|
|
|
bngbuck
SFN Addict
USA
2437 Posts |
Posted - 11/26/2010 : 15:32:26 [Permalink]
|
Dr. Mabuse.....
Thank you for your courteous reply.| usually when text is surrounded by those little boxes, it usually implies those are quotes of some kind. |
Yes, that is one common use for the box enclosure. In over seven decades of active reading I have encountered many other applications of the use of this emphasis, including focus of attention, quotation, commentary outside of the text subject, organization of response to query, separation of sub-text content from main text, and many others. I was attempting to respond to Dude's trisectioning of an analysis of religion, each subject requiring a different response. "Setting them aside for consideration" was exactly my intent.| I know your boxes were made by the box-tag and not the quote-tag, but those were still marking text, and setting then apart (for special consideration) |
I try to use the back-shaded quote box for direct attribution to others, providing the source - a courtesy usually not necessary when the text is one's own.
I became irritated because of your earlier "pompous ass" comment, because I had considered the source and I did not feel it was either characteristic of you or in order. Coming from others here whose primary posture is attack mode, I would not have mentioned it.
I felt that you were making a snarky comment implying plagiarism. I understand that you were not and I overreached. I will readily admit that the ever-increasing sniping contests on these forums has colored my judgment.
If it is of passing interest to you, I have considered most of your contributions here refreshingly clear of insult for insult's sake alone. |
 |
|
|
skepticalover
New Member
12 Posts |
Posted - 12/16/2010 : 23:38:09 [Permalink]
|
| I personally believe atheists haven't found or been shown the spirit yet, because once you know, you know. I do believe they are a step up from the mindless organized religion freaks though, because they are questioning the system. But once you find your spirit then you know that religion isn't really such a bad thing because all that matters fundamentally is treating others how you would like to be treated, being kind and having love for one another. If religion can help bring that out in people then it can be a good thing. |
Nail polish without all the carcinogens - http://www.metapolish.com |
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
 Posted - 12/17/2010 : 12:45:48 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by skepticalover
I personally believe atheists haven't found or been shown the spirit yet, because once you know, you know. I do believe they are a step up from the mindless organized religion freaks though, because they are questioning the system. But once you find your spirit then you know that religion isn't really such a bad thing because all that matters fundamentally is treating others how you would like to be treated, being kind and having love for one another. If religion can help bring that out in people then it can be a good thing.
|
I believe that people who make nonsensical pronouncements like the above are, generally, misguided and overly credulous. A little education might assist you in better understanding reality.
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
leoofno
Skeptic Friend
USA
346 Posts |
Posted - 12/17/2010 : 14:04:34 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by skepticalover
I personally believe atheists haven't found or been shown the spirit yet, because once you know, you know. I do believe they are a step up from the mindless organized religion freaks though, because they are questioning the system. But once you find your spirit then you know that religion isn't really such a bad thing because all that matters fundamentally is treating others how you would like to be treated, being kind and having love for one another. If religion can help bring that out in people then it can be a good thing.
|
Please, show me the spirit that I might believe.
Take your time, no rush. |
"If you're not terrified, you're not paying attention." Eric Alterman
|
|
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9688 Posts |
Posted - 12/17/2010 : 14:06:28 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by skepticalover
I do believe they are a step up from the mindless organized religion freaks though, because they are questioning the system. |
"questioning the system" is only part of what we do here at Skeptic Friends Network.
Have another look at out mission statement (it's at the bottom of every page, above the bottom menu), and realise that our scope is much bigger than that.
| But once you find your spirit then you know that religion isn't really such a bad thing because all that matters fundamentally is treating others how you would like to be treated, being kind and having love for one another. |
That's the Golden Rule, and it's as old as any philosophy around. Certainly as old as any religion.
No news here...
Really, no need to get spiritual to "get it" but logical with a basic knowledge/insight into the human condition.
If religion can help bring that out in people then it can be a good thing.
|
Yes. Unfortunately, religion is to only way to reach a particular part of the population, and as long as they need religion in order to behave and be good members of society, I sure hope they stay religious. |
Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3
"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse
Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder. |
|
|
|
sailingsoul
SFN Addict
2830 Posts |
Posted - 12/17/2010 : 14:47:57 [Permalink]
|
| Oh! I agree, Religion can be great for people who NEED a reason to be good to other human beings. Like those who fear the delusion of Hell and a Deity who in spite of being loving condemns "His creations/ children" to eternal damnation if the don't ask for forgiveness before dying. Just think of it, after a life time of service to all creatures big and small you can be rewarded with an eternity of praising God and possible hanging with Pol Pot, Stalin, Hitler, and everyone else who got saved before dying but after killing and jacking up any number of other human beings. For people who NEED that type of motivation to be a decent human beings, I wouldn't bother to piss on, if I passed them on fire and dying of thirst in the desert. Even if they get to "heaven" and I won't. SS |
There are only two types of religious people, the deceivers and the deceived. SS |
|
|
|
Hawks
SFN Regular
Canada
1383 Posts |
Posted - 12/17/2010 : 22:15:35 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by skepticalover
I do believe they are a step up from the mindless organized religion freaks though. |
Well, it's always nice to not be lowest in the pecking order.
| But once you find your spirit then you know that religion isn't really such a bad thing because all that matters fundamentally is treating others how you would like to be treated, being kind and having love for one another. |
Assuming that your spirit is all about being nice. Of course, not all spiritual and religious people are like that.
If religion can help bring that out in people then it can be a good thing.
|
Sure. There are a lot of sociopaths out there. Religion might be the medicine they need. |
METHINKS IT IS LIKE A WEASEL
It's a small, off-duty czechoslovakian traffic warden! |
|
|
|
Robb
SFN Regular
USA
1223 Posts |
Posted - 12/23/2010 : 08:34:46 [Permalink]
|
I finally had time to read this thread and found it most interesting. It seems to me that some people view skepticism as a life philosophy and some think of it as a tool. I would say both types of people need to be included in the skeptical tent. I think Dave W and Dude have expressed that skepticism must lead to atheism. I can see their point and I probably agree with it, but is there room for people like me who do not call themselves a skeptic but have learned skepticism and have used it as a tool in their life for their betterment? I hope so.
Most of you know that I believe in God but I have learned a lot from posting and reading here over the last 5-6 years and have changed my mind on a lot of things because of what I have learned about skepticism. I have promoted critical thinking on subjects with my friends such as vaccines, the so called war on Christmas, various conspiracy theories etc as a result from what I have learned about skepticism. I would say that even though I am a theist, I have advanced skepticism is some way even though I don’t think of it as a life philosophy. I do acknowledge that if I were to go to a skeptic convention that there would be discussion about religion and most people there would be atheist or agnostic.
I guess my point is that as humans we do a great job of compartmentalizing things. Just look at sport fans. We have a harder time being consistent with our beliefs in all aspects of our lives. I would suggest that someone can be a skeptic on some subjects but not on others. My question is then is that person less credible on all subjects if they are not rational on a couple of others?
I hope at least some of this made sense.
|
Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master. - George Washington |
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
Posted - 12/23/2010 : 11:52:22 [Permalink]
|
Robb:
My question is then is that person less credible on all subjects if they are not rational on a couple of others? |
Well look. We're fine with Penn & Teller when they are going after psychics and many other areas of concern to skeptics. But when they move into politics, or areas of science that have political implications, like AGW, their credibility fly's out the window. Once their bias trumps consensus science, many of us stop listning to them. Same goes for Shermer. Then there is Hal Bidlack. He's a deist and a pretty darned good skeptic. But again, his deism is viewed as irrational, (something he admits to which is more than can be said for Penn and Shermer when they are promoting their libertarianism.) So it's very hard to view him as a skeptic where it comes to his religious beliefs. In fact, it's not even possible. Pamela Gay is a Christian and even PZ Myers called her a credible skeptic. (No doubt he is not including in his assessment of her whatever rationalization she makes for being a Christian.)
I'm not saying that your religious beliefs get a pass. We can't do that. Any claim that lacks evidence or is outside of nature (because we have found nothing that is outside of nature) should be dismissed as not credible. But aside from your religious beliefs, if there is a good reason to doubt a claim and you can get there by using critical thinking, there is no reason to dismiss what you conclude in those areas because you have rejected using the same tools to examine your own belief about religion. (I can only suggest that that you should examine that kind of inconsistency in yourself.) There is data to support the benefits of vaccination. There is good reason to think that we aren't being visited by aliens and so on. So yeah, you can be a as much a skeptic as Penn and Shermer and Gay and Bidlack are. And yeah, most of us will still conclude that you are not applying your skepticism to your own belief in God or you would reject that belief.
For my part, I'm not a purest. You can even call yourself a skeptic as far as I'm concerned. But not when the talk moves to religion. Like a judge who is asked to preside over a case that he has a personal or vested interest in, if you don't recuse yourself, we will remove you because in the area of religion, faith takes precedence over logic and reason and is therefor counter to putting to use the tools that we promote. We can't overlook that sort of thing. But for my part, and this is like a mantra with me because I have said it so many times, if what you bring to the table is mostly reasonable, logical and rational, then you can call yourself a skeptic. Michael Shermer does... |
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Too many atheists?
