|
|
|
marfknox
SFN Die Hard
USA
3739 Posts |
Posted - 03/15/2007 : 22:42:09 [Permalink]
|
Humbert wrote: quote:
The "vagueness" of many theists' beliefs is precisely what makes them so unsound. It's fuzzy, muddled thinking.
That is the argument I hear over and over again, but it sounds like more slippery slope stuff. Just because someone engages in magical thinking on certain topics does not mean that they will engage in magical thinking on other topics. Specifically, liberal and moderate believers tend to only engage in magical thinking in regards to questions that are not answered by or contradicted by scientific discoveries, and they also tend to separate their personal religious beliefs and morality from public policy for the sake of freedom, peace, and pluralism. When we take away all the reasons why religion is bad for politics and society, what exactly is the point of politically and socially criticizing what is left when the individuals holding on to those few and vague shreds of faith find something fulfilling and worthwhile in them?
quote:
Try and get someone to explain what they even mean by "spirituality" and you often times get a shrug--"you know," they say.
No, I don't know, and apparently they don't either. Any belief that requires not clarifying or thinking very hard about it cannot be considered a positive, especially when the alternative is clearly superior. Far from making an idea better, vagueness only serves to disguise deficiencies.
I suggest that we are going to have to agree to disagree here.
John wrote: quote:
In a perfect world, I agree with you entirely.
It is exactly because it is an imperfect world that I advocate refraining from judging politicians based on religious affiliations or labels. If it were a perfect world, all people would be sophisticated enough to realize that affiliations and labels mean very little in comparison with track records of political action.
quote:
However, the fact is, the non-political beliefs of politicians can and do have a significant impact. For those that are open about it, it can be debated in the appropriate political arena, or pointed out that it may not be appropriate.
What religious beliefs are not appropriate? There is a difference between beliefs and actions. Many public servants are perfectly well able to separate their personal beliefs from their role as a politician. I fail to see how their personal beliefs become part of the equation unless they themselves bring it into the equation by saying that their policies will be guided by their personal religious beliefs. People such as Mitt Romney have very much tried to separate personal beliefs from their political roles, and yet people keep making such a big deal about his Mormonism.
quote:
The bigger threat is those with a significant religious agenda who are prepared to mask it in order to gain more political power before being open about their agendas.
Anyone trying to mask their true political agenda will be outed as soon as they start acting on that true agenda. And in any such case, the problem is with the polit |
"Too much certainty and clarity could lead to cruel intolerance" -Karen Armstrong
Check out my art store: http://www.marfknox.etsy.com
|
| Edited by - marfknox on 03/15/2007 22:47:36 |
 |
|
|
H. Humbert
SFN Die Hard
USA
4574 Posts |
 Posted - 03/15/2007 : 23:19:04 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by marfknox
That is the argument I hear over and over again, but it sounds like more slippery slope stuff. Just because someone engages in magical thinking on certain topics does not mean that they will engage in magical thinking on other topics.
When is magical thinking ever a good thing? I'm not making any slippery slope argument. I submit that fuzzy, muddled, confused thinking is by definition a bad thing all by itself. Why would we have to wait until bad thinking leads to bad actions before we discourage it? Why not just say we discourage bad thinking?
quote:
I suggest that we are going to have to agree to disagree here.
How can you disagree that vagueness is inferior to clarity of thought?
|
"A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he generally believes to be true." --Demosthenes
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool." --Richard P. Feynman
"Face facts with dignity." --found inside a fortune cookie |
| Edited by - H. Humbert on 03/15/2007 23:37:06 |
|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
Posted - 03/15/2007 : 23:20:42 [Permalink]
|
I really want to agree with you, Marf, about Harris' slippery slope thing. Maybe you're right, as he seems to say that there is nothing wrong with liberal religion except for the slippery slope thing. You are right that just because you have dumb ideas in one area that it doesn't make you have dumb ideas in others. Atheists can have dumber ideas. The problem with religion, and I think he would agree, is that it makes dumb ideas SACRED. Atheists can also make dumb ideas sacred (or near sacred depending on how you define sacred). Patriotism can be a near sacred dumb idea.
I don't think Harris says that very well, but I think that is what he is saying about liberal religion. If there is kind of a fuzzy maybe supernatural, then that makes it okay to have a less fuzzy more definite supernatural. It's true that it doesn't make it okay to strap bombs on oneself.
However, a lot of us are still struggling with some beliefs that I think surround religion. A lot of us seem to live in a world where the battle between Good and Evil exist. I think that's why we so easily buy into things like wars and death penalties, and locking up millions of our citizens. It may be (I doubt it strongly, but it may be) that some of those things may be necessities at times, but note that I said "so easily".
But, you're correct, although maybe you wouldn't say it this way, that if religion is a dumb idea, then it is one kind of dumb idea, and not the creator of all dumb ideas.
I think we probably need to reject all Democrats and all Republicans because they promote a corrupt system, not just because they publicly claim supernatural ideas, and we need not assume that because one is skeptical in one area of their lives, that they are skeptical in all areas of their lives. |
I know the rent is in arrears
The dog has not been fed in years
It's even worse than it appears
But it's alright-
Jerry Garcia
Robert Hunter
|
|
|
|
Starman
SFN Regular
Sweden
1613 Posts |
Posted - 03/16/2007 : 01:37:50 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by marfknoxquote:
that leads to the slippery slope,
Which is a logical fallacy. You can't condemn a person's beliefs as harmful just because they fall on a continuum with beliefs which are known to be harmful.
There is an important difference with the "give cover to religious fanatics" argument that Harris makes. quote:
Sam Harris
The problem is that wherever one stands on this continuum, one inadvertently shelters those who are more fanatical than oneself from criticism. Ordinary fundamentalist Christians, by maintaining that the Bible is the perfect word of God, inadvertently support the Dominionists
While you might disagree with the argument, that is not a slippery slope.
If these moderates teach and/or proclaim that their sacred texts and dogmas are inerrant (or god inspired) and above criticism (and that it is rude to challenge their religious beliefs) they most definitely provide cover to those that willing to act according to what those sacred texts really says.
This does not make these moderates bad people, but they do show a lack of responsibility.
|
"Any religion that makes a form of torture into an icon that they worship seems to me a pretty sick sort of religion quite honestly"
-- Terry Jones |
| Edited by - Starman on 03/16/2007 01:45:09 |
|
|
|
moakley
SFN Regular
USA
1888 Posts |
Posted - 03/16/2007 : 05:21:37 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by marfknox
Moakley wrote: quote:
As long as theistic fundamentalism is being asserted, we need assertions of atheistic fundamentalism. To prevent those moderates along the religious continuum from drifting to the theistic extreme. After all, for the most part, we are a nation of believers.
First of all, please explain this atheistic fundamentalism and how it helps counter theistic fundamentalism.
I find it interesting that you would wonder what atheistic fundamentalism was given the recent thread that you participate in. I do not recall your asking for an explanation there. I believe that you understand the words and are being intentionally obtuse. To what end, I can't imagine. I was only using your words as a launching pad for my own thoughts.
quote:
Originally posted by marfknox
Third of all, where does this “nation of believers” line come from?
I really don't know. I did a quick google found several hits, but I don't recall seeing any of them before. Since you are not questioning the veracity of this statement I'll move on to your second issue.
quote:
Originally posted by marfknox
Second of all, please provide any evidence which shows that moderate theists are more likely than atheists to drift into theistic extremes.
In the light of being a "nation of believers" this seems obvious. If we hear the same assertions sincerely repeated by anyone who appears to be in a position of authority, there is a tendency to believe without question.
I know you asked for evidence instead of opinion, but it is time for me to start being billable.
I also believe that you just rattle off this list of questions/challenges in about 30 seconds. Like I said I was only using your words as a launching pad for my own. I thought they were more supportive than anything else.
|
Life is good
Philosophy is questions that may never be answered. Religion is answers that may never be questioned. -Anonymous |
|
|
|
Vegeta
Skeptic Friend
United Kingdom
238 Posts |
Posted - 03/16/2007 : 06:22:09 [Permalink]
|
| Does every political topic have to end up like this? |
What are you looking at? Haven't you ever seen a pink shirt before?
"I was asked if I would do a similar sketch but focusing on the shortcomings of Islam rather than Christianity. I said, 'No, no I wouldn't. I may be an atheist but I'm not stupid.'" - Steward Lee |
|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
Posted - 03/16/2007 : 06:24:02 [Permalink]
|
What do you mean by "end up?" Are you calling someone an ass?  |
I know the rent is in arrears
The dog has not been fed in years
It's even worse than it appears
But it's alright-
Jerry Garcia
Robert Hunter
|
|
|
|
marfknox
SFN Die Hard
USA
3739 Posts |
Posted - 03/16/2007 : 09:10:16 [Permalink]
|
Humbert wrote: quote:
When is magical thinking ever a good thing?
When it causes no human suffering but causes human joy through its psychological effects.
quote:
I'm not making any slippery slope argument. I submit that fuzzy, muddled, confused thinking is by definition a bad thing all by itself. Why would we have to wait until bad thinking leads to bad actions before we discourage it? Why not just say we discourage bad thinking?
You are not making a slippery slope argument? OK, please replace “fuzzy, muddled, confused thinking” with “smoking” or “drinking alcohol” and you will then see things as I see them. I don't expect you to agree with me, and I understand your opinion on this matter and respect it. I am, however, trying to get you and others to understand how I take this different opinion, while remaining myself an atheistic skeptic.
quote:
How can you disagree that vagueness is inferior to clarity of thought?
Not in either a general or universal sense, but I would disagree that clarity of thought is always superior to vagueness. I think there are certain conditions and situations which break the rule.
Actually, one of these is art. As an artist doing the type of art I do, I've had to train myself to engage in fuzzy, muddled, and confused thinking – something difficult and highly uncomfortable for me. But if I use clarity of thought about what I'm doing, my work always turns out contrived and far too self conscious. So instead I have to go about this method where I pretend I'm in some altered state. Some might call these spiritual experiences, but as an atheist I just can't believe that. What I think I'm doing really is tapping into my intuition, and that my intuition is far more sophisticated in speaking in the visual language of my work than my conscious mind. My conscious mind leads me to create really boring, heavy handed, predictable works. But my intuition (not always of course, but often) leads me to create much more subtle, unique, and striking works. Given that I have this experience with art making, it is not difficult for me to imagine that religious thinking for some individual people might help them in other personal pursuits. Again, I would never advocate religious belief in general or universally, I simply think that certain kinds of faith can be a beneficial attribute for certain people.
Gorgo wrote: quote:
The problem with religion, and I think he would agree, is that it makes dumb ideas SACRED. Atheists can also make dumb ideas sacred (or near sacred depending on how you define sacred). Patriotism can be a near sacred dumb idea.
Well, I would argue that making a purely faith-based concept sacred is itself a dumb idea. And also, anyone who is willing and able to separate their personal religious beliefs from what they think public policy should be (Ex: my mom personally considers abortion sinful, but she is pro-choice and she also would not judge many individuals who get abortions under straining circumstances. I have met many Catholics who take a similar position.) is not holding those personal religious beliefs to be “sacred” in any traditional sense. Traditionally, things that are sacred are untouchable. It is blasphemy |
"Too much certainty and clarity could lead to cruel intolerance" -Karen Armstrong
Check out my art store: http://www.marfknox.etsy.com
|
| Edited by - marfknox on 03/16/2007 09:17:28 |
|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
Posted - 03/16/2007 : 09:50:23 [Permalink]
|
quote:
You are not making a slippery slope argument? OK, please replace “fuzzy, muddled, confused thinking” with “smoking” or “drinking alcohol”
Once you say that reality is not a good idea, that you are not worth very much as you are, then you start needing to add things that add a false sense of worth. You "need" to smoke to look cool, to drink to "soothe your nerves", etc. You need to learn cosmic secrets that make life worth living (again, see the Rabbi thread mentioned earlier).
That's the dumb idea that I was talking about, and religion makes that sacred. I can think fuzzily, and my life is worth something because I've "tapped into the cosmos" or am following "god's plan."
That is different than recognizing that there are different ways to use your brain to create, etc. |
I know the rent is in arrears
The dog has not been fed in years
It's even worse than it appears
But it's alright-
Jerry Garcia
Robert Hunter
|
| Edited by - Gorgo on 03/16/2007 09:52:48 |
|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
Posted - 03/16/2007 : 09:54:43 [Permalink]
|
quote:
A thread becomes what the people on it want to discuss. If you want to discuss some other aspect of the topic, by all means, bring it up. Be pro-active, man.
I think what Vegeta means is that this type of "debate" turns into something less than cordial too often. |
I know the rent is in arrears
The dog has not been fed in years
It's even worse than it appears
But it's alright-
Jerry Garcia
Robert Hunter
|
|
|
|
marfknox
SFN Die Hard
USA
3739 Posts |
Posted - 03/16/2007 : 11:17:27 [Permalink]
|
Gorgo wrote: quote:
Once you say that reality is not a good idea, that you are not worth very much as you are, then you start needing to add things that add a false sense of worth.
This must be your opinion since you can't actually know the minds and hearts of anyone else, much less that of all people who hold religious beliefs. I very much disagree with this psychoanalysis of religious people, but I suspect that since we've gone over this subject before, we'd best agree to disagree here.
quote:
You "need" to smoke to look cool, to drink to "soothe your nerves", etc. You need to learn cosmic secrets that make life worth living (again, see the Rabbi thread mentioned earlier).
I drink because I enjoy it. Also, you are treading into a weird area here, because many drugs do actually soothe peoples nerves. Many people who are actually sick self medicate with alcohol and marijuana. I don't see how that meshes with the smoking to look cool. I started smoking because I otherwise didn't have an addictive personality, my mother was able to quit cold turkey, so I thought I could do it in moderation. Sadly, I got addicted, and now I have to fend off constant urges. How does any of that have to do with your talk about hating reality or seeing oneself as worthless? I also drink in moderation. I do it because I like it. It sounds like you are saying that people can't drink for good reasons. If that is what you are saying, then I really disagree with you. But I'm not sure. Maybe you should try to rephrase things in another way.
quote:
That's the dumb idea that I was talking about, and religion makes that sacred.
Religion does not always make that sacred. In fact, modern Western religion makes very little sacred. Pluralism is far more accepted in today's modern world than enforced concepts of sacredness.
quote:
I think what Vegeta means is that this type of "debate" turns into something less than cordial too often.
I thought he was miffed that the subject was getting changed or honing in too intensely on only one aspect of the main issue of the thread. I don't think anyone here is being uncordial.
|
"Too much certainty and clarity could lead to cruel intolerance" -Karen Armstrong
Check out my art store: http://www.marfknox.etsy.com
|
| Edited by - marfknox on 03/16/2007 11:17:48 |
|
|
|
H. Humbert
SFN Die Hard
USA
4574 Posts |
Posted - 03/16/2007 : 13:52:31 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Vegeta
Does every political topic have to end up like this?
Actually, this thread is in the religion folder.
|
"A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he generally believes to be true." --Demosthenes
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool." --Richard P. Feynman
"Face facts with dignity." --found inside a fortune cookie |
|
|
|
HalfMooner
Dingaling
Philippines
15831 Posts |
Posted - 03/16/2007 : 14:53:30 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by marfknox
Humbert wrote: quote:
When is magical thinking ever a good thing?
When it causes no human suffering but causes human joy through its psychological effects.
This nonsense from an atheist? Every religion justifies itself, in part, that way. Any "human joy" should be counted against the tally of human suffering caused by the same inattention to reality. I submit that the ledger will always show that religion causes more suffering than joy. Any religious person who is doing good things could do it better if unencumbered by bullshit.
|
“Biology is just physics that has begun to smell bad.” —HalfMooner
Here's a link to Moonscape News, and one to its Archive. |
| Edited by - HalfMooner on 03/16/2007 14:54:18 |
|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
Posted - 03/16/2007 : 16:23:14 [Permalink]
|
quote:
I drink because I enjoy it. Also, you are treading into a weird area here, because many drugs do actually soothe peoples nerves.
I didn't say everyone smokes and drinks for the same reason. I said, and maybe I said it badly, that people smoke to look cool. I didn't mean all people. I know from experience,many kids start and continue smoking because they think it looks cool. They do not add that kind of lie to their lives for any other reason than because they think they are deficient in some way without it. People "self-medicate" but that does not make it a good idea, so I miss your point there.
Again, if you don't agree with my "psychoanalysis," please disagree with it, but please don't assume that I think it's "psychoanalysis." It is a statement made from observation, which I think is still legal here. Again, read the Rabbi article, and ask other people those kinds of questions, and you'll find the same thing I did. |
I know the rent is in arrears
The dog has not been fed in years
It's even worse than it appears
But it's alright-
Jerry Garcia
Robert Hunter
|
|
|
|
marfknox
SFN Die Hard
USA
3739 Posts |
Posted - 03/16/2007 : 18:48:15 [Permalink]
|
Halfmooner wrote: quote:
This nonsense from an atheist?
There's no reason to go there. There has been enough hostility and insults thrown around on this forum lately and my skin grows thinner and thinner.
quote:
Every religion justifies itself, in part, that way. Any "human joy" should be counted against the tally of human suffering caused by the same inattention to reality.
I guess you missed where I wrote: “when it causes no human suffering”. I'd also love to know the human suffering caused by the faith of the likes of liberal United Methodists, as only one example of moderate, modern believers. And spare me the pure abstractions. I want to know in terms of hard reality – through realistic examples – how that kind of faith is harmful.
quote:
I submit that the ledger will always show that religion causes more suffering than joy.
OK, you wanna back that claim up with evidence?
quote:
Any religious person who is doing good things could do it better if unencumbered by bullshit.
I'm not arguing that religion encourages good deeds. There is zero evidence that religion makes someone more or less compassionate or more or less liable to engage in acts of kindness. Rather, I'm arguing that religion can simply enrich the experience of life of some individuals having those religious experiences. Please explain to me how that harms anyone when the religious beliefs themselves do not require or even prescribe irrational actions.
Gorgo wrote: quote:
People "self-medicate" but that does not make it a good idea, so I miss your point there.
Self medicating is often better than no medicating. People who self medicate with alcohol or other drugs often do so because they don't have the health insurance or wherewithal to obtain psych meds which might be more helpful. Of course no psych meds are cures. So my point was that often self medicating is a good idea because at least it is doing something about a real problem.
quote:
Again, if you don't agree with my "psychoanalysis," please disagree with it, but please don't assume that I think it's "psychoanalysis." It is a statement made from observation, which I think is still legal here. Again, read the Rabbi article, and ask other people those kinds of questions, and you'll find the same thing I did.
If not psychoanalysis, it is an interpretation of peoples' frame of mind, and it is an interpretation that I disagree with. I've done my share of philosophical and religious discussion with both atheists and a variety of believers, and I do not agree with your conclusions in the slightest. I have not found the same thing that you have. You and I just have different ways of looking at this issue.
|
"Too much certainty and clarity could lead to cruel intolerance" -Karen Armstrong
Check out my art store: http://www.marfknox.etsy.com
|
| Edited by - marfknox on 03/16/2007 18:53:12 |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Thank Stark
