[Old Man G Funk]

Perhaps that's where Dawkins has got it wrong. Why does religion have to be attacked? That just creates a more entrenched position and polarises opinion further. If there is something I don't like about his writing it is the lack of attempt to reach out to those who don't understand evolution and are afraid of it. He writes brilliantly for those who are coming looking for answers but alienates others perhaps.

There are certainly greater evils in this world than believing in creation. How that belief is manipulated and misused is one, greed another and blind patriotism a third. And that ignores such wondrous bigotry as racism, homophobia, misogyny...

I don't think Dawkins attacks as much as people give him credit for. He certainly draws a distinct relationship between evolution and atheism, but his "attacks" on religion usually amount to questioning, which the one being questioned automatically perceives as an attack on either that person or his/her religion.

 

[Silver]

The only way you will get people to question it is to give them the tools to examine their own value systems. Attacking those systems directly will inevitably lead to entrenchment and an unwillingness to ever admit to being wrong.

Teach them logic, give them information but let them think for themselves and make their own conclusions. That way they have some ownership of their beliefs.

99% of the people in America have those tools. They refuse to use them.

As for the second part, that's the kind of thinking that gets us to "Jesus put the fossils there to test our faith" passing as biology in the Bible Belt. They surely have ownership of those beliefs. That doesn't stop them from being totally wrong.

 

[Old Man G Funk]

I've had personal experiences that left me zero doubt that there's more to life than what can be proven or examined. That's all I'll say on the subject

Without evidence of such experiences, they can either be chalked up to anecdotal evidence (which you won't mind if I disregard I hope), god-of-the-gaps argumentation, and/or a few other things. Positing that they are the work of a supernatural deity that can not be shown to exist (by definition) is the least rational thing a person can do.

 

[Old Man G Funk]

I dont "believe" in a higher power, but I acknowledge its possibility and humanity's need for one.

Why, exactly, does humanity need a higher power?

 

[BurlyShirley]

Why, exactly, does humanity need a higher power?

For direction, or they'll have no reason not to kill,stab,rape,molest,taunt,maim,rape,rape,molest,maim,taunt and belittle one another until the race disappears.

 

[fluff]

99% of the people in America have those tools. They refuse to use them.

No they don't. Not unless America is vastly more intelligent than Europe. I move in relatively intelligent circles and there are still frighteningly few people with a real grasp of logic and any grasp of the length of time involved in the theory of the origin of live.

As for the second part, that's the kind of thinking that gets us to "Jesus put the fossils there to test our faith" passing as biology in the Bible Belt. They surely have ownership of those beliefs. That doesn't stop them from being totally wrong.

Whether they are wrong or right is irrelevant when it comes to holding their beliefs dear. You will never separate some people from a beleif in God's creation, but ridicule is only going to make it worse.

I can speak personally for that as I was brought up in a religious household and pretty much brainwashed into believing in creation. I am the only member of my family to reject religion and I was only able to do so after a lot of thought and study.

 

[fluff]

For direction, or they'll have no reason not to kill,stab,rape,molest,taunt,maim,rape,rape,molest,maim,taunt and belittle one another until the race disappears.

Wait, isn't it religion that makes us do that?

 

[BurlyShirley]

I can speak personally for that as I was brought up in a religious household and pretty much brainwashed into believing in creation. I am the only member of my family to reject religion and I was only able to do so after a lot of thought and study.

Well thats what happens when you study the devils books.

 

[BurlyShirley]

Wait, isn't it religion that makes us do that?

Sometimes.
Usually when Im maiming or taunting, I dont quote scripture. Sometimes I do during the rapes tho.

 

[Silver]

No they don't. Not unless America is vastly more intelligent than Europe. I move in relatively intelligent circles and there are still frighteningly few people with a real grasp of logic and any grasp of the length of time involved in the theory of the origin of live.



Whether they are wrong or right is irrelevant when it comes to holding their beliefs dear. You will never separate some people from a beleif in God's creation, but ridicule is only going to make it worse.

I can speak personally for that as I was brought up in a religious household and pretty much brainwashed into believing in creation. I am the only member of my family to reject religion and I was only able to do so after a lot of thought and study.

We're actually in the same boat. My upbringing is the same as yours. Think back to growing up, do you think picking up a copy of Origin would have been encouraged? I know it wouldn't have been for me. And that really pisses me off, because I hated biology growing up. It didn't make sense to me, it was like a building hanging in mid air with no visible support.

When I'm speaking of the tools, I'm talking about literacy in general, not the specifics of logic and astrophysics. But, same thing again. In the circles I grew up in, trying to convey the concept billions of years would have been seen as an attack on faith.

 

[Old Man G Funk]

For direction, or they'll have no reason not to kill,stab,rape,molest,taunt,maim,rape,rape,molest,maim,taunt and belittle one another until the race disappears.

So, you are saying that humans need an authoritarian father-figure with a whip ready in order to NOT kill, etc.?

I guess all atheists are rapists, murderers, molesters, etc.?

 

[fluff]

So, you are saying that humans need an authoritarian father-figure with a whip ready in order to NOT kill, etc.?

I guess all atheists are rapists, murderers, molesters, etc.?

It would be interesting to know how many rapists, murders and molesters etc are atheists, and how many believe in god....

 

[LordOpie]

Without evidence of such experiences, they can either be chalked up to anecdotal evidence...

that is all it is.

which you won't mind if I disregard I hope...

yeah, I wasn't asking anyone to believe me. Just contributing to the discussion

 

[BurlyShirley]

So, you are saying that humans need an authoritarian father-figure with a whip ready in order to NOT kill, etc.?

I guess all atheists are rapists, murderers, molesters, etc.?

As fluff said about the #s of people he knows with a real grasp on logic; its probably about the same number that can base their morality unselfishly on just not ****ing other people over. Most people need a handbook IMO.

 

[Old Man G Funk]

Wait, isn't it religion that makes us do that?

What he said.

I'll also add that religion has been used as justification for more slaughter throughout the years than probably anything else. Perhaps if we didn't have this irrational notion of a higher power, we would get in pissing wars over whose got the greater god, and we wouldn't be killing each other off so much. We'd probably also be quite a bit more advanced culturally and technologically.

 

[Old Man G Funk]

As fluff said about the #s of people he knows with a real grasp on logic; its probably about the same number that can base their morality unselfishly on just not ****ing other people over. Most people need a handbook IMO.

And all the handbooks out there preach hate and murder.

 

[BurlyShirley]

What he said.

I'll also add that religion has been used as justification for more slaughter throughout the years than probably anything else. Perhaps if we didn't have this irrational notion of a higher power, we would get in pissing wars over whose got the greater god, and we wouldn't be killing each other off so much. We'd probably also be quite a bit more advanced culturally and technologically.

Although I agree that religion has done horrible things, I think, as I said in the last post, that it at least gives people a sense of right and wrong that they wouldnt find justification for in any other way. No god would equal 10 times the chaos, IMO.

 

[Old Man G Funk]

that is all it is.


yeah, I wasn't asking anyone to believe me. Just contributing to the discussion

So, can you explain how it is rational or logical? If it can't be repeated, if it most certainly could be the product of something that you simply can't understand, then how is positing the existence of some supernatural being (which incidently is usually self-contradictory) the most rational mode of thought?

Note, I'm not attacking you here, just debating.

 

[fluff]

that is all it is.


yeah, I wasn't asking anyone to believe me. Just contributing to the discussion

Clearly certain people here will be highly sceptical and I don't blame you for not going any further. I have to say that short of a personal visit from God or seeing relatives I have lost returning from the dead there is little that I can imagine that would convince me of the existence of a 'higher power'.

Now that does not mean I rule out the possibility of more intelligent life forms in the universe, I just doubt that they have ever been, or ever will be, here.

 

[Old Man G Funk]

Although I agree that religion has done horrible things, I think, as I said in the last post, that it at least gives people a sense of right and wrong that they wouldnt find justification for in any other way. No god would equal 10 times the chaos, IMO.

Right, because having holy books that tell people to commit genocide is actually better than not.

 

[fluff]

As fluff said about the #s of people he knows with a real grasp on logic; its probably about the same number that can base their morality unselfishly on just not ****ing other people over. Most people need a handbook IMO.

Sadly I agree. Greed is far more of a problem than religion.

 

[fluff]

Right, because having holy books that tell people to commit genocide is actually better than not.

The atheist bolshevic collective that was the USSR was hardly a paragon of virtue.

 

[Old Man G Funk]

Sadly I agree. Greed is far more of a problem than religion.

Actually, greed is probably the number one cause of strife, but religion is usually the justification. It's the way that the people in charge whip up the lesser people to get them into the fight.

 

[Old Man G Funk]

The atheist bolshevic collective that was the USSR was hardly a paragon of virtue.

But was it atheism that told them to murder?

 

[BurlyShirley]

Right, because having holy books that tell people to commit genocide is actually better than not.

The basic philosophy of most of the worlds religions does not do this. Blame the human factor. Your atheist political parties (basically religions themselves since they outlaw religion) ie. Nazis, Stalinist russia, dont have too good a track record themselves.

 

[fluff]

But was it atheism that told them to murder?

Well, you can't blame their interpretation of the bible, so perhaps it was the lack of a handbook that brought them to greater genocide that any other 20th century state that I can think of?

 

[fluff]

Actually, greed is probably the number one cause of strife, but religion is usually the justification. It's the way that the people in charge whip up the lesser people to get them into the fight.

I thought was (in descending order):

Fear
Standard of Living
The American Way
Share Price
Taxes
The Pagan

Edit: but maybe I was listening to the wrong channel

 

[Silver]

Well, you can't blame their interpretation of the bible, so perhaps it was the lack of a handbook that brought them to greater genocide that any other 20th century state that I can think of?

You think that Stalinist Russia and the Nazis in Germany didn't have a handbook?

The Soviets were officially atheist, that doesn't mean that they listened to logic and reason. Lysenko is a great example of that.

 

[LordOpie]

So, can you explain how it is rational or logical?

Have you ever been in love? If the person you love was in mortal danger, would you sacrafice yourself to save them? How is that rational or logical?

Everyone finds their own way to a higher power or they don't. Everyone falls in-love or they don't. I'm not really sure why it needs to be explained.

 

[ohio]

Have you ever been in love? If the person you love was in mortal danger, would you sacrafice yourself to save them? How is that rational or logical?

Everyone finds their own way to a higher power or they don't. Everyone falls in-love or they don't. I'm not really sure why it needs to be explained.

It's actually relatively easy to show that the emotion of love is the result of evolution, and for humans an effective tool in healthy maintenance of the species. Love exists in several forms in the animal kingdom, beyond even primates. See albatross behavior for example: an animal that is known to commit suicide out of love, to the evolutionary benefit of the species..

 

[fluff]

You think that Stalinist Russia and the Nazis in Germany didn't have a handbook?

The Soviets were officially atheist, that doesn't mean that they listened to logic and reason. Lysenko is a great example of that.

Hang on a minute, what's your point? OMFG argues that the religion-based handbooks cause carnage, Shirley and I point out that two regimes that didn't so much as nod in the direction of god were two of the most murderous ever and you see that as an attack on logic?

 

[Changleen]

I think we need to include excessive nationalism when we discuss that type of thing fluff. For all intents and purposes it has the same effect - people believe things without question or rational basis, and can be persuaded to do really nasty things because of it.

The dual evils of religion and blind patriotism.

They are essentially the same.

 

[Silver]

Hang on a minute, what's your point? OMFG argues that the religion-based handbooks cause carnage, Shirley and I point out that two regimes that didn't so much as nod in the direction of god were two of the most murderous ever and you see that as an attack on logic?

I should have fleshed that out a bit.

I'm lumping in rationality with non-belief in a deity. (Or at least non-belief in a deity as described in any one of the countless holy books our species of chimp has turned out since we figured out how to speak and write.)

Nazis were not officialy atheists, in the first place. And while the Soviets were, they certainly didn't embrace rationality either. (The Khmer Rouge were atheists as well, and so are the Chinese. Why? Because Marx/Lenin/Dear Leader demands it. Can you question Marx/Lenin/Dear Leader? Nope. If it walks like a duck and talks like a duck...)

I should have defined my terms better. Unlike the term Christian or Muslim, atheist has no implications beyond non-belief in gods.

 

[BuddhaRoadkill]

Well, Americans (all of you) have no sense of style or taste for fashion, food, drink, architechture, cars and almost uniformly have bad haircuts. So there. :love:

N8 is not a representitive sample Change. ink:

 

[Changleen]

N8 is not a representitive sample Change. ink:

You can't fool me, I've been to Arizona.

 

[valve bouncer]

OMFG

Sorry to derail momentarily, but was that deliberate because it made me laugh.

 

[DaveW]

Man, I have to defend 2 countries...

Damm right or we throw you out! :nuts:

 

[fluff]

I think we need to include excessive nationalism when we discuss that type of thing fluff. For all intents and purposes it has the same effect - people believe things without question or rational basis, and can be persuaded to do really nasty things because of it.

The dual evils of religion and blind patriotism.

They are essentially the same.

Absolutely - new entry at number 2.

I did mean to have it in my original list but my tongue stuck in my cheek and it slipped away.

 

[BuddhaRoadkill]

As fluff said about the #s of people he knows with a real grasp on logic; its probably about the same number that can base their morality unselfishly on just not ****ing other people over. Most people need a handbook IMO.

I'm with Burly on this one. If someone is actually capable of believing "Jesus put the fossils there to test our faith" ... can they really be expected to understand the simple logic of live and let live?
Out of curiosity, how are we defining Higher Power for this discussion? Is it the godlike intelligent designer or the Carl Sagan "we are not alone" kind of higher power?
I once considered myself an athiest, until I understood science. Now I'm agnostic.

 

[Old Man G Funk]

The basic philosophy of most of the worlds religions does not do this. Blame the human factor. Your atheist political parties (basically religions themselves since they outlaw religion) ie. Nazis, Stalinist russia, dont have too good a track record themselves.

I'm calling BS on this. Ever read the Bible?

Atheism is NOT a religion. Get it straight.

Nazis were in cahoots with the Christians.

In Stalinist Russia, Stalin did not want to share power. Religions have always tried to hold power over the people, so what's a megalomaniac to do? He destroys the religion and installs himself as the religious figure (like Mao in China.) It's no different, and it certainly isn't atheistic or rational.