|
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
 Posted - 04/01/2014 : 08:29:05
|
A list, by Ed Brayton:...things I really wish some of my fellow atheists would stop saying and doing. This is hardly an exhaustive list, just the first few that come to mind.
1. Please stop saying that “we’re all born atheist.” Babies are atheists in the same sense that an office chair is an atheist. The statement is trivially true and completely irrelevant to any discussion I can imagine... There are eight more items. I've been guilty of some (usually not for years, though). You?
|
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13476 Posts |
Posted - 04/01/2014 : 10:33:37 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dave W.
A list, by Ed Brayton:...things I really wish some of my fellow atheists would stop saying and doing. This is hardly an exhaustive list, just the first few that come to mind.
1. Please stop saying that “we’re all born atheist.” Babies are atheists in the same sense that an office chair is an atheist. The statement is trivially true and completely irrelevant to any discussion I can imagine... There are eight more items. I've been guilty of some (usually not for years, though). You?
|
I saw his post in my timeline asking for suggestions of things atheists should stop saying. Just about everything I could think of had already been covered.
I suppose I've been guilty of some of those no-no's but I can't think of when. One that drives me crazy (other than the agnostic thing) is calling people of faith mentally ill and that bringing kids up in a faith is child abuse. (I think the child abuse thing came from Dawkins. I'm not sure.)
I have thought that the tax exempt thing was based on being a nonprofit charitable organization. So I get that. Most churches aren't abusing their tax exempt status.
My problem, and this has to do with the people in charge of enforcing the laws with regard to tax exempt status, are Benny Hinn types who live a lavish lifestyle and don't do any charitable work that I know of. And then there's Scientology, an organization that charges it's followers lots of money to advance and behaves like the cult that it is. I don't see how they have demonstrated a reason to receive tax exempt status.
I have several friends of faith. None of them are stupid and all of them are strong secularists. For me that's the bottom line. I'm not an anti-theist. They know that I think their belief is irrational, because we discuss it. But I'd rather have them at the table than someone like Roderick (Remember him? An extreme case if ever there was one.) or an atheist who does nothing but bash religion. There are some fine people of faith within the skeptical community. Pamela Gay comes to mind and there are others. There is no reason to chase people like them away. It's very okay to not agree with them. It's not okay to call them stupid and brainwashed and all of those other things that Ed has listed. |
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
 |
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9687 Posts |
Posted - 04/02/2014 : 12:07:06 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Kil
I suppose I've been guilty of some of those no-no's but I can't think of when. One that drives me crazy (other than the agnostic thing) is calling people of faith mentally ill and that bringing kids up in a faith is child abuse. (I think the child abuse thing came from Dawkins. I'm not sure.)
|
Yes, that's Dawkins.
I think it's from The God Delusion.
|
Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3
"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse
Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder. |
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13476 Posts |
Posted - 04/02/2014 : 14:03:39 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dr. Mabuse
Originally posted by Kil
I suppose I've been guilty of some of those no-no's but I can't think of when. One that drives me crazy (other than the agnostic thing) is calling people of faith mentally ill and that bringing kids up in a faith is child abuse. (I think the child abuse thing came from Dawkins. I'm not sure.)
|
Yes, that's Dawkins.
I think it's from The God Delusion.
|
Well he should have conferred with a child psychologist, or several, or all of them before saying such a stupid thing. |
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
On fire for Christ
SFN Regular
Norway
1273 Posts |
Posted - 04/03/2014 : 03:55:36 [Permalink]
|
| How about "If God is so good why does he let bad things happen?" |
 |
|
|
|
BigPapaSmurf
SFN Die Hard
3192 Posts |
Posted - 04/03/2014 : 04:37:58 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by On fire for Christ
How about "If God is so good why does he let bad things happen?"
|
That is usually a response to some outrageous claim that your God is some kind of uber-hippie-ghandiesque-being made of pure love.
Also we are still waiting for an answer. |
"...things I have neither seen nor experienced nor heard tell of from anybody else; things, what is more, that do not in fact exist and could not ever exist at all. So my readers must not believe a word I say." -Lucian on his book True History
"...They accept such things on faith alone, without any evidence. So if a fraudulent and cunning person who knows how to take advantage of a situation comes among them, he can make himself rich in a short time." -Lucian critical of early Christians c.166 AD From his book, De Morte Peregrini |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
Posted - 04/03/2014 : 05:19:59 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by On fire for Christ
How about "If God is so good why does he let bad things happen?"
|
Theologians have been struggling with the problem of evil since before the time of Epicurus. All answers to date fall into three broad categories: arguments from ignorance, denials of morality, and denials of the popular conception of the Christian god. What's your answer? |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
On fire for Christ
SFN Regular
Norway
1273 Posts |
Posted - 04/03/2014 : 08:11:22 [Permalink]
|
Pick one. The point is that the question is designed to cause doubt among theists, and it seldom does, it's like something a 12 year old atheist might ask. The topic is "dumb things atheists say", IMO that's an ineffective question and usually leads nowhere productive, therefore dumb.
I think it's more stupid than Dawkins' comment. Indoctrination, is basically brainwashing which can fall under the umbrella of abuse, depending on where you choose to draw that line. I think this list is ok, but a bit overly-sensitive. I'll go over it point by point.
1. I've never heard anyone say we're all born atheist. Even though I spend way more time discussing religion with atheists than with believers. Yes it's a dumb thing to say but I've never heard anyone say it. It's a non-sequitur, I'm not even sure what point people INTEND to make with this comment.
2. Some of these I've never heard in my life. Because of guilt? Wow never heard it. Fear of death? Maybe a few times, but usually that pertains to any kind of afterlife discussion such e.g. ghosts mediums, not just religion. In some of those cases, it's probably true.
3. Again, I've never heard that, dumb thing to say but I'm not sure how many people are actually saying it. Created to control? Usually I hear "religion was created to explain things we didn't understand". Is THAT a bad thing to say too? If anything the former suggests top down invention of a concept for a specific purpose, which is kind of stupid, and the latter suggests more of a evolving collection of beliefs. So yes I agree that the "control" suggestion is stupid. Controlling people is a byproduct of religion rather than the motivating factor of creating a religion, IF we are talking about the older religions. I would probably agree that scientology was created for the purpose of control.
4. is a good one. Biblical literalists are pretty hard to find, but reading anything from an atheist forum you'd think that every christian in America is a young Earth creationist.
5. sure ok. If people actually say the things this guy claims then yeah atheists can be complete idiots.
6. Depends on definitions. I'm not sure if being delusional is a mental illness. So if you define delusion as a mental illness and you define religion as a delusion then why not? I don't think anyone literally thinks religion is a virus. That sounds more like people making an analogy. It certainly shares some characteristics. This seems more like a pet peeve than a seriously dumb thing to say.
7. "how about asking them what they believe, or what they mean by whatever term they use?" Labels can be a convenient way of accurately categorising people/things without having to explain things at length. If you ask someone if their religious beliefs and they say "There are no Gods" that person is an atheist and that label applies. So he's just being a wimp with that comment. As for his comment on agnosticism, yeah he's correct, some agnostics are on the fence, but many of them for all intents and purposes are atheists who use the term "agnostic" because you can't prove a negative. There's a debate that you should assume a negative as a default position, but that's for you guys to argue about. I'm staying out of that debate.
8. OK, i'm not a tax expert with regards to my own country let alone the USA so not getting involved in this.
9. Again US-centric issue. I don't know or care what the founding fathers were. But the point he misses is that it's an argument from authority anyway, rendering it moot. |
|
|
|
|
The Rat
SFN Regular
Canada
1370 Posts |
Posted - 04/03/2014 : 09:53:04 [Permalink]
|
| "We're all born atheist" is also often used as a response to a silly statement, and as such it's factually correct, and I have no problem with it. I have been told that I am christian because my parents are, and my response is that I was born atheist, as is everyone else. |
Bailey's second law; There is no relationship between the three virtues of intelligence, education, and wisdom.
You fiend! Never have I encountered such corrupt and foul-minded perversity! Have you ever considered a career in the Church? - The Bishop of Bath and Wells, Blackadder II
Baculum's page: http://www.bebo.com/Profile.jsp?MemberId=3947338590 |
|
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9687 Posts |
Posted - 04/03/2014 : 10:30:07 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by On fire for Christ
IMO that's an ineffective question and usually leads nowhere productive, therefore dumb.
|
Aren't most questions posed by atheists to theists inneffective (and therefore dumb)?
It's not like most theists are interested in accepting an opposing view for the sake of argument to examine their own position or faith, are they? That hasn't been my experience anyway.
They would rather let their confirmation bias dictate that what their pastor is saying is the God-honest truth(tm). |
Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3
"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse
Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder. |
|
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9687 Posts |
Posted - 04/03/2014 : 11:51:35 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by On fire for Christ
1. I've never heard anyone say we're all born atheist. Even though I spend way more time discussing religion with atheists than with believers. Yes it's a dumb thing to say but I've never heard anyone say it. It's a non-sequitur, I'm not even sure what point people INTEND to make with this comment. |
Like Ed Brayton said, it's trivially true, and thus hold little value as an argument in and of itself. I guess one instance to use it is when some theists claims that we inherently want to re-connect to Jesus or God (some god or another anyway). We know such a claim is bullshit just because "everyone being born atheist" is trivially true.
2. <snip> In some of those cases, it's probably true. |
Indeed. When I meet people, I try to not jump to conclusions, but let them tell me in their own words why they believe. Generalising when you don't have enough data for a proper conclusion is bad form.
3. Again, I've never heard that, dumb thing to say but I'm not sure how many people are actually saying it. Created to control? |
Perhaps not to such a high degree created to control other people (unless we're talking Scientology) as much as co-opted to be used as an instrument to control people. Islam is one such religion, where clergy and men in power in for example the Middle East use it to enslave and oppress women. Or to keep the power-balance tilted in men's favour so they can continuing practising disgusting things like honour-killings if "their" women do things against "their owner's" will.
So, when arguing special cases, absolutely. But I don't think the argument is valid generally.
Usually I hear "religion was created to explain things we didn't understand". Is THAT a bad thing to say too? |
No, because it seems to be true.
The writers of the Bible had no concept of evolution, so they made up the story of God creating all the animals, and then paraded them in front of Adam so he could name them. We know that ancient people had no concept of evolution, even though they were guiding it when they practised selective breeding. What we get is a post-hoc explanation why there are different species/genera/families of animals.
The same goes for other natural phenomena. Lighting bolts from an angry Zeus, or from the wheels of Thor's wagon as he raced the sky with it.
All these explanations build the mythos which seems to build on a seed of anthropomorphism of some sort or another.
If anything the former suggests top down invention of a concept for a specific purpose, which is kind of stupid, and the latter suggests more of a evolving collection of beliefs. So yes I agree that the "control" suggestion is stupid. Controlling people is a byproduct of religion rather than the motivating factor of creating a religion, IF we are talking about the older religions. I would probably agree that Scientology was created for the purpose of control. |
There probably were many separate small things, like the instant karma of getting knocked nearly senseless after throwing a rock straight up in the air, that morphed together into a growing collection of explanation for "mysterious" things.
Religions offer a very convenient way out of the moral dilemma of acting like shit toward people by letting us redefine people into groups of us and them, and then allowing the invented God's morals to replace the natural Golden Rule.
4. is a good one. Biblical literalists are pretty hard to find, but reading anything from an atheist forum you'd think that every Christian in America is a young Earth creationist. |
Aren't a majority of American Christians young earth creationists?
Ed wrote: "There is no One True Christianity."
Me: Really? Have you tried convincing Pentecostals or Southern Baptists of that?
Ok, that was partly in jest. But only partly.
5. sure ok. If people actually say the things this guy claims then yeah atheists can be complete idiots. |
When I slowly woke up from my mental slumber that was my Christian faith, I finally came to say to myself "what the hell was I thinking", implying that for some 10 year's I hadn't done much of it. This is of course only anecdotal, and it's not like I suddenly jumped 40 points of IQ...
I just didn't apply my mind to questioning the lies I had been fed.
So I agree with Ed. Christians aren't necessarily stupid, they are potentially not using their abilities correctly. And atheists who act like idiots may be stupid people who are atheists for the wrong reason.
6. Depends on definitions. I'm not sure if being delusional is a mental illness. So if you define delusion as a mental illness and you define religion as a delusion then why not? I don't think anyone literally thinks religion is a virus. That sounds more like people making an analogy. It certainly shares some characteristics. This seems more like a pet peeve than a seriously dumb thing to say. |
I think it was Richard Dawkins who coined the expression "meme" to describe how an idea can be compared to something tangible like a virus. A viral video on you-tube, a meme like can_I_has_cheezburger cat photos spreading through the internet like a (benevolent) virus.
As such, Christianity as religion as a meme has been spreading the last 2000 years like a virus with a patient-zero somewhere in the Near East. I'm pretty sure it would be revealing to run scenarios in the CDC's computers and compare them to historical records of different religions expansions.
7. "how about asking them what they believe, or what they mean by whatever term they use?" Labels can be a convenient way of accurately categorising people/things without having to explain things at length. If you ask someone if their religious beliefs and they say "There are no Gods" that person is an atheist and that label applies. So he's just being a wimp with that comment. As for his comment on agnosticism, yeah he's correct, some agnostics are on the fence, but many of them for all intents and purposes are atheists who use the term "agnostic" because you can't prove a negative. There's a debate that you should assume a negative as a default position, but that's for you guys to argue about. I'm staying out of that debate. |
I always thought that atheist was someone who didn't believe in any gods, and agnostic (as opposed to gnostic) didn't claim special knowledge.
I don't consider myself a fence-sitter because I call myself agnostic. I consider myself an agnostic atheist; I am atheist because I don't believe in any gods, but I'm agnostic because I don't claim to have special knowledge that says there aren't any gods. That's not fence sitting, it's admitting that I don't have any positive evidence that there aren't any gods what-so-ever.
A Christian would be a gnostic theist since he claims to have special knowledge about the existence of a God (him having a name, and a family of sorts)...
8. OK, i'm not a tax expert with regards to my own country let alone the USA so not getting involved in this.
9. Again US-centric issue. I don't know or care what the founding fathers were. But the point he misses is that it's an argument from authority anyway, rendering it moot.
|
Both of these represent problems we don't have in Sweden. I do feel concerned about religions' influence in the European parliament which have authority to dictate national policy, through other member states' representatives. |
Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3
"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse
Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder. |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
Posted - 04/03/2014 : 19:12:58 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by On fire for Christ
The point is that the question is designed to cause doubt among theists, and it seldom does, it's like something a 12 year old atheist might ask. The topic is "dumb things atheists say", IMO that's an ineffective question and usually leads nowhere productive, therefore dumb. |
Well, if "productive" doesn't include millions of man-hours and entire books dedicated to theodicy. Theologians, past and present, have expended a lot of effort trying to resolve the paradox.| I would probably agree that scientology was created for the purpose of control. |
Don't need to guess on that one, we have the testimony of Harlan Ellison:Scientology is bullshit! Man, I was there the night L. Ron Hubbard invented it, for Christ's sakes! ... We were sitting around one night... who else was there? Alfred Bester, and Cyril Kornbluth, and Lester del Rey, and Ron Hubbard, who was making a penny a word, and had been for years. And he said "This bullshit's got to stop!" He says, "I gotta get money." He says, "I want to get rich". And somebody said, "why don't you invent a new religion? They're always big." We were clowning! You know, "Become Elmer Gantry! You'll make a fortune!" He says, "I'm going to do it." The totalitarianism of Scientology came about in service of that goal.| 4. is a good one. Biblical literalists are pretty hard to find, but reading anything from an atheist forum you'd think that every christian in America is a young Earth creationist. |
It's about 5% of the population, but they're loud and legislatively active. Just a couple of years ago, the Texas Board of Education had a YEC majority working to destroy science education - not just in the state, but the nation, because they thought that Texas' textbook purchasing power was larger than it really was. They present a much greater threat to science, democracy and an educated populace than their meager numbers reflect, that's why they get disproportionate control. Look at what Ken Ham, almost single-handedly, is doing to the economy of Kentucky.| 9. Again US-centric issue. I don't know or care what the founding fathers were. But the point he misses is that it's an argument from authority anyway, rendering it moot. |
No, it's an extremist response to David Barton-esque revisionists who claim that the Founding Fathers were all devout Evangelicals. The truth is that most of them were Christians, but not Christians like the idiots who claim that the U.S. is a "Christian nation" and/or that it's laws are based on the Bible. "The Founding Fathers were atheists" is dumb in response to dumb. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
Posted - 04/03/2014 : 19:18:01 [Permalink]
|
| Oh, and we know the word 'agnostic' was coined to be a direct replacement for 'atheist' but without the negative socio-political baggage that the latter word carried at the time (and still does). The popular understanding of 'agnostic' has shifted over time to mean someone who is a wishy-washy fence-sitter, but that's clearly not what Huxley intended. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
The Rat
SFN Regular
Canada
1370 Posts |
Posted - 04/04/2014 : 05:53:10 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dave W.
The popular understanding of 'agnostic' has shifted over time to mean someone who is a wishy-washy fence-sitter, but that's clearly not what Huxley intended.
|
Of course not. Huxley could never be accused of being wishy-washy! 
|
Bailey's second law; There is no relationship between the three virtues of intelligence, education, and wisdom.
You fiend! Never have I encountered such corrupt and foul-minded perversity! Have you ever considered a career in the Church? - The Bishop of Bath and Wells, Blackadder II
Baculum's page: http://www.bebo.com/Profile.jsp?MemberId=3947338590 |
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Dumb things atheists say
