I will concede that anyone who believes that the entire Bible is factual and without allegory might have a bit of trouble when it comes to fighting ignorance as a Doper. Will you concede that this is such a rarity that it is almost hypothetical?
For the sake of keeping the debate going, yes. I’ll concede that point.
One can be a religious person and still answer another doper’s question correctly about the US tax code, or the Java programming language, or what there is to do in Baltimore, or how shoes are made, or what life is like in Ghana, or any of myriad other questions which have nothing to do with religion.
The proposition is whether or not religion stands in the way of fighting ignorance, basically.
Then shouldn’t you have refined your original question to make it clear that you’re talking about literal belief in religious myth?
I assumed by using the examples in the OP that it would have been a given. My mistake and apologies.
And even then, true believers would only be ill-equipped to fight ignorance regarding those religious myths.
A perfectly fundamentalist literalistic Christian could still fight ignorance in other fields perfectly well.
Counterpoint: Many atheists are ill-equipped to fight ignorance of any sort.
As it has been pointed out by others, will you also concede that Biblical Ignorance is a but small subset of Total Ignorance?
The only people with religious views I keep as close friends all understand metaphor and allegory and they are all old-earth creationists who pretty much believe in evolution for instance, but view it as God’s method of creating.
I would say we are far more than hypothetical in our existance and would not concede your point on our rarity. But we are obviously far outnumbered by young-earth creationists. Popularity does not, of course, prove an idea is correct.
I won’t concede that but maybe a re-definition is in order. I’d say that there are two types of ignorance.
-
Ignorance out of no exposure. I haven’t been exposed to the intricacies of vedic math or brain surgery. So I’m currently ignorant to those. Just as I’m illiterate when it comes to reading a sign written in Thai but I’m literate when it comes to English.
-
Ignorance out of a willful nature. Using a bit of the Merriam Webster’s definition of lacking knowledge or comprehension of the thing specified. Meaning that one does not comprehend that Biblical Verse A cannot fit into Reality Slot B and then chooses to remain such out of a willful nature. Those who choose to eschew truth to keep their beliefs intact.
If you ask me, atheists who criticize the bible on a basis that every word can only be a factual claim and ignore literary techniques of metaphor allegory and simile for instance are every bit as stoopid as people who claim that the entire bible is 100% factual and true.
Also in this category are atheists who can’t stop claiming things like “christians worship a zombie.”
This is a strawman. A zombie is animated dead. It is still a rotting stinking corpse. A resurrected person who is no longer dead is not a zombie. Christians do not claim Jesus is an animated corpse which is still dead. If you have to change the argument of someone else in order to demolish it, you are attempting to manipulate the observer. These sorts of practices are just as ignorant as the fundamentalist views.
Don’t you have it backwards? The people who believe in what happened to Jonah know that a person can’t be swallowed by a fish and survive, which is why they make such a big deal about it happening to Jonah, because he experienced a miracle. If they were ignorant about the fact that you can’t survive being eaten by a fish, they wouldn’t make such a big deal about it happening to Jonah.
I’m pretty offended you define religious as following an Abrahamic religion.
:rolleyes:
So they’re willing to suspend reality to believe in a story. And to me, that’s succumbing to ignorance.
Luckily I used a disclaimer “For the sake of this debate”. But if you need to be offended, please find another thread.
I wanted this to be a GD instead of the PIT to keep it more of a debate. This was cleared through a moderator before I posted the thread.
I don’t really get the premise at all. I am a Christian myself, and I know plenty of Christians who don’t have any problem with any current science. In most cases, it’s a complete non-issue to reconcile their beliefs and science. In the cases where there are issues, it can simply come down to the idea that many of the stories are allegory, that God tends to work through natural processes, or that they’re things that science really cannot meaningfully study.
Hell, I’ve even known some who were Young Earth Creationists and, though they didn’t agree with the conclusions of the science of evolution, they understood that it was the best picture science could paint given the available evidence. And there are still some things that that they might believe are literally true and are just miracles.
For instance, consider the story of Jonah, as you have. Yes, it says a fish, but at the time that story was written, a fish was basically anything that swam in the ocean, so a whale would have qualified as a fish to them, which could explain at least how he might have not drowned. Or, maybe they also believe that it is, in fact, scientifically unexplainable, and that it was simply a miracle and God directly intervened, so there won’t be a scientific explanation for those specific cases. That doesn’t mean that they necessarily believe that there’s a scientific explanation for how it might happen in general.
And, of course, as others have said, religion being religious, even believing some fantastic stories on little or no evidence doesn’t mean that someone is inherently ignorant or unable to fight ignorance. I think many people have certain irrational beliefs and they may or may not be able to meaningfully fight ignorance with regard to those sets of beliefs, but it doesn’t mean they can’t fight ignorance in other areas.
It’s because they believe in the existence of a divine being that isn’t bound by natural laws. It’s not that they’re willing to suspend reality to believe in a story, it’s that they believe in a being that can itself suspend reality. But they realize that when it happens, it’s an extraordinary, miraculous occurrence.
Well, if the question is really just as simple as, “Can you be religious and be a doper?” then obviously the answer is “yes”. We have a great number of religious dopers. Some of them are even pretty nutty and believe all types of whackadoodle things, and yet they are members and aren’t hassled too much. And I’m sure they think they are advancing the fight against ignorance. Hell, occasionally they probably are!
stpauler, I pity you for *your *ignorance. Perhaps by the end of this thread, you will have been enlightened.
Sweeping generalizations are the bane of good discourse. To assume that all of group X think like Y is foolish. To think that even people who claim to think alike, do in fact think alike, is foolish. Everybody has their own motivations for what they do and what they think. Some people have coinciding motivations, some people have coinciding thoughts. You can’t identify religious people as all willfully ignorant for the same reason that you can’t identify all Americans as big fat loud talkers who drive SUV’s and eat steak. And you certainly can’t qualify someone as either a doper or not simply by their beliefs in a particular (or any) religion.
There are entirely too many factors to consider and each person must be viewed as their own person. Stop hating america 
Of course you can be religious and still like the dope: haven’t you heard of Godsmack?