Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Radu Andreiu on June 25, 2010 at 2:06pm

So is it a numbers game now? Is logic somewhat affected by great numbers of people who believe illogical things? I have passed this phase where I considered religions to be plausible or logical. I have neurological reasons to believe there isn't an afterlife, even if I can't be 100% sure, but the fact that it says in a book there is an afterlife and that I should take their word for it doesn't really affect my point. So, yeah, I don't really care who believes something as long as it is stupid. If people believed in invisible flying elephants, should I have spend precious time reading why it would all be bullshit when it would have been as clear as day that this was in fact the case?

Should I read why ghosts, alien abductions and crop circles, homeopathy, voodoo, or Bigfoot are probably not real as well? Should I give up my entire spare time for this crap? Maybe I made the wrong choice when I thought that my time could be spent on better things than studying illogical beliefs.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Nelson on June 25, 2010 at 2:27pm

who said it was a numbers game? i simply said that whereas the belief in god has a huge influence in our day to day lives, the belief in the existence of invisible flying elephants has none and so is irrelevant.
neither did i say that because a book says that there's an afterlife that you should take the books word for it.
what i'm saying is that whether or not an afterlife exists is, wouldn't you say, a key thing when it comes to being sure about what you believe and, as such, you had better read the arguments for and against, the objections to these arguments, and the answers to those objections.

your invisible flying elephant analogy failed so you decided to offer the very same analogy just with ghosts, alien abductions, and crop circles substituted in place of invisible flying elephants? really?
the analogy fails for the very same reason.

listen, if what you're saying is that you have the ability to decide what is true or not on your very own without the aid of the written works of experts in relevant subjects, that's just absurd.
given a single lifetime, a lay person can not possibly reason out on their own why and how, for instance, fine-tuning arguments fail, why and how the Kalam Cosmological Argument fails, why and how the Transcendental Argument fails, and the length and breadth of the discussion of the problem of evil and all possible theodicies that aim to answer the problem.

you need to read to do that. assertions to the contrary are folly from arrogance and naivete.

you need to read about history (and the way historians "do" history; goes to the reliability of the gospel narratives), archaeology (goes to the historicity of the Hebrew Bible's narrative), biblical criticism (again, the reliability of the gospels, but also how they took shape and what their authors intended to convey) psychology (how does religious thought arise in us?), anthropology (what do the common features of the world's religions teach us about their truth or falsity and the reality of a supernatural basis to religion?), neurocognitition (how does "theory of mind" show us how religious thought works and what does that tell us about the truth or falsity of religion), physics and cosmology (all cosmological and fine-tuning arguments), philosophy (critical thinking and analytical thought but at the very least about how to properly formulate arguments and spot when they are ill-formulated such that the argument fails at the outset), as well as evolution (key for understanding how altruism arose in us without the need of the divine) and the nature of morality (without divine ordination on what basis can we say we have morality?). without at least a conversational knowledge of these topics you can't mount a full-fledged intellectual defense of skepticism of religion.

Permalink Reply by Radu Andreiu on June 25, 2010 at 3:23pm

Why does the belief in "god" (what god exactly) has such a "huge influence in our day to day lives"? I don't believe in any god because I can't find any reason to believe in one, therefore any argument that supports my view is unnecessary.

About the afterlife, what can I say? Our consciousness is the result of our brain activity, the brain activity stops when we die, end of story.

Also, my analogies didn't fail. It's just that you said they did. The effectiveness of homeopathy has a great importance to our lives. It would mean that we can cure diseases by undergoing homeopathic treatments. I can come up with thousands of other unproven treatments just for filling your time with trying to disprove them. Wait a minute! They wouldn't be proven in the first place, so they wouldn't need to be disproved, right? It's the same thing with aliens, ghosts and yes, gods. It is important whether I might get abducted by an alien, possessed by spirits or attacked using voodoo techniques. I don't need to read arguments against these things when there is no real argument for them, do I?

Anyway, I bet that you can't come up with a single argument for the existence of any god that I couldn't argue against without reaching for outside help.

Permalink Reply by Keith Johnston on June 25, 2010 at 5:37pm

I think the other other thing to point out here Radu and Nelson is no amount of logic, proof or rational argument will ever change the mind of a Fundy or Evangelical. Debating them is pointless since they have serious mental issues (this is not just me name calling, there is real evidence for this and some of the most conclusive can be found at: http://home.cc.umanitoba.ca/~altemey/)..
When you debate you ask some one to think. These people do not think at all. So if you were to read volumes and volumes of religious "stuff" in order to be armed to debate these mind-free people you would be seriously waisting a lot of time.

Also what is the point of trying to disprove the unprovable?
There is no point at all.

Permalink Reply by Gaytor on June 25, 2010 at 4:15pm

You do make a valid point. I've thought about reading the Koran for some good giggles, but in the end it's still based on the Abrahamic God, and I know how I feel about him. As far as looking further, I don't have an interest in gods, just as I don't read up on Bigfoot, Ghosts, and other fantastical stories.
Am I closed minded... maybe. It's not the closed minded type where nothing else is possible. I'm just not going out of my way pro or con. There are too many subjects in the world for me to fixate on one. I still read up on religion constantly, but I stick to the Bible due to location/culture.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by M on June 30, 2010 at 10:09pm

Have I thoroughly studied other religions? No. Do I know the basics of the major ones? Yes. It's more due to the overwhelming number of religions and then breaking them into their again even more overwhelming sects, cults, offshoots, etc. than because I am "closed-minded." I don't believe in a god (or gods or goddesses, etc.), and so I don't necessarily feel the need to explore the world's religions in depth. I don't think I'll suddenly discover one hidden someone that I really need to worship. It's fun to read about religions sometimes, Christianity included. I don't limit myself, certainly. I just don't always seek it out.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Graham E. Lau on July 1, 2010 at 9:34am

Yes, I do study other religions, in so much that I'll read a little here and there and I am interested, however I spend much more of my time studying the sciences, martial arts, and reading and writing sci-fi that I tend to only give a very small fraction of my think-time to religion.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Bill on July 2, 2010 at 6:18pm

It is important to study religions to better understand the evolution of human societies. It helps one to understand how and why people think and behave the way they do.

I am confident that if you seriously study religion, it will only re-enforce your atheism. At the same time, it will help you to navigate the religious world we still find ourselves in.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jon Heim on August 10, 2010 at 2:49pm

I don't think that it is wise to call your self an Atheist unless you took the time to do research on other beliefs.
My fiance is Pagan, which really got me interested in other beliefs. I have learned a lot about other religions, and actually, if your going to have to defend your own beliefs, it helps to know others. esp. since most of them are so intertwined. most Christians don't even know that their region is so much like other ones, or that it comes from Pagan roots.

don't get me wrong, I'm not against religion at all. I find it interesting that so many people can share the same beliefs and base there lives on it. Its political science, its history, its philosophy, its just interesting to me to study other religions.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Keith Johnston on August 14, 2010 at 11:05am

"I don't think that it is wise to call your self an Atheist unless you took the time to do research on other beliefs."
Thats patently ridiculous. A very basic understanding of science is all the evidence any person needs to realize there is no God.
All study of religion reveals is that there are many methods we can use to control people.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Cara Coleen on August 15, 2010 at 1:18am

I would take your argument further and assert we were born atheist (as I'm sure you would agree and have probably already acknowledged). There are no qualifiers for atheism except that a person does not believe, even if their reasons for not believing are stupid. If a person doesn't play chess, that's it... they don't play chess. It doesn't matter if they don't play because they were never taught, or because they played and decided they didn't like it, or because they found flaws in the strategies. It's all the same.

What I think is "unwise" is claiming a belief system that you have not researched (atheism is lack of belief... in one thing). I was born into a Christian family and considered myself a Christian... but the more I read about the history of Christianity and its foundation, Judaism, the more I realized I had no idea what I'd been subscribing to all those years. A person shouldn't claim to be a Republican or Democrat until they know what those parties stand for. But choosing to be "unaffiliated" when you register to vote does not require research.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Becca on August 14, 2010 at 1:37am

I only study religion is so far as it affects the other things I am currently interested in. I don't however actively seek out information on 'other' religions (like reading their 'holy' books); frankly I find it to be a waste of my time. I'd rather spend the bulk of my time researching and seeking to understand the universe to the best of my and current science's ability (or on things relating to teaching pre-kindergarteners).

Really for me it all boils down to one simple thing: proof. Is there testable empirical proof that your god exists? If there isn't then I'm not particularly interested and I'm not going to waste my precious time debating ad nauseum with that person either.

I find it really arrogant and insulting that practically ever theist I have ever discussed religion with wants me to reconsider the same arguments I have already considered over and over again or wants me to read their religious text. What makes any person think that 'god of the gaps' (as only one example of the arguments I hear over and over again as if they were novel)is going to be any better of an argument for the existence of god today than it is going to be tomorrow. What makes them think that reading only one book again or for the first time is going to change my mind on everything? If that were true I wouldn't be where I am today I'd be at my local Catholic Church (since that is the religion I was 'born' into.)

Even after all I've said I don't consider myself closed minded; but neither is my mind so open that my brains fall out. I'm cautiously receptive to new information/arguments and willing to change my mind/views when ample evidence is presented.

Anyways... if you find actively studying religions and reading their texts to be intellectually fulfilling then I really think that's an awesome thing. The rest of us atheists who don't find it intellectually fulfilling are really in debt to you for providing us with your information through google searches when the topic/contents of 'holy' books are necessary for an argument. :)

• ▶ Reply

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