This is going in GD (unless a mod moves it), since it deals with religion and I’m sure it will generate controversy.
Here’s my idea: Since the Judeo-Christian god does not exist, it’s impossible for anyone to use him as an actual “crutch” to deal with life’s challenges. One can draw no actual strength from nothingness. The fact is, religious believers who cling to God when facing hardships are struggling just as existentially alone as we atheists are, whether they realize it or not. Their strength comes not from any god, but from their fellow humans and from within themselves, just as is the case with those of us who lack theistic belief. So let’s not patronize* theists by hurling epithets like “crutch” or “imaginary friend” at their object of belief; they are engaging in a natural, ancient, deep-seated coping technique that, ultimately, is as functional as any other.
*(I know that theists will no doubt feel patronized anyway by my OP here, but I’m trying to at least do away with a misguided and inaccurate form of skeptical patronizing.)
When atheists talk about God being a crutch, they’re not saying that theists draw strength from God, because he doesn’t exist. They’re saying that theists draw strength from their belief in God. You haven’t addressed that, and I don’t see a reason someone couldn’t draw strength from their belief in something, whether or not that thing exists.
But it’s not as functional as any other. Believing falsehoods might make it easier to cope with your problems, but it makes it harder to solve your problems.
Reality is subjective. As long as people are convinced their faith is what saves them in hard times, it’s as good as real, even if it is just a placebo effect.
You’ve kind of poisoned the well here by asserting the non-existence of God, haven’t you? Even if we take it as a given for your argument that God doesn’t exist, I’m not really sure that faith is comparable to non-faith coping mechanisms. For instance, if someone is very ill and praying for a recovery, whether or not prayer has a placebo effect, there’s not really anything else that compares to that. Sure, one can hope really hard that the medicines or surgeries will work, but one praying certainly hopes that as well but still has prayer on top of that.
But most of all, I think there’s a base assumption about faith that you’re not addressing. Certainly many people do use God as a way of coping with life’s hardships, whether it’s praying for things to improve or simply believe that God works all things for the best. But, in my own faith, I don’t use God, my belief in God, prayer, or any of that like as a form of coping, only as a manner of understanding.
I don’t agree. All the theists I know work just as hard as atheists at finding material solutions to their problems. Christians, for example, go see doctors when they’re sick, lawyers when they’re in legal trouble, and buckle their seat belts to avoid injury in the event of a car crash. These are actively-sought solutions, not just coping mechanisms.
As the old saying goes, “Trust in God, but keep your powder dry.”
Meh, not really. It’s just a starting assumption for the sake of a debate–a debate that is directed primarily at unbelievers.
I’m not sure I follow. You seem to be saying that faith can render material comfort/solutions above and beyond unbelief (eg, the placebo effect)…correct? If so, then that tends to reinforce my point, I think: we shouldn’t use epithets like “crutch” for something that actually gives someone strength or succor.
But again, I’m not sure I understand your point.
That’s cool.
Then I think my OP is even more applicable to you than to other believers; you’re not using anything as a crutch, and none of my fellow atheists should ever use such a term as an insult against you, especially.
As I mentioned to Blaster Master, I’m not trying to debate the existence of any god, least of all declare God non-existent by fiat. I’m trying to engage atheists in a debate on whether or not it’s appropriate to describe theistic belief as a “crutch” for its coping mechanism benefits, when theists are clearly in the same boat as we, existentially.
Oh yeah, well here’s my idea: Since booze isn’t a panacea, it’s impossible for anyone to use it as an actual “crutch” to deal with life’s challenges. One can draw no actual strength from whiskey. The fact is, rummies who cling to the bottle when facing hardships are struggling just as blindly as the sober are, whether they realize it or not. Their strength comes not from any bottle, but from their fellow humans and from within themselves, just as is the case with those of us who lack the need to drink. So let’s not patronize drunks by hurling epithets like “crutch” or “wino” at their object of salvation; they are engaging in a natural, ancient, deep-seated coping technique that, ultimately, is as functional as any other.
Or, put another way, just because someone thinks that talking to the sky fairy can help them, it doesn’t mean that they are in a better position. It certainly doesn’t mean that their belief isn’t putting them in a worse place. And it sure as hell doesn’t mean that their “solution” isn’t a blight on society.
Your comparison of religious belief (as a coping mechanism) to alcohol is rather problematic, IMHO. I don’t think it has even remotely been established that religious belief is a much a “blight on society” as is alcoholism. Make that case first, please, and then I might concede that you may have a point.
No. Why? This argument assumes God doesn’t exist. Do we need to have a “Is there a god!?” argument surrounding every potential religious debate? What purpose would it serve this thread to debate whether God exists or not?
Anyway, of course it’s a crutch. The entire point of believing a religion is to be able to mentally handle things that you couldn’t otherwise handle without relaxing your anxiety and lack of understanding and just letting warm fuzzy feelings wash over you. It’s a conflict created in the mind, and it can be solved by the mind - only rather than coming to terms with it, instead the person uses the warm fuzzies of whatever they want God to be as a crutch.
I guess you don’t know any Christian Scientists, and who knows how many other christian sects that don’t believe in medical treatment. Every couple of years a story makes the news when parents get prosecuted for letting their child die because they decided to rely on faith healing.
As to to OP, I’m not sure that "drawing strength is the best term. Perhaps they draw confidence or reassurance or some kind of serenity from their faith. I suppose it’s a matter of how you define strength.
Christian Scientists and other sects who reject medical treatment do not remotely exhaust the set of those humans who are religious, so my point stands.
I can’t speak for other atheists, but I don’t have an issue with it. People can pray and try to gather strength from any number of things I’m not interested in, and as long as they aren’t try to push it on me I’m fine to live and let live. I don’t get into a lot of debates about the existence of god, or the why’s and how’s of other people’s beliefs. I feel like that’s personal, and I have no need to “convert” anyone.
That said, I will jump into debates about separation of church and state, or religious fundamentalists trying to use their religion as a blueprint for how our society should be. I also feel free to criticize people like Michelle Bachmann, and other hypocrites like her. But the beliefs you have in your mind? Not my concern.