# Mr. Moto, are you out... **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [January 19, 2006, 3:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mr-moto-are-you-out/340661 "2006-01-19T15:42:39Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![tim314](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tim314/32/3468_2.png) [@tim314](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tim314)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2006, 5:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mr-moto-are-you-out/340661/41 "2006-01-19T17:27:34Z")
> [@Excalibre](#): > > No, it’s not. :rolleyes: I’m quite tired of this. Don’t you understand the most basic principles of logic? The fact that there’s no evidentiary way to prove that God doesn’t exist is meaningless - if there’s no evidence _for_ a concept, it’s irrational to believe in it. First of all, what the hell? I’m _defending_ teaching atheism on the grounds that it deserves the same standing as teaching religion, and you come in and act like I’m _attacking_ atheism. I think you missed my point. Second of all, I think you’re wrong anyway. I am familiar with the principles of logic. In fact, there are many systems of logic, not all of which need be applicable to the real world. _Deductive_ logic doesn’t contain any principle of the form “it’s irrational to believe something without evidence.” Other systems of logic may, but which of these systems should be considered to apply to the real world is the subject of much debate. (Why do you think there’s a branch of philosophy called “logic”?) Furthermore, what evidence do you have for the assertion that it’s irrational to believe something with no evidence one way or the other? None, I suspect – it’s your opinion. My opinion is that it’s irrational to believe something _in spite of significant evidence to the contrary._ Moreover, I’d say it’s irrational to believe something _for no reason._ But if someone’s gut intuition tells them there’s a God (for example), then I’d say trusting that intuition (which has given them verifiably correct conclusions with regard to other matters) isn’t irrational, given that they have no evidence to the contrary. Hell, I’d say that’s the same reason I believe that the data received by my senses corresponds to a physical reality – I don’t have any evidence that it does, but my gut feeling is “the world is real.” I’m going to believe that until presented evidence to the contrary. (Note: I’m not saying people _should_ believe things based solely on their gut feelings, only that to do so is, in my opinion, not irrational – and I certainly don’t think there’s universal concensus that it is.) But, this is a huge digression: the point of my comment was to suggest why someone would want to instill atheism in their kids. (which you said you didn’t understand) My answer was that it’s for the same reason that someone wants to teach their kids religion – they’re passing on their beliefs. But if you _already_ think belief in God is irrational, then why the hell wouldn’t you understand someone wanting to steer their kid away from an irrational belief? ---
**Author:** ![tim314](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tim314/32/3468_2.png) [@tim314](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tim314)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2006, 5:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mr-moto-are-you-out/340661/42 "2006-01-19T17:34:53Z")
> [@Waverly](#): > > No, he said you have to be honest, and gave an example of such honesty. It does not follow that other approaches are inherently dishonest. You assume this part because you had a knee jerk reaction to what you perceived as a theist imposing their views. For example, it would be equally honest, if not in the child’s best interest, to say, “Gosh, I really don’t know where your teacher went, and it isn’t possible to know.” That’s sound agnosticism, but maybe not the way to handle an upset child. > > I’m no theist, and I still don’t have a problem with what Moto said. I would, in fact, do the same. To me, Mr. Moto’s statement seems to pretty clearly imply that he considers mentioning heaven a necessary component of an honest response. If he should clarify that that isn’t what he meant, then I’ll withdraw my criticism. ---
**Author:** ![Kalhoun](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/3bc359/32.png) [@Kalhoun](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kalhoun)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2006, 5:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mr-moto-are-you-out/340661/43 "2006-01-19T17:36:22Z")
> [@FilmGeek](#): > > I agree with Moto. Not “your teacher is in heaven now” but when or if the kid says “did teacher go to heaven” with tears in her eyes, afraid it might not be so, I don’t see a problem with saying “yes, I bet she did”. The same as if she said “is teacher living with santa and the easter bunny now?”. > > This is about making a little girl not afraid, not about teaching beliefs, theological or not. Any atheist who did this would be copping out like six ways from Sunday. You make it sound as if the truth is some sort of child abuse. They’re not made out of bone china fercrissakes. Tell the kid no, she’s dead now but you can always remember how much you liked her and how she helped you to learn to read or whatever. This fear of upsetting children…I just dont get it. ---
**Author:** ![pseudotriton\_ruber\_ruber](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/a9a28c/32.png) [@pseudotriton\_ruber\_ruber](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pseudotriton_ruber_ruber)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2006, 5:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mr-moto-are-you-out/340661/44 "2006-01-19T17:37:53Z")
> [@Mr. Moto](#): > > This isn’t a debate I wish to get into too deeply. I’ll just bet you don’t. ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Moto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9de0a6/32.png) [@Mr.Moto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Moto)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2006, 5:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mr-moto-are-you-out/340661/45 "2006-01-19T17:44:37Z")
> [@tim314](#): > > To me, Mr. Moto’s statement seems to pretty clearly imply that he considers mentioning heaven a necessary component of an honest response. If he should clarify that that isn’t what he meant, then I’ll withdraw my criticism. First of all, I would not bring it up at such a time. I would only be prepared to answer questions about it. And the answers I would have would be that some people do believe in heaven, and some of her friends probably believe in it. I would explain to her that it wasn’t a belief that Mommy and Daddy had, for whatever reasons that was. I would clarify what those beliefs were, and answer whatever questions were asked. Above all, I would stress that it was okay for different people to believe different things. I wouldn’t press her for her beliefs at this point, but I would let her know that whatever they were, they were okay ones to hold. ---
**Author:** ![tim314](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tim314/32/3468_2.png) [@tim314](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tim314)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2006, 5:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mr-moto-are-you-out/340661/46 "2006-01-19T17:52:08Z")
> [@Mr. Moto](#): > > First of all, I would not bring it up at such a time. I would only be prepared to answer questions about it. > > And the answers I would have would be that some people do believe in heaven, and some of her friends probably believe in it. I would explain to her that it wasn’t a belief that Mommy and Daddy had, for whatever reasons that was. I would clarify what those beliefs were, and answer whatever questions were asked. > > Above all, I would stress that it was okay for different people to believe different things. I wouldn’t press her for her beliefs at this point, but I would let her know that whatever they were, they were okay ones to hold. In that case, I don’t see anything objectionable about that position. In fact, that’s basically the same thing I’d do. ---
**Author:** ![scr4](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/59ef9b/32.png) [@scr4](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/scr4)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2006, 5:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mr-moto-are-you-out/340661/47 "2006-01-19T17:52:08Z")
> [@tim314](#): > > First of all, what the hell? I’m _defending_ teaching atheism on the grounds that it deserves the same standing as teaching religion, and you come in and act like I’m _attacking_ atheism. I think you missed my point. You are claiming atheism is just another religion. Most atheists would consider that an attack on atheism, or at least a profound misunderstanding of what religon is. ---
**Author:** ![FilmGeek](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/b19c9b/32.png) [@FilmGeek](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FilmGeek)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2006, 6:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mr-moto-are-you-out/340661/48 "2006-01-19T18:04:51Z")
Oh spare me. I never said to lie (when it comes to death, what is the truth anyway? I’ve got an open enough mind that if heaven exists, neat. I may not believe, but I’m not arrogant enough to assert that I KNOW THE TRUTH no matter what I believe) to the kid, and I never in any way implied child abuse. ---
**Author:** ![tim314](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tim314/32/3468_2.png) [@tim314](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tim314)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2006, 6:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mr-moto-are-you-out/340661/49 "2006-01-19T18:09:55Z")
> [@scr4](#): > > You are claiming atheism is just another religion. Most atheists would consider that an attack on atheism, or at least a profound misunderstanding of what religon is. No, I’m claiming that belief that there is no God is a _religious belief_. I even took the time to _define_ what I meant by a religious belief, namely a belief about a religious question (as opposed to a scientific question.) Claiming that belief in the non-existence of God is a religious belief (as I defined the term) doesn’t imply that atheism is a religion. In fact, I never said “atheism is a religion”, nor do I think that it is, since religions have other components that atheism lacks (e.g., traditions, rituals, etc.) In my further comments, I made the point that I don’t consider belief in God any more irrational than belief that there is no God. Are you seriously telling me that most atheists would be offended by someone claiming that belief in God is _not irrational_? I don’t see how this can be considered an attack on atheism (nor was it intended as such) – rather, it’s a defense of theism _against_ the accusation that it’s irrational. ---
**Author:** ![scr4](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/59ef9b/32.png) [@scr4](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/scr4)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2006, 6:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mr-moto-are-you-out/340661/50 "2006-01-19T18:20:38Z")
> [@tim314](#): > > In my further comments, I made the point that I don’t consider belief in God any more irrational than belief that there is no God. Are you seriously telling me that most atheists would be offended by someone claiming that belief in God is _not irrational_? No, I am offended by your claim that belief in God is equally rational. In the absense of evidence, the only rational action is to not believe it. ---
**Author:** ![eleanorigby](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/ee7513/32.png) [@eleanorigby](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/eleanorigby)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2006, 6:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mr-moto-are-you-out/340661/51 "2006-01-19T18:26:18Z")
> [@Revenant Threshold](#): > > As you’ve said before, Mr. Moto, you live in a vastly non-secular country. It’s unsurprising that a majority of kids believe in a soul. > > If you want to prove it’s hardwired? You’re going to have to find cases where children were pretty much left alone completely until they were 10 or so. I don’t think there are that many (banning Genie as the obvious one) and I don’t recall any study looking at her religious beliefs. I could be wrong, though. But there are no "Blue Lagoon"s on Earth. It’s been awhile since anthropology for me, but I do remember learning that a belief structure of some kind was a delineation of any human group-in contrast to animals that may well work together for a common good. Primitive people had burial rituals, made sacrifices to whatever gods they believed in etc. I think that the impulse to believe in the supernatural is a fairly fundamental one. Note that I am not defending the merits of any particular religious construct at all. Nor am I saying that such is a requirement to be human. Believing that in some way, a dead person is looking out for you, over you, goes to a reward, whatever, is an understandable impulse when faced with grief or sudden death. Especially for a 5 year old, who most likely still plays pretend–the pink unicorn is very real to 5 year olds. (Not THE pink unicorn, but pink unicorns in general.) What is not to understand here? So, if we apply that knowledge to the fact that this little girl may well have questions re her teacher’s death-- it is no big jump in logic, and certainly no disrespect to atheism, to state that this little girl may need some info re religious beliefs, given the societal structure that she is in. Or is this the time to tout the “superiority” of atheism? Is this the time to ridicule other’s beliefs? I don’t understand the drive to NOT allow discussion of meta-physics (at whatever level) in such a case as this. If I were this kid, and Daddy told me that Mrs D is rotting in the ground and never more shall she be–I’d think, hell no! Or maybe I’d think, cool! Or gross! Who knows? But on the chance that kidlet MAY have more questions, the broaching of the subject is not out of line. Loss is difficult for all, but can be hardest on kids. Now, I seriously doubt that this kid has suffered any real trauma from this, given the short period of time she knew the teacher, but shouldn’t we be looking at how to assist the kid in coming to terms with this? And if that way differs significantly from her peer group’s, shouldn’t that be addressed? IMO, any atheist who insists on Their Way as the only Way is as bad as an religious person insisting that Their Way is the only Way. BOTH deserve condemnation and criticism for their intolerance. (I am not saying that the OP is any way evincing the above rigid traits. I am just speaking to the topic). ---
**Author:** ![Hamadryad](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/6de8d8/32.png) [@Hamadryad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hamadryad)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2006, 6:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mr-moto-are-you-out/340661/52 "2006-01-19T18:27:03Z")
> [@scr4](#): > > No, I am offended by your claim that belief in God is equally rational. In the absense of evidence, the only rational action is to not believe it. Exactly. Not to mention, to an atheist it’s NOT the answer to a religious question, because religion is a null concept. If I think apple pie is vile no matter which apple pie you offer me, you really can’t expect me to tell you which one is my favorite. ---
**Author:** ![EddyTeddyFreddy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/eddyteddyfreddy/32/18796_2.png) [@EddyTeddyFreddy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/EddyTeddyFreddy)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2006, 6:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mr-moto-are-you-out/340661/53 "2006-01-19T18:28:42Z")
**Mr. Moto** , you are a graceless ass. [**Pochacco** has replied to you](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=7013563&postcount=51), making it clear what she thinks of your comments. Do you apologize? Hell, no. Instead you graciously inform her: > [@Mr. Moto](#): > > Pochacco, since you have a good handle on that aspect of that, I won’t bring it up any further in this thread. How thoughtful of you, you condescending twit. ---
**Author:** ![Crotalus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/crotalus/32/41_2.png) [@Crotalus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Crotalus)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2006, 6:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mr-moto-are-you-out/340661/54 "2006-01-19T18:37:52Z")
> [@EddyTeddyFreddy](#): > > **Mr. Moto** , you are a graceless ass. [**Pochacco** has replied to you](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=7013563&postcount=51), making it clear what she thinks of your comments. Do you apologize? Hell, no. Instead you graciously inform her: How thoughtful of you, you condescending twit. Geez, why all of this venom toward **Mr. Moto**? The OP in the other thread requested that any further debate on what **Moto** suggested be confined to this Pit thread, he praised (it seemed to me) her handling of what she told her child, and agreed to comply with her wish to refrain from debating it further in her thread. Condescending twit? Sheesh. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Hamster\_King](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/8edcca/32.png) [@The\_Hamster\_King](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Hamster_King)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2006, 6:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mr-moto-are-you-out/340661/55 "2006-01-19T18:44:33Z")
FWIW, I’m a guy. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2006, 6:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mr-moto-are-you-out/340661/56 "2006-01-19T18:47:43Z")
> [@FilmGeek](#): > > I never said to lie (when it comes to death, what is the truth anyway? I must have misunderstood, then. You said: > [@](#): > > I agree with Moto. Not “your teacher is in heaven now” but when or if the kid says “did teacher go to heaven” with tears in her eyes, afraid it might not be so, I don’t see a problem with saying “yes, I bet she did”. If you don’t bet that she did go to heaven, then you would have lied by saying that. Obviously if you are sincere in such a statement, then you’re not lying–but then you’re also not **Pochacco**. 🙂 My problem is not with people who honestly tell their kids that they believe someone went to heaven. My problem is with people who do not believe in heaven but who lie about their beliefs to their children. I think that’s a very poor idea. Daniel ---
**Author:** ![Crotalus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/crotalus/32/41_2.png) [@Crotalus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Crotalus)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2006, 6:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mr-moto-are-you-out/340661/57 "2006-01-19T18:49:54Z")
> [@Pochacco](#): > > FWIW, I’m a guy. Sorry, dude. I formed that misconception based on absolutely no evidence. ---
**Author:** ![Polycarp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/82dd89/32.png) [@Polycarp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Polycarp)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2006, 6:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mr-moto-are-you-out/340661/58 "2006-01-19T18:56:03Z")
> [@scr4](#): > > No, I am offended by your claim that belief in God is equally rational. In the absense of evidence, the only rational action is to not believe it. I happen to agree with your second statement. I consider your opinion expressed in the first sentence a graceless and condescending claim to your being the Purveyor of Absolute Truth on a par with the most egregious of self-righteous evangelists. Because I and my co-religionists weigh the evidence that may or may not point to the existence of a God differently than you does not make your opinion about that evidence right and ours wrong. The egotism of a typical fundamentalist and the egotism of a typical atheist are about on a par, IMO. And my apologies to any fundamentalists and atheists who happen to believe in freedom of religion and don’t issue supercilious ukases of this sort. ---
**Author:** ![tim314](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tim314/32/3468_2.png) [@tim314](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tim314)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2006, 6:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mr-moto-are-you-out/340661/59 "2006-01-19T18:59:13Z")
> [@scr4](#): > > No, I am offended by your claim that belief in God is equally rational. In the absense of evidence, the only rational action is to not believe it. As I have said, I disagree with this view about what is or isn’t rational. (see my comments above) But furthermore: I’m not a religious person (i.e., I’m not affiliated with any religion). While I believe that there is some sort of god, I acknowledge the opposite belief (that there is no God) to be equally rational. I acknowledge that I _might_ be wrong about whether or not God exists, and atheists might be right. Furthermore, I think atheism is _at least as rational_ as any religion, and _more rational_ than some. I doubt you could find a theist with a more positive view of atheism. And yet, you’re saying that because I refuse to condemn belief in God as irrational, you’re offended by me. Not that you merely disagree with me, but that you actually _take offense_ at the fact that I don’t consider a belief contradictory to yours to be irrational. If this is the case, you must be offended by virtually every theist on the face of the earth. In which case, I think you’re absurdly thin-skinned. I’m not even saying you’re _wrong_ about whether or not God exists; I’m just saying “I don’t think all the people who disagree with you are being irrational.” > [@Hamadryad](#): > > Exactly. Not to mention, to an atheist it’s NOT the answer to a religious question, because religion is a null concept. If I think apple pie is vile no matter which apple pie you offer me, you really can’t expect me to tell you which one is my favorite. I’m not sure what you mean by a “null concept.” Surely atheists acknowledge religion exists; they just think those beliefs are wrong. It’s not my intent to imply that religion is _more appropriate_ for answering the question of whether God exists than atheism. I’m using “religious question” to mean that it’s not the sort of question that can be settled by examining empirical evidence. (I.e., you can’t do an experiment to prove whether or not God exists.) If you think I’ve made a poor choice of words for conveying this, fine, feel free to suggest a better one. But that’s just a matter of semantics. ---
**Author:** ![Amazon\_Floozy\_Goddess](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/779978/32.png) [@Amazon\_Floozy\_Goddess](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Amazon_Floozy_Goddess)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2006, 7:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mr-moto-are-you-out/340661/60 "2006-01-19T19:10:10Z")
From the MPSIMS thread: > [@Pochacco](#): > > We’ve had many talks with our kids about other peoples’ supernatural beliefs. **We’ve told them that people like to tell stories about gods and magic and while some of these stories have good things to teach us, they’re not true.** Bolding mine. You’ve already taught her the wrong thing by saying this. My parents taught me that people all over the world have different religions. They didn’t preach whether they were right or wrong; they just left it at that. I was raised Catholic, but my parents respected me enough to show me the way they believed, but to leave the ultimate decision of my faith up to me. I’m part Native and have chosen to follow that path now. You have no place saying that my beliefs are “not true”. How would you know? You’re not omnipotent, and neither am I. I wouldn’t presume to tell you your beliefs weren’t true, just as I wouldn’t presume to tell a Muslim, Jew, Buddhist, etc. Varied religions all have their own worth and beauty and are one of the things show just how wonderful humanity can be. To say that someone’s religion is “not true” is squashing that, and it exhibits ignorance. This is how wars get started. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mr-moto-are-you-out/340661.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mr-moto-are-you-out/340661.md?page=4)