|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
 Posted - 12/07/2009 : 02:54:47 [Permalink]
|
1) Forcing others to believe the way I do
2) Trying to sell something
3) Not thinking less of people who do not share my beliefs
4) Not allowing my belief to interfere with my analysis of claims except for the blind spot that I have for religion
I would say that this bit of woo is harmless and there are far more glaring items that should take precidence. (Don't get me started on magnets)
|
That's why I'm more interested in specific claims. The fact that you're a theist doesn't really tell me much, and as far as I know, you may be right. When you start telling me what the supernatural does to affect the world, then those claims could possibly be tested, and you could be involved in something dangerous.
It might seem harmless, for instance, to believe in Satan, and I'm not suggesting that you do, but if you see the world around you as a battle between good and evil, then that harmless idea affects the way that you react to the world. That simple idea might be dangerous. I wouldn't want you to be jailed, but I would want to either learn the facts behind your belief, or help you to change your mind. |
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
|
 |
|
|
Bob Lloyd
Skeptic Friend
Spain
59 Posts |
Posted - 12/07/2009 : 04:45:11 [Permalink]
|
There are several reasons why religious Woo is problematic but first I'd discount the seriousness of the personal god/spirituality group. For those whose private beliefs give them comfort, they are little different from those people who see good in everyone. They are looking on the bright side, seeing an afterlife, a future after death, and general behave in positive ways, act considerately, and so on. No harm at all in that. That they may take on faith things which are unevidenced shows only that they are willing to believe things other people wouldn't. And since these things are untestable anyway, there's no way to resolve any questions about it.
The problem arises when those beliefs are allowed to influence their practice in such a way that it influences other people. In the case of indoctrinating children into religious beliefs, this necessarily undermines their critical faculties because they are expected to take on trust incredible things. Children are still learning to use their critical faculties and to be given an area which is off limits to rationality such as religion, where known physical laws are not allowed to apply, causes confusion. It also opens the door to other unreasonable beliefs. Doing that to children just isn't fair to them.
But in society more broadly, where religious ideas are claimed to be the source of moral and ethical values, that is much more serious. When it becomes important to individuals to follow the line put out by religious bodies, that is directly influencing politics and having a social effect based on irrational beliefs. An example is where religious bodies are represented on the school boards, or during selection interviews. This is an insidious effect of religious involvement in social institutions. Often religious institutions exert a very heavy moral influence on society, preventing progress in areas such as stem cell research, transplantation work, fertility and contraception studies, and so on. Such religious influence in society is harmful.
When religious ideas have a social embodiment in institutions wielding power, then it is very important to exert counter-pressure to defend rationality, to limit religious influence in social morality and ethics, to restrict their authority in political matters. The separation of church and state is a very important principle.
As for the priority of the moment, there are many. Defending children against religious indoctrination is right up there with the rest of them - undermining a child's developing rationality is a very serious harm which renders them vulnerable to all sorts of irrational influences. Defending consumers against fraudulent claims is important of course but more important is ensuring that people with chronic illnesses are given the best care possible, and that those with serious illnesses are not led astray by charlatans.
I think religious people need to think very carefully about the social consequences of just the kind of irrationality they are willing to accept for their faith, and more particularly the consequences of generalising those beliefs across society. Those values which they believe to be religious are nearly always secular values and they can maintain them without any reference to deities. To my mind, there's no problem in people believing in deities so long as they also recognise that there is no evidence and that it is on the very small end of the probability spectrum. It's when they insist that it is factually correct and thereby claim a necessary effect on, and a right to influence, the real social and political world that the problems start to stack up. Especially when they indoctrinate children to believe the same thing. |
|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
Posted - 12/07/2009 : 05:24:53 [Permalink]
|
To my mind, there's no problem in people believing in deities so long as they also recognise that there is no evidence and that it is on the very small end of the probability spectrum. It's when they insist that it is factually correct and thereby claim a necessary effect on, and a right to influence, the real social and political world that the problems start to stack up. Especially when they indoctrinate children to believe the same thing.
|
If they agree with you on all that, they don't really believe, do they?
[edited for some attempt at clarity]
|
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 12/07/2009 06:04:49 |
|
|
|
Bob Lloyd
Skeptic Friend
Spain
59 Posts |
Posted - 12/08/2009 : 05:41:48 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Gorgo
To my mind, there's no problem in people believing in deities so long as they also recognise that there is no evidence and that it is on the very small end of the probability spectrum. It's when they insist that it is factually correct and thereby claim a necessary effect on, and a right to influence, the real social and political world that the problems start to stack up. Especially when they indoctrinate children to believe the same thing.
|
If they agree with you on all that, they don't really believe, do they?
[edited for some attempt at clarity]
|
I've met religious people, in fact people who work in science, who quite freely acknowledge that there is no evidence and also accept that the probability is very low. Nevertheless, because it gives them solace, they are happy to maintain the belief in a deity.
Some folks switch that into something more metaphysical, something subtle about the nature of reality. For them, it doesn't seem to be a problem and they are able to separate the rationality they use in their daily lives from their beliefs. I still think they're suppressing a huge contradiction but that's their choice.
It's similar to those who argue for the Stephen Jay Gould stuff about non-overlapping Magisteria. I don't buy that stuff but some folks do. |
|
|
|
ThorGoLucky
Snuggle Wolf
USA
1487 Posts |
Posted - 12/08/2009 : 11:09:09 [Permalink]
|
You cannot force knowledge. And some people's brains are wired differently so that they accept as fact the thoughts in their head, anecdotes, correlations (as opposed to causations) and the authority of family, friends and even Faux News, haha.
|
|
|
|
astropin
SFN Regular
USA
970 Posts |
Posted - 12/08/2009 : 11:26:49 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Bob Lloyd
It's similar to those who argue for the Stephen Jay Gould stuff about non-overlapping Magisteria. I don't buy that stuff but some folks do.
|
Non-overlapping magisteria is biggest load of crap Stephen ever put to paper. It still amazes me that gibberish like that can come from a mind like his. Of course then we have other examples like Francis Collins......it's amazing the level of self delusion people can maintain. |
I would rather face a cold reality than delude myself with comforting fantasies.
You are free to believe what you want to believe and I am free to ridicule you for it.
Atheism:
The result of an unbiased and rational search for the truth.
Infinitus est numerus stultorum |
|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
Posted - 12/08/2009 : 11:27:46 [Permalink]
|
I've met religious people, in fact people who work in science, who quite freely acknowledge that there is no evidence and also accept that the probability is very low. Nevertheless, because it gives them solace, they are happy to maintain the belief in a deity.
|
You also understand why I think it's the same as saying, "I don't believe it, but I believe it."
It doesn't give them solace, what they tell themselves about it seems to give them temporary solace. |
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 12/08/2009 11:28:17 |
|
|
|
Valiant Dancer
Forum Goalie
USA
4826 Posts |
Posted - 12/08/2009 : 19:41:41 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by bngbuck
Valiant Dancer......
Although you didn't finish your first sentence, I think I know what you're saying. Theism, as you personally practice it, seems indeed a relatively harmless vice. I think the problem lies with those who are indoctrinated in irrationality like religion at an early age and whose intellects don't mature sufficiently to deny the dogma later in life. Proselyting of any nature becomes dangerous and damaging to reason very quickly
And "religion", with all the preposterous baggage that that word implies, is a far worse affliction than Theism. My wife subscribes to a god of the vapours somewhat akin to the pantheistic supernaturality of the Shaivas, only without any of the distinguishable entities such as Brahma, Vishnu, Shiva itself, etc. Hers is a true pantheism which sees God and the Universe as the the same entity with no anthropomorphic embodiments. Intelligence originates in a collection of astronomical bodies! Sheesh!
Now, to me, this is almost as silly as the old guy with a big beard envisioned by Michaelangelo; but I can see some emotional comfort, for those who need it, in imagining that there is an intelligence, design, and purpose engine churning away out there, somewhere, in charge of things.
Also, that part of that purpose and design might be individually concerned with little old me, my troubles and tribulations, and especially what happens to me after I have used up my allotted (short) time on this Earth.
All I can say, VD, is that would be nice to be able to entertain such comforting delusions. Like permanently being on anxiolytics or opiates. I just can't do it, however, and the older I get, the firmer my resolve.
What is your view of your God, VD?
|
As you do not have the same psychological need for connectedness to the universe or ceremony (aka the dog and pony show of religious ritual), I don't think any religion really fits you.
My view of my dieties are that of a three forces. A creative force which splits itself into a male and female aspect. A destructive force with the intent of building something better. And a destructive force that exists for destruction alone. The last force is not productive or healthy and is not called upon. My deities help me focus on those aspects of myself that I am not pleased with and change them accordingly.
|
Cthulhu/Asmodeus when you're tired of voting for the lesser of two evils
Brother Cutlass of Reasoned Discussion |
|
|
|
Bob Lloyd
Skeptic Friend
Spain
59 Posts |
Posted - 12/09/2009 : 08:33:03 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Gorgo
I've met religious people, in fact people who work in science, who quite freely acknowledge that there is no evidence and also accept that the probability is very low. Nevertheless, because it gives them solace, they are happy to maintain the belief in a deity.
|
You also understand why I think it's the same as saying, "I don't believe it, but I believe it."
It doesn't give them solace, what they tell themselves about it seems to give them temporary solace.
|
Yeah, I agree. I've tried pointing out the infinite regression in this sort of psychological sleight of hand, without success. I think people in this position basically won't think about the contradictions. They do the believe/don't believe bit and decide they can't decide so leave the contradiction unresolved. They kid themselves they're keeping an open mind but it's really bending to ideological indoctrination. The good thing is that they entertain sufficient doubt to stop them proselytising about their beliefs. |
|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
Posted - 12/09/2009 : 11:07:26 [Permalink]
|
As you do not have the same psychological need for connectedness to the universe or ceremony (aka the dog and pony show of religious ritual), I don't think any religion really fits you.
My view of my dieties are that of a three forces. A creative force which splits itself into a male and female aspect. A destructive force with the intent of building something better. And a destructive force that exists for destruction alone. The last force is not productive or healthy and is not called upon. My deities help me focus on those aspects of myself that I am not pleased with and change them accordingly.
|
No one would want to make any of that illegal, but to continue the thought, the idea that you have some psychological need might itself be a testable claim. Not that we want to quiz you here, but the idea of psychological need could mean anything from the fact that you like performing the rituals knowing that they're meaningless, to the fact that you have psychotic episodes or even die without them.
Same with the idea of the gods involved. Are these beings supernatural? Do they have some impact on the world? Etc. Are other people affected by them? What can you do with the idea of gods that you can't do without it? Again, I mean all these questions to be taken rhetorically. I'm just illustrating the point about defining what we're talking about. |
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
|
|
|
|
bngbuck
SFN Addict
USA
2437 Posts |
Posted - 12/10/2009 : 00:40:50 [Permalink]
|
Valiant Dancer.....
| My view of my dieties are that of a three forces. A creative force which splits itself into a male and female aspect. A destructive force with the intent of building something better. And a destructive force that exists for destruction alone. The last force is not productive or healthy and is not called upon. My deities help me focus on those aspects of myself that I am not pleased with and change them accordingly. |
This kind of concept of "Deities" seems to me to be about the only useful one I've heard. To the extent that it is helpful in actually perceiving one's own shortcomings and leads to correcting them, I think it is actually a pretty good kind of Deism. Far too many folks are incapable of understanding their own failings and inadequacies and if a "religion" can contribute something to lessen that tendency, I'm all for it!
|
|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
Posted - 12/10/2009 : 01:38:11 [Permalink]
|
Far too many folks are incapable of understanding their own failings and inadequacies and if a "religion" can contribute something to lessen that tendency, I'm all for it!
|
I don't want to move this to a discussion of what his religion is or isn't, but I wonder if this is a little like telling someone with a cold that it's good they're taking echinacea. |
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
|
|
|
|
Bob Lloyd
Skeptic Friend
Spain
59 Posts |
Posted - 12/10/2009 : 07:28:22 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by bngbuck
Valiant Dancer.....
| My view of my dieties are that of a three forces. A creative force which splits itself into a male and female aspect. A destructive force with the intent of building something better. And a destructive force that exists for destruction alone. The last force is not productive or healthy and is not called upon. My deities help me focus on those aspects of myself that I am not pleased with and change them accordingly. |
This kind of concept of "Deities" seems to me to be about the only useful one I've heard. To the extent that it is helpful in actually perceiving one's own shortcomings and leads to correcting them, I think it is actually a pretty good kind of Deism. Far too many folks are incapable of understanding their own failings and inadequacies and if a "religion" can contribute something to lessen that tendency, I'm all for it!
|
Understanding one's shortcomings doesn't need to postulate unevidenced forces whether for good, evil, destruction, or whatever. If what is meant is the think about actions as falling on some moral scale, somewhere between what is socially considered "good" and socially considered "bad", then that's what we all do anyway whether religious or not. But postulating the existence of these forces is something else, it's accepting irrational notions as a guide to practice.
You can get all the benefits of self-assessment with secular values and ethics and it sounds like this notion of "deities" is simply a way of formulating the idea of constructive introspection, considering our actions against some accepted moral scale.
There's a difference between taking different viewpoints in order to analyse something, and postulating immaterial supernatural entities. It sounds like these "deities" are just viewpoints from which he introspects, and that he isn't arguing for the actual existence of these supernatural forces. |
|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
Posted - 12/10/2009 : 08:31:04 [Permalink]
|
There's a difference between taking different viewpoints in order to analyse something, and postulating immaterial supernatural entities. It sounds like these "deities" are just viewpoints from which he introspects, and that he isn't arguing for the actual existence of these supernatural forces.
|
More than that, from what little he's said, there is no reason to think that he's using his religion to do anything but fool himself into believing that he's doing anything constructive. He may be actually avoiding doing anything constructive by doing this. |
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
|
|
|
|
bngbuck
SFN Addict
USA
2437 Posts |
Posted - 12/10/2009 : 09:47:10 [Permalink]
|
Gorgo.....
| ....he's using his religion to do anything but fool himself into believing that he's doing anything constructive. He may be actually avoiding doing anything constructive by doing this. |
I don't read that in VD's post. I think it's more like Bob Lloyd put it, the "Dieties" don't really exist except as a framework for him to analyze questions of right and wrong, ethical judgement and the like.
Hell, let's ask him!
Valiant, could you elaborate a little on your own personal Trinity and how you may find direction or guidance from them? |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Why religion is Woo too
