[QUOTE=P13 B01;21316665]
I would also question your idea that you have a choice to believe in God. Either you do or you don't, it's not something you can change on a whim. If I say "I have a mind-reading dragon in my dining room", either you believe me or you don't. With no extra information, you can't suddenly switch from belief to non-belief or vice versa. Even if I said "The mind-reading dragon in my living room will solve the world's problems and give you $1000 if only you believe in him", you still can't choose to believe, no matter how much you want to. You can PROFESS to believe, but the mind-reading dragon would know you don't. Same goes for God.[/QUOTE]
That's the flaw that renders Pascal's Wager completely useless. Good show.
[QUOTE=Zeke129;21316646]You're p. cool, but you don't fit the definition of a Christian. You believe in the Christian god, doesn't look like you follow their teachings any further than that however.
So why mislabel yourself? Just say you're a theist who rejects the teachings of organized religion. That's highly respectable.[/QUOTE]
I believe most of the New Testament. I see the Old Testament as sort of guidelines about how to live your life. An ancient, outdated set of guidelines for that matter. I see myself as more of a Christian than those who believe in the entire Bible, because I believe in Christ and his teachings, and not some of the stupid, unnecessary things in the Old Testament.
I hope that makes sense. Anyway, we probably shouldn't throw this thread off track.
I've already voiced my opinion on the Pope being "arrested". I think that it most likely won't happen because Dawkins won't find him or won't be ale to access him. Also, if it did happen, there were be major uproar all across the world.
I don't think the world needs for him to be arrested. Maybe heavily reprimanded, and he should apologize, along with the rest of the Catholic Church, to the victims. But not arrested.
[QUOTE=lulzbocks;21315998]
I also wish that [B]you[/B] respect my choice to believe in God and Christianity, with all of its contradictions and stupidities. I support Gay rights and marriage, abortion, and obviously I do not support child molestation, and I know that a lot of it contradicts what I believe. But I don't care, and I want the hope that Life After Death gives me. So I hope that you can accept me.[/QUOTE]
I accept that. I'm glad you can see past the contradictions and stupidities to make the right moral choice in the face of your belief. The thing is that alot of people can't, and there is the problem.
[QUOTE=P13 B01;21309743]If I say "murder is bad", am I stereotyping? Am I making a huge generalisation? Because there are contexts in which murder is not bad, for example in self defence. If that's too strong an example, take "envy is bad" - perhaps a envious person will strive harder to achieve what they lack. The point is that both envy and murder are things which we should discourage (and CERTAINLY not encourage).
However, perhaps there are other ways in which we could get the benefits of envy and murder without the problems. For instance, a desire to fulfill one's potential could also cause a person to strive harder, without the bad feelings of envy. Incapacitation may still save my life without the problem of having taken someone else's. Thus we should encourage attempts to fulfil one's potential or to incapacitate, rather than be envious or murder.
I put forward the idea that we can still have the benefits of irrationality (comfort, purpose etc), without having the problems (the suicide bombers etc), if we become more rational. Even if you argue that we [i]completely lose[/i] all the benefits of irrationality, I would say it is worth it for the loss of the problems. I would submit that the problems of irrational thinking far outweigh the benefits.[/QUOTE]
I appreciate what you're saying, but by narrowing your thinking like that you leave out many many things that have been beneficial to mankind. Instead of making such broad and sweeping and narrow-minded generalizations like 'religion is bad,' and 'irrational thinking is bad,' I think it is more beneficial and far less limiting to say what specific parts are wrong, such as suicide bombings and holy wars, instead of trying to lump it together with the many benefits that have been provided. I think when it comes to rational thinking it is much better to be open-minded than close minded, and I feel that that applies to this situation too.
[QUOTE=DamagePoint;21317020]I appreciate what you're saying, but by narrowing your thinking like that you leave out many many things that have been beneficial to mankind. Instead of making such broad and sweeping and narrow-minded generalizations like 'religion is bad,' and 'irrational thinking is bad,' I think it is more beneficial and far less limiting to say what specific parts are wrong, such as suicide bombings and holy wars, instead of trying to lump it together with the many benefits that have been provided. I think when it comes to rational thinking it is much better to be open-minded than close minded, and I feel that that applies to this situation too.[/QUOTE]
Moderation breeds extremism, and presents a legitimate front for it as well.
[QUOTE=DamagePoint;21317020]I appreciate what you're saying, but by narrowing your thinking like that you leave out many many things that have been beneficial to mankind. Instead of making such broad and sweeping and narrow-minded generalizations like 'religion is bad,' and 'irrational thinking is bad,' I think it is more beneficial and far less limiting to say what specific parts are wrong, such as suicide bombings and holy wars, instead of trying to lump it together with the many benefits that have been provided. I think when it comes to rational thinking it is much better to be open-minded than close minded, and I feel that that applies to this situation too.[/QUOTE]
My point with religion is that you can't get rid of the suicide bombings and child molestation cover-ups without also getting rid of hope for little old ladies. I accept that hope is beneficial, but I do not accept that the amount we gain by leaving religion alone is more than we gain by attacking it.
Expressed simply:
Bad from rationality < Bad from irrationality
Good from rationality > Good from irrationality
Thus it is a good idea to reduce irrationality and increase rationality.
The point is I can't say "the suicide bombers are being irrational! Here's why..." without also implying that "the little old ladies are being irrational! Here's why..." If I state an argument against the existence of God, or a defence of science, even if my intentions are to only bring down those who do bad things for irrational reasons, I will bring down those who do good things for irrational reasons. That's why I am general in my statements about irrationality.
Also, be careful how you use "open-minded" and "close-minded". "Open-minded" =/= "Not decided" and "Close-minded" =/= "Decided". I can have an opinion and still be open to new ideas.
The Old Testament's statements on the history of the tribes in the Levant are probably largely true. There have been [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mesha_stele]disco[/url][url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tel_Dan_Stele]veries[/url] that suggest quite a bit of the OT is true.
[editline]02:36AM[/editline]
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;21317460]Moderation breeds extremism, and presents a legitimate front for it as well.[/QUOTE]
So.
Extremism is bad
Moderation is bad
Are we just supposed to not believe anything about anything?
[QUOTE=lazyguy;21317747]The Old Testament's statements on the history of the tribes in the Levant are probably largely true. There have been [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mesha_stele]disco[/url][url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tel_Dan_Stele]veries[/url] that suggest quite a bit of the OT is true.
[editline]02:36AM[/editline]
So.
Extremism is bad
Moderation is bad
Are we just supposed to not believe anything about anything?[/QUOTE]
No, faith is the problem here, not belief, or moderation. You can't be an extremist without faith, and because of their faith, the moderates are made to look bad, but at the same time the inverse is true. The extremists look slightly more reasonable. In the end, I have no problem with moderation, but organized religion does not have a point, or a purpose anymore. It's not helping, and it's really not getting us anywhere. There are far better uses of our time, and rather than learning theological shit, they should, and could learn philosophy that is based on more reasoned out logic and actually understand something.
[QUOTE=lazyguy;21317747]The Old Testament's statements on the history of the tribes in the Levant are probably largely true. There have been [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mesha_stele]disco[/url][url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tel_Dan_Stele]veries[/url] that suggest quite a bit of the OT is true.
[/QUOTE]
Except for all the supernatural stuff
[QUOTE=P13 B01;21317518]My point with religion is that you can't get rid of the suicide bombings and child molestation cover-ups without also getting rid of hope for little old ladies. I accept that hope is beneficial, but I do not accept that the amount we gain by leaving religion alone is more than we gain by attacking it.
Expressed simply:
Bad from rationality < Bad from irrationality
Good from rationality > Good from irrationality
Thus it is a good idea to reduce irrationality and increase rationality.
The point is I can't say "the suicide bombers are being irrational! Here's why..." without also implying that "the little old ladies are being irrational! Here's why..." If I state an argument against the existence of God, or a defence of science, even if my intentions are to only bring down those who do bad things for irrational reasons, I will bring down those who do good things for irrational reasons. That's why I am general in my statements about irrationality.
Also, be careful how you use "open-minded" and "close-minded". "Open-minded" =/= "Not decided" and "Close-minded" =/= "Decided". I can have an opinion and still be open to new ideas.[/QUOTE]
I wasn't calling [i]you[/i] close-minded. Sorry if that's how I sounded. I was just saying that making making statements such as 'religion is bad' and 'irrational thinking is bad' limits a persons thinking and isn't particularly helpful when making decisions based on those subjects.
As far as irrational thinking doing more bad things than good things, I think that is entirerly and debatable. I'm not saying this as a Christian, as I myself am agnostic. But all throughout history you have people that do things that are not very rational at all, or make very much sense but the world is better off for it.
For example, Christopher Columbus. He was the first mainland European to travel to the new world, his mission was very dangerous, and there was no reason to believe he would make it back alive, let alone find anything to show for it. If he had not completed that mission it's very possible that there wouldn't be a New World, or at least not until several hundred years later and the world would not be as we know it today. Or look at the second world war, and the millions of people that volunteered to help liberate europe even though the likelihood of being injured or worse was extremely high. And the millions acts of kindness given not because it would earn any financial or benefit, or a place in heaven.
So, I guess what I'm saying is risk-taking is often irrational and has led to many good things, so I don't think it's necessarily true that irrational thinking has caused more bad things than good.
[QUOTE=P13 B01]If I state an argument against the existence of God, or a defence of science, even if my intentions are to only bring down those who do bad things for irrational reasons, I will bring down those who do good things for irrational reasons. That's why I am general in my statements about irrationality.[/QUOTE]
Crime could be just another example. Even if more black people committed crimes than didn't, it wouldn't make the statement 'black people are bad' more valid or useful.
I still don't believe that makes irrationality a bad thing, all it means is suicide bombing is a bad thing. My main point is by saying things like that you're limiting your view, which is a bad thing. Although I supposed we could get into an entire argument just on that too...
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;21317460]Moderation breeds extremism, and presents a legitimate front for it as well.[/QUOTE]
How the fuck would moderation lead to extremism. Mr. Logical should know what a fallacy slippery slope is, yes?
Hell, by that logic, you moderately believe there's no god, therefore soon you'll be lynching Christians and burning churches.
[QUOTE=lulzbocks;21315998]I respect all of your points which I agree with for the most part. I accept that you are an atheist and that you have every right to be and that it makes you no less of a person.
I also wish that [b]you[/b] respect my choice to believe in God and Christianity, with all of its contradictions and stupidities. I support Gay rights and marriage, abortion, and obviously I do not support child molestation, and I know that a lot of it contradicts what I believe. But I don't care, and I want the hope that Life After Death gives me. So I hope that you can accept me.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=JDK721;21316594]I accept you.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=lulzbocks;21316611]Thanks. I wish the rest of the world was as accepting of everyone.[/QUOTE]
This sounds like an episode of Dr. Phil.
[QUOTE=Mexican;21318250]How the fuck would moderation lead to extremism. Mr. Logical should know what a fallacy slippery slope is, yes?
Hell, by that logic, you moderately believe there's no god, therefore soon you'll be lynching Christians and burning churches.[/QUOTE]
I guess you've never heard of escalation. Yeah, that. That never happens right? Escalation never happens.
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;21318581]I guess you've never heard of escalation. Yeah, that. That never happens right? Escalation never happens.[/QUOTE]
Okay so if I were to say that an organized atheist group could escalate into a corrupted manipulative mess as countless other groups in history have I'm an idiot but if you say that some dude praying on his own terms and not going to a church is going to lead to a holy war and blue laws then you're totally logical.
[QUOTE=Mexican;21318719]Okay so if I were to say that an organized atheist group could escalate into a corrupted manipulative mess as countless other groups in history have I'm an idiot but if you say that some dude praying on his own terms and not going to a church is going to lead to a holy war and blue laws then you're totally logical.[/QUOTE]
Hey, I can totally misconstrue points and miss the point too! Just like you!
But of course, what else can be expected from you.
Any group can escalate and become corrupt. Any group with any people. No one has denied that. And again, some how you're some illiterate you missed my entire point, and a point others have brought up where NONE of us have a problem spirituality. Someone quietly believing may be irrational to a degree, but it is not detrimental. Organizing that, corrupts it. Faith is not a good thing, but on it's own is harmless, however, like I just said, any group can become corrupt.
[QUOTE=DamagePoint;21318017]For example, Christopher Columbus. He was the first mainland European to travel to the new world, his mission was very dangerous, and there was no reason to believe he would make it back alive, let alone find anything to show for it. If he had not completed that mission it's very possible that there wouldn't be a New World, or at least not until several hundred years later and the world would not be as we know it today.[/QUOTE]
Christopher Columbus was a genocidal bastard
Not the best example I think
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;21319058]Any group can escalate and become corrupt. Any group with any people. No one has denied that.[/QUOTE]
Oh yeah tell that to every other atheist in this thread a few pages back.
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;21319058]And again, some how you're some illiterate you missed my entire point, and a point others have brought up where NONE of us have a problem spirituality. Someone quietly believing may be irrational to a degree, but it is not detrimental. Organizing that, corrupts it. Faith is not a good thing, but on it's own is harmless, however, like I just said, any group can become corrupt.[/QUOTE]
What the hell do you consider moderate then. You called me moderate and I don't even have faith in anything.
[QUOTE=Mexican;21319134]Oh yeah tell that to every other atheist in this thread a few pages back.
What the hell do you consider moderate then. You called me moderate and I don't even have faith in anything.[/QUOTE]
Because you were insiting a group would become corrupt just because they were atheist. That's really not how it works.
Maybe I didn't make this clear, but there's a huge motherfucking difference between a moderate "spiritualist" and a moderate organized religious practitioner.
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;21319276]Because you were insiting a group would become corrupt just because they were atheist. That's really not how it works.[/QUOTE]
No I wasn't and I'm sorry to hear you perceived it that way. I said the same as you, that organization can corrupt any group and should be avoided.
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;21319276]Maybe I didn't make this clear, but there's a huge motherfucking difference between a moderate "spiritualist" and a moderate organized religious practitioner.[/QUOTE]
Which I'm neither. But whatever I'm guessing you assumed I was.
[QUOTE=Mexican;21319134]Oh yeah tell that to every other atheist in this thread a few pages back.
[/QUOTE]
No one is denying that organizations can have corruption.
But if there was some sort of atheist organization based around reason and logic, I would definently want to be a part of that as opposed to one based around blind fath and irrationalities.
Atheist corporations are more likely to be corrupt than Christian corporations.
If such things exist.
[QUOTE=Wakka;21319536]Atheist corporations are more likely to be corrupt than Christian corporations.
If such things exist.[/QUOTE]
I was talking about organization of an ideal, not a corporation. I don't see why an atheist corporation would be more corrupt since the two groups share a lot of the same morals.
And to be honest, yeah, atheism is less likely to get corrupted than most theistic religions. But it's still an unnecessary risk and a step in the wrong direction.
[QUOTE=Wakka;21319536]Atheist corporations are more likely to be corrupt than Christian corporations.
If such things exist.[/QUOTE]
Why? Because there's no god given moral code? Wakka, don't start this stupid fucking argument again.
[QUOTE=Zeke129;21316646]You're p. cool, but you don't fit the definition of a Christian. You believe in the Christian god, doesn't look like you follow their teachings any further than that however.
So why mislabel yourself? Just say you're a theist who rejects the teachings of organized religion. That's highly respectable. I have nothing but the utmost respect for people who can practice spirituality (whether it be prayer, ritual, meditation, whatever) personally.[/QUOTE]
i don't think you can really tell someone whether they're christian or not, especially since you're coming from the perspective of an atheist
Motherfucking pope should be arrested. And gassed.
Live forever, Protestantism! :v:
[QUOTE=combine487;21316742]I accept that. I'm glad you can see past the contradictions and stupidities to make the right moral choice in the face of your belief. The thing is that alot of people can't, and there is the problem.[/QUOTE]
well, how are things getting done by harassing all theists then?
if you just run up to a guy, tell him that everything he believes is irrational, how do you think he's going to react? sunshine & roses?
[QUOTE=Archy;21320326]well, how are things getting done by harassing all theists then?
if you just run up to a guy, tell him that everything he believes is irrational, how do you think he's going to react? sunshine & roses?[/QUOTE]
Theists are victim-targets of pretty much every religion.
[QUOTE=darkheadcrab;21320475]Theists are victim-targets of pretty much every religion.[/QUOTE]
theists are people who are religious, what are you talking about
[QUOTE=Archy;21320517]theists are people who are religious, what are you talking about[/QUOTE]
i meant athiests, nm
[QUOTE=Wakka;21319536]Atheist corporations are more likely to be corrupt than Christian corporations.
If such things exist.[/QUOTE]
yeah fucking atheists need to be imprisoned tortured and killed before they rip the moral fabric of our society clean in two
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.