Quote:
Originally Posted by #-3
I think we do have to consider plausibility.
I think as this point we understand enough about the universe to know that the earth doesn't predate the sun, the women didn't spring from the ribs of men, that substantial portions of the flood myths were taken from tales of earlier cultures, that stories about future kings floating down the river in baskets is older than writing. We know that substantial portions of the Jesus myth was constructed and modified to draw comparisons to current events of grander figures at the time they were formulated. We know that sun isn't the wheel of a burning chariot, at this point we can be confident enough about mind/body monism to dismiss the idea of reincarnation or an after life.
I think there can be a great deal of confidence that no religion has proposed a plausible solution to that which they claim to explain, and the majority of claims religions have made can be directly disproven.
Atheism on the other would be incredibly easy to disprove if wrong, and nearly impossible to prove if right, but I have yet to see and argument against it that does not start with a big presupposition. I have seldom met an atheist who would be unhappy to modify their beliefs in the face of direct evidence.
|
Right. Not the point I was getting at, and not a discussion I care to delve into on this board which I know is populated with a lot of non-religious folks.
There are clearly holes in a lot of religions' stories about origins of earth and people and so forth from the standpoint of science and recorded history, which is why I don't wholeheartedly buy into one specifically.
It doesn't make it acceptable to cast people that were raised into specific religions as lesser, stupid, or utterly misled. The core texts/scriptures aside, there are in many cases good principles and community values that are taught and practiced and plenty of good that comes from people of different religions. A lot of high achievers out there identify with one. There's a lot of charity work and giving back to the community, which i experienced growing up in one such religion where people were kind and no one forced beliefs on me. Not all religions are the same, not all are extreme and attempting to brainwash. Having participated in one and studied a number over the years, I've been blessed with some insightful perspectives. People get something out of gathering, helping others out and doing things for a good cause, even if its due to the alleged words of some prophet or deity, it's still a good thing and makes people feel good. There's nothing wrong with that.
It's just basic, mature, human decency to be accepting of what people may have grown up only knowing or were raised into due to culture or where they happened to be living. The point was Sliver's post was a slight on these people and lumping them together and on an open board such as this I wasn't going to just let that slide. It's not cool tbh, and coming from a point of view that appears to be very limited and generalizing.
(A good number) of atheists may be open and willing to accept new ideas if compelling evidence is presented. But are they also capable of exhibiting respect to the fellow man that grew up with a different, highly religious background, and understanding that in many cases its not their fault or choosing for the environment and accompanying beliefs with which they were raised? I would hope so. Because alleging that religious people are less intelligent on average is something that hasn't been proven, and so from that same perspective it feels like a hypocritical "leap" to make, merely based in not liking or identifying with such groups.