Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Frink on January 6, 2009 at 11:21pm

Hypocrisy, Trey. He's accusing them of hypocritical behavior in relation to their dogma.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by chiz on January 6, 2009 at 11:29pm

heh, actually, I was calling my parents hypocritical b/c I don't want to speak for his. I don't know them and have no real clue as to why the chose to join the church.. but, if I were to 'label' or stereotype them, that is what I would say.

Walk the walk means, follow the rules laid out by the bible, go to church, pray regularly, repent, take care of themselves, don't gossip.. no glutton, lust, greed, pride, envy, etc.. you, being a believer, know the drill; all that jazz.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Fluther on January 8, 2009 at 2:31pm

Here's a quote from mensa magazine ...
"Of 43 studies carried out since 1927 on the relationship between religious belief and one's intelligence and/or educational level, all but four found an inverse connection. That is, the higher one's intelligence or education level, the less one is likely to be religious or hold "beliefs" of any kind." .... I suspect the four were by the Discovery Institute!! though the differences involved were relatively small (4-8 IQ points)
Wikipedia shows that it's the more developed nations that are less religious, so perhaps it has to do with culture, having money and being EDUCATED rather than being intelligent.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by macabre on January 8, 2009 at 7:39pm

I guess it doesn't really matter whether you believe or not as long as you sorta see through the whole thing.
I met uncountable amounts of stupid believers, but also some (only few, unfortunatelly) who really saw through religion.
If someone came to this point, the only basic question left is whether someone wants to believe in any religious idea of god.
Those are the folks who really live charity, peace, forgiveness and all the other good ideas.
In the same way, there are not only few atheists who do not believe in god or anything, but just that does not make them good persons. I met some persons who actually argue in a "after I died, there won't be nothing, so why the f** should i care about anything that doesnt benefit me?". Beside those, of course, there are (they're the atheist majority, i think and hope) the atheists who take ethics, morals, etc. as their world view's basis.
Maybe it's true that atheists are more intelligent on average because it takes some more brains to scrutinise religion, whether or not they abolish it afterwards. (the ones who don't become profound believers, eh ;D).

My point is: I don't care whether someone is intelligent or the dumbest moron on earth and likewise whether he or she believes in something, as long as he or she lives his or her life in a manner exemplary for the vast majority of people.


macmacmac

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jinxie27 on January 8, 2009 at 7:48pm

I think the atheists of our generation were mostly brought up with a religious background. That might be a massive generalisation, I know, but I imagine it was much less popular back in the 80s to be an atheist then it is now. Even if that's all wrong, from my perspective alone I was brought up with a very religious background, and then when I realised I had the power to reject it, I sat down and had a really good *think* about it, and I decided I would believe what I wanted to believe and not what I was told to believe.

Yes, I think believers are less intelligent, because to me they are people who have not had a good think about it, because if they did, in my mind, they'd see how ridiculous it all was. I don't think you can be that intelligent and still be a believer, unless there are some serious modifications made to your beliefs.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Mark on January 23, 2009 at 6:33am

Well the way I see it. On average the intelligence of the believers would have to be lower. There is a lot more time and effort spent on converting the gullible and less intelligent to a belief in god, than in a belief in no god. And no, being gullible or unintelligent isn't necessarily a requirement to believe in god. Heck I believe in science and the only real proof I have is someone told me so.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Pam on January 23, 2009 at 10:57am

But the difference is that the proof is the science. You don't have to understand how to build a dam to see that it works, or know anything about rocket science to watch a space launch. Science proves itself every day, with everything we use, no leap of faith required. :-)

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by chiz on January 23, 2009 at 12:27pm

Still, this doesn't touch on the idea that theist are willfully ignorant to the subject. What if they choose to ignore reason for personal gain or effect?

I'm still of the belief that the average theist doesn't really believe in the god they follow to begin with. They only follow for community convenience.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Mark on January 24, 2009 at 2:45pm

Still not proof, for all i know. The shuttle could be launched into space by the power of prayer. Yes i know it isn't. but, we live on faith same as religious people. For lots of things in our lives.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Pam on January 26, 2009 at 8:40am

But it isn't faith. If we wonder how something operates, then we can probably acquire the information necessary to understand it. You might question whether or not the information is accurate, but a shuttle relying on erroneous information would not make it safely into space.

If you see a shuttle launched into space, and you know the science responsible for putting the shuttle into orbit, what, if not the science, can you attribute to the shuttle's successful launch? Believing in science is not a matter of faith. It is only a matter of observation.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by DD_8630 on January 28, 2009 at 6:06am

Have you ever seen the roundness of the Earth, or do you trust the observations and measurements (photographs, etc) of others? It's a tricky thing: we chastise the theist for his blind faith, yet we seem to have it ourselves: we defer to the expertise of others all the time.

But then, the difference is obvious: experts are only considered as such if their claims are theoretically sound and experimentally verified (lest we forget those biological scientists who are Creationists).

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by chiz on January 29, 2009 at 1:30am

hmm.. I think your logic is broken.
Maybe I just read it wrong..

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• 5
• Next ›
• Page