On the SDMB, why do atheists and theists have to be such utter dicks to each other?

The BBQ Pit
141

[QUOTE=pseudotriton ruber ruber]
Well, they’re rational up to a point, beyond which all theists (that I’ve met) tend to make claims of a subjective, or irrational, or contradictory nature that effecftively squelches the conversation. “Tell me, Dr. Felsenstein, now that we’re done discussing brain surgery, why it is that you feel so strongly that God necessarily exists?” will not, in my experience, yield a rational answer, though the conversation up to that point may have been exceedingly rational.
[/quote]

You have made a perfectly good argument worthy of debate; in fact, I don’t really disagree with what you say here. It is not an argument that Trihs makes. There are no such qualifications in anything he says. And have you forgotten that in addition to calling them “irrational,” he also calls them stupid and immoral? And murderous?

And on this, prr, you and I are 100% in agreement.

142

[QUOTE=Malacandra]
It’s more like “People who hold religious beliefs, which I consider irrational by definition, are therefore irrational on an indeterminate number of other points as well”, which needs only to be articulated fully to be shown up for the nonsense it is. To give you a for-instance, I believe in God, which I fully acknowledge to be not susceptible to scientific proof, but when it comes to crossing the road, I rationally look both ways; I do not trust to faith to ensure that the way is clear.
[/QUOTE]

Here is the rub, though. Many, if not most, religious folk do not consider their religious beliefs irrational-- they will insist that it is rational, even if it’s “not subject to scientific proof”. Those of us who don’t agree begin to suspect that they don’t even understand the meaning of the term, and question whather anything they say or do has rational basis.

However, as I said about my own beliefs regarding religion in post #89, I do understand there are people who can be irrational in relation to theism, and still rational in other ways. I know it is possible, though I do not understand how it is possible.

143

I believe that the key to understanding the issue is not to look at it as Faith vs. Logic, but more like differing philosophies.

For example, in the last year or so, I became what most would consider a pacifist. I have had discussions with people who strongly disagree with that philosophy, but it has never turned into a heated debate. While that could be attributed to my refusal to participate in an argumentative way, I attribute much of it to a mutual understanding that our difference in philosophy is not religious or political, and that we’re really not that different otherwise.

[QUOTE=Boyo Jim]
I do understand there are people who can be irrational in relation to theism, and still rational in other ways. I know it is possible, though I do not understand how it is possible.
[/QUOTE]

This is a good example of “respectful disagreement.” You can state that you find the belief irrational, and not resort to juvenile insults. This is the kind of discussion I crave. The only trouble is that it’s a lot like sitting under a warm light on a cool summer night, it’s nice at first but eventually the bloodsuckers show up.

144

[QUOTE=Malacandra]
It’s more like “People who hold religious beliefs, which I consider irrational by definition, are therefore irrational on an indeterminate number of other points as well”, which needs only to be articulated fully to be shown up for the nonsense it is. To give you a for-instance, I believe in God, which I fully acknowledge to be not susceptible to scientific proof, but when it comes to crossing the road, I rationally look both ways; I do not trust to faith to ensure that the way is clear.
[/QUOTE]
And does your religion tell you not to ? No. Because if it did, you’d march into the road without looking and die, or sit around moaning about how terrible a person you are for looking before crossing. As long as whatever a person is doing hasn’t been spoken on by their religion, believers can sometimes act rationally; but as soon as they hit something involving their religion their judgement shuts off.

[QUOTE=Linty Fresh]
But for all his ground-standing, he never once offers an alternative. It’s always “Believers are this” or “Believers are that,” but he never seems to come up with anything better.
[/quote]
“Don’t believe that nonsense” doen’t count ?

[QUOTE=Linty Fresh]
It’s easy to call an entire group stupid. The hard part is proving it. And he never even tries. He just kind of stands there and says the same damned thing over and over again, and it always seems to come back to “Believers are stupid, because they’re stupid.”
[/QUOTE]
Either you haven’t been listening to me, or you are lying. I’ve pointed out again and again that they are foolish because what they believe at best, has NO evidence for it, and usually outright contradicts both fact and logic. That IS stupid, like it or not. If they want to claim that their beliefs deserve respect, then the believers should come up with some evidence, and with claims that don’t contradict reality.

I call them the same things I would anyone else with their record of denying reality, and making crazy claims with zero evidence. I’m simply applying the same rules of judgement to everyone, instead of giving religion the pass I’m supposed to.

145

[QUOTE=Der Trihs]
I call them the same things I would anyone else with their record of denying reality, and making crazy claims with zero evidence. I’m simply applying the same rules of judgement to everyone, instead of giving religion the pass I’m supposed to.
[/QUOTE]

Very noble. Now if only you’d apply them to yourself . . .

146

[QUOTE=JRDelirious]
… nothing brings out the inner dick like the certainty that You Have Truth, Right and Good on your side, while They Are Wrong, Evil (or just Dumb) and Harmful.
[/quote]

If I’m reading this right, it’s all the fault ogf the theists ? The capitalization suggests facetiously, presumed divine inspiration.

147

[QUOTE=Q.E.D.]
So, all those cross-burning Klansmen are burning crosses because that T-shape has the best pyrological properties?
[/QUOTE]

So now all Christians are supposed to be affiliated with the KKK because they proclaim they are Christian?

Nice BIG broad brush, that. And complete nonsense, and you know it. The KKK has like what, a few thousand members anymore? Twenty thousand? They are ridiculed as a fringe group of a bygone era, and rightly so…they are racist assholes that in no way represent the mainstream of modern Christianity.

148

[QUOTE= Der Trihs]
I call them the same things I would anyone else with their record of denying reality, and making crazy claims with zero evidence.
[/QUOTE]

Yeah, but you’d only do it on the internet, not because theists are stupid like you claim, but because you don’t want to deal with the consequences of being a dick.

No one would kick your ass because you’re an atheist, but I wouldn’t bet on the same safety based on your being a dick.

149

I don’t know, man. The bible says nothing about abortion or gay marriage, but some christians can be pretty irrational about those.

150

[QUOTE=eleanorigby]
But (dredges up old file from college sociology and anthropology) man is a social and a spiritual creature.
[/QUOTE]

Man is a social animal and is afraid of death. He wouldn’t be spiritual if there was no death. Pretty much all this spirit stuff, all the religions, are about what happens after you’ve kicked the bucket. It is nothing more than that. Once we figure out how to cure death, people will be able to leave it in the past. And, frankly, if all the money that went to religions now were spent in finding the cure, then a person wouldn’t have to worry about seeing their daughter in the afterlife as she wouldn’t be there.

[QUOTE= Dangerosa]
The conservative religions get all the press - they are defining the terms of the debate. And we are giving them that when we don’t emphasize the middle and define everything as ends of the spectrum.
[/QUOTE]

Say the Magical Pink Unicorn tells us we must love everybody and kill our enemies.
You decide that you will only follow the love our enemies part. The more fundamentalist types decide that they will follow the second part (and pay lip service to the first part). Which one is right? Well, you can’t tell which one is right because the whole thing is based upon what is written in the book and nothing more. Just because the majority follows the first part doesn’t make the fundamentalists wrong about the second part.
So, as an outsider to your religion how do I counter the fundamentalists (so that I don’t end up dead)? I can argue that the religion is make believe, but you get upset about it and start telling us all the good works you’re religion has done. Maybe so, but what are you doing to ensure that I don’t get smitten by the people who follow your same religion? Have you changed your holy book to ensure that there can be no contradictions and to marginalize the few nutbars? Nope. So, what should I do now? It is YOUR religion, after all, that allows the fundamentalists to interpret your book the way they do. They don’t grow in a vacuum.

151

[QUOTE=Don’t Call Me Shirley]
I don’t know, man. The bible says nothing about abortion or gay marriage, but some christians can be pretty irrational about those.
[/QUOTE]
“Bible” and “Christianity” are only loosely connected.

[QUOTE=Happy Scrappy Hero Pup]
Yeah, but you’d only do it on the internet, not because theists are stupid like you claim, but because you don’t want to deal with the consequences of being a dick.

No one would kick your ass because you’re an atheist, but I wouldn’t bet on the same safety based on your being a dick.
[/QUOTE]
It’s amusing how often I get this argument. “We’re a bunch of thugs, therefore we’re right and you’re wrong !” Despite all the babbling about Christian morality, scratch a Christian’s civilized facade and you’ll find a bully.

Of course, it’s not like you could counter my demand for evidence by actually producing any. A fundamental problem with defending a lie.

152

[QUOTE=Der Trihs]
And quite often it’s “poisoned gifts” they are giving. “Gifts” given in concert with destructive lies, or used to coerce people into converting, or simply useless. Being religious, they don’t actually care about the welfare of others; they are concerned with pushing their religion.[/qoute]

Oh c’mon, are you even serious? Christian values dictate a selfless giving of oneself to benefit the welfare of others, a value that is often derided because it’s fucking HARD to do and it’s easier to default into a stage of “I don’t feel like it”, but yet I still fucking care! And the issue you seem to have with prosletyzing is probably valid, but I for one would knowingly lie my ass off to a generous religious organization and pay lip service to a God I didn’t believe in if I was fucking starving. This leaves aside the fact that you enormously overrate the amount of religious “pressure” on poor peoples that embrace actual aid.

Dude, call it stupid to believe in a God, but don’t call the hard work to help people that happen to be fucking Christian evil. You’re just way off base, and a man of your supposed intellect should know better. Or at least have the good grace to co-exist with people whom in your superiority deign to be beneath you simply because they believe in God.

Honey and vinegar and all.

[QUOTE=Der Trihs]
No, it’s mostly changed style, and much more importantly lost a lot of power. It’s no nicer, and it’s only goal it the same goal it’s always had; push Christianity down the collective throats of the world.

Because they are the defining feature of religion. They keep it alive, control it’s agenda, reflect it’s core values.
[/QUOTE]

Changed style? And exactly how do you expect any beaurocratic organization to make immediate changes to suit you?

I think that the community at large gets it with you, likely agrees in principle with most of your ideals, but cannot share them due to their idealistic nature or due to the vitriol with which you adhere to them.

153

Whoops. Fucked that all up. Damn.

154

Damn, I’m late to this party. Have to admire PZ Myers for this. Offensive, sure, but most reality checks are.

[QUOTE=Darkhold]
Of course there’s this subset of atheist that’s just an asshole that has a hard-on because they’ve seen the light so to speak. They usually end up pissing me off because they make me look bad in the process.
[/QUOTE]

Hey. Bummer about the making you look bad thing but just to set this straight I don’t get hard-ons (because that would be weird). My penis just tingles.

155

[QUOTE=FoieGrasIsEvil]
**Oh c’mon, are you even serious? Christian values dictate a selfless giving of oneself to benefit the welfare of others, a value that is often derided because it’s fucking HARD to do and it’s easier to default into a stage of “I don’t feel like it”, but yet I still fucking care!
[/quote]
“Christian values”, to the extent the phrase even has meaning, largely consists of pushing Christianity down as many throats as possible, not helping people. The only “welfare” they care about is the welfare of the soul, which is imaginary.

[QUOTE=FoieGrasIsEvil]
And the issue you seem to have with prosletyzing is probably valid, but I for one would knowingly lie my ass off to a generous religious organization and pay lip service to a God I didn’t believe in if I was fucking starving.
[/quote]
Which shows how coercive Christian “charity” is, and how little it has with actual charity.

[QUOTE=FoieGrasIsEvil]
Changed style? And exactly how do you expect any beaurocratic organization to make immediate changes to suit you?
[/quote]
How about stop lying and spreading bigotry ?

[QUOTE=FoieGrasIsEvil]
I think that the community at large gets it with you, likely agrees in principle with most of your ideals, but cannot share them due to their idealistic nature or due to the vitriol with which you adhere to them.
[/QUOTE]
No. Most of the community is religious, and therefore cares little or nothing for the real world or real people. They are concerned with maintaining their fantasy, at any cost, to themselves or others.

156

[QUOTE=I Love Me, Vol. I]
It seems you’ve got the road-crossing thing down. If you could just figure out some method for rationally looking both ways before believing in things that do not exist (objectively speaking) then you would be peachy.
[/QUOTE]

And when you are able to prove that God does not exist, I shall cease to believe in Him upon the instant. However, to draw a parallel I’ve mentioned before, it is impossible from inside the Matrix to conduct any experiment that will establish that you are a figment of a computer’s imagination, and you can’t perform any tests on the Programmer without the Programmer’s cooperation, which he is able to extend or withdraw exactly as and when He sees fit. So as far as the eternal verities are concerned, I accept that I must use other tools - and merely be grateful that the world around me is largely rational and consistent enough for my poor brain to manage.

Incidentally, I was only providing a rebutter to the implied statement that someone who is irrational about anything must be irrational about everything, and not seeking to establish my own peachiness, but thanks for your gratuitous judgment, which certainly ran counter to the assertion that atheists and theists go around being dicks to each other all the time.

157

[QUOTE=Der Trihs]
And does your religion tell you not to ? No. Because if it did, you’d march into the road without looking and die, or sit around moaning about how terrible a person you are for looking before crossing.
[/QUOTE]

Would I? And where’s your evidence for how I would behave, Captain Scientific Rationality? :dubious:

158

[QUOTE=Malacandra]
And when you are able to prove that God does not exist, I shall cease to believe in Him upon the instant.
[/QUOTE]
Just curious, but what exactly would you accept as evidence?

Besides God Himself appearing before you and saying, “I shall now cause Myself to cease to exist!”, of course.

159

[QUOTE=Malacandra]
And when you are able to prove that God does not exist, I shall cease to believe in Him upon the instant.
[/QUOTE]

If I make the claim that the flying spaghetti monster is living in my garage, it is up to me to show it to you, not you to disprove that it is there. Let’s at least agree to the ground rules. Because if this was any other debate about anything other than religion, say if I said that I have the fastest car in the world in there, you’d be expecting us to follow this rule and expect me to prove that I do, wouldn’t you?

160

Could someone help me prove that the tooth fairy doesn’t exist? If I can’t, Malacandra will be forced into believing in it!