If you thought they would be happier religious?

strobe

So this is a semi hypothetical situation.......

If you were in a situation where you could convince someone that the whole god thing was wrong. But you were significantly convinced that although you would be telling them the truth. They would be less happy than they were before they knew the truth....Would you still shatter their illusion?

Revolution9

Atari Jaguar (I'm a sucker for tradition)

strobe wrote: »

So this is a semi hypothetical situation.......

If you were in a situation where you could convince someone that the whole god thing was wrong. But you were significantly convinced that although you would be telling them the truth. They would be less happy than they were before they knew the truth....Would you still shatter their illusion?

No. That would be a terrible thing to do. Imagine you were convinced you'd see your deceased wife/husband/mother/father again one day in paradise, only for someone to tell you that you're full of sh!t and it's all a fantasy, probably a lecture or two on why there is no God. I'd never even attempt to take away a person's faith.

strobe

Revolution9 wrote: »

No. That would be a terrible thing to do. Imagine you were convinced you'd see your deceased wife/husband/mother/father again one day in paradise, only for someone to tell you that you're full of sh!t and it's all a fantasy, probably a lecture or two on why there is no God. I'd never even attempt to take away a person's faith.

But what about a ten year old child that still believes in Santa Clause? Would it not be better to tell them their was no Santy, even if it makes them sad for a short time? Just to tell them the truth?

Teferi

Atari Jaguar (I'm a sucker for tradition)

strobe wrote: »

But what about a ten year old child that still believes in Santa Clause? Would it not be better to tell them their was no Santy, even if it makes them sad for a short time?

You have obviously lost everything special about Santa and Xmas. Believing in Santa was the best part of Christmas. It is now less special I know it was parents putting presents under the tree. I would rather that person live in ignorance.

Revolution9

Atari Jaguar (I'm a sucker for tradition)

strobe wrote: »

But what about a ten year old child that still believes in Santa Clause? Would it not be better to tell them their was no Santy, even if it makes them sad for a short time? Just to tell them the truth?

The truth is something that can be proved factually. God has neither been proved or disproved, except by Homer Simpson in that one episode of the Simpsons.

Every child will come to realise Santa Claus isn't real.
Does it break their heart when they find out? Maybe for a day or two.
Lets say a child grows up an orphan, parents died in a car crash. Little boy grows up always with the hope of one day meeting them in some sort of afterlife. Retains that hope into his adulthood. Who are you to try and take it away from him? If you convinced him there was no God, it's likely that poor chap would be utterly devastated for a long period of time. Maybe the rest of his life.

mikhail

Teferi wrote: »

You have obviously lost everything special about Santa and Xmas. Believing in Santa was the best part of Christmas. It is now less special I know it was parents putting presents under the tree. I would rather that person live in ignorance.

Really? I think it was jolly nice of my folks to give me toys, especially back when we didn't have much money. Certainly more helpful to the family dynamic that the conviction that some Arctic slave owner was breaking into my house and judging me.

Revolution9

Atari Jaguar (I'm a sucker for tradition)

mikhail wrote: »

Really? I think it was jolly nice of my folks to give me toys, especially back when we didn't have much money. Certainly more helpful to the family dynamic that the conviction that some Arctic slave owner was breaking into my house and judging me.

Did you think like that when you were 7 years old? I doubt it.
I was thrilled at the thought of a magical bloke giving me free gifts coz he thought I was a nice little kid.

I don't know. A very dear friend of mine is extremely religious and on one occasion told me that sometimes its all she has. It would probably destroy her if she was proven wrong.

strobe

Revolution9 wrote: »

T Who are you to try and take it away from him? If you convinced him there was no God, it's likely that poor chap would be utterly devastated for a long period of time. Maybe the rest of his life.

Who am I? No one important. This is the point of the thread.

Revolution9

Atari Jaguar (I'm a sucker for tradition)

strobe wrote: »

Who am I? No one important. This is the point of the thread.

I know. my point is why would anyone want to do that to a person? Surely you wouldn't want that on your mind. Look at the quote below:

I don't know. A very dear friend of mine is extremely religious and on one occasion told me that sometimes its all she has. It would probably destroy her if she was proven wrong.

Some people base their lives and dreams on this religion lark. Exposing this as a fraud would be a very mean act. It would take a callous person to do so.

Ignorance is Bliss
Knowledge to some is a curse

Zillah

I would shoot myself instead.

strobe

Revolution9 wrote: »

I know. my point is why would anyone want to do that to a person? Surely you wouldn't want that on your mind. Look at the quote below:



Some people base their lives and dreams on this religion lark. Exposing this as a fraud would be a very mean act. It would take a callous person to do so.

Ignorance is Bliss
Knowledge to some is a curse

But to some, forced ignorance was the chains.

And knowledge was what set them free.

strobe

Zillah wrote: »

I would shoot myself instead.

Wrong thread (i think) Zillah, but I like your style.

Einhard

Atari Jaguar (I'm a sucker for tradition)

I voted no because, even though I'll happily argue with believers for hours on end, I'd never want to cause someone deliberate unhappiness, which is what you're suggesting. Although I'd have to ask how religious someone could be if they could be talked out of their faith so easily.

ColmDawson

I don't know. It pains me to say this, but there's always the tiny chance that I'm wrong, so maybe it would be unfair to ruin someone's happiness for the rest of their life when neither of us can be sure.

On the other hand, I'm not sure happiness is preferable to truth. I am fairly certain I'd rather know the truth even if my happiness took a knock.

mikhail

Revolution9 wrote: »

Did you think like that when you were 7 years old? I doubt it.
I was thrilled at the thought of a magical bloke giving me free gifts coz he thought I was a nice little kid.

A seven year old kid has bugger all reasoning skills. It's all about how your parents sell it.

But yeah, I might have mourned old Santy for as long as it took me to find something shiny, but ultimately I thought it was nice to be able to thank my parents for what they were doing.

I just wish I hadn't immediately shared my new knowledge with my little brother. It's tougher when you're four.

Dr. Loon

No. I would prefer them to be happy but ignorant.

I voted yes, because I believe the truth is infinitely more important than delusion, even if that means sacrificing a small amount of happiness. People deserve the truth. My caveat though, is that the person would need to be asking the initial question. I wouldn't start harrassing someone out of their faith. Only if they asked, and I suppose it would depend on their mental state.

I know I would rather the truth, than to live a lie.

Einhard

Atari Jaguar (I'm a sucker for tradition)

Dr.Loon wrote: »

I voted yes, because I believe the truth is infinitely more important than delusion, even if that means sacrificing a small amount of happiness. People deserve the truth.

Yes, but that's a decision that you made, and that you have to live with. But it's the height of arrogance to decide that for someone else. Although I've come to realise that hubris and atheism are far from mutually exclusive.

strobe

Good intentions, gone astray....

ColmDawson

Einhard wrote: »

Yes, but that's a decision that you made, and that you have to live with. But it's the height of arrogance to decide that for someone else. Although I've come to realise that hubris and atheism are far from mutually exclusive.

I don't suppose you saw the part where I said I would have reservations due to the possibility that atheism is the wrong position, did you?

Einhard

Atari Jaguar (I'm a sucker for tradition)

ColmDawson wrote: »

I don't suppose you saw the part where I said I would have reservations due to the possibility that atheism is the wrong position, did you?

Oops, I actually quoted the wrong post! Fixed now.

Pushtrak

No. I would prefer them to be happy but ignorant.

The truth is far more important than temporary or even permanent happiness. At what point should someone be allowed to persist in fantasy? Flat Earthers? Young Earth Creationists? Evolution deniers? Holocaust deniers?

So, yes, I would tell them the truth.

strobe

strobe wrote: »

But you were significantly convinced that although you would be telling them the truth.

This isn't a sentence...

Anyway in answer, it depends on their mental state. If it's a child or someone who has lost a loved one, or someone in some similar state, I would like to think that even I had more tact than to shatter their illusion. If it's just someone average with a belief who would be unhappier without it... I don't know. I always prefer knowledge over ignorance, even if it hurts.
edit: now that I've thought about it: I never try to go around converting people either way so I can't imagine I would do that here. If they brought it up and we were discussing it I would discuss it but that's it.
edit 2: not that I even make any claims about god's existence anyway, but this was assuming I was an atheist

Ghost Buster

No. I would prefer them to be happy but ignorant.

Zillah wrote: »

I would shoot myself instead.

OTHER THREAD OTHER THREAD!!!!! Sheeeesh:rolleyes:.... but Im still a catholic.....:cool:

The Mad Hatter

Teferi wrote: »

You have obviously lost everything special about Santa and Xmas. Believing in Santa was the best part of Christmas.

Being Santa is the best part of Christmas.

Choochtown

No. I would prefer them to be happy but ignorant.

I voted yes. It may make them less happy in the short term but for the rest of their life? I think not.

I find it hard to believe that religious people (even the real nutters) really 100% believe in what they say in the same way for instance that they "believe 100%" that Obama is president of USA. That's why they feel the need to reaffirm things every so often with like-minded deluded colleagues (eg. going to mass, communions, confirmations, posting on this forum etc.)

What I'm trying to say is that if a believer found out tomorrow that there was no sky wizard they might be a bit upset but would ultimately get over it. If for instance they found out that their real beliefs were all a sham (like The Truman Show!) it would probably freak them out for the rest of their life.

Busi_Girl08

Atari Jaguar (I'm a sucker for tradition)

If they asked me why I am an Atheist, I would explain why, and have whatever discussion or debate that will occur afterwards.

Would I actively try to deconvert them? No.

My Mum is Catholic, non-practising, but she still has her faith. She believes (or at least "likes to believe") that we go somewhere when we die, somewhere where we are at peace, etc.
My uncle has terminal cancer, he might not make it to next summer, so how much of a cow would I look like if I told my mum that there is no afterlife, that he will just rot in the ground?
She would be devestated.

I'm sorry, but militant atheism can sometimes be almost as bad as religious preaching.

Truley

Atari Jaguar (I'm a sucker for tradition)

Presuming that the person is definately happier with religion and the truth would guarantee an unhappier outcome then I would refrain from saying anything. I would feel guilty for being the casue of their unhappiness.

ShooterSF

Atari Jaguar (I'm a sucker for tradition)

Busi_Girl08 wrote: »

If they asked me why I am an Atheist, I would explain why, and have whatever discussion or debate that will occur afterwards.

Would I actively try to deconvert them? No.

This. With one condition added on. The minute they use their belief to impose or try and impose their morals on others the gloves come off.

Shenshen

strobe wrote: »

So this is a semi hypothetical situation.......

If you were in a situation where you could convince someone that the whole god thing was wrong. But you were significantly convinced that although you would be telling them the truth. They would be less happy than they were before they knew the truth....Would you still shatter their illusion?

Difficult... I have a hard time with the concept of being happy in ignorance. I know sometimes you're happier not knowing, but then there's always the feeling that one day you'll be forced to face the truth anyway, so where's the point in procrastinating?

That said, I don't see it as my job to go round trying to convert people. If they don't want to know, I'm not going to talk to them about it. And if they do want to know and ask, it's their decision to give up their ignorance, I'll be happy to assist any amount of fact-finding they're interested in.

Mark Hamill

No. I would prefer them to be happy but ignorant.

Zillah wrote: »

I would shoot myself instead.

I would shoot my friend, then everyones happy.

Zillah

Mark Hamill wrote: »

I would shoot my friend, then everyones happy.

Well he believes he is going to heaven so apparently it is the moral choice.

MagicMarker

Atari Jaguar (I'm a sucker for tradition)

If I could convince someone that God doesn't exist then they obviously didn't have much faith to begin with, and therefore probably wouldn't be significantly less happy than they were before.

But no, I don't think it would. An individuals beliefs are of no concern to me so long as they keep to themselves.

But if they initiate the conversation then I'm not going to lie for them.

token56

Atari Jaguar (I'm a sucker for tradition)

The whole premise here is that the person is happy with their faith, so once this faith is not actually damaging to you or someone else in a serious way then really, why is any concern of yours. Faith is a personal thing and presumming it is affecting that person and only that person then I dont see why somebody has the right to try convince them their faith is wrong just because its the opinion that its more important that the "truth" is known.

Really it just all seems a bit selfish to me. I mean if them having faith or no faith doesn't actually affect you in any way, then why is it important to you that you must "enlighten" them. Is it really just self satisfaction or what? It all seems a bit preachy to me which I'm just not keen on.

If this persons faith is actually affecting you in some way, well I guess it really depends on how it's affecting, are they preaching to you etc? Do you need to challenge their beliefs to stop it affecting you? I could only think of extreme cases where I would think it's acceptable to try and "enlighten" the other person and this such example doesn't fit the bill in my opinion anyway.

Zillah

token56 wrote: »

The whole premise here is that the person is happy with their faith, so once this faith is not actually damaging to you or someone else in a serious way then really, why is any concern of yours.

Well, they're wrong. And frequently, on the internet.

The Mad Hatter

(Just in case you don't know what Zillah's getting at: )