| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Fhdra
Joined: 02 Dec 2009
Posts: 532
|
 Posted: Mon Feb 07, 2011 11:28 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| this1neguy wrote: | | I'd like everyone to stop for a moment and read this article. It is incredibly relevant. |
What bothers me the most of this article isn't the content, but the fact that people who don't believe in a god need to constantly prove that other people are wrong to do it or that, in the case of THIS article, people only believe in a god because their mind tells them to...
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
blingdomepiece 
Joined: 03 Aug 2007
Posts: 4358
Location: Ottawa ON Canada
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 07, 2011 1:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Fhdra wrote: | | this1neguy wrote: | | I'd like everyone to stop for a moment and read this article. It is incredibly relevant. |
What bothers me the most of this article isn't the content, but the fact that people who don't believe in a god need to constantly prove that other people are wrong to do it or that, in the case of THIS article, people only believe in a god because their mind tells them to... |
Well, he is an evolutionary psychologist, so presumably it's in his field of study / job description to write about things like this.
_________________
Expert Pro Keys: 50/63 GS, most recent The Killing Moon
Expert Pro Drums: 53/83 GS, most recent Free Bird / Oh My God / Oye Mi Amor
Expert Pro Bass: 6/83 GS, most recent Everybody Wants to Rule the World
  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
this1neguy
Joined: 19 Aug 2007
Posts: 5444
Location: Flint, MI
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 07, 2011 4:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| blingdomepiece wrote: | | Fhdra wrote: | | this1neguy wrote: | | I'd like everyone to stop for a moment and read this article. It is incredibly relevant. |
What bothers me the most of this article isn't the content, but the fact that people who don't believe in a god need to constantly prove that other people are wrong to do it or that, in the case of THIS article, people only believe in a god because their mind tells them to... |
Well, he is an evolutionary psychologist, so presumably it's in his field of study / job description to write about things like this. |
What bdp said, plus: yes, it's written by an expert in the field, but that doesn't mean you can take everything stated as being what everyone believes or being perfectly correct. It's not so much trying to prove those who believe in a god as being wrong as it is trying to explain why they believe in a god. I don't think you can get overly defensive about this simply because it's trying to take a scientific viewpoint on the issue at hand.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
PiemanLK
Joined: 03 Dec 2007
Posts: 4711
Location: /export/home
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 07, 2011 5:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Fhdra wrote: | | What bothers me the most of this article isn't the content, but the fact that people who don't believe in a god need to constantly prove that other people are wrong to do it or that, in the case of THIS article, people only believe in a god because their mind tells them to... |
I think what Aaron said is right. This guy isn't saying it's right or wrong to believe in a God, just merely explaining why people do. And in any case, I don't see why why anyone should have some sort of protected status on their beliefs, where people can't think other people's beliefs aren't right or wrong. It seems like people with faith sometimes have a one-way street idea of freedom of expression. You're allowed to believe something but I'm not allowed to say it's wrong?
_________________
[quote=''Otend'']Id come up with a long post, but Pieman said what we are all thinking, as usual[/quote]
[quote=''youhas'']EDIT TO ADD: Hey, post #3000! Neat! I will eagerly anticipate my set of ScoreHero-branded steak knives within six to eight weeks.[/quote]
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Brockbfball1563 
Joined: 29 Apr 2007
Posts: 3245
Location: Rochester, NH
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 07, 2011 9:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| PiemanLK wrote: | | Fhdra wrote: | | What bothers me the most of this article isn't the content, but the fact that people who don't believe in a god need to constantly prove that other people are wrong to do it or that, in the case of THIS article, people only believe in a god because their mind tells them to... |
I think what Aaron said is right. This guy isn't saying it's right or wrong to believe in a God, just merely explaining why people do. And in any case, I don't see why why anyone should have some sort of protected status on their beliefs, where people can't think other people's beliefs aren't right or wrong. It seems like people with faith sometimes have a one-way street idea of freedom of expression. You're allowed to believe something but I'm not allowed to say it's wrong? |
And that's one of my beefs with this whole situation as well. We can discuss and argue about abortion, gay marriage, marijuana legalization, the drinking age, anything else political, who the best sports team is, who the best American Idol singer is, what movie should have won best picture, etc., but anytime anyone wants to discuss and argue about religion, it's all "HEY MAN DON'T INSULT MY BELIEFS." I just don't get why religion gets a free pass on this simply because, well, it's religion. Why can't we argue about it like we do almost everything else in life?
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
voidedalive2x 
Joined: 29 May 2008
Posts: 7922
Location: jefferson city, MO
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 07, 2011 10:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I would personally be more offended (and react with that quote) if you (not YOU, Brock, just people in general) directly said something like "RELIGION IS SHIT" or something like that. If you simply said something like "That's nice, but I don't believe in that," then I'd be fine.
It would be nice if the majority of Christians AND athiests (read: anyone who's not an extremist or near that fringe) reacted like that, but there are some who take personal offense if people do not agree with them. 
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
joekickass1234
Joined: 10 Jan 2008
Posts: 1436
Location: Cherry Hill NJ
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 08, 2011 4:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Brockbfball1563 wrote: | | And that's one of my beefs with this whole situation as well. We can discuss and argue about abortion, gay marriage, marijuana legalization, the drinking age, anything else political, who the best sports team is, who the best American Idol singer is, what movie should have won best picture, etc., but anytime anyone wants to discuss and argue about religion, it's all "HEY MAN DON'T INSULT MY BELIEFS." I just don't get why religion gets a free pass on this simply because, well, it's religion. Why can't we argue about it like we do almost everything else in life? |
We're not allowed to talk about Dragonforce's live show either.
_________________
Stone Head <----My Band, Check us out (Look us up on facebook and myspace too)
Bass Shredding?
If any one want to play some Left 4 Dead 1 or 2 on the PC, add me: joekickass1234
3926 0220 0199 1364 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
voidedalive2x
Joined: 29 May 2008
Posts: 7922
Location: jefferson city, MO
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 08, 2011 5:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
What do I care about their live shows? Their studio music's good, and that's what I care to hear.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
blingdomepiece
Joined: 03 Aug 2007
Posts: 4358
Location: Ottawa ON Canada
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 08, 2011 3:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Brockbfball1563 wrote: | | And that's one of my beefs with this whole situation as well. We can discuss and argue about abortion, gay marriage, marijuana legalization, the drinking age, anything else political, who the best sports team is, who the best American Idol singer is, what movie should have won best picture, etc., but anytime anyone wants to discuss and argue about religion, it's all "HEY MAN DON'T INSULT MY BELIEFS." I just don't get why religion gets a free pass on this simply because, well, it's religion. Why can't we argue about it like we do almost everything else in life? |
The classic rule of etiquette is not to discuss politics or religion at the dinner table. For whatever reason, these are areas that people tend to hold very close feelings about... it's essentially their vision of the ideal present world, and the ideal next world. You mess with someone's dreams at your own risk. Some people can't handle discussion of other topics either that you would think are less consequential... sports and music are two examples I've seen. When people hold strong polarized views about anything, every other view tends to be seen as inferior. If you dismiss (even in the nicest way) someone's opinion on politics, religion, or something else they strongly believe in, it can be hard for them to not feel like they are being dismissed as a person.
The original topic of this thread was "American Attitudes Towards Atheism". This is something that can be rationally discussed because you are discussing a phenomena, whether you agree with it or not. For example you could discuss whether America could handle an openly atheistic president, or how tolerant America really is towards it. Once you get away from that and into how tolerant America SHOULD be towards that, you are treading into much more difficult waters because people are feeling a need to justify themselves (whether they reply or show restraint).
A theological discussion here is 99.9% likely to be a total waste of time for everyone involved, except where people choose to link to sources that provide information (as opposed to editorial content), as some have done, because the real benefit of a discussion thread isn't in beating people down with your opinion, it's in learning something you didn't expect to when you opened the thread.
_________________
Expert Pro Keys: 50/63 GS, most recent The Killing Moon
Expert Pro Drums: 53/83 GS, most recent Free Bird / Oh My God / Oye Mi Amor
Expert Pro Bass: 6/83 GS, most recent Everybody Wants to Rule the World
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
this1neguy
Joined: 19 Aug 2007
Posts: 5444
Location: Flint, MI
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 08, 2011 7:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I agree with bdp in that this thread needs a new topic of discussion, and preferably a more objective one, so I'm going to go ahead and start this one with myself as an example.
I was raised in a Jewish household, to a degree - my dad's side of the family is Jewish; my mom's and stepmother's sides are not, but then my mom is not all that religious and my stepmother converted when she married my dad. We were never deeply religious; we belong to a reform synagogue, and we only used to attend services every few weeks up until my Bar Mitzvah. After that, I didn't have as much of an incentive to go - it's not that I wanted to turn my back on my religion after all that time put into it, but I didn't feel the need to confirm it by going every week. We still celebrate the major holidays, still fast on Yom Kippur, still say blessings over Shabbat dinner; but...
I don't really believe in God. I think that's a large part of why I stopped wanting to attend synagogue regularly. I feel as though it's okay, though, because I still attempt to follow the moral guidelines of Judaism and adhere to the general rules (I don't keep kosher, for one example of a non-general rule) as best as possible, because Judaism is a religion that very much teaches how to be a good person. There's no pushing of the religion on others or anything nearly so inflammatory.
Now, my discussion question: is this okay? What are your perceptions of people who state that they belong to a religion that has a god as a main focus but do not necessarily believe in that deity? I can say I've received my share of funny looks when I've told people that I'm Jewish but I'm more or less agnostic, but that's the best description I have of my religious views.
Discussion. Go.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
PiemanLK
Joined: 03 Dec 2007
Posts: 4711
Location: /export/home
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 08, 2011 7:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| blingdomepiece wrote: | | [because the real benefit of a discussion thread isn't in beating people down with your opinion, it's in learning something you didn't expect to when you opened the thread. |
I can't think of any way to make this not sound like I'm brown nosing like it's going out of style or trying not to get banned, but...
I think this is the most intelligent thing I've heard in this thread and I totally shouldn't be posting in it because I'm really just here to be correct about everything.
EDIT: I agree with Fugi, he said what I wanted to say but way more directly.
_________________
[quote=''Otend'']Id come up with a long post, but Pieman said what we are all thinking, as usual[/quote]
[quote=''youhas'']EDIT TO ADD: Hey, post #3000! Neat! I will eagerly anticipate my set of ScoreHero-branded steak knives within six to eight weeks.[/quote]
Last edited by PiemanLK on Tue Feb 08, 2011 8:01 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fugitive
Joined: 20 Aug 2007
Posts: 3035
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 08, 2011 7:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| this1neguy wrote: | Now, my discussion question: is this okay? What are your perceptions of people who state that they belong to a religion that has a god as a main focus but do not necessarily believe in that deity? I can say I've received my share of funny looks when I've told people that I'm Jewish but I'm more or less agnostic, but that's the best description I have of my religious views.
Discussion. Go. |
To put it bluntly, I think you're kidding yourself. You're not Jewish, you're just a guy with morals that used to be Jewish. Judaism wasn't the first religion to present a moral code, and it wasn't the last. Same goes for Christianity, Islam, Taoism, Buddhism, etc... To call yourself a certain religion means you follow that religion and it's tenants, and you clearly do not follow Judaism.
I guess I just don't see why the labels are necessary. Why can't you just be a person with a set of morals that's non-religious? Why bother calling yourself Jewish if you don't believe in the main tenant of the religion? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
NavyCherub
Joined: 28 May 2008
Posts: 3396
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 08, 2011 8:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Fugitive wrote: | | Judaism wasn't the first religion to present a moral code |
Actually, Judaism was the first religion to involve a moral component. The role religion has played in each early civilization was large, but religions before Judaism were only used for the sake of explaining natural phenomena in lieu of scientific explanation. Judaism also began that way; actually, it wasn't even really monotheistic until a bit later into its life. At the beginning they acknowledged the other gods that their neighbors had (the Egyptians and to a less extent most of Mesopotamia) but they chose to only worship "their" God. They were also the first religion to claim to have a covenant with their God, while all previous ones based their gods on how nature treated them; for example, in Egypt the gods were basically benevolent because nature treated them well, while in areas around Mesopotamia the gods were typically said to be angry or spiteful because they were frequently flooded and such. To contrast this, the Jews' idea of God was that he gave them rules and as long as you followed those rules you were good with him. The early influence on their religion by the stories that surrounded them is pretty strong - the flood that covered the earth comes from The Epic of Gilgamesh (I believe Gilgamesh's tale is the first recorded written down story, I might be slightly off there though), and the Garden of Eden was also an idea borrowed from Mesopotamian culture. These kinds of connections plus archeological findings that prove certain events depicted in the Bible actually happened, such as the Exodus and various happenings surrounding Ramses II, which is why the Bible (when used carefully) can be used as an accurate historical document.
What does this mean? I suppose what I'm trying to tie this all into is that the Torah and the laws and ideas surrounding early Judaism are actually the Jews attempting to record their own history and intertwine the real events that happened to them with moral teachings for the future, which is why they were the first religion to use morality as a major aspect of their belief system. On a similar note
| Quote: | | Christianity, Islam |
Essentially branches of Judaism.
Really more like philosophies than religions in the traditional western sense, though I admit I haven't delved into East Asian beliefs enough to say for certain how well they can be compared to Judaism.
I feel like this needs to be broken up, if it's confusing let me know. Please note that I have no strong ties or feelings one way or another in the debate of "who's right," I simply find theology and the history behind it all very interesting and frequently do my own research on it.
edit//As far as my opinion on
| this1neguy wrote: | | Now, my discussion question: is this okay? What are your perceptions of people who state that they belong to a religion that has a god as a main focus but do not necessarily believe in that deity? I can say I've received my share of funny looks when I've told people that I'm Jewish but I'm more or less agnostic, but that's the best description I have of my religious views. |
I believe that it is perfectly fine when you consider the historical aspects of Judaism. You come from a long running and active culture with a large background and choosing to respect the teachings of the people who you come from is certainly in the spirit of the original intention.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fugitive
Joined: 20 Aug 2007
Posts: 3035
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 08, 2011 8:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I phrased that wrong. Judaism wasn't the first to present a moral code. There were laws and rules recorded long before monotheistic religions were developed.
That said, dissecting who was first was fairly irrelevant to the main point of my post. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
NavyCherub
Joined: 28 May 2008
Posts: 3396
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 08, 2011 9:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Fugitive wrote: | | I phrased that wrong. Judaism wasn't the first to present a moral code. There were laws and rules recorded long before monotheistic religions were developed. |
Yes, they go all the way back to Hammurabi's 288 laws posted on a stone in the city which basically boiled down to "an eye for an eye."
| Fugitive wrote: | | That said, dissecting who was first was fairly irrelevant to the main point of my post. |
Actually I disagree, and I assume you didn't see my edit which is where I found the words to conclude my post in a way that relayed what I really wanted to say to this1guy. The reasons they had those laws is just as important.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Copyright © 2006-2024 ScoreHero, LLC
|
Powered by phpBB
|
![Inbox [ Login ]](templates/subSilver/images/icon_mini_message.gif){kind=icon}
Inbox [ Login ]
Search
Memberlist
Profile
Log in
