|
Generic warning to all - keep the discussion civilized. Any further ad-hom attacks will be moderated. |
I'm a "non-believer." I also live in the Southeastern United States, so I have a lot of "religious" (I use the term loosely) friends, coworkers, etc.
What you'll discover are a few things. First, they (the "religious") don't behave, in a day to day fashion, in way which is consistent with what they "believe" (which is a good thing). They still look both ways before crossing the street. They still go to the doctor. They do "rational" things like everyone else. If you ask them seriously, they will acknowledge that they believe in some deity that is all powerful and all knowing and has a "plan" for everything. But they don't act like they believe it. If they truly believed in such a deity, they wouldn't take any "rational" action, because it would be irrelevant. If god wants you dead, you will die (and vice versa). No need to go to the doctor, or make sure a car isn't going to hit you. But they don't actually act like that.
Of course, if pressed, they will mumble something about "free will" and how god also gave them that. How "free will" squares with the "divine plan" of an all-powerful being is beyond me. And frankly, it is beyond them, and they will usually say as much. It is generally better not to ask.
Ultimately what I'm getting at, is that most "believers" don't actually live their day to day lives in sync with what they claim to believe. That would be crazy (but there are some people that actually do this, "Christian scientists" and such, but I don't know any of them). So, you don't really need to worry about most "believers."
|
So, while we don't have an exact definition, we now know at least partly what rationality is/contains in the area of spiritual beliefs: Not using the words "One True God" is rational. Great, we are already one step closer to solving the puzzle.
|
On September 28 2013 01:49 blubbdavid wrote:
So, while we don't have an exact definition, we now know at least partly what rationality is/contains in the area of spiritual beliefs: Not using the words "One True God" is rational. Great, we are already one step closer to solving the puzzle.
I figured that telling you to look for a definition would be boring for you and instead I decided to give a pretty good example why he'd obviously be incompatible with "rationality" in that regard. I think even he would admit that he didn't come off as particularly rational when he used that label.
Frankly, I would argue that you're insulting your own intelligence with your cheap rhetorical questions. I mean, many religious people themselves admit that their religion is outside of the real of rationality anyway. It's faith-based, they know it and they express it. The admission that their faith is not rational shows that at least they're intellectually honest.
|
Belief can make otherwise good people do very evil things. Religion has been a prime offender in this regard since recorded history. I don't think fear of belief that puts itself beyond question is unwarranted.
|
I think that it's fair to assume a certain percentage of religious people are scary, and that percentage is probably similar to the percentage of all people that are scary. For that reason, I think it's better to judge people on a case by case basis rather than having a sweeping generalization. Most religious people I have met have been perfectly decent people. If we were to disregard everyone who had any sort of belief or sway with something irrational, then we're gonna have to include fortune cookies, horoscopes, personality tests, superstition, etc. In the end, probably >90% of all people would be considered feared at that point. That would also include me. FEAR ME!!! MWAHAHAHHAHAA
|
On September 27 2013 12:11 hypercube wrote:
Not sure why you think leaders are religious. The pursuit of power is a highly competitive field. Arguably the most competitve one. I am sure that anyone who succeeds is extremely rational.
Other than that, most people defer to some authority over observation and rational analysis. And even those who claim to be rational in principle often fall short in practice. Religion is just one example and it might not even be the most common one by now.
really? just because its the most competitive field anyone who succeeds is extremely rational? really???
where is your 1st grade logic? or just your ability to read history past and present...regarding leaders. you are actually contending that leaders and the competition to become a leader is a MERITOCRACY....ROTFL.
if most people are religious, and hes contending that religious people are irrational, then leaders can gain power by also being irrational.
i do agree that most humans, religious or not, are irrational. but that is a different point to be made.
|
Are you just completely unaware of realpolitik?
|
It just occurred to me that I've probably read someone bashing religion on the internet nearly every day for the last five years. Some people even put that shit in their signatures, there's just no avoiding it!
"Look at me, I don't believe in religion! Look, I'm so smart! Look how dumb these other people are!" Ugh, I need a drink.
|
haha koreasilver, never change <3
|
I also fear religious people, at least in theory, but there are no Muslims around where I live, and Christians here aren't religious at all; they go to church on Sundays and don't give a flying fuck about the ten commandments (or the rest of the bible for that matter) for the rest of the week.
It's really about people's rationality; the only difference between people who actually believe in a god and those who believe in e.g. horoscopes is that the former have a whole crazy worldview, while the latter only have limited and disjointed crazy beliefs. Unfortunately, there's a lot of those irrational/crazy people, and while I wouldn't say I'm afraid of them, I'm definitely wary of them and would never trust them with anything important. They also tend to be very susceptible to other crazy worldviews such as Anthroposophy, Scientology, Gnosticism, etc.
Of course you can be an atheist and be just as irrational. Rationality isn't about what you believe, but why you believe what you believe. It's just that proportionally, much more theists than atheists are irrational, because all theists are irrational.
For anyone who's not familiar with the concept of rationality, espially those who think of it as some kind of subjective and arbitrary thing that can be defined this or that way: Rational behaviour is about being influenced as little as possible by cognitive biases, and applying Bayesian reasoning to arrive at objectively correct conclusions. If you haven't heard of either of those before, but are pretty sure you're pretty rational already, this is most likely a typical case of the bias blind spot and introspective illusion.
|
On September 28 2013 09:41 And G wrote:I also fear religious people, at least in theory, but there are no Muslims around where I live, and Christians here aren't religious at all; they go to church on Sundays and don't give a flying fuck about the ten commandments (or the rest of the bible for that matter) for the rest of the week. It's really about people's rationality; the only difference between people who actually believe in a god and those who believe in e.g. horoscopes is that the former have a whole crazy worldview, while the latter only have limited and disjointed crazy beliefs. Unfortunately, there's a lot of those irrational/crazy people, and while I wouldn't say I'm afraid of them, I'm definitely wary of them and would never trust them with anything important. They also tend to be very susceptible to other crazy worldviews such as Anthroposophy, Scientology, Gnosticism, etc. Of course you can be an atheist and be just as irrational. Rationality isn't about what you believe, but why you believe what you believe. It's just that proportionally, much more theists than atheists are irrational, because all theists are irrational. For anyone who's not familiar with the concept of rationality, espially those who think of it as some kind of subjective and arbitrary thing that can be defined this or that way: Rational behaviour is about being influenced as little as possible by cognitive biases, and applying Bayesian reasoning to arrive at objectively correct conclusions. If you haven't heard of either of those before, but are pretty sure you're pretty rational already, this is most likely a typical case of the bias blind spot and introspective illusion.
I contend that your points are rendered invalidated because cats.
|
On September 28 2013 07:26 nath wrote:Show nested quote +On September 27 2013 12:11 hypercube wrote:
Not sure why you think leaders are religious. The pursuit of power is a highly competitive field. Arguably the most competitve one. I am sure that anyone who succeeds is extremely rational.
Other than that, most people defer to some authority over observation and rational analysis. And even those who claim to be rational in principle often fall short in practice. Religion is just one example and it might not even be the most common one by now. really? just because its the most competitive field anyone who succeeds is extremely rational? really??? where is your 1st grade logic? or just your ability to read history past and present...regarding leaders. you are actually contending that leaders and the competition to become a leader is a MERITOCRACY....ROTFL.
Sure, the guy who manipulates the voters and his opponents best becomes the leader. That's not what people usually mean by meritocracy but it is a competition.
To be fair some countries have more open competition than others. In Britain the aristocracy retains a great deal of wealth and power despite their obvious genetic disadvantage (as Eddie Izzard said it's a bad idea when cousins marry). But people like Putin or Harry Reid weren't born into power, they got there by being the best at playing the system.
if most people are religious, and hes contending that religious people are irrational, then leaders can gain power by also being irrational.
Or you can have the best of both worlds by lying about it. As they say: "What they don't know, can't hurt you."
You accuse me using 1st grade logic but I think you're just not cynical enough.
|
On September 28 2013 03:37 Mothra wrote:
Belief can make otherwise good people do very evil things. Religion has been a prime offender in this regard since recorded history. I don't think fear of belief that puts itself beyond question is unwarranted.
I respectfully disagree. In my opinion, it is government that has been a prime offender in all recorded history. Government (a King, a dictator, or otherwise) has used religion to make believers do very evil things. Government has used ideology, which is very akin to religion in terms of dogmatic beliefs, to make otherwise good people do very evil things. The amount of individual human lives that government has killed throughout the span of history far exceeds the victims of violent religious conflict.
LOL thank you for bringing that back to the forefront of my consciousness. That was truly a gem. :D
|
Government isn't a "thing", it's a denominator for people with certain political power. Historically, the vast majority of people in government positions were also deeply religious. It's not the government that makes people do "evil" things, it's religion (or in late modern history its replacement, ideology) that makes "government" and other people do "evil" things. A few examples:
- Flower wars and other human sacrifices
- Witch hunts (traditionally a grassroots movement, check out the Malleus Maleficarum, it's a fascinating read)
- Inquisition
- Crusades and other so-called holy wars
- Castes and slavery
Also, a lot of atrocities can be attributed to missionary efforts. You can also add the holocaust to the list, as Hitler was religiously motivated (he also persecuted atheists).
And these are just the coordinated, grand-scale atrocities. There's a plethora of atrocities committed on a smaller scale, such as parents refusing medical help for their children, persecution of scientists, destructive censorship, terrorism, female genital mutilation, forced marriages, indoctrination of children, persecution of homosexuals, and so on.
Pretty much everything "evil" that can be attributed to ideology was invented by religion.
|
Religion isn't a "thing, it's a denominator for people with certain societal and political power.
Also, Stalin says hi.
|
Farvacola, he did specify that ideology is the culprit a lot of the time. Stalin and Mao had ideologies which made them do atrocious things much in the same way religion could have.
I also agree with him when he says that religion is responsible for a bunch of bullshit on the small scale like the refusal of treatment. Ideology can be responsible for the same kind of human idiocy - like the refusal of vaccines because of some shit that Martha Stewart has said, and somehow pop culture supersedes medicine and science in part of the collective minds and certain people are now stupidly afraid of getting their kids vaccinated.
Ideologies and religions can act as catalysts for dumb decisions.
That said, none of it justifies being afraid of ALL religious people, but I think it's fair to question their judgment in some cases.
|
You're young. You'll learn. We're all just people. Fear of zealots and manipulators is justified, but it's unfair to jump to this judgment merely by the fact that someone is a "believer."
|
On September 29 2013 04:45 Djzapz wrote:
Farvacola, he did specify that ideology is the culprit a lot of the time. Stalin and Mao had ideologies which made them do atrocious things much in the same way religion could have.
I also agree with him when he says that religion is responsible for a bunch of bullshit on the small scale like the refusal of treatment. Ideology can be responsible for the same kind of human idiocy - like the refusal of vaccines because of some shit that Martha Stewart has said, and somehow pop culture supersedes medicine and science in part of the collective minds and certain people are now stupidly afraid of getting their kids vaccinated.
Ideologies and religions can act as catalysts for dumb decisions.
That said, none of it justifies being afraid of ALL religious people.
All of those problems with society have roots that go beyond religion though; "religion is responsible for bad things" is a flashy red herring that is quite fashionable to hone in on these days. Unfortunately, nothing is so simple, and the attitudes that underlie vaccine denial and the like, while certainly oftentimes present alongside some sort of religiosity, are not a religious phenomena.
|
On September 29 2013 05:10 farvacola wrote:Show nested quote +On September 29 2013 04:45 Djzapz wrote:
Farvacola, he did specify that ideology is the culprit a lot of the time. Stalin and Mao had ideologies which made them do atrocious things much in the same way religion could have.
I also agree with him when he says that religion is responsible for a bunch of bullshit on the small scale like the refusal of treatment. Ideology can be responsible for the same kind of human idiocy - like the refusal of vaccines because of some shit that Martha Stewart has said, and somehow pop culture supersedes medicine and science in part of the collective minds and certain people are now stupidly afraid of getting their kids vaccinated.
Ideologies and religions can act as catalysts for dumb decisions.
That said, none of it justifies being afraid of ALL religious people. All of those problems with society have roots that go beyond religion though; "religion is responsible for bad things" is a flashy red herring that is quite fashionable to hone in on these days. Unfortunately, nothing is so simple, and the attitudes that underlie vaccine denial and the like, while certainly oftentimes present alongside some sort of religiosity, are not a religious phenomena.
I think it's disingenuous to dismiss the connection just by calling a red herring. Sure you can say the world's more complex than a one-liner explanation of why religion has been responsible for bad things but if you try to be a realist for a second you'll be willing to make that concession.
Religion has played a role in many events and just general occurrences that most people would qualify as bad. Sure, it's part of a bigger more general thing that anthropologists could have a field day with, but that doesn't mean that we can't try to point out how religion influences people and/or their actions, sometimes negatively.
I mean let's take a very direct type of influence on the micro scale. A little village has a church and a bunch of people go to it, they have something in common, a sentiment that they belong there. The church authority decides to suggest that people be charitable. It's entirely possible that the people of the town will take up on that moral guidance or whatever.
Now if the same church says you should hate the fags, or you shouldn't wear a rubber because it's bad, it's hard not to dismiss the causal link when religious people have more of a tendency to dislike homosexuals and less people used condoms in a bunch of African countries after the pope said not to use rubbers some years ago which led to an increase in the numbers of cases of AIDS.
These are just examples but still, religion and ideologies, like many other things, are factors which can influence people to be shitty when they otherwise wouldn't be. It's kind of like that crowd psychology thing that said people in a crowd can tend to be dicks. It can have a vile snowball effect. Slap to that the fact that religions are generally tied to old scripture with an outdated sense of morality, and you have an influence which can easily be bad.
|
On September 29 2013 05:19 Djzapz wrote:Show nested quote +On September 29 2013 05:10 farvacola wrote:On September 29 2013 04:45 Djzapz wrote:
Farvacola, he did specify that ideology is the culprit a lot of the time. Stalin and Mao had ideologies which made them do atrocious things much in the same way religion could have.
I also agree with him when he says that religion is responsible for a bunch of bullshit on the small scale like the refusal of treatment. Ideology can be responsible for the same kind of human idiocy - like the refusal of vaccines because of some shit that Martha Stewart has said, and somehow pop culture supersedes medicine and science in part of the collective minds and certain people are now stupidly afraid of getting their kids vaccinated.
Ideologies and religions can act as catalysts for dumb decisions.
That said, none of it justifies being afraid of ALL religious people. All of those problems with society have roots that go beyond religion though; "religion is responsible for bad things" is a flashy red herring that is quite fashionable to hone in on these days. Unfortunately, nothing is so simple, and the attitudes that underlie vaccine denial and the like, while certainly oftentimes present alongside some sort of religiosity, are not a religious phenomena. I think it's disingenuous to dismiss the connection just by calling a red herring. Sure you can say the word's more complex than a one-liner explanation of why religion has been responsible for bad things but if you try to be a realist for a second you'll be willing to make that concession. Religion has played a role in many events and just general occurrences that most people would qualify as bad. Sure, it's part of a bigger more general thing that anthropologists could have a field day with, but that doesn't mean that we can't try to point out how religion influences people and/or their actions, sometimes negatively. I mean let's take a very direct type of influence on the micro scale. A little village has a church and a bunch of people go to it, they have something in common, a sentiment that they belong there. The church authority decides to suggest that people be charitable. It's entirely possible that the people of the town will take up on that moral guidance or whatever. Now if the same church says you should hate the fags, or you shouldn't wear a rubber because it's bad, it's hard not to dismiss the causal link when religious people have more of a tendency to dislike homosexuals and less people used condoms in a bunch of African countries after the pope said not to use rubbers some years ago which led to an increase in the numbers of cases of AIDS. These are just examples but still, religion and ideologies, like many other things, are factors which can influence people to be shitty when they otherwise wouldn't be. It can have a vile snowball effect. Slap to that the fact that religions are generally tied to old scripture with an outdated sense of morality, and you have an influence which can easily be bad.
It's a red herring because religion is no different than any other ideological apparatus in terms of how humans are liable to use and misuse its constituent message. National identification of the masses, "progress", the appearance of science among a host of other ideas are all at play when large groups of people make poor judgments, but none are responsible in and of themselves. There is a reason why people who write blogs like this are totally unaware of how much charity and do-gooding comes about as a result of religious influence; the world is a much scarier place when no one thing is essentially "bad" or "good".
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
