FacebookTwitter
Hatrack River Forum   
my profile login | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» Hatrack River Forum » Active Forums » Books, Films, Food and Culture » California Proposition 8 (Page 22)

  This topic comprises 30 pages: 1  2  3  ...  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  ...  28  29  30   
Author Topic: California Proposition 8
Boris
Member
Member # 6935

 - posted      Profile for Boris   Email Boris         Edit/Delete Post 
And self-identifying as no religion does not necessarily equal "does not believe in a supreme being"
Posts: 3003 | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Threads
Member
Member # 10863

 - posted      Profile for Threads   Email Threads         Edit/Delete Post 
That's correct Boris.

quote:
Most Americans believe that angels and demons are active in the world, and nearly 80 percent think miracles occur, according to a poll released yesterday that takes an in-depth look at Americans' religious beliefs.
This Story

The study detailed Americans' deep and broad religiosity, finding that 92 percent believe in God or a universal spirit -- including one in five of those who call themselves atheists. More than half of Americans polled pray at least once a day.

Source

The last stat is puzzling but makes a bit more sense when considering that atheism is mostly a response to the idea of an omniscient, omnipotent, and omnibenevolent god (or a god with some of those features).

Posts: 1327 | Registered: Aug 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Teshi
Member
Member # 5024

 - posted      Profile for Teshi   Email Teshi         Edit/Delete Post 
I know people who subscribe to a vague sense of there being something but nothing that can be really described as having the same kind of oomph as God.

This being might simply be a "bigger" reflection of themselves. A sense, perhaps, that ones conscience is bigger than ones self and therefore is a seperate being.

Personally, I wouldn't describe these people as atheists, but I can well believe that they might describe themselves as atheists on paper, as there really is no option that describes them accurately.

Either way, America is tremendously religious. More than fifty percent believe angels and demons guide their lives?

For all intents and purposes, I think that the unreligious count as everyone who doesn't follow the tenets of an impersonal set religion OR they may believe in a supreme being (while not following any religious tenets) but do not consult that supreme being for guidance in matters such as determining the validity of moral choices.

Perhaps that should be a question on the next census.

Posts: 8473 | Registered: Apr 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Scott R
Member
Member # 567

 - posted      Profile for Scott R   Email Scott R         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
More than fifty percent believe angels and demons guide their lives?

I didn't see this cited in the article.
Posts: 14554 | Registered: Dec 1999  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Teshi
Member
Member # 5024

 - posted      Profile for Teshi   Email Teshi         Edit/Delete Post 
Do you mean you didn't see it at all, or you didn't see that it was cited? Nothing in the article was cited, it was all referencing this same poll. That is only a sample, though, and the angels/demons bit is omitted.

EDIT: Here is the original poll with the relevant angels/demons data (very top of page ten).

quote:
Similar patterns exist with respect to beliefs about the existence of angels and demons. Nearly seven-in-ten Americans (68%) believe that angels and demons are active in the world. Majorities of Jehovah’s Witnesses (78%), members of evangelical (61%) and historically black (59%)
Protestant churches, and Mormons (59%) are completely convinced of the existence of angels
and demons. In stark contrast, majorities of Jews (73%), Buddhists (56%), Hindus (55%) and the
unaffiliated (54%) do not believe that angels and demons are active in the world.

Of course, this is just statistics.
Posts: 8473 | Registered: Apr 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Scott R
Member
Member # 567

 - posted      Profile for Scott R   Email Scott R         Edit/Delete Post 
The phrase in question, that I quoted, is "guide their lives."

The article uses the term "active in the world."

Do you see the difference?

Posts: 14554 | Registered: Dec 1999  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Mucus
Member
Member # 9735

 - posted      Profile for Mucus           Edit/Delete Post 
As a tangent, I'm curious if those numbers from the US) for Buddhists and Hindus are representative of their fellow believers in other countries where they predominate. If anyone happens to have statistics on that, I would definitely be interested.
Posts: 7593 | Registered: Sep 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Teshi
Member
Member # 5024

 - posted      Profile for Teshi   Email Teshi         Edit/Delete Post 
Ah, I see what you're getting at, it helpeth to specify the problem first time around rather than being vague.

I can edit myself if you want, but there is no hidden meaning to my "reinterpretation" of the quote other than that's the way I read it. I assume that when people say that demons are active in the world, they mean they are interfering in a way that affects people's actions. However, if that's a problem for you, my comment- that this is amazing- stands in the original wording or in my reinterpretation.

Posts: 8473 | Registered: Apr 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Juxtapose
Member
Member # 8837

 - posted      Profile for Juxtapose   Email Juxtapose         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by Boris:
The terms deny and disbelieve tend to imply no way, no how, don't they?

No they don't. Some of the definitions I've checked imply a fairly high level of confidence. None have mentioned absolute certainty.
Posts: 2907 | Registered: Nov 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
King of Men
Member
Member # 6684

 - posted      Profile for King of Men   Email King of Men         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by Boris:
And self-identifying as no religion does not necessarily equal "does not believe in a supreme being"

Fortunately for me, no such strong stance is required by my wording "not strongly affiliated with a church", which indeed is weaker than self-identifying as no religion. Perhaps you should take a minute to reread exactly what I was suggesting.
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
scifibum
Member
Member # 7625

 - posted      Profile for scifibum   Email scifibum         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Atheism in America is astonishingly absent from politics, given there are more atheists in the US than there are people in Canada almost twice over.
Old hash, but I just wanted to point out that Canada is rather absent from US politics as well.
Posts: 4287 | Registered: Mar 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Danlo the Wild
Member
Member # 5378

 - posted      Profile for Danlo the Wild   Email Danlo the Wild         Edit/Delete Post 
If I am fed up with the social skills of the modern female, can I CHOOSE to be gay?

If yes, how do I get past the NOT being attracted to men in any way shape or form? How do I stop being attracted to women's eyes, smile, small of the back, hair, lips, neck, stomach, boobies and cute butts?

Seriously, I have no attraction to men, and am allergic and scared of another man's penis. How do I solve this problem if I make a choice to be gay?

Posts: 377 | Registered: Jul 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
BlackBlade
Member
Member # 8376

 - posted      Profile for BlackBlade   Email BlackBlade         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by TomDavidson:
quote:
Tom you yourself have said that you think the removal of the belief in God is the only way the human race will be saved.
Sure. And you're pretty sure that it's only through belief in God that the human race will be saved. I permit you to believe that, right? And an easy majority of people in this country believe that, right?

So where's this world in which you're "forced" to "live and let live," while we have the luxury -- not afforded to you, according to your POV -- of thinking you're deluded?

How about the fact that I believe this world can still thrive and become better through the efforts of the religious and areligious. My worldview does require that I invite those who will, to come and accept Christ. But ultimately it is not my job to root out all those who will not believe. The only time all unbelievers will disappear is when God himself lives on earth and to not believe is to deny everything rational there is to be believed.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
King of Men
Member
Member # 6684

 - posted      Profile for King of Men   Email King of Men         Edit/Delete Post 
I don't think you answered the question that Tom asked.

I just thought of a different question, though. You've stated many times that you have 'tested' your faith by entering a meditative-ish state and asking for confirmation that you were doing the right thing. You ignore that others have done the same thing and got back the affirmative for different faiths, but let that pass for now. Why did you not apply this to something more independently verifiable? For example, you might have asked your god to let you know the 900th digit of pi. (No cheating by peeking beforehand, of course.) If you got a strong feeling that it was, let's say, 4, you could then Google it afterwards. Repeat three times for 1-in-1000 confirmation of your god. Wouldn't that be a better test than your feeling of "yes, that's right", which many people of other faiths also report?

Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 124

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
But ultimately it is not my job to root out all those who will not believe.
Nor is it mine to root out those who will. Do you assume that I feel that way?
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
scifibum
Member
Member # 7625

 - posted      Profile for scifibum   Email scifibum         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Why did you not apply this to something more independently verifiable? For example, you might have asked your god to let you know the 900th digit of pi. (No cheating by peeking beforehand, of course.) If you got a strong feeling that it was, let's say, 4, you could then Google it afterwards. Repeat three times for 1-in-1000 confirmation of your god. Wouldn't that be a better test than your feeling of "yes, that's right", which many people of other faiths also report?
A common view is that God reveals on a need-to-know basis, and God determines the need (and also the other preconditions of revelation). It's also very common to claim that you need to study out the answer in your mind and ask for confirmation, rather than just ask for a bit of information.

Since God doesn't need or want you to know the 1000th digit of pi, praying about it will have no effect. On the other hand, if God wants you to believe in him, he'll let you know (preconditions having been met) if you're on the right track. Or so the answer would go, I believe. (For myself I don't believe there's anyone there who will give any kind of answer, anymore.)

KoM, you need to realize that the very subjective, personal nature of this kind of revelation is intrinsic to its understood purpose and value: Pulling numbers from the sky has not been described as a necessary function of salvation.

Posts: 4287 | Registered: Mar 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
BlackBlade
Member
Member # 8376

 - posted      Profile for BlackBlade   Email BlackBlade         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by TomDavidson:
quote:
But ultimately it is not my job to root out all those who will not believe.
Nor is it mine to root out those who will. Do you assume that I feel that way?
Perhaps. Beyond proselyting, what would you allow organized atheists to do in their efforts to erase religion? Is there more you would allow them to do in order to obtain this greater good?

-----

KOM: Because that is in essence jumping off the pinnacle of the temple to see if God would save me. I could pray to God about the clothing you are wearing right now, but why would the knowledge benefit me in any meaningful way? The fact I can use google to find out pi is already available to me and so it does not behoove God to give me that without me having first exhausted my resources.

There is no way I could independently find out if Joseph Smith actually found some gold plates with writing he actually translated correctly from a people who were actually spoken to by God. Because it is impossible to prove for myself and because knowing that truth is so important God decides to step in and reveal it to people.

Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
King of Men
Member
Member # 6684

 - posted      Profile for King of Men   Email King of Men         Edit/Delete Post 
I wasn't suggesting BlackBlade should use this as a method of calculating pi. Computers are faster. I was suggesting he use it as a means of confirming his testimony, which he has repeatedly stated is an acceptable use of prayer. Perhaps your faith is different - I don't recall your church at the moment - but BlackBlade believes that his god can be actively tested through asking for confirmation in prayer. I want to see if he has the courage of his convictions.
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
King of Men
Member
Member # 6684

 - posted      Profile for King of Men   Email King of Men         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
KOM: Because that is in essence jumping off the pinnacle of the temple to see if God would save me. I could pray to God about the clothing you are wearing right now, but why would the knowledge benefit me in any meaningful way? The fact I can use google to find out pi is already available to me and so it does not behoove God to give me that without me having first exhausted my resources.
If your god never gives you any information that can be verified otherwise, then how do you know what you get from it is true? Would not the knowledge that such revelation is really, testably trustworthy be worth a lot to you?

Further, if you managed to pray your way to knowing what I'm wearing, and then posted it here, wouldn't that be a powerful testimony to me? That might not be so useful to you, personally, but probably your god would find it useful. So would I, of course. In fact, although you will not do this thing for yourself, may I ask as a favour that you do it for me? I promise I will convert to your church if your prayers give you accurate knowledge of this. No sarcasm, I genuinely want to see for myself whether your faith works.

Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
scifibum
Member
Member # 7625

 - posted      Profile for scifibum   Email scifibum         Edit/Delete Post 
I'm answering the question, you asked, King of Men. In BlackBlade's religion, in which I was raised, God is understood to answer prayers for his own purposes. Those purposes are understood to include confirming the truth of the religion, and of God's existence, when certain preconditions are met. However, there is no indication that God will provide specific answers to arbitrary questions. God's purposes also include submitting to his way of doing things, which again precludes asking for a digit of pi.

I understand you weren't proposing using God as a calculator, but BB's church doesn't promote a God who is there to provide the answer to any question. It's also true that church members are advised to come up with the best answer to any question they want an answer to on their own, and then ask for a confirmation (a "yes" revelation which might not even be verbal). The test you are proposing isn't in line with BB's understanding of God.

(Though I wonder if you already understand this and are merely poking at the fact that the answers that can be had aren't falsifiable.)

Edit: cross posted.

Posts: 4287 | Registered: Mar 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 124

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Beyond proselyting, what would you allow organized atheists to do in their efforts to erase religion?
I'd permit them to live good lives and advance scientific knowledge. That's all that's necessary; as the gaps shrink and it becomes obvious even to the casual observer that God isn't required for goodness, God will fade away. It might take generations, but the God of the modern world is already unrecognizable as the God of three hundred years ago.

[ January 02, 2009, 10:00 PM: Message edited by: TomDavidson ]

Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
BlackBlade
Member
Member # 8376

 - posted      Profile for BlackBlade   Email BlackBlade         Edit/Delete Post 
KOM:
quote:
If your god never gives you any information that can be verified otherwise, then how do you know what you get from it is true? Would not the knowledge that such revelation is really, testably trustworthy be worth a lot to you?
Often God reveals the truth of a matter and then the verifiable prove becomes available. I know the Book of Mormon is true, and since learning that I have found things in the book that to me prove Joseph Smith could not have made it all up.

quote:
Further, if you managed to pray your way to knowing what I'm wearing, and then posted it here, wouldn't that be a powerful testimony to me? That might not be so useful to you, personally, but probably your god would find it useful. So would I, of course. In fact, although you will not do this thing for yourself, may I ask as a favour that you do it for me? I promise I will convert to your church if your prayers give you accurate knowledge of this. No sarcasm, I genuinely want to see for myself whether your faith works.
In this instance I have no impressions of what you are wearing KOM. But why should I do all the work? You go ask God what He would have you do with real intent to do anything no matter how strange and see what happens. Then live your life as best you know how and I am sure it will be well with you.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
BlackBlade
Member
Member # 8376

 - posted      Profile for BlackBlade   Email BlackBlade         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by TomDavidson:
quote:
Beyond proselyting, what would you allow organized atheists to do in their efforts to erase religion?
I'd permit them to live good lives and advance scientific knowledge. That's all that's necessary; as the gaps shrink and it becomes obvious even to the casual observer that God isn't required for goodness, God will fade away. *kiss*
We shall see. I hope that means that if the day comes that when the religious are in the minority and people are trying to pass laws that make it impossible for them to reasonably practice their religion that you will stand in the way.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 124

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
I know the Book of Mormon is true, and since learning that I have found things in the book that to me prove Joseph Smith could not have made it all up.
You realize that, by the getting the order of these two things wrong, you invalidate the argument?
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
King of Men
Member
Member # 6684

 - posted      Profile for King of Men   Email King of Men         Edit/Delete Post 
How many tests must I submit your religion to before I am allowed to give up and say "No, it is wrong"? A test which I know can give false answers is of no use to me. This is not me being contrary, it's just a fact of the way my mind works. The answer must be externally verifiable - at least once, just once. To act on anything less is to be no better than a suicide bomber, who kills because of internal states of his brain, unchecked against the outside world. I won't stoop so low. Not for any purpose.
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
King of Men
Member
Member # 6684

 - posted      Profile for King of Men   Email King of Men         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Often God reveals the truth of a matter and then the verifiable prove becomes available. I know the Book of Mormon is true, and since learning that I have found things in the book that to me prove Joseph Smith could not have made it all up.
Would those things have convinced you before you 'knew' that the book was true? If not, then there is no verification, just circular arguing. You must know this; why do you argue things you cannot really believe in?
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
MattB
Member
Member # 1116

 - posted      Profile for MattB   Email MattB         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
The answer must be externally verifiable - at least once, just once. To act on anything less is to be no better than a suicide bomber, who kills because of internal states of his brain, unchecked against the outside world.
Not really. We can bash extreme cases against each other, but the fact remains that the primary value of empiricism as an epistemology is to allow scholars and scientists to communicate with each other. As a description of the way that the vast majority of humanity actually live reasonably happy and valuable lives and make successful and fruitful decisions that don't involve blowing each other up, it's pretty weak.

The interesting thing about BB's statement is what the word 'true' means. It might mean that the events the book describes are empirically verifiable, like you guys are assuming. Or it might mean something else.


quote:
the God of the modern world is already unrecognizable as the God of three hundred years ago.
Nope; perhaps this is true for folks who write pop-religious scholarship, but there's more Catholics today who pray to Saint Jude and more Protestants today who believe the earth was created in seven days than there were in 1709.

Tom, you need to stop getting your religious history from Hitchens and Dawkins. You're still going on about 'gaps.' God hasn't been merely an explanatory mechanism for a good 2500 years.

Posts: 794 | Registered: Aug 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
MightyCow
Member
Member # 9253

 - posted      Profile for MightyCow           Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by BlackBlade:
Because it is impossible to prove for myself and because knowing that truth is so important God decides to step in and reveal it to people.

God has revealed to me a whole lot of truth which is impossible to prove, but which I know is True because God told me.

Rule one is that everyone on earth owes me 10% of their yearly income, before expenses and taxes. You get to know the other rules once you pay up.

Don't act like you don't have to pay either - God told me it's the truth, and that's all that matters, right?

Posts: 3950 | Registered: Mar 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
swbarnes2
Member
Member # 10225

 - posted      Profile for swbarnes2           Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by MattB:
We can bash extreme cases against each other, but the fact remains that the primary value of empiricism as an epistemology is to allow scholars and scientists to communicate with each other.

Oh really?

If your spouse were diagnosed with cancer, you would really tell the doctor to skip all that empirically based medicine stuff, because all it is is epistomology?

Or would you say "I want you to give my spouse the treatment that the evidence says works best"?

Or perhaps you would say "Doc, use the kick-butt cancer-killing, life-saving drug that God revealed to all those praying priets and rabbis and pastors"?

Or maybe not...because God has never once stepped in and actually made a revelation that was physically useful, even when such a revelation could have saved millions of lives?

Posts: 575 | Registered: Feb 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
dkw
Member
Member # 3264

 - posted      Profile for dkw   Email dkw         Edit/Delete Post 
Perhaps you should try reading Matt's post without your polemical goggles on and see if that really fits with what he said.
Posts: 9866 | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Teshi
Member
Member # 5024

 - posted      Profile for Teshi   Email Teshi         Edit/Delete Post 
I think Matt is talking about Truth, as in, with a capital T, as opposed to truth the empirically measurable kind of truth.
Posts: 8473 | Registered: Apr 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 124

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
I hope that means that if the day comes that when the religious are in the minority and people are trying to pass laws that make it impossible for them to reasonably practice their religion that you will stand in the way.
Can you give me a hypothetical, here? Are we talking about banning head scarves from public schools, crosses around necks, pro-life protests, the ritual consumption of hallucinogenic drugs, infant sacrifice, or crusades against homosexuality?

quote:
God hasn't been merely an explanatory mechanism for a good 2500 years.
I'd disagree. That He's often used as an explanatory mechanism for philosophy as well doesn't mean that He's still being used as anything other than seam sealant. It's just a different sort of seam.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
katharina
Member
Member # 827

 - posted      Profile for katharina   Email katharina         Edit/Delete Post 
Someone saying they are not religious because the gaps have been filled is like someone saying they don't believe in modern medicine because leeches did nothing for their diabetes.

It says more about the speaker's ignorance of the topic than the actual topic.

Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Threads
Member
Member # 10863

 - posted      Profile for Threads   Email Threads         Edit/Delete Post 
I don't think the claim is that the gaps have been filled. The claim is that God does not satisfactorily fill the gaps.
Posts: 1327 | Registered: Aug 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Boris
Member
Member # 6935

 - posted      Profile for Boris   Email Boris         Edit/Delete Post 
Oh come on, KoM, Tom, just admit it. Even if God were to come down and punch you in the face you wouldn't believe in a supreme being. You believe what you believe because it makes your life easy and comfortable. Even if I were able to reproduce the results of your prime number prayer thing, you'd just simply explain it away. Just quit lying. It's annoying.
Posts: 3003 | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 124

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Someone saying they are not religious because the gaps have been filled is like someone saying they don't believe in modern medicine because leeches did nothing for their diabetes.
Really? But in your example, leeches aren't modern medicine; that's the equivalent of saying you aren't religious because you don't think scientists have fully explained where lightning comes from. It's nonsensical.

A better analogy would be like saying that you don't go to a chiropractor because aspirin and surgery have addressed your spinal problems to your satisfaction.

---------

quote:
Even if God were to come down and punch you in the face you wouldn't believe in a supreme being.
I absolutely and resolutely do not admit this. I have said before that I am perfectly willing to believe in any God that has positive evidence for its existence. And, moreover, I have given specific examples of not only the kind of evidence I would be willing to accept, but the kind of evidence I have in the past attempted to obtain towards that end.

The one kind of evidence I will not accept is shiny, happy, fuzzy, "I feel it in my heart" stuff. Because I have absolutely no doubt that, given sufficient time and desire, I can convince myself to feel anything at all that I wish to feel.

[ January 04, 2009, 12:38 PM: Message edited by: TomDavidson ]

Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Threads
Member
Member # 10863

 - posted      Profile for Threads   Email Threads         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by Boris:
You believe what you believe because it makes your life easy and comfortable.

After all this time you still can't take their arguments at face value?
Posts: 1327 | Registered: Aug 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
GinaG
Member
Member # 11862

 - posted      Profile for GinaG           Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by TomDavidson:
quote:
Beyond proselyting, what would you allow organized atheists to do in their efforts to erase religion?
I'd permit them to live good lives and advance scientific knowledge. That's all that's necessary; as the gaps shrink and it becomes obvious even to the casual observer that God isn't required for goodness, God will fade away. It might take generations, but the God of the modern world is already unrecognizable as the God of three hundred years ago.
Keep dreaming. The existentialism of the modernists is already swallowing its own tail. Yet atheists keep insisting that the religious must justify our existence, even though they clearly (empirically, if you prefer) are the aberration.

And as I believe someone already pointed out, it is the conservative forms of religion that are in ascendance, not the "discoveries" of the last 300 years.

Posts: 117 | Registered: Nov 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 124

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
it is the conservative forms of religion that are in ascendance
Unless you start killing people, this will be temporary. And even the "conservative" forms aren't out there insisting -- as they once did -- that the Earth is flat and the center of the universe.

As more and more "religious" principles are disproved or subsumed into secular culture, the only thing left will be the private sense of the numinous. And once that sense becomes fully replicable at will -- which I have no doubt will happen within my lifetime -- I don't see much of a role left for a church, except basic community/tradition maintenance.

Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 124

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson         Edit/Delete Post 
Let me explain. I think every successful religious movement is successful in part because it provides answers to questions being asked by the founder's parents' generation for which more empirical evidence has not yet provided answers. I think one reason we're seeing a resurgence in "conservative" religion right now is not because people are believing in old-school gods more, but because a series of questions being asked nowadays is "How should I feel about all these things changing in uncomfortable ways and all the people I see out there who are very unlike me?" Conservative religion provides an answer to that question that satisfies a certain selfish impulse.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
King of Men
Member
Member # 6684

 - posted      Profile for King of Men   Email King of Men         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by Boris:
Oh come on, KoM, Tom, just admit it. Even if God were to come down and punch you in the face you wouldn't believe in a supreme being. You believe what you believe because it makes your life easy and comfortable. Even if I were able to reproduce the results of your prime number prayer thing, you'd just simply explain it away. Just quit lying. It's annoying.

You're the liar.
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Boris
Member
Member # 6935

 - posted      Profile for Boris   Email Boris         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by King of Men:
quote:
Originally posted by Boris:
Oh come on, KoM, Tom, just admit it. Even if God were to come down and punch you in the face you wouldn't believe in a supreme being. You believe what you believe because it makes your life easy and comfortable. Even if I were able to reproduce the results of your prime number prayer thing, you'd just simply explain it away. Just quit lying. It's annoying.

You're the liar.
Really? You don't think you'd explain away any evidence I were to give you of God's existence? You have already stated that you will accept the existence of God only upon being given empirical evidence of his existence. Seriously, God coming down and punching you in the face isn't empirical. It's something only you would experience, and I doubt you could repeat the process to make sure it actually happened.

Do you truly demand that a being with the entire universe at his fingertips submit to your demands for proof? Are you really that arrogant and conceited?

Furthermore. You say that people should just be good without worrying about what God thinks. I challenge you to come up with a universally acceptable explanation of what "Good" is without relying on the Judeo-Christian mores that have been built into Western society for hundreds of years.

Posts: 3003 | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
dkw
Member
Member # 3264

 - posted      Profile for dkw   Email dkw         Edit/Delete Post 
You're claiming that the cultures of the world that have not been heavily influenced by Judeo-Christian religion have no concept of what westerners would call "good"? That seems kind of silly.
Posts: 9866 | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
MattB
Member
Member # 1116

 - posted      Profile for MattB   Email MattB         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
As more and more "religious" principles are disproved or subsumed into secular culture, the only thing left will be the private sense of the numinous.
This is almost exactly what academics like, most famously, Peter Berger were arguing in the 1960s and 1970s. In the 1990s and 2000s, nearly all of them, like Berger, David Martin, Charles Taylor, and so forth, have revised themselves. Weirdly, the world seems to be getting more, not less, religious.
Posts: 794 | Registered: Aug 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Mucus
Member
Member # 9735

 - posted      Profile for Mucus           Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by Boris:
...
Furthermore. You say that people should just be good without worrying about what God thinks.

Ummmm, no. An atheist would say that since the Christian god doesn't actually exist, people cannot worry about what the Christian god thinks just as we both don't really worry about what the Aztec Quetzalcoatl thinks. At most, people can worry about what they *think* either thinks.

quote:
I challenge you to come up with a universally acceptable explanation of what "Good" is without relying on the Judeo-Christian mores that have been built into Western society for hundreds of years.
dkw already pointed out that you're ignoring the majority of society by limiting it to Western society. All I would add is that Western society obviously had some concept of "good" before Judeo-Christian mores.
Posts: 7593 | Registered: Sep 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
GinaG
Member
Member # 11862

 - posted      Profile for GinaG           Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by TomDavidson:
quote:
it is the conservative forms of religion that are in ascendance
Unless you start killing people, this will be temporary. And even the "conservative" forms aren't out there insisting -- as they once did -- that the Earth is flat and the center of the universe.
First observation: Unless you have a crystal ball, there is no way for you to know this.

Second: How is it that you blame religion for wrong ideas even when those wrong ideas were the science of the time? P.S. Very few people, religious or not, believed in a flat earth.
quote:

As more and more "religious" principles are disproved or subsumed into secular culture, the only thing left will be the private sense of the numinous. And once that sense becomes fully replicable at will -- which I have no doubt will happen within my lifetime -- I don't see much of a role left for a church, except basic community/tradition maintenance.

How exactly do you "disprove" a religious principle? Are you going to discover a scientific test that will prove there is no Trinity? Hear my skepticism. Since you can't ever do that, your religion of science is no threat to mine.

My theory is that post-Enlightenment atheists don't mind the rabble being religious, so long as they can imagine themselves as a kind of aristocracy or priesthood, in control of those rituals they imbue with religious significance, mostly the rituals of science. Never mind that modern science arose out of religion, in particular out of Roman Catholicism, and that the majority of scientists over the brief span of that word's existence have been theists and not thought what they did in the course of their work was incompatible with their faith. That is precisely because science does not have religious significance for them, unlike for a certain brand of atheist. The atheist would like to excise these people as heretics since they don't show the proper reverence, but thanks to postmodernism there are fewer and fewer who find it necessary to be that unbalanced or who are impressed by the modernist holdovers' bluster.

Essentially it seems to me what you are doing is assuming that all of humanity approaches religion and science the way you do, to wit that one drives out the other, and that everyone is always going to play by the rules of a game that's stilted and stacked. Big assumptions.

I won't even go into the fact that this sort of vision of the future rests on Euro-American egocentrism, i.e., the rest of the world is bound to become like us in our latter days rather than we like them.

Posts: 117 | Registered: Nov 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
King of Men
Member
Member # 6684

 - posted      Profile for King of Men   Email King of Men         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Do you truly demand that a being with the entire universe at his fingertips submit to your demands for proof?
No. I demand that you, an ordinary mortal like myself, show some evidence of your assertions. Until you convince me that your hypothesized supreme being actually exists, I make no demands of it at all, any more than you make demands of Santa Claus.

quote:
Furthermore. You say that people should just be good without worrying about what God thinks. I challenge you to come up with a universally acceptable explanation of what "Good" is without relying on the Judeo-Christian mores that have been built into Western society for hundreds of years.
I in turn challenge you to come up with a universally acceptable account of what is good at all, with or without a god. Considering how small the LDS church is at the moment, I would be a bit careful about what I label 'universally acceptable', were I you. I'll even be generous and give you 5%; that is, your theory need only be acceptable to 95% of humanity, to make room for plain contrary people. So what's your theory, then?
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 124

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Do you truly demand that a being with the entire universe at his fingertips submit to your demands for proof?
Sure. Why not? Why should the fact that proving His existence should be easier for Him give me less right to demand it? You wouldn't ask that I'd devote my life to some random dude's list of instructions without knowing that he actually existed; why should that be less true of a really powerful dude?

quote:
Weirdly, the world seems to be getting more, not less, religious.
I don't think it's all that weird. Pushback is inevitable. You can blame a lot of the current extremism in Iran on prematurely forceful reform attempts in the '30s.

--------

quote:
Second: How is it that you blame religion for wrong ideas even when those wrong ideas were the science of the time?
That religion was the science of the time -- and that modern religion, egg on its face, no longer attempts to make claims about the shape of the Earth -- is not lost on me. That we nowadays make the distinction between "knowing" something scientifically (i.e. actually knowing it) and "knowing" religious "Truth" (i.e. not actually knowing anything at all) is one of the great virtues of secular culture.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Threads
Member
Member # 10863

 - posted      Profile for Threads   Email Threads         Edit/Delete Post 
IIRC, Gina practices a form of Orthodox Christianity.

EDIT: Just a note to KoM

Posts: 1327 | Registered: Aug 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
King of Men
Member
Member # 6684

 - posted      Profile for King of Men   Email King of Men         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Essentially it seems to me what you are doing is assuming that all of humanity approaches religion and science the way you do, to wit that one drives out the other, and that everyone is always going to play by the rules of a game that's stilted and stacked. Big assumptions.
Empirically backed observations. People do get less religious as science becomes more powerful.

quote:
My theory is that post-Enlightenment atheists don't mind the rabble being religious, so long as they can imagine themselves as a kind of aristocracy or priesthood, in control of those rituals they imbue with religious significance, mostly the rituals of science.
Then your theory is wrong; I object very much when "the rabble" - your phrase, not mine - are religious, because they elect politicians who enact laws on the basis of that religion. Or more succinctly. As for the "rituals of science", I suggest you read this. I also suggest you meditate on a lightbulb. Those 'rituals' really, truly do work, you know.
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
  This topic comprises 30 pages: 1  2  3  ...  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  ...  28  29  30   

   Close Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Contact Us | Hatrack River Home Page

Copyright © 2008 Hatrack River Enterprises Inc. All rights reserved.
Reproduction in whole or in part without permission is prohibited.


Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.2