Is it aggressive to look for and challenge theistic claims when they are about me?
I am frequently accused of being aggressive, bullying and 'looking for arguments' mostly with Christians but the odd Muslim and Hindu too because I seek out theistic claims made online in news articles, blogs and on discussion forums and challenge them. Is this fair? If theists claim that they have an immortal soul which will experience eternal bliss or eternal torment and that they are made in the image of a god who is interested in everything they do, this is one thing. However, they also claim that I do and am.
This is quite important surely and something which I have the right to try to get to the bottom of? If gods or souls exist and impact humanity so seriously, it is essential to human wellbeing that we confirm and understand this. I do not challenge theists' right to claim the existence of gods and souls but simply ask them to explain why they make this claim. If a creationist asks me what right I have or how I dare to tell them they are a species of large ape I accept this as a valid question. I provide them with physiological specifications of apes, our biological classification as hominidae, fossil evidence, genetic evidence and the significance of vestigiality and ebryology explained for lay people like me.
If I ask a theist what is the evidence for these claims about gods and souls and they tell me there is none, this is just what they believe, I am also quite happy to leave it there after suggesting faith is not necessarily a virtue. But so many don't. They then attempt to support their argument by claiming 'scientific evidence.' This puts their claim into an area in which the evidence must be presented and may then be challenged. This is the 'scientific evidence' for gods and souls which I have been presented with.
1) Bodies weigh 21 grams less after death.
No, they don't. The one study which claimed this used six subjects, two of which were discarded and two of which showed weight loss but one of them gained it again and then lost it again. Even if all six of them instead of one had lost 21 grams this would not prove it was a soul.
2) No-one knows what the pineal gland does. It must house the soul.
Yes, we do, it produces melatonin which regulates aging, sexual development and sleep patterns. It is also still there and demonstrably dead after death. Besides which, not knowing what something does is not evidence of a soul.
3) Near death experiences prove there is a soul - see this book by Dr Alexander, a neuroscientist , who experienced it and became a Christian.
No, they don't. He wasn't a neuroscientist, he was a neurosurgeon and already a Christian. Being a scientist of any kind does not mean you apply the scientific method to every aspect of your life anyway. NDEs occur to people of all religious beliefs and none and they all see things in keeping with their own beliefs or those they were culturally familiar with.This is the best evidence for them being psychological. If everyone who saw a god saw the same one no matter which one they'd been raised to believe in, this could be evidence of something. Also for people to remember these experiences means that their brains must have been functioning and storing the memories which means these experiences occurred at a time when they were alive tho their brains may well have been starved of oxygen.
4)Memories of past lives prove there is a soul. Look at this book called Old Souls: The Scientific Evidence For Past Lives by the scientist Ian Stevenson.
No, he was a psychiatrist who spent forty years trying to prove past lives and ultimately failing. Please see the reception of his 'work' by all credible scientific forums.
It is at this point I am accused of being aggressive. Is this fair? I don't think so. I have the right to challenge and ask for evidence for any claims made about me, the nature of my being and my future.
Helen Pluckrose
Suddenly my daughter's school seems a little better! This year's teacher is an atheist and his degree is in evolutionary biology so I'm less worried.
I agree very much that there is a time and a place for aggressively arguing your point of view. This is largely why I do it online - I find Christians who want to argue. Well, they seem to want to argue cos they write something attacking atheism. They then say I am intolerant for disagreeing. Should have specified before, I do not go to Christian forums and break into conversations. I argue on sites for all faiths and none and I have google alerts out specifically for criticism of atheism and evolution. Some of these are from Christian blogs but really, if you are gonna write an essay entitled something like ' How to persuade a young friend Dawkins is wrong about evolution' or ' Why atheists don't really exist' and post it on the internet, what do you expect? I am never rude but answer as I indicated above. I really do think people claiming all sorts of nonsense for other people as well as themselves should expect to have to defend it.
I do take your point about US, Strega. I seem to argue mostly with Americans on Twitter and Yahoo Answers. They make our Christians seem very tame and I realy feel for American atheists especially in the South. Recent election results and stats on young people's beliefs very encouraging tho.
Dec 16, 2012
Reg The Fronkey Farmer
A complete stranger will knock on my front door and tell me that his truth is the one and only truth. It is the “real TRUTH”. This implies that everything I understand or that from the pillars of my reality is wrong. So rather than me just throwing all that in the bin after spending most of my life developing it and accepting his word that he is right I will question him.
So I do and as usual I discover not only is what he saying preposterous but that he has no evidence for any of it. When I tell him “Sorry you may be correct but I just don’t believe you” he will then proceed to attempt to dismantle what I believe the Truth to be by presenting me with the most skewed and pathetic understanding of Science that I start to wonder if we are from the same planet. He will eventually leave but not before he gives me that line about me being a fool because I say in my heart that there is no god (which I have not actually said). So he will insult me on my own front door and then get annoyed when I challenge him and still demand I respect his views. He will then tell me I need to learn some humility. WTF!!
So don’t ever wonder in such cases if you are right to aggressively challenge their claims. Take no prisoners ever.
My favorite at the moment. It was his first anniversary yesterday.
Dec 16, 2012
James Cox
Is it necessary that everyone believe as you, or we do?
There was an experience I had in HS, where I formed a panel to explore theist belief. I found one person that was willing to take the witness stand and be cross examined. He was a believer but not a top drawer mind. It was clear during the panel that he was becoming stressed, and I felt that that I had crossed a line into abuse of this poor guy/kid. I never did this again, for fear that I would become the grand inquistor and cause a decay of my own function.
While young kids are mostly just repeating what they are told, older people are not much different. If they find their exit from theist belief, I am more motivated to offer suggestions. If they are still submerged into the ideology, it is unclear if we can offer much support, except for challenges to critical points in dogma/ideology, where they might begin to find their exit.
I suggest a little more kindness. If you cross examine to excess, you might only be helping them find a deeper commitment to theism, since they are already measuring virtue, wisdom, and spirituality from within that system. Getting them to noticed/realize the reality of their dust mote existence, might be very hard due to their focus or reduced vision.
I remember a line out of an old Star Trek show, '...our world is hollow, and I have seen the stars...' if memory serves. This is a similar moment we could be trying to find...
Dec 17, 2012