation of galaxies to the evolution of immune systems. That is after all what religion attempts to hold dominion over.

No, these are questions of natural philosophy/science. If you are claiming that dictating the workings of the natural universe is religion's main purpose then you are simply lying. Generally speaking, there is no epistemelogical conflict between religion and science.

Can you demonstrate, from the core teachings of Christianity, how that religion's main purpose is to attempt to explain how the natural world works?

eoin5 wrote: »

By whom and how so? Can you back this up?

Flamed Diving wrote: »

Tee hee! What?

Where did you grow up?

1990s Dublin. The overwhelming majority of my peers are atheists, and not for consciously intellectual reasons. Thus, they have been culturally influenced to be atheists.

It's no less determined than how growing up in the 1930s produced an almost completely Catholic generation.

sink wrote: »

Considering I never picked up a book on atheism until I was in my 20's nor had I any discussions with atheists it would have been pretty difficult for them to brainwash me. On the other hand I was in chapel 6/7 days a week all through secondary school and read the bible daily, said prayers and sang hymns. Yet I can't honestly say there was ever a point in my life when I truly believed there was a god.

Obviously, atheist brainwashing does not have to come from explicitly atheist sources. Any claim that only matter matters, or that life has no meaning is implicitly atheist. Why did you never believe there to be a God? Because you saw "no evidence"?

Another major part of atheist brainwashing is wherever there are parents who do not act as if God is a part of their daily lives, in the view of their children. Even if the parent is a theist when asked, it sends a message that God is not real because he has no effect on this parent's life. If the claims of Christianity (and most other religions) are true, then it is the most important thing in the world. But if the parent does not act like that, then it greatly diminishes the reality of God.

Mickeroo wrote: »

For me being an atheist is not about just not believing in god but about the freedom to think for yourself in all aspects of life.

Being a thinking person, whether atheist, Christian or Buddhist, is about the freedom to think for yourself in all aspects of life.

Flamed Diving

Húrin wrote: »

1990s Dublin. The overwhelming majority of my peers are atheists, and not for consciously intellectual reasons. Thus, they have been culturally influenced to be atheists.

It's no less determined than how growing up in the 1930s produced an almost completely Catholic generation.

Interesting. Where is this doctrine that you had shoved down your throat since birth?

Mickeroo

Húrin wrote: »

Being a thinking person, whether atheist, Christian or Buddhist, is about the freedom to think for yourself in all aspects of life.

True, there are planty of people who have faith who think for themselves, thisis evident from the amount of people who reject certain parts of their chosen religons but someone who sticks rigurously to the teachings of a religious text or organisation cannot be a "thinking person". A "thinking person" would not believe in something as weak as hydroplate theory for example.

Húrin

Flamed Diving wrote: »

Interesting. Where is this doctrine that you had shoved down your throat since birth?

What do you mean?

sink

Húrin wrote: »

Obviously, atheist brainwashing does not have to come from explicitly atheist sources. Any claim that only matter matters, or that life has no meaning is implicitly atheist. Why did you never believe there to be a God? Because you saw "no evidence"?

Yes! And the people who told me there was a god could not tell me why they believed it outside of their own personal feelings. At the same stage the Rugby team knew they were going to win this year because they felt it. However in the end we had verifiable evidence the rugby team were full of ****, unfortunately religion has conveniently positioned itself outside of such requirements.

Húrin wrote: »

Another major part of atheist brainwashing is wherever there are parents who do not act as if God is a part of their daily lives, in the view of their children. Even if the parent is a theist when asked, it sends a message that God is not real because he has no effect on this parent's life. If the claims of Christianity (and most other religions) are true, then it is the most important thing in the world. But if the parent does not act like that, then it greatly diminishes the reality of God.

Lol . Are you seriously trying to argue that the lack of actively religious parents counts as brainwashing? How intellectually dishonest is that?

Flamed Diving

Húrin wrote: »

What do you mean?

Well, when I was young we were taught catholic doctrine at school. We had to go to church every week and were told that we would burn in hell unless we believed what everyone else was thinking. How is this comparable with some of your mates being atheists?

Stercus Accidit

Most atheist I imagine teach their children what is actually correct(read that, what we actually know, not that there is no god), rather than "this is right, I dont know why but it is".

My parents never taught me a religion, saying only I could make the choice myself when older. I was still subjected to it at school. Which side had me for an hour a week learning what I was meant to believe, and which allowed me my own choice?

I was free to decide my whole life, and I think religion et al, after my 22 years of not being influenced(except maybe at school to believe) is a bunch of sh*te tbh. Theres something for ye.

Just my freely formed opinion, I only heard about what an atheist was from those who believed who were trying to place me in a social group.


Any Teacher at school -Oh you don't believe in God, so you're an atheist?

Me - I am, whats that?

Ickle Magoo

OP,

I didn't have any eureka moment, either. I don't think I've ever been able to make sense of theism. I'm naturally cynical & suspicious, my Mum said I looked at her blankly when she was trying to tell me about the tooth fairy, I told my folks I thought they were making up Santa too & they asked me not to tell my older sibling.

My parents are theists, albeit my Dad is agnostic. I think perhaps because of that, they consider faith to be intensely personal thing (as my Dad would say; "What goes on between me & the Big Man, is between me & the Big Man, I don't need any of his lackeys telling me what He wants to say to me", lol). So, although encouraging me to attend Church with them when I was little, as soon as I started asking questions, many of which they were unable to answer to any degree of satisfaction, I was able to choose my own spiritual path.

I find it quite a depressing thought that one day I'll go sleep & never wake up & know anything ever again. The thought of it kind of scares me quite a lot tbh but I just have to be a bit scared because I can't just switch on the belief of an alternative, I'd be pretending or kidding myself because deep down I just don't buy it.

I can understand the comfort people get from their faith & why they think God is wonderful if he created all of life as we know it, but they never talk about the really nasty stuff, the horrendous bacterium that can only live by eating human flesh, or the worm that lives by burying through a child's eye-ball & why their all knowing, all loving God would create such a thing. Why baby rapists win the lotto and Nun's get stabbed to death. If there was any kind of order of events, ANY kind of reasoning to the claims, any kind of "justness", I could see myself believing. But I just haven't seen anything that would convince me that things don't just happen randomly - to anyone - regardless of faith or lack of - so what's the point?

I suppose the ultimate prize is a version of Heaven or afterlife but the cynic in me thinks it's mighty convenient that the only proof I'll get of a God who created this world is when my life ends & I'm no longer a part of it. Maybe Heaven does exist, maybe there is a God, maybe there are a million? You see, when I start going through the possibilities of what could have created the earth (if an omnipotent being did, of course) & what could be waiting for me after life other than pushing up daisies, I don't see anything that would make me lean towards supporting just one option out of the infinite possibilities. I guess until I find some kind of proof of what I should be believing in, I have no option but believe in nothing - or I'd have to believe in anything & everything.

Anyhoo...sorry for the long post, I'm a rambler

Húrin

I think you all are conveniently forgetting that there are many more agents at work in a child's development than parents and school. There are peers, the media, and capitalism, and probably others. For the most part, these groups are promoting materialism, consumerism, relativism, and ideas like exclusive scientific authority in obtaining knowledge (positivism). Spirituality and religion is sidelined, treated as a source of moral nagging, or just downright ridiculed.

That is one reason why most of this generation are mindlessly falling into line as atheists.

I am not here to convert anyone, or tell them that they ought to believe in God. Each to his own I say. I am arguing against the characterisation that people raising their children in religion are brainwashers or child abusers. Atheists do not have some sort of objective view of reality, nor does atheism inherently promote free thinking any more than religion.

Mickeroo

Húrin wrote: »

I think you all are conveniently forgetting that there are many more agents at work in a child's development than parents and school. There are peers, the media, and capitalism, and probably others. For the most part, these groups are promoting materialism, consumerism, relativism, and ideas like exclusive scientific authority in obtaining knowledge (positivism). Spirituality and religion is sidelined, treated as a source of moral nagging, or just downright ridiculed.

That is one reason why most of this generation are mindlessly falling into line as atheists.

I dont think this is particularly true of Irish media or schools. I dont know anybody who is raising their children as atheist,saying you're an atheist is still pretty much frowned upon where I come from.

Religion does not promote free thinking.....too many rules.