U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Atheism and Agnosticism
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 01-19-2019, 12:21 PM
 
Location: Parts Unknown, Northern California
40,859 posts, read 18,557,746 times
Reputation: 18653

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mightyqueen801 View Post
Maybe he's smart enough to know to say things approved of by the people who pay him.
His enthusiasm suggested that he was sincere in his statements.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-19-2019, 12:41 PM
 
Location: Florida
19,786 posts, read 19,886,317 times
Reputation: 23202
The question is, would he have stood up and publicly blamed god for making/letting them lose, if they had ??
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-21-2019, 05:20 PM
 
Location: Parts Unknown, Northern California
40,859 posts, read 18,557,746 times
Reputation: 18653
Quote:
Originally Posted by old_cold View Post
The question is, would he have stood up and publicly blamed god for making/letting them lose, if they had ??

If he was going to blame anyone, it most likely would have been Satan.

Atheists never represent themselves this way. If the coach had been an atheist, he would not have gone out of his way to credit the absence of religious faith as the key to winning. Such a coach would have just credited the people in the program and their supporters, the issue of religion would not be introduced. No athlete retires and writes a book called "It Was My Muscles, Not Jesus."

That leaves us at a public relations disadvantage. We are a smart collective, how might we balance the scales in this area?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-27-2019, 03:23 AM
 
39,033 posts, read 10,825,389 times
Reputation: 5082
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harry Diogenes View Post
It also raises the question what did Alabama do wrong? Surely they prayed as well?
Their faith must not have been strong enough.

Quote:
Originally Posted by old_cold View Post
The question is, would he have stood up and publicly blamed god for making/letting them lose, if they had ??
he doesn't need that kind of trouble. But there is a school of thought that argues that this was all part of God's plan and it was His Will that they should lose. Which makes you wonder - if it's all planned in advance and can't be changed, why pray anyway?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9IKkfBKLApY

All of a piece with a god that helps you find your car -keys but can't tip off security at the airport before 9/11.

Last edited by TRANSPONDER; 01-27-2019 at 03:57 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-28-2019, 09:48 AM
 
39,033 posts, read 10,825,389 times
Reputation: 5082
Just in passing, some of you may know that I have become aware of Selective Memory in theist apologists. They really do seem to blank out from their minds any time they got soundly rebutalled. I'm wondering is this is also the reason why they keep putting the same old arguments. What's the Psychology behind battling away (and becoming increasingly outrageous in their methods) before flouncing off or running away shouting "I win". Then popping up again on another thread after a decent interval and doing it all again. Is it Faith that makes them feel they can't be wrong; it just needs them to do it again, in different words.

Has any psychological study been done on Faith -based denialist apologetics?

This isn't it, but it is confirming just what atheism already worked out.

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/b...ith-and-reason
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-28-2019, 10:32 AM
Status: "Scarface IS fiction!" (set 7 days ago)
 
Location: Germany
5,037 posts, read 936,220 times
Reputation: 713
Quote:
Originally Posted by TRANSPONDER View Post
Just in passing, some of you may know that I have become aware of Selective Memory in theist apologists. They really do seem to blank out from their minds any time they got soundly rebutalled. I'm wondering is this is also the reason why they keep putting the same old arguments. What's the Psychology behind battling away (and becoming increasingly outrageous in their methods) before flouncing off or running away shouting "I win". Then popping up again on another thread after a decent interval and doing it all again. Is it Faith that makes them feel they can't be wrong; it just needs them to do it again, in different words.

Has any psychological study been done on Faith -based denialist apologetics?

This isn't it, but it is confirming just what atheism already worked out.

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/b...ith-and-reason
Someone posted a video that showed theists have different types of arguments that together supports the beliefs of the theists. So when they are shown to be wrong in one area, the other arguments still support their belief.

There is also the common method of moving on to a new argument without really paying attention to what has been said. They think their new argument refutes the previous position, so they move on until they come back to the original argument again.

There is also the problem that they do not want to be wrong, so cognitive bias starts to work to get around any uncomfortable facts.

Some people are not intelligent enough to understand the rebuttal. And maybe some of us think our rebuttal is good, only to find even other atheists do not understand. My 'people killing because they wear pants' to demonstrate correlation does not mean causation when theists bring up Stalin.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-28-2019, 11:02 AM
 
39,033 posts, read 10,825,389 times
Reputation: 5082
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harry Diogenes View Post
Someone posted a video that showed theists have different types of arguments that together supports the beliefs of the theists. So when they are shown to be wrong in one area, the other arguments still support their belief.

There is also the common method of moving on to a new argument without really paying attention to what has been said. They think their new argument refutes the previous position, so they move on until they come back to the original argument again.

There is also the problem that they do not want to be wrong, so cognitive bias starts to work to get around any uncomfortable facts.

Some people are not intelligent enough to understand the rebuttal. And maybe some of us think our rebuttal is good, only to find even other atheists do not understand. My 'people killing because they wear pants' to demonstrate correlation does not mean causation when theists bring up Stalin.
Quite so. That is what I long since identified as 'cult-think' apologetics and I first identified it in the UFO apologetics world (and the allied 'alternative history' field). It was precisely the same kind of fiddling of evidence, deprecation of 'science' and denigration of the opposition that I saw in Theist apologetics.

There was even the 'Ok ..good point...what about this, then..?' apologetic, which relies on the skeptik (the term is used in UFOlogy and in Theist apologetics) having to come up with a solid explanation of a 'sighting' (just as an argument for religion) and, if they can't, this is supposed to 'prove' the Faith.This is the idea behind moving about from one point to another (1) and is similar (but not to be confused with) to the "Gish Gallop" which churned out a long series of claims which would take all day to refute, even if the opposition could remember them.
It doesn't work like that at all. Atheism (and UFO skeptiks) are obliged only to not be convinced by the 'evidence' provided; they do not have to rebut it all. This produces howls of protest because it means that all the unbeliever has to do is stick his (or her) fingers in their ears. Some may do so, but the point about logic and reason combined with atheism is that we Have to give the claims fair consideration.

Faith can lie to itself; indeed the self -delusion of faith is considered meritorious. But as soon as atheist starts doing that, they have blown it. We HAVE to be honest at least to ourselves.

(1) as well as Theism being obliged to evade any really serious disproofs of their claims because 'Faith' in their case (I do believe) is their conviction that God is putting true facts into their heads. They CANNOT thus ever admit being seriously wrong. Which brings us back to selective memory, denial, and doing the same argument all over again.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-28-2019, 11:55 AM
 
Location: Parts Unknown, Northern California
40,859 posts, read 18,557,746 times
Reputation: 18653
Quote:
Originally Posted by TRANSPONDER View Post
Quite so. That is what I long since identified as 'cult-think' apologetics and I first identified it in the UFO apologetics world (and the allied 'alternative history' field). .
We have different understandings of what alternative histories are if you attempt to lump them in with UFOology.

UFO claimants are insisting that something we don't know to be true, is actually true. Alternative history writers are simply altering some known historical outcome, with the reader well aware that this is an alteration, not fact, and then proposing what scenarios might have played out as a consequence. It is just diverting reading, nothing more, no claims of validity, it is unambiguously marketed as fiction.

I've read my share of these books and some have been very entertaining, others not so much. No cult think, no hidden conspiracy, no alliance with the world of UFOs, just novels.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-28-2019, 01:48 PM
 
Location: Florida
19,786 posts, read 19,886,317 times
Reputation: 23202
Speaking of novels, I think I might have mentioned this before but almost every "good' ( By that meaning a good writer) has included somehow and atheist main character.Usually worked into the story without being the least preachy, just as a matter of fact
But, being practically house bound by the cold( yeah, I know, I'm in Florida but everything is relative!
I randomly picked up a couple of books from our community library.

Although one was 'cute' in some ways,(kids, talking animals) the explainations given to a kid whose friend was killed and whose parents were kidnapped and presumed dead, rivaled anything we read on here or on the Christianity board.


"God works in mysterious ways"...."there will be good from it eventually, we just don't know how"

I braved the temperatures to go and find something less 'gaggy' but gave them to a dear friend who will love them.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-28-2019, 03:22 PM
 
39,033 posts, read 10,825,389 times
Reputation: 5082
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grandstander View Post
We have different understandings of what alternative histories are if you attempt to lump them in with UFOology.

UFO claimants are insisting that something we don't know to be true, is actually true. Alternative history writers are simply altering some known historical outcome, with the reader well aware that this is an alteration, not fact, and then proposing what scenarios might have played out as a consequence. It is just diverting reading, nothing more, no claims of validity, it is unambiguously marketed as fiction.

I've read my share of these books and some have been very entertaining, others not so much. No cult think, no hidden conspiracy, no alliance with the world of UFOs, just novels.
Sorry - my fault. I should have explained. had in mind Atlantis, gods from outer space, pre diluvian sea- kingdoms and Egyptians teaching the Aztecs to build pyramids. They are a nice bridge between UFOs (including UFO's in the Bible) and Christian YE Creationism. I well recall old Eusebius arguing for 'Egyptians could never have cut stone', which is classic Gods from outer space stuff and seemed to have no point in YE Creationism other than 'Science is wrong about everything it thinks it knows', which is one of the Three pillars of Christian fundamentalism - distrust of science, because science supports evolution which debunks Genesis - literalism.

The two apologetics seem joined at the hip.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Atheism and Agnosticism
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top