quote:Originally posted by King of Men: correlation does equal causation when you've carefully controlled for confounding factors!
Nope. The odds improve, but they're still not equal.
And given that people are not subatomic particles, good luck with "carefully controlling for confounding factors."
Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm sorry, I know KOM is baiting, but for Pete's sake, he's posing it as a hypothetical. The whole point of a hypothetical is that it's a question that is impossible to answer with real life details getting in the way. So if you don't want to answer him, tell him you think he's trolling and you're not going to respond, but quit nit-picking that his question isn't valid in the real world, because he made that clear from his first post.
Posts: 7954 | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Says the man who'se never designed an experiment in his life... So you are saying that all of sociology is a pseudo-science, merely because it might in a hypothetical scenario be used to show that religion is not all it's cracked up to be?
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Let's say that abusive parents(emotional and physical) exist across faiths, and the impetus for the abuse varies from situation to situation. Since a person's faith can, and often does, influence how one raises the child, then it's possible that a misinterpretation of the tenets of the faith can function as the impetus for the abuse.
This could be the story of one of those cases.
Bao,
There is an entire industry in black criminal literature. I don't read it. I think that it's too bad so many people substitute it for richer literature, but it is what it is.
quote:Originally posted by King of Men: Says the man who'se never designed an experiment in his life... So you are saying that all of sociology is a pseudo-science, merely because it might in a hypothetical scenario be used to show that religion is not all it's cracked up to be?
Funny that you think I've never designed an experiment before, when I actually have, several times. Good to know you think you're so high above me though. Way to have an ego problem. And sociology is used to explain human nature. It relies greatly on the idea that people are incapable of going against human nature.
And while I do know you're trolling, like you do with every religion thread you come across, I'll answer your hypothetical. A set of beliefs should not be held responsible for an individual's lack of ability to understand the beliefs. The truth of the matter is that the vast majority of religious people are only too anxious to just go along with human nature. Meanwhile the main purpose of religion is to help people break away from the more unsavory parts of human nature. A person who is seeking the animal urge to be "leader of the pack" as it were would certainly find the rigid guidlines of organized religion appealing, particularly if said religion gives what to them would be adequate license to rule over other people. But such a person could not truly say that they were following the doctrine of that religion and I would very easilly tell that person (assuming we're only talking about Mormons here), to their face, with great anger, that they were not members of the Church.
Anyone who feels like cracking open LDS scripture will find that actions like the father in this particular book are looked down upon. Were they to be made public, the father would likely face discipline and could potentially be excommunicated from the church. In the REAL world. But apparently not in this book, where the entire world this family lives in is fabricated to reach a specific result.
Posts: 3003 | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by King of Men: By that logic, it's impossible to say whether antibiotics save lives, because you can't see what would have happened if you didn't give the medicine. Is the concept of 'statistically significant, other factors held constant' really so difficult for people to grasp?
If you want FDA approval for your drug, you must show that people without your drug are worse off than with it. I would accept the hypothetical if you found that a normal, non-abusive, "other factors held constant" group of people who joined the religion became abusive then I will accept that the religion causes abusive behavior.
Posts: 1001 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:A set of beliefs should not be held responsible for an individual's lack of ability to understand the beliefs.
I think you must be misunderstanding the question. Suppose you could really show that atheists were worse people, for a value of 'worse' we can both agree on, say child abuse. What would be your reaction to that piece of science?
quote:And sociology is used to explain human nature. It relies greatly on the idea that people are incapable of going against human nature.
Quite so, and it tries to find out about human nature by... measuring things, with controls. What was your point? (Not snark, I'm really confused.)
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
If you COULD prove that a set of beliefs made people more disposed to be abusive (which I really hope you agree that you really can't), then yes, I'd say it's a bad thing. And thank you for clarifying the hypothetical. I did misunderstand it.
Posts: 3003 | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm not sure why you couldn't prove that a given set of beliefs made people more likely to be abusive. As an extreme example, a committed Nazi is not very likely to be a nice person. That signal stands out of the noise loud and clear; others might need a bit more searching, but I don't see why it couldn't be done in principle.
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Warning: I'm about to link to a potentially disturbing news article. I'd say this guy's beliefs, if they really are his beliefs and not just a justification he set up to look like a belief system, make him more prone to be abusive.
Okay. So before I criticize this book, I'm gonna see if the library has it. I agree that I'm not spending money on it, but I would be willing to read it and take notes.
Posts: 21182 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yeah. It's not too much of a leap to say that someone whose beliefs say he should have sex with kids will be more likely to have sex with kids.
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
Remember, it's not about whether you think that the beliefs in the book are true to life, the issue is whether the character as portrayed in the book could sensibly interpret her life, as it appears to her, the way she does.
If you go scouring the book, jotting down all of the character's false opinions, you'll end up writing as much as the author did. It's like a Catholic going through the Da Vinci Code.
Posts: 5600 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by King of Men: I'm not sure why you couldn't prove that a given set of beliefs made people more likely to be abusive. As an extreme example, a committed Nazi is not very likely to be a nice person. That signal stands out of the noise loud and clear; others might need a bit more searching, but I don't see why it couldn't be done in principle.
But was it the beliefs that made the nazi that way or was he that way from the beginning?
Posts: 3003 | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
I'm not denying the right of such literature to exist or calling for censorship or anything like that. I just believe that it's bigotry at heart even if the medium is fiction.
Posts: 1412 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by King of Men: I'm not sure why you couldn't prove that a given set of beliefs made people more likely to be abusive. As an extreme example, a committed Nazi is not very likely to be a nice person. That signal stands out of the noise loud and clear; others might need a bit more searching, but I don't see why it couldn't be done in principle.
But was it the beliefs that made the nazi that way or was he that way from the beginning?
Not relevant. If evil people gravitate to a given movement or belief, that's just as bad as the belief creating evil people.
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Actually, weren't most of the Nazis normal people when they weren't committing genocide? Isn't that what makes the Holocaust so terrifying? Because it could potentially have been us committing those acts?
Posts: 4655 | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by King of Men: I'm not sure why you couldn't prove that a given set of beliefs made people more likely to be abusive. As an extreme example, a committed Nazi is not very likely to be a nice person. That signal stands out of the noise loud and clear; others might need a bit more searching, but I don't see why it couldn't be done in principle.
But was it the beliefs that made the nazi that way or was he that way from the beginning?
Not relevant. If evil people gravitate to a given movement or belief, that's just as bad as the belief creating evil people.
It's completely relevant. Bad people can find an excuse to be much worse in a good environment. An evil person can very easilly distort and twist anything that is originally good to suit their own desires.
Posts: 3003 | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by pH: Are all the works of fiction portraying Masons as evil (I'm thinking of the movie "From Hell") bigoted, then?
-pH
I would say, "Yes." Unless we're talking about provably true historical incidents, anything portraying Masons as evil just because they're Masons (not saying that there are bad people in every bunch, but saying, "If you join the Masons you join a CULT OF EVIL") is bigoted.
Posts: 21182 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Looks like most of the reviewers aren't thinking about the religion aspect...then we have one "wait, Mormons can read Harry Potter!", one "well my Mormon family abused me", one review that mentioned the religious part in passing (apparently "[t]he story starts with her feeling things that good mormons don't feel. i.e. sexual desires"), two "but other relgions can be abusive too, she wasn't trying to single out Mormons", and one Wow review:
quote:Like the relgious angle you say may think things aren't like they are portrayed but there are two things you have to keep in mind one is the fact that Ellen Hopkins took the time to research this and talked to people who were of this religion and have stopped practicing or converted. Also those of you find the religious references offensive should take at the fact that you are looking the world through the eyes of a teen in a dysfunctional family, you realize that some things will appear distorted. If you don't read this book due to the religious content it is foolish, because this book does address some real issues of religion like hypocrisy and double standards while still keeping an interesiting and moving plot.
My mom grew up Mormon. Her friend Shelley grew up in the same church, and yet after they both left and Shelley joined some weirdo freaky church she ended up "remembering" all the devil worship and brainwashing and sexual abuse in the church. Yeah...only asking people who have left is a really good way to get completely unbiased opinions, I'm sure.
Maybe some families do go overboard with restrictions--there are plenty of book-burners out there, religious or not, and probably some of them are Mormon. But when (active) Mormons write fantasy and science fiction, buy fantasy and science fiction, sell fantasy and science fiction...I'm just not buying the idea that it's a Mormon thing.
And back to the Amazon site--maybe, just maybe, the author didn't intend to give readers a false impression of Mormons. But when Amazon actually lists the keyword of this book as "books Mormon" and giving the category "Mormon" right up there with family issues, alcoholism, and YA literature...
quote:Originally posted by King of Men: I'm not sure why you couldn't prove that a given set of beliefs made people more likely to be abusive. As an extreme example, a committed Nazi is not very likely to be a nice person. That signal stands out of the noise loud and clear; others might need a bit more searching, but I don't see why it couldn't be done in principle.
But was it the beliefs that made the nazi that way or was he that way from the beginning?
Not relevant. If evil people gravitate to a given movement or belief, that's just as bad as the belief creating evil people.
It's completely relevant. Bad people can find an excuse to be much worse in a good environment. An evil person can very easilly distort and twist anything that is originally good to suit their own desires.
Yes, but if the movement attracts the evil people, it must be because something in it appeals to them, no? That's not likely to be a good thing.
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
What isn't? The thing that appeals to them, and thus the movement (probably disagree, possibly agree, depending on the situation), or the fact that they're attracted to the movement at all (probably agree). If they're screwed-up evil people, they might be attracted to anything; like the whole "oh we shouldn't put such-and-such in movies because some teenager's going to do it and get himself killed" argument. We can't seriously expect anyone to write a movie that won't include fire or dangerous driving or whatever because some person with a distorted version of reality would imitate it. If you're saying something is inherently wrong with any group which tends to attract certain kinds of evil people: I'd have to wonder what part of it was so attractive, and why. I mean shoe store employees might have a marginally higher rate of employees with foot/shoe fetishes, but that doesn't mean that shoe stores are bad. On the other hand, if it's something like "I'm a sadist with control issues, and this organization gives me an awful lot of control over people" (like concentration camps and prisons and so on), something needs to change in the institution as well.
Posts: 283 | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
I can't say the book appeals to me as it is in poetry form, but my relatives who are not Mormon but SDA see the devil in everything. Once they would not allow me to watch a Star Wars movie and got angry at me for reading books with a witch in it or King Author books. On different sides of the family. Also my mother things HP is demonic even though she's never read it before. It's quite aggravating. I reckon there are people like that in every religion, a small handful, then there are the hypocritical types. (I never even knew my grandfather on my mother's side was an alcoholic until she told me today and he was SDA) But, to many of the people in the religion certain restrictions are not something oppressive, but just the way things are and only looks bad to outsiders.
Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
One thing I learned long ago is that certain things cut across all sorts of dividing lines:
alcoholism, drug addiction, domestic violence, child abuse . . . the list goes on . . .
It would be more fair, I imagine, to say, as a reviewer, that the story deals with certain ills of the human condition, portrayed by a family that also happens to be Mormon, rather than setting up the review as one of proving bad things happen to those who are Mormon.
Posts: 5609 | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I wouldn't mind reading a book about alcoholism in a Mormon family-- as long as they're not setting it up as something that "good" Mormons do all the time, but portraying the devestating effect of alcoholism and abuse on a family and how a Mormon family might (actually) deal with it.
Posts: 21182 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
