Location: A simple man leading a complicated life....
Exp:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sliver
lol, so you're seriously pretending talking to demons is not crazy? Textcritic, step back from Christianity for a little bit and live in the real world. If one of my friends told me they conversed with god and talked to demons I would think they were absolutely nuts. Because they would be.
lol, so you're seriously pretending talking to demons is not crazy? Textcritic, step back from Christianity for a little bit and live in the real world.
This IS my "real world". What on earth is that supposed to mean, anyways? Are you suggesting that I am somehow deluded because I have friends and family members who sincerely believe that they communicate with God?
Have you ever witnessed an "exorcism" or encountered a "demonic" manifestation first hand? We recognize these as symptoms of schizophrenia, but in a context that subscribes to spiritual forces, it is very difficult not to be impressed by the sense that these forces are real. Again, people who believe in such things are not necessarily—or even predominantly—"crazy". I suspect that the majority of people are highly impressionable, and are most frequently prone to group think and generalizations. Most people are not captivated by complex or technical explanations for anything, which is why "the devil made me do it" is still a much more satisfying and palatable answer than "faulty interpretation of the misfiring of dopaminergic neurons."
Which one of Timon, Pumbaa, or Simba is crazy?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sliver
If one of my friends told me they conversed with god and talked to demons I would think they were absolutely nuts. Because they would be.
Do you think the same thing about people who talk to their pets or their car? We are conditioned to anthropomorphize the natural world, and in a spiritually saturated culture such encounters with spiritual phenomena are pretty common. This does not make someone crazy. Your response is actually quite interesting, because it appears quite similar to an argument from incredulity: You can't imagine the power and effect of religious experience, therefore all such experience must be a product of insanity. Again, this is a highly arrogant claim that suggests that you are somehow immune to the sorts of social pressures and intuitive habits that produce these effects.
__________________
Dealing with Everything from Dead Sea Scrolls to Red C Trolls
Quote:
Originally Posted by woob
"...harem warfare? like all your wives dressup and go paintballing?"
I didn't like hearing prayer in school because it was lying to children. The concept of heaven may be comforting, but it's intellectually dishonest to tell children stories and pretend they are true. They don't have sufficient judgement at a young age to discount them.
Really? Better not tell your kids about the easter bunny, santa, tooth fairy, etc.
Any educated person with half a brain knows you can't talk to demons because there is no such thing as a demon.
So, we can conclude that virtually every person who believes in demons is really an unintelligent, uneducated half-wit?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sliver
Don't try to make me seem like an a-hole for saying something so obviously true it's inarguable. Unless you want to prove to me that demons exist, in which case I'll revisit my position.
My argument in this thread is not for the existence of God, or angels and demons, or spiritual forces of any kind. You are completely missing the point here which is this: Even fully functioning, well developed, socially and mentally well adjusted people can come to believe some incredible things. It is foolish and arrogant of us to belittle one's intelligence or their mental capacity solely on the basis of their beliefs.
Think about this:
You and a couple of other posters in this thread have already passed judgement on my mother-in-law as "mentally deficient," "delusional," "crazy," and suffering from having "only half a brain" because of what I have reported about her beliefs. You have done so without ever having spoken to her, met her, or even seen her. It's presumptuous and ignorant; I say that because you are not taking into account and as far as I can tell simply have no appreciation for the many factors and variables that produce belief.
__________________
Dealing with Everything from Dead Sea Scrolls to Red C Trolls
Quote:
Originally Posted by woob
"...harem warfare? like all your wives dressup and go paintballing?"
This IS my "real world". What on earth is that supposed to mean, anyways? Are you suggesting that I am somehow deluded because I have friends and family members who sincerely believe that they communicate with God?
My guess: He's having trouble dealing with the cognitive dissonance of an intelligent person who disagrees with his world view so fundamentally, it in a sense is shaking his faith.
But then I probably shouldn't put words in someone else's mouth. I'm not a psychiatrist.
My guess: He's having trouble dealing with the cognitive dissonance of an intelligent person who disagrees with his world view so fundamentally, it in a sense is shaking his faith.
But then I probably shouldn't put words in someone else's mouth. I'm not a psychiatrist.
Good call!
The funny thing is that I suspect that I don't even disagree with his worldview. I'm a committed evidentialist, but what I really take issue with is this unbelievably pompous insistence that the failures of others to conform to his standards of evidence and reality somehow qualifies that person as marginal, stupid, or mentally or socially handicapped.
People by and large need to realize that we are all capable of many of the preposterous and unpalatable thoughts and behaviours that we impugn in others.
__________________
Dealing with Everything from Dead Sea Scrolls to Red C Trolls
Quote:
Originally Posted by woob
"...harem warfare? like all your wives dressup and go paintballing?"
The funny thing is that I suspect that I don't even disagree with his worldview. I'm a committed evidentialist, but what I really take issue with is this unbelievably pompous insistence that the failures of others to conform to his standards of evidence and reality somehow qualifies that person as marginal, stupid, or mentally or socially handicapped.
People by and large need to realize that we are all capable of many of the preposterous and unpalatable thoughts and behaviours that we impugn in others.
Several of the most brilliant lawyers and judges that I know are devoutly religious. I admit that, as a pompous atheist, I'm always a little bit disappointed when I learn that one of these brilliant people that I admire believes in the bible/koran. However, that said, it demonstrates to me profoundly that there is no causal nexus between religiosity and intelligence.
__________________
"Life of Russian hockey veterans is very hard," said Soviet hockey star Sergei Makarov. "Most of them don't have enough to eat these days. These old players are Russian legends."
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Makarov For This Useful Post:
This IS my "real world". What on earth is that supposed to mean, anyways? Are you suggesting that I am somehow deluded because I have friends and family members who sincerely believe that they communicate with God?
I'm saying the fact that you entertain their crazy talk as anything other than crazy talk is strange. I guess I'm lucky that my friends and relatives are sane for the most part. I would have a very difficult time talking to somebody about their discussions with god and demons.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Textcritic
Have you ever witnessed an "exorcism" or encountered a "demonic" manifestation first hand? We recognize these as symptoms of schizophrenia, but in a context that subscribes to spiritual forces, it is very difficult not to be impressed by the sense that these forces are real. Again, people who believe in such things are not necessarily—or even predominantly—"crazy". I suspect that the majority of people are highly impressionable, and are most frequently prone to group think and generalizations. Most people are not captivated by complex or technical explanations for anything, which is why "the devil made me do it" is still a much more satisfying and palatable answer than "faulty interpretation of the misfiring of dopaminergic neurons."
Yes, I know these people believe these forces are real. That's what makes them mentally deficient. I suppose it's impressive in the same way the shoe-throwing crazies on Jerry Springer are entertaining to watch, but that's about where my fascination ends.
So if I don't believe in encounters with demons, does that mean I'm less impressionable and less prone to group think and generalizations? Isn't that a better way to be? I'll answer that for you...yes, it is.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Textcritic
Do you think the same thing about people who talk to their pets or their car? We are conditioned to anthropomorphize the natural world, and in a spiritually saturated culture such encounters with spiritual phenomena are pretty common. This does not make someone crazy. Your response is actually quite interesting, because it appears quite similar to an argument from incredulity: You can't imagine the power and effect of religious experience, therefore all such experience must be a product of insanity. Again, this is a highly arrogant claim that suggests that you are somehow immune to the sorts of social pressures and intuitive habits that produce these effects.
That's a pitiful analogy. First of all, pets are real so talking to them is an actual interaction. They communicate back and can respond to words, tones, gestures, etc. It's not crazy to talk to your dog.
When people anthropomorphize things like their car, they know it's not real. If I asked my car if it was ready to rock 'n roll as I was about to lay a giant patch, if it answered I would drive myself straight to the doctor to have my head examined.
There's nothing arrogant in saying I am immune from a powerful religious experience when in fact thus far I have been immune from a powerful religious experience. The fact that I was raised in an areligous house probably has something to do with that. I understand you'd concede that as you're acknowledging that these experiences stem from a social atmosphere, but that doesn't make it any less ridiculous for a grown person educated in Canada to believe in demons. It's utter nonsense.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Textcritic
So, we can conclude that virtually every person who believes in demons is really an unintelligent, uneducated half-wit?
We can absolutely conclude that their belief in demons is a completely unintelligent, uneducated belief, yes. That everybody should agree on. I won't go so far as to sum up their entire person with the same descriptors, but if that's the only piece of information I know about somebody it sure will colour my impression, as it should.
By the way, I love how you baited somebody like me with your faux in-passing remark about your relative believing she conversed with god and talked to demons, then feigned indignation when I took it. I knew it was what you were doing, but well played anyway.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Textcritic
My argument in this thread is not for the existence of God, or angels and demons, or spiritual forces of any kind. You are completely missing the point here which is this: Even fully functioning, well developed, socially and mentally well adjusted people can come to believe some incredible things. It is foolish and arrogant of us to belittle one's intelligence or their mental capacity solely on the basis of their beliefs.
I'm not missing the point at all. You're muddying the point with your eloquent nonsense. Of course it's reasonable to belittle people for believing stupid things.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Textcritic
Think about this:
You and a couple of other posters in this thread have already passed judgement on my mother-in-law as "mentally deficient," "delusional," "crazy," and suffering from having "only half a brain" because of what I have reported about her beliefs. You have done so without ever having spoken to her, met her, or even seen her. It's presumptuous and ignorant; I say that because you are not taking into account and as far as I can tell simply have no appreciation for the many factors and variables that produce belief.
Textcritic, your mother-in-law may not be delusional, but she is certainly behaving like a delusional person with a mental deficiency if she is talking to demons and conversing with god. God can't talk to you. Demons can't talk to you. If you claim they can you have a problem.
And give me a break with this presumptuous and ignorant BS. As I said above, you cast your line hoping for a fish and caught one. Don't pretend this exchange came about organically...it's exactly what you wanted when the only thing you have ever said about your MIL was that she has imaginary friends. If you told us she liked to volunteer her time rescuing orphans I would have thanked your post. You gave us the tidbit about her that was going to raise eyebrows.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Textcritic
Good call!
The funny thing is that I suspect that I don't even disagree with his worldview. I'm a committed evidentialist, but what I really take issue with is this unbelievably pompous insistence that the failures of others to conform to his standards of evidence and reality somehow qualifies that person as marginal, stupid, or mentally or socially handicapped.
People by and large need to realize that we are all capable of many of the preposterous and unpalatable thoughts and behaviours that we impugn in others.
My standards of evidence? You have to be kidding me. Guy, demons don't exist. Quit pretending I have some warped sense of reality or unreasonable standards of evidence.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Sliver For This Useful Post:
Several of the most brilliant lawyers and judges that I know are devoutly religious. I admit that, as a pompous atheist, I'm always a little bit disappointed when I learn that one of these brilliant people that I admire believes in the bible/koran. However, that said, it demonstrates to me profoundly that there is no causal nexus between religiosity and intelligence.
Yeah, I've noticed the same thing. I wonder how religious they would be if they weren't raised with religion of any sort, and then somebody tried to sell them on it in their 20s? Probably none, but it's a question that will never be answered.
I think a lot of these people are not being intellectually honest with themselves if they are believers, though. Somebody close to me who I consider to be very intelligent went from believing a literal version of the bible to being a full-on atheist in his late 30s, so there is hope I suppose.
Several of the most brilliant lawyers and judges that I know are devoutly religious. I admit that, as a pompous atheist, I'm always a little bit disappointed when I learn that one of these brilliant people that I admire believes in the bible/koran. However, that said, it demonstrates to me profoundly that there is no causal nexus between religiosity and intelligence.
I can see judges being religious, how else can they pretend to be god.
Quote is relevant to the discourse that Textcritic and Sliver are having:
"George Bush says he speaks to God every day, and Christians love him for it. If George Bush said he spoke to God through his hair dryer, they would think he was mad. I fail to see how the addition of a hair dryer makes it any more absurd." - Sam Harris
I find this sort of stereotypical characterization of all atheists as rational, critical thinkers in contrast to all theists as mindless zealots to be pompous, and a little offensive. The results of this poll completely refute your supposition: more than 20% of all respondants who consider themselves to be atheists also claim to be certain about it.
I think you misunderstood my point. I wasn't saying that atheists are more or less likely to be certain about their positions than theists. An atheist who is 99% sure that he is right is no more nor less zealous than a theist who is 99% sure that he is right, so I'm not sure where you got the zealousness/rationality impression from my post.
I was simply giving my impression of how equally certain theists and atheists are likely to classify themselves. In my experience, an atheist who has a shadow of doubt is more likely to call himself agnostic than a theist who has that same shadow of doubt. The sample size is too small to draw any real conclusions, but, consistent with my supposition, this poll is showing a higher percentage of theists who consider themselves to be gnostic than the percentage of atheists who consider themselves to be gnostic.
Yeah, I've noticed the same thing. I wonder how religious they would be if they weren't raised with religion of any sort, and then somebody tried to sell them on it in their 20s? Probably none, but it's a question that will never be answered.
I think a lot of these people are not being intellectually honest with themselves if they are believers, though. Somebody close to me who I consider to be very intelligent went from believing a literal version of the bible to being a full-on atheist in his late 30s, so there is hope I suppose.
Yeah, I wonder how religious you would be if you were raised by a nice christian family when you were younger, then were exposed to Atheism in your 20's. You'd probably still be religious, but that's a question that will never be answered.
I think a lot of Atheists that were raised with no religion around them are being intellectually dishonest with themselves. Somebody close to me who I consider to be very intelligent didn't know a thing about God as a child, and is now a Born-again Christian in his late 20's, so there is hope I suppose.
Yeah, I wonder how religious you would be if you were raised by a nice christian family when you were younger, then were exposed to Atheism in your 20's. You'd probably still be religious, but that's a question that will never be answered.
I question your assumption here.
I suspect most North American atheists were raised in religious families (this would be an interesting subject for a poll). Anecdotally, most non-believers I know were formerly religious but lost the faith as they got older and learned critical thinking skills rather than unquestionably accepting authority (e.g. parents and religious leaders).
This is mainly a matter of demographics, though. Until the past few decades, virtually everyone in North America practiced religion (predominantly Christianity). So if someone became an atheist, they were almost certainly born into a religious family.
Now more people, especially those belonging to the younger generations, are abandoning their family's religious beliefs. I would not be surprised if religion in Canada resembled Scandinavia within a few decades.
Being religious or not is not a function of intelligence.
I've known people that have gone both ways. Raised in nice Christian families and were atheists by their 20's or 30's, and people that were not religious and "got saved" in their 20's and 30's.
The ones I know usually became atheists out of reading the Bible closely, evaluating their own beliefs and introspection.
The ones I know that became Christian usually did so out of different kinds of motivation, trouble in their life, a major emotional event, or a lack of direction or sense of emptiness.
Though of course those are anecdotes so I don't claim they're representative of anything other than personal experience; the atheists I know I usually meet through channels that probably select such kinds, and the Christians I know got saved through evangelism (sometimes my own) which is designed to select such individuals.
I guess what I'm trying to say is people are complex and reasons are myriad, it's hard to reduce things to only a few causes.
__________________ Uncertainty is an uncomfortable position.
But certainty is an absurd one.
IThis is mainly a matter of demographics, though. Until the past few decades, virtually everyone in North America practiced religion (predominantly Christianity). So if someone became an atheist, they were almost certainly born into a religious family.
That's a good point, the primary determining factor as to what religion you are is where you are born.
And even those that weren't raised Christian in NA or practiced it were certainly exposed to it culturally.
__________________ Uncertainty is an uncomfortable position.
But certainty is an absurd one.
Being religious or not is not a function of intelligence.
I've known people that have gone both ways. Raised in nice Christian families and were atheists by their 20's or 30's, and people that were not religious and "got saved" in their 20's and 30's.
The ones I know usually became atheists out of reading the Bible closely, evaluating their own beliefs and introspection.
The ones I know that became Christian usually did so out of different kinds of motivation, trouble in their life, a major emotional event, or a lack of direction or sense of emptiness.
Though of course those are anecdotes so I don't claim they're representative of anything other than personal experience; the atheists I know I usually meet through channels that probably select such kinds, and the Christians I know got saved through evangelism (sometimes my own) which is designed to select such individuals.
I guess what I'm trying to say is people are complex and reasons are myriad, it's hard to reduce things to only a few causes.
Fair enough, but is it possible people are "setting aside" or "turning down" their intelligent self to believe some of the more absurd things in their religion? Is there any way for somebody like me to understand talking to demons or having two-way conversations with god as perfectly reasonable? It honestly seems so incredibly stupid. Maybe I have blinders on or something.
