Incidentally, I am personally an agnostic weak atheist. I have no belief in gods but I don’t believe it’s possible to know they don’t exist.
What the fuck are you talking about? I haven’t seen anyone else besides you take a cheap shot like this. And if you have such a blatantly obvious disregard for me, you’ve never said shit to me about it. Hamadryad at least tactfully clarified her view in her last response post. But you? You’re just being an asshole. Got nothing to actually contribute to this besides below-the-belt punches? And you’re saying I’m not capable of deep thought. :rolleyes:
After more than 5,000 years of gods, goddess, creation myths, and religious figures, I think you are on safe ground asserting that humans tend to form supernatural beliefs.
Notwithstanding the accuracy of those beliefs, I think Moto’s correct about humans having some behaviours flashed to eprom, if not strictly hard wired.
Your daughter sounds pretty cool, Hama.
Amazon Floozy Goddess, switch to decaf. No one is attacking your heritage.
Jesus Christ.
Dictionary definitions are based on how terms are commonly used. Excuse me for using a word as it is commonly used and as it is defined in the dictionary, as opposed to using it as a technical term in formal philosophy. :rolleyes:
Seriously, just because a common English word may also have a technical meaning in a particular field, it’s not reasonable to expect everyone to use it only in that precise technical sense as opposed to the standard usage. “Atheist” is not purely a technical term.
Something can be religious without being a religion. I would think that by most common definitions of “religious”, whether or not God exists is a religious question.
But anyway, you’re just attacking semantics here. If you actually read everything I wrote, my meaning should have been perfectly obvious. Instead, you’re attacking what you think the words I said should have meant.
That analogy would only hold if I were talking about “lack of belief in religion.” And if “magical beliefs” actually were a term used to refer to a set of beliefs. If people talked about one’s “magical beliefs”, meaning beliefs about questions like “whether a rabbit can be pulled from a hat”, then it would make sense to call the belief that rabbits can’t be pulled from hats a “magical belief”. But no one talks like that, so the analogy isn’t applicable.
As to whether it’s offensive, I think the fact that you consider “religious” to be an insult is kind of insulting to those who are religious.
When I have my spiritual beliefs likened to fairy tales, like they have no significance, that sure seems like an attack to me. I have a right to take offense at that.
I personally have the opinion that ALL supernatural beliefs are nonsense. I have no control over that opinion. I can’t force myself to believe anything else. That doesn’t mean that I’m singling out one belief more than any other or that I can’t respect people who do hold those beliefs. I think you’re being too thin-skinned about this. Everyone is entitled to believe whatever they want and we are obliged to respect that right. But that doesn’t mean we have to respect the beliefs themselves.
There are no religious questions unless god (or some form of religion) is accepted as a given. That’s the problem with characterizing atheists as holding religious beliefs.
It strikes me as being similar to classifying “Is the world real, or am I imagining it?” as a physics question. (A weak analogy, but the best I could come up with. Can anybody help me out with a better one?)
Who said that fairy tales have no significance? Sounds like you might have some personal baggage you’re bringing into this.
I consider religious beliefs, myths, fables, and fairy tales to be synonyms. So what? I recognize that your beliefs have meaning to you, and that is a strength of yours, not a weakness.
While I consider the details of your belief to be mythological, I would characterize your beliefs as your method for tapping into your own inner strength, much like meditation for a Buddhist. Is that really an attack on your beliefs?
But it’s NOT an attack at you. Some people simply do believe that ALL religion is nonsense. It’s not about “the white settlers attacking Natives”, it’s just how they feel about religion in general.
You have a right to feel offended, I suppose. And I have the right to feel that you’re overreacting.
A cheap shot is too good for the likes of you. Don’t come in here with your hate speech and then act offended when someone calls you on it. The post you made that I quoted reveals quite clearly what gutter your mind is posting from, don’t expect me to give your racist views a free pass. :mad:
The bolding is mine.
That statement makes no sense at all. If I believe Christianity is true (there is no salvation other than through Christ) then by definition I must believe that all other religions are false. If I’m an atheist (which I am) then I believe that all religions are false. Saying that “varied religions all have their own worth and beauty” is to demote faith into just another cultural artifact, something quaint and colorful, but without real meaning.
If all religions are true then none are true.
I’d object to the use of the word “real”, and offer up “objective” or “universal” as alternatives.
It doesn’t matter what the specifics of your beliefs are, but if you have some way of drawing comfort in the bad times, then your beliefs have real meaning and value, regardless of whether or not the particulars are accurate.
Two people with mutually exclusive belief systems can both draw comfort from their beliefs, regardless if one or both of their belief systems end up being factually incorrect.
Basically, everyone has the capacity to make up whatever they want to provide this comfort. As an atheist, imagining eternal bliss isn’t how I would draw comfort when faced with the loss of a loved one. But then again, if I wanted to, I could imagine that anyway:
See, during the last moment of life, in the instant of death, the brain ceases the ability to process time, which translates into a near infinite dilation of the sense of time. Also, during this moment of death, endorphins (or whatever) in the brain get released which envelope the dying brain in joyous state of bliss, and due to the time distortion of their senses this momentary final experience is subjectively indistinguishable from an eternity in heaven.
I don’t really believe this, but I don’t fully disbelieve this either. When confronted by loss, I could certainly find comfort in it. What harm if it’s factually incorrect? Hell, I could determine it to be false and still draw comfort from it.
In the end, all questions of the unknown are answered by wishful thinking anyway. Trying to figure out which religion is objectively true seems to miss the point entirely. Much like being offended that somebody else considers your beliefs to be a load of hogwash is missing the point.
I am an atheist because I don’t credit any aspect of the human condition to any cause other than being human. We all have whatever (potential) strength we have just by virtue of being who we are. To offload the good things into the realm of god is to cheapen the human race, IMO.
AFG, a quick google came up with some basic starting points of native American spiritual beliefs: http://www.nhc.rtp.nc.us:8080/tserve/eighteen/ekeyinfo/natrel.htm
(bolding mine)
Can you see that to an atheist or an agnostic, this is no different from mainstream christianity or any other world religion? Creation myths, spirits, and souls. It’s all the same thing. They’re made up by man to explain, control, and comfort. Every religion’s got ‘em, and atheists ain’t buyin’ it.
Part of my OP here (unexpressed) was to pit the introduction of religion gratuitously and offensively into a thread that had little to do with religion but, instead, specifically and politely requested that religious issues be excluded from any responses:
“Any suggestions for how to talk to our daughter about [her teacher’s brutal murder]? ……my daughter is imaginative and sensitive and we’re anticipating that she’ll find it unsettling. BTW, we’re atheists, so if you have any advice please keep it secular in nature.”
Mr. Moto chose to disregard that polite request and responded (in its entirety) with this:
*“I understand that you are an atheist. However, your daughter might not necessarily be one, even at her age. Children don’t seem to be “wired” for atheism, it seems.
She may have questions about where her teacher “went”, especially if her classmates talk about heaven or an afterlife.
If she asks you about this, you have to answer her honestly as well, that you do not believe in a heaven, but other people do.”*
So let me speculate that if the OP was from a devout Christian, it might easily have read like this:
“Any suggestions for how to talk to our daughter about [her teacher’s brutal murder]? ……my daughter is imaginative and sensitive and we’re anticipating that she’ll find it unsettling. BTW, we’re deeply religious Christians, so if you have any advice please place it within that context?"
Now if Mr. Moto had responded to that polite request by writing
*“I understand that you are a Christian believer. However, your daughter might not necessarily be one, even at her age. Children don’t seem to be “wired” for Christianity, it seems.
She may have questions about where her teacher “went”, especially if her classmates talk about their doubts about heaven or an afterlife, or if they come from multi-cultural homes, or have vivid imaginations as many kindergartners do.
If she asks you about this, you have to answer her honestly as well, that you believe in a heaven, but other people don’t.”*,
I think his defenders, and Christians generally would have a real problem with that, and rightly so. Can’t you see the blatant hypocrisy here? If not, you’re ignoring the beam in your own eye while complaining bitterly about the mote in your atheistic brother’s eye.
Don’t assume, PRR. I have no problem with the second (fictional) scenario. My thoughts are that the girl will have questions. Period. Because she WILL hear things said. The parents can take as far as they wish, or they can choose to leave it all for a future time. But for you to assume that my acceptance of that part of Mr Moto’s post is somehow some sort of “blatant hypocrisy” because of your own preconcieved notions of religious people is as distasteful as some ultra fundie using the opportunity to attempt to convert the child aginst the parent’s wishes.
Think before you post. Not everyone fits into your predjudice.
Let’s see if all your co-religionists share your admirable tolerance for introducing atheism in a thread that explicitly asks for a Christian perspective.
Just like my SDMB atheist comment here earlier, here you will find more thinking. In other venues, you would likely be right. A lot of nonthinking of beliefes goes on out in the real world, religious or not.
And just for fun, a poll!
Who’s the athiest atheist?
Just to go on record, tho: Some few of the religious Dopers are as embarassing to critical thinking religionists as is Creationism. But, for the most part, I’ve seen some very rational debate about non rational topics in my time here. Of course, the crazy loud mouths stand out, as always.
Racist views? Hardly. It WAS hateful white settlers who told the Native peoples that their beliefs were wrong and bad. How the fuck is stating that racist? It’s history, you idiot. Look it up. Or would you rather pretend it never happened like some people try to deny the Holocaust?
Some soothing music surely would help.
Any suggestions?
Anyone?