02-04-2008, 12:56 PM | #161 (permalink) | |||
Minion of Joss
Location: The Windy City
|
Quote:
Quote:
I think, especially in American Christianity, all of these problems are greatly reinforced by the social pressures associated with a Christian atmosphere in which, I am told, it is seen as undesirable to question, and bad behavior to take issue with the teachings of the pastor or priest. These things create a great pressure to conform, or at least keep very quiet about one's questions, doubts, and innovations. Thus, I think many fundamentalists remain fundamentalist at least in part out of fear of rejection or stigmatization by their communities. Again, I don't believe this to be true of all fundamentalists, but I think it may be true for many. Sometimes I think ignorance breeds fundamentalism. This, in my personal opinion, seems to be often true for Christians in America. I have met an astonishing plethora of Christians in America who are shockingly ignorant about their own religion (if I, a Jew, can tell, it must be a shocking lack of education), and comparatively poorly educated in general. In such cases, I think the lack of self-worth and insecurity components are greatly magnified. Tolerance and flexibility are the hallmarks of pluralism. But it can be very difficult to embrace pluralism if one feels oppressed, and thus wishes to maximize one's embrace of the doctrine of exclusivity in order to feel less so. I have noted also that a number of the fundamentalist Christians I have met come from either the impoverished or the wealthy. I have certainly met middle-class fundamentalists, but I note that in my personal experience, they seem to be in the minority. To me this seems to indicate that the poor grasp onto fundamentalism in the hope that excessive righteousness will alleviate their suffering. The wealthy, to the contrary, seem to embrace a quasi-Calvinistic outlook, in which they embrace fundamentalism in what they perceive as acknowledgement or gratefulness for the divine Grace which they believe their financial and social success to represent. But in either case, what leaps out at me is that it is the very poor whose religious and secular education is often impeded by their circumstances; while the wealthy are often preoccupied with enjoying the fruits of their material success, and since they seem to take that wealth as a sign of grace anyhow, they are unmotivated to further their religious education. I have no proof for any of this. It is just my speculation: it seems likely to me, but I make no claims to its actual accuracy. And I am fully aware that there are some fundamentalists whose motivations are entirely different, and who are explained by none of the hypotheses I have offered. Quote:
But I do absolutely understand that, if one were to read the Written Torah in isolation, it would doubtless be quite disconcerting in places, and tremendously obscure in others.
__________________
Dull sublunary lovers love, Whose soul is sense, cannot admit Absence, because it doth remove That thing which elemented it. (From "A Valediction: Forbidding Mourning" by John Donne) |
|||
02-06-2008, 06:39 AM | #162 (permalink) |
still, wondering.
Location: South Minneapolis, somewhere near the gorgeous gorge
|
"God is happy, sabu. He plays
with us." With no evidence to the comtrary, I believe that theism, in one form or another, will last as long as this species does, and even longer amongst others. The only harm that comes from what I view as an absurd fantasy is that it turns us into "us" and "them" when, (yes, I'm gonna say it again), IT'S JUST US HERE, PEOPLE! & GO(O)D loves us, anyway. If there were more suicide bombers there'd be less need for social workers. I hope (talk about a go(o)d word!) that social workers start focusing on society more, and that the theists eventually realize what they're trying to be, which is? Good.
__________________
BE JUST AND FEAR NOT Last edited by Ourcrazymodern?; 02-06-2008 at 06:49 AM.. Reason: spelling |
03-26-2008, 01:12 PM | #163 (permalink) | |||
Location: Waterloo, Ontario
|
Quote:
Quote:
We agree that trying to explain science with religion is stupid. However, that religion exists is a reality and science is the study of reality. So, why couldn't science examine religion? You don't think sociology and neurology are sciences? What are you saying, specifically? Quote:
|
|||
03-26-2008, 02:36 PM | #164 (permalink) | |
Minion of the scaléd ones
Location: Northeast Jesusland
|
Quote:
So how can anyone suggest such a thing? Job security is part of the answer. Flip side of it is God is usually conceived of as a Cause rather than an effect. There are lots of cases where you can measure the effect, but the cause is obscure. Gravity is a great example. Masses attract. That's an effect. Why? Einstein took a stab at it and it seems to work, but until the mediation of cause and effect is observed, you can at most say that Einstein described a likely way that gravity may work. Now, lest you mistake me for a believer, let me disabuse you. I am a shit disturber, and insisting on the existence of things beyond humanity's capacity to know is an argument that interests me. Is that God? I don't know. I don't much care. I think atheism misses the point. I do not believe that God is necessary, therefore I am unconcerned as to whether God exists in a objective sense. God Certainly and Inarguably, though, exists as an Idea. As fuzzy as Ineffability makes the idea, that may be as much of an existence as is needed to cause an effect.
__________________
Light a man a fire, and he will be warm while it burns. Set a man on fire, and he will be warm for the rest of his life. |
|
03-26-2008, 09:58 PM | #165 (permalink) | |||
Junkie
Location: In the land of ice and snow.
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
|||
03-27-2008, 12:20 AM | #166 (permalink) | |||
Location: Waterloo, Ontario
|
Quote:
Quote:
In other words (without a forced quotation), those who wonder why anyone would investigate theism scientifically miss the point of science! Quote:
My problem with religion is when religious people start enforcing the principles of their fairy tales onto me. When they start influencing politics, en mass, on issues of what I may or may not wear, whom I may or may not marry, what I may or may not research, what we may or may not teach, etc... then fuck you and your religion! These people have political power and very few of them live with the idea that "well, they're my beliefs so I'm the only one who needs to follow them." Christians on this continent think that their religion constitutes absolute morality and, thus, must enforce this onto everyone... I only brought up science because that's what offends me the most. In rural America, anti-science fundamentalist christians are not a fringe minority. They make up more than 50% of the population and the rest of the theists don't appear to be standing up to their religious cousins. It really looks like religion is the problem and not just a couple of wackos... |
|||
03-27-2008, 05:33 AM | #167 (permalink) | |
Minion of the scaléd ones
Location: Northeast Jesusland
|
Quote:
So to answer the original question of whether Theism is down for the count, the answer has to be no. Should it be? I couldn't care less. Whether or not it is the primate troop imperatives will remain, and they are the problem, not the justifications given for them.
__________________
Light a man a fire, and he will be warm while it burns. Set a man on fire, and he will be warm for the rest of his life. |
|
03-27-2008, 08:38 AM | #168 (permalink) | ||||
Junkie
Location: In the land of ice and snow.
|
Quote:
are observable and amenable to scientific investigation is a subset of the set of things that are observable- to claim otherwise is to claim that science can achieve omniscience. Quote:
The point that I was making is that there are many beliefs held by theists for which examination by the scientific process is irrelevant. Science has nothing to say about the existence of a god, but it can say things about what an existing god is not, for instance, god is obviously not a visible hobgoblin on Pat Robertson's shoulder. Science is impotent when it comes to explaining the things that theism (in it's most general form) attempts to explain. Quote:
Quote:
that the culture of rural america is much more complex than you seem to think it is. |
||||
03-27-2008, 09:40 AM | #169 (permalink) | |||||||
Location: Waterloo, Ontario
|
Say, what's with the formatting, filtherton? Why all the extraneous carriage returns? It looks like I'm reading a Shakespeare play without all the rhyme or poetry...
Quote:
It's ironic that you think I tend to oversimplify... Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
In my experience, the things that religion attempts to explain are things that don't bear explanation... Quote:
Yes, not all theists are attempting to make me live by their beliefs... Are you even understanding my arguments or are you desperately trying to find every pedantic way that my statements aren't strictly true and comment on those fine points? Effectively all christians on this continent are, in fact, trying to enforce their beliefs onto me. They do so whenever they elect a politician whose views and policies coincide with their christian sensibilities. In other words, they're trying to erect public policy based on their fairy tales. This is an enforcement of their beliefs onto me. Of course, this is their democratic prerogative but, of course, I will want to convince them that they're wrong. Hence, the debate continues... Quote:
|
|||||||
03-27-2008, 10:25 AM | #170 (permalink) | ||||||
Junkie
Location: In the land of ice and snow.
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Your problem is that your entire premise is based on arguments that aren't strictly true. Make the arguments strictly true and you lose the dramatic "every theist is trying to force me to believe in god" angle. You're left with, "Some theists are real crumb bums." Which is a statement I don't disagree with. Quote:
Seriously, though, if you're trying to claim that christians can't govern secularly, then you should probably take a gander at the political state of the United States in the context of christian doctrine. Christ loved the poor- americans don't. Christ was a pacifist. Quote:
The problems of humanity manifest themselves in everything humanity does, including religion and the scientific establishment. The fact that you seem to think that we'd all be better off without religion seems to me to reflect a certain naivety concerning just how fucked up humans are. |
||||||
03-27-2008, 10:35 AM | #171 (permalink) |
... a sort of licensed troubleshooter.
|
A recent poll said around 50% (I think it's 47% total, 39% men and 53% women) of Americans believe in evolution. The other 50%? Those are the pious folk who are the problem. But blaming "humanity" or "human nature" is bullshit. These people need to be held responsible for contradicting science and logic.
|
03-27-2008, 12:06 PM | #172 (permalink) | |
Junkie
Location: In the land of ice and snow.
|
Quote:
And not quibble, but not believing in evolution doesn't necessarily imply a lack of logic-- two logically sound arguments can come to contradictory conclusions and logically sound arguments aren't required to resemble reality in any meaningful way. What does holding people responsible for contradicting science and logic entail? How do you hold them responsible? Do you call the Rational Response Squad? Do you at all appreciate the notion that there is more than one valid way to make sense of the world? So some folks don't believe in evolution. I guess I won't ask them for homework help the next time I take a biology class. Blaming human nature may be bullshit, but it is less bullshit than blaming religion. Blaming religion ignores the fact that dysfunctional idiots exist in secular societies too. If you are of the opinion that humanity created religion, which being an atheist you probably are, then how can you possibly blame religion for religious people being messed up instead of blaming people for people being messed up? |
|
03-27-2008, 12:21 PM | #173 (permalink) | |||||||||
... a sort of licensed troubleshooter.
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
|||||||||
03-27-2008, 12:26 PM | #174 (permalink) |
warrior bodhisattva
Super Moderator
Location: East-central Canada
|
Copernicus was a Roman Catholic. So was Galileo. Devoutly so.
This isn't religion vs. science.
__________________
Knowing that death is certain and that the time of death is uncertain, what's the most important thing? —Bhikkhuni Pema Chödrön Humankind cannot bear very much reality. —From "Burnt Norton," Four Quartets (1936), T. S. Eliot |
03-27-2008, 12:28 PM | #175 (permalink) | |
... a sort of licensed troubleshooter.
|
Quote:
|
|
03-27-2008, 12:50 PM | #176 (permalink) | ||||||||
Junkie
Location: In the land of ice and snow.
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
You: "Speaking of religious people rejecting science and forcing their beliefs on the rest of us, 50% of americans are piously rejecting evolution." Me: "How many of those people are forcing their beliefs on the rest of us? You: "Oh, I don't know *quotes incredibly large range without source and acknowledges that he has no idea*" Me: "Okay, how many of those people are rejecting evolution for religious reasons?" You: "Oh, I don't know, it's not important." Why did you bring it up again? Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
||||||||
03-27-2008, 01:07 PM | #177 (permalink) | |||||
... a sort of licensed troubleshooter.
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
|||||
03-27-2008, 03:06 PM | #178 (permalink) | |
warrior bodhisattva
Super Moderator
Location: East-central Canada
|
Quote:
__________________
Knowing that death is certain and that the time of death is uncertain, what's the most important thing? —Bhikkhuni Pema Chödrön Humankind cannot bear very much reality. —From "Burnt Norton," Four Quartets (1936), T. S. Eliot |
|
03-27-2008, 03:42 PM | #180 (permalink) | |
warrior bodhisattva
Super Moderator
Location: East-central Canada
|
Quote:
__________________
Knowing that death is certain and that the time of death is uncertain, what's the most important thing? —Bhikkhuni Pema Chödrön Humankind cannot bear very much reality. —From "Burnt Norton," Four Quartets (1936), T. S. Eliot |
|
03-27-2008, 04:06 PM | #181 (permalink) |
... a sort of licensed troubleshooter.
|
It's not as simple as a black and white religion vs. science situation, but you can see where there have been rather serious problems. I've never seen atheist fundamentalists hold up scientific progress. Religion is uniquely dogmatic and as such will always have elements that are strongly conservative.
Remember when I mentioned the 50% number? Around 40% believe in theistic evolution, which doesn't believe in abiogenesis (the origin of life). Only about 9% believe in real evolution and abiogenesis. 9% is about the amount of Americans that aren't religious or pseudo religious. I can't prove that the relationship between statistics is causal, but it sure as hell is correlative. |
03-27-2008, 06:42 PM | #182 (permalink) | |||||
Junkie
Location: In the land of ice and snow.
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Given that many people have problems wrapping their heads around basic math, chemistry and physics it doesn't seem that out of the question that there would be a lot of people who have trouble wrapping their heads around the concept of evolution. And since knowledge of evolution doesn't really matter all that much in the day to day activities of most people, including most scientists, it doesn't surprise me that a lot of people don't seem to care about it, or understand enough of it to see how much sense it makes. It certainly doesn't scare me, anymore than the fact that Bush got elected to a second term scares me. It's par for the course as far as humanity goes. Quote:
Quote:
|
|||||
03-27-2008, 06:59 PM | #183 (permalink) | ||||||
... a sort of licensed troubleshooter.
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
This isn't about having trouble understanding evolution, though. It's about willful ignorance. Have you ever debated an ID proponent or creationist? Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Trust me, this is the same coversation I'm having on a good dozen forums and several emails right now. Science is factual, philosophy is subjective. They can go hand in hand, but they are very different. |
||||||
03-27-2008, 08:36 PM | #184 (permalink) | ||||
Junkie
Location: In the land of ice and snow.
|
Quote:
Quote:
The only reason I debate with atheists is that I am one, and I feel that some of them poorly represent the rest of us, and do so while betraying a definite lack of the very reason and rationality they cite as their justification for nonbelief. Quote:
Maybe I'm just over reacting to lazy use of language, but when an atheist criticizes religion in general for things that aren't a general property of religion I feel the need to say something. I'm sure you can relate to the need to correct someone else's willful ignorance. Quote:
Last edited by filtherton; 03-28-2008 at 08:36 AM.. |
||||
03-29-2008, 07:36 AM | #185 (permalink) | ||
Psycho
Location: In transit
|
Quote:
Quote:
<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/sV-a1vmZ6y8&hl=en"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/sV-a1vmZ6y8&hl=en" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>
__________________
Remember, wherever you go... there you are. Last edited by sprocket; 03-29-2008 at 07:40 AM.. Reason: Automerged Doublepost |
||
03-29-2008, 08:03 AM | #186 (permalink) | ||
... a sort of licensed troubleshooter.
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
||
Tags |
count, theism |
|
|