Why do some people make such bad arguments for the Superiority of their Religion? (believing, belief)
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.
Ha, well you do have a point there, and my answer would be that a person gets caught up in the conversation, which may well have drifted from the title question, and forgets what thread she's in.
Yes, if someone claims their religion is superior, then they should be prepared to have good reasons to say that. Why they make "such bad arguments" is likely because they really think that their arguments aren't bad.
I don't think my "religion", such as it could be called, is superior to any other, so the thread really doesn't apply to me.
I just find the constant demands for evidence tiresome. There isn't any evidence to show anyone else for what people believe. To be fair, I find the canned responses to the constant demands for evidence tiresome, too.
There's a forum on Buddhism that I discovered maybe 3 years ago, and I really enjoyed it for about a year. Then it got to be a rerun (so to speak). Same old topics, and -- unlike this forum where at least we get some new blood occasionally -- the exact same characters. So I dropped out. But every few months I will check back in. Same old posters, same old discussions. However, new things occur here enough that this forum has, thus far, held my interest. Maybe it's because we have such great mods!
We see here yet another popular atheist word game. Religious faith is not inherently different from any other species of faith. We exercise faith in large and small ways every day in contexts having nothing to do with religion. Most of the time, this faith is based on rational analysis of the best available data. The leap of faith is often a very small one; we don't even think about it.
Yes, faith, like belief is often based on evidence. We understand this precisely because of the word games theists play, pretending faith based on evidence is equal to blind faith so they can accuse us of following a belief or faith system. But that is not the faith Transponder is talking about here, he is responding to ...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mightyqueen801
Not to you, it isn't. Everyone is not you.
Surely by now you understand that people have faith without the need for reason and more importantly, without the need to give somebody else reason.
This is the faith we are talking about, because when we talk about evidence, we use that word.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irkle Berserkle
The atheist pretense is that religious faith is irrational magical thinking, based on no evidence or even flatly contrary to all evidence and reasoning. The game is to insist religious faith is fundamentally different from any other species of faith and is, by definition, irrational. The fact that billions of otherwise rational people, including scientists and academics, hold deep religious faith would seem to be a problem for this position, yet the atheists continue their game. I can't remember who it was, but I got one longtime contributor to paint himself into the embarrassing corner of insisting that, yes, those billions of believers are all irrational - there is some mental quirk whereby even Nobel laureates "go irrational" when the topic is religion; only he and his fellow atheists have escaped this trap. Really, ya think?
You are refuting yourself. Once again, these religious scientists are not coming to their scientific conclusions because of their religion, they are coming to natural conclusions by compartmentalizing their religious beliefs. And their scientific discoveries tell us nothing about why they are religious.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irkle Berserkle
My faith is neither irrational nor contrary to the best evidence and arguments known to me. The best evidence and arguments known to me have, after a long and diligent quest, led me to the point where my leap of faith was quite small considering the massive stakes. I assume an atheist whose faith in atheism is based on something more that a couple of Richard Dawkins videos on YouTube would say likewise. Neither the atheist nor I can know, except with some sort of internal "knowing," that our convictions are true. In living as though they are true, we exercise faith.
No, you may have internal "knowing,", atheists see incredible claims and are rejecting them (subconsciously or not) based on the evidence we have.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irkle Berserkle
This word game is precisely the counterpart to atheists' insistence that atheism is not a belief system. Atheists deny the existence of God.
Another word game. Atheists do not believe in gods. To deny the existence of God is to believe but to deny this belief. And atheism is a conclusion based on a system, it is not the system.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irkle Berserkle
The non-existence of God is their belief system. Because an atheist can't know there is no God, he or she must make a leap of faith toward that position.
Now you are doing the very thing you accuse us of, playing games with the varying degrees of the word 'faith'.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irkle Berserkle
When the atheist lives as though there is no God, he or she is exercising faith that is epistemologically indistinguishable from mine. It's simply a matter of where one thinks the best evidence and arguments point.
I can not speak for other atheists, but how I live my life is not based on my atheism.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irkle Berserkle
It's quite astonishing to me that atheists keep relying on these word games. I don't know of any theistic counterpart to this. It certainly doesn't suggest that atheists have any great confidence in the strength of their position. Insisting religious faith is irrational is sort of like one big ad hominem fallacy.
Again you either do not understand or are misrepresenting to pretend we are being dishonest by accusing us of doing the thing theists do, and you your self did.
OP, I think the answer is that there is little rational thought applied to their beliefs.
If anyone takes the time to deconstruct their particular beliefs, there is no way a person could continue to swallow "whatever" beliefs whole - they start falling apart with the tiniest bit of scrutiny.
People are taught to believe certain things or they are attracted to certain ideas - most of it is pretty irrational in nature.
I am not sure there is little rational thought applied to their beliefs, some theists do rationalize their beliefs. But the rest of your post hints at a problem with their arguments, they do not test to see if their rationalization is sound, either because they do not know how, or because cognitive bias favors their comfortable beliefs they were taught.
The average working class person doesn't have the time to sit around pondering how to convince others of their belief. This has to be targeted towards the devout, disabled and/or perhaps retired populations. Who else has the time?
some atheist avoid talking about rational believing beliefs. I mean they will say "Ok, you didn't use the word god so its ok," ... really? as an atheist I even think about aligning how the universe works to god?
or talking about other claims on how the universe works is a strawman because it is not addressing deity vs no deity only? really? that what this is about?
and is "You didn't use the word god" the standard that makes belief reliable or not? really? Is questioning each others claims about how the universe works really based on how it affects atheism? If so, a name change is in order.
they refuse to put "deny everything" up against serous questioning and yet trumpet and brow beat theist about doing it. its the strangest thing. I hesitate talking about it like that because its like tuning on the lights in a roach infested house. You kill the ones in the open, but a bomb is the only way to really address the problem.
We talk all the time about rationale for believing beliefs. The bottom line is not in fact Faith. It is the validity of the evidence, and it doesn't matter whether one comes to the conclusion through the evidence or validates the belief afterwards through the evidence.
That's where the point (and the point of all the debating here) is that the evidence does not support theism and it does support no-theism. So whether arguing on faith or evidence, atheism is the better rationale.
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Last Amalekite 1Sam15
You keep using the “â€. Who are you quoting?
I do the same. It means "Suppose someone says this, then...." or "I have heard this argument used, so..." It isn't intended to be a quote from anyone's post.
We talk all the time about rationale for believing beliefs. The bottom line is not in fact Faith. It is the validity of the evidence, and it doesn't matter whether one comes to the conclusion through the evidence or validates the belief afterwards through the evidence.
That's where the point (and the point of all the debating here) is that the evidence does not support theism and it does support no-theism. So whether arguing on faith or evidence, atheism is the better rationale.
Unfortunately, one can't seem to go out into the sunshine and enjoy it because of those pesky believers.
Religion should never be about trying to be superior to other religions. Religion should simply be about trying to have a better relationship with God, which in turn makes us better people. People acting in their best character wouldn't try to look down on others' religious views.
All religions are manifestations of connections to God.
Religion should never be about trying to be superior to other religions. Religion should simply be about trying to have a better relationship with God, which in turn makes us better people. People acting in their best character wouldn't try to look down on others' religious views.
All religions are manifestations of connections to God.
I really do not think many people have the time and/or interest to invest into what others believe unless it somehow affects them. One of the ways people may affect others without realizing it is through feelings of rejection "If you believe so and so, that means you reject me."
Religion should never be about trying to be superior to other religions. Religion should simply be about trying to have a better relationship with God, which in turn makes us better people. People acting in their best character wouldn't try to look down on others' religious views.
All religions are manifestations of connections to God.
I like that. Sometimes the 'Cosmic Origins' argument will (not often ) get to "Suppose there is a creator -god? Which one?" (not quoting anyone in particular) and they say: "It's all the same God". Which again kicks the question down the road - Which one? The implication being that the god (if it exists) is the god of all religions or none, and any path is the 'relationship', even if it is the path of non - belief.
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.
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.
