# What's with the entrenched anti-religion groupthink around here? **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [December 22, 2008, 9:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-with-the-entrenched-anti-religion-groupthink-around-here/478365 "2008-12-22T21:01:29Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 15
**Author:** ![cosmosdan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a6a055/32.png) [@cosmosdan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cosmosdan)\ **Post date:** [December 25, 2008, 5:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-with-the-entrenched-anti-religion-groupthink-around-here/478365/281 "2008-12-25T17:37:38Z")
> [@Stratocaster](#): > > No, I’ll leave it to the discerning reader to determine for himself how it was used in an obviously dismissive manner in this thread. Your clarification for Kalhoun makes my point, though interestingly you think otherwise. I didn’t write the dictionary or define the word. It appears to me that you misunderstood arbitrary from the get go. I can’t speak for everyone but I didn’t use it in a dismissive manner. I pursued it for the sake of accuracy. Having _reasons_ for believing as we do does not mean our beliefs are not arbitrary. IMO It’s an important point to consider. Understanding the influence of our own preference and discretion helps keep us open to learn and set aside beliefs when the learning and growth process asks us to. ---
**Author:** ![SmartAleq](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/smartaleq/32/163_2.png) [@SmartAleq](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SmartAleq)\ **Post date:** [December 25, 2008, 5:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-with-the-entrenched-anti-religion-groupthink-around-here/478365/282 "2008-12-25T17:44:26Z")
> [@Stratocaster](#): > > No, I am not going to play that game. I’m not interested in arguing Christianity versus Scientology. I am merely pointing out the self-evident observation that one could do so, whatever position one happened to hold, and that argument need not be arbitrary. You are asserting otherwise, which is silly on its face, unless we accept the unprovable base assertion of many in this thread (which I won’t repeat yet again). You know, this sounds an awful lot like “I won’t go there because I know I can’t defend my position adequately.” The question posed is “assume you know nothing of either Christianity or Scientology and you run across the base documentation for both–what objective criteria would you use to decide that one or the other is valid” and it’s a very fair question. What, precisely, is more “right” about the bible than “Dianetics?” Aside from your (arbitrary) belief that one is the word o’god and the other is claptrap? I realize you don’t like the word “arbitrary” and it offends your sense of the rightness of your position, but seriously there is no OBJECTIVE reason to choose one set of religious dogma over any other aside from personal preference and subjective belief that one is more “right” than the others. Using the word “arbitrary” to describe the method by which people choose religion and also to describe the initial genesis of those religions is absolutely accurate–sorry if you’re offended by the use of a completely correct word but there it is, and you’re not doing a very good job of arguing your position. ---
**Author:** ![Kalhoun](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/3bc359/32.png) [@Kalhoun](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kalhoun)\ **Post date:** [December 25, 2008, 5:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-with-the-entrenched-anti-religion-groupthink-around-here/478365/283 "2008-12-25T17:47:56Z")
> [@cosmosdan](#): > > I think you missed the part where I agree that beliefs are arbitrary. Including my own. Including your own as well. > It seemed that those objecting to the term were thinking of only one definition of the word that alluded to a momentary whim off no real significance. Arbitrary has a broader meaning. People have reasons for certain beliefs and religions have criteria and traditions. It’s not all momentary shallow whim, but it is arbitrary nonetheless. I’ll agree that in terms of religion, they are often not arrived at on a momentary whim (though sometimes they are), but they’re still of no real significance, regardless of how long it took you to make your choice. There is no way of measuring the validity of any choice, except by way of your personal opinion. If you want to call that god, fine. But it isn’t the all-governing god that society defines the word as. It only matters to you. A less misleading term for that is “conscience.” ---
**Author:** ![devilsknew](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/4da419/32.png) [@devilsknew](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/devilsknew)\ **Post date:** [December 25, 2008, 5:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-with-the-entrenched-anti-religion-groupthink-around-here/478365/284 "2008-12-25T17:57:05Z")
> [@cosmosdan](#): > > I think you missed the part where I agree that beliefs are arbitrary. Including my own. Including your own as well. > It seemed that those objecting to the term were thinking of only one definition of the word that alluded to a momentary whim off no real significance. Arbitrary has a broader meaning. People have reasons for certain beliefs and religions have criteria and traditions. It’s not all momentary shallow whim, but it is arbitrary nonetheless. I think a famous zen buddhist koan declaring your [Original Face](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Original_face) would be contemplative in this case, for all involved …not singling **cosmodan** out, here… “What did your face look like before your parents were born?” It digs deep to the arbitrary. Most of our social, economic, religous, and legal traditions are all based on and handed down by ancient and modern arbiters of the arbitrary and pernicious schizophrenias of society. ---
**Author:** ![cosmosdan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a6a055/32.png) [@cosmosdan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cosmosdan)\ **Post date:** [December 25, 2008, 5:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-with-the-entrenched-anti-religion-groupthink-around-here/478365/285 "2008-12-25T17:59:46Z")
> [@Kalhoun](#): > > I’ll agree that in terms of religion, they are often not arrived at on a momentary whim (though sometimes they are), but they’re still of no real significance, regardless of how long it took you to make your choice. There is no way of measuring the validity of any choice, except by way of your personal opinion. If you want to call that god, fine. But it isn’t the all-governing god that society defines the word as. It only matters to you. A less misleading term for that is “conscience.” that’s your arbitrary opinion is it? ---
**Author:** ![cosmosdan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a6a055/32.png) [@cosmosdan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cosmosdan)\ **Post date:** [December 25, 2008, 6:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-with-the-entrenched-anti-religion-groupthink-around-here/478365/286 "2008-12-25T18:01:33Z")
> [@devilsknew](#): > > I think a famous zen buddhist koan declaring your [Original Face](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Original_face) would be contemplative in this case… > > “What did your face look like before your parents were born?” > > It digs deep to the arbitrary. > > Most of our social, economic, religous, and legal traditions are all based on and handed down by ancient and modern arbiters of the arbitrary and pernicious schizophrenias of society. Interesting. Thanks for the input. ---
**Author:** ![coffeecat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/coffeecat/32/3405_2.png) [@coffeecat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/coffeecat)\ **Post date:** [December 25, 2008, 6:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-with-the-entrenched-anti-religion-groupthink-around-here/478365/287 "2008-12-25T18:06:54Z")
> [@cosmosdan](#): > > I didn’t write the dictionary or define the word. It appears to me that you misunderstood arbitrary from the get go. I can’t speak for everyone but I didn’t use it in a dismissive manner. I pursued it for the sake of accuracy. > > Having _reasons_ for believing as we do does not mean our beliefs are not arbitrary. IMO It’s an important point to consider. Understanding the influence of our own preference and discretion helps keep us open to learn and set aside beliefs when the learning and growth process asks us to. If by “arbitrary” you mean “subject to individual discretion,” I agree, religion, like all matters of opinion, is arbitrary. That’s not what all your co-irreligionists meant by it. **Q.E.D.** said something about throwing darts at a dartboard. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [December 25, 2008, 6:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-with-the-entrenched-anti-religion-groupthink-around-here/478365/288 "2008-12-25T18:11:38Z")
Incidentally, if the OP’s premise was correct and there was some kind of aggressive cadre of atheists on this board, I’d’ve thought after six pages we’d see something like [this](http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/warriorshtm/howlers.htm). That we have not, I figure, is sufficient counter-evidence. ---
**Author:** ![coffeecat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/coffeecat/32/3405_2.png) [@coffeecat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/coffeecat)\ **Post date:** [December 25, 2008, 6:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-with-the-entrenched-anti-religion-groupthink-around-here/478365/289 "2008-12-25T18:13:02Z")
> [@Kalhoun](#): > > Well, maybe I’m missing something, but I think those definitions are precisely what everyone has been pointing to in this thread. It’s personal preference, based on nothing but what sounds good to the chooser. You don’t like the jew thing with the baths and separate dishes (maybe it just doesn’t fit into your daily schedule) so you go with something less demanding of your personal time and energy. Arbitrary. It has nothing to do with the rightness or wrongness of a set of religious beliefs. It’s what you personally can pencil into your daytimer. People have been tortured to death rather than change their faith, you know. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [December 25, 2008, 6:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-with-the-entrenched-anti-religion-groupthink-around-here/478365/290 "2008-12-25T18:13:06Z")
> [@coffeecat](#): > > **Q.E.D.** said something about throwing darts at a dartboard. What’s the minimum degree of reverence he need have shown? ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [December 25, 2008, 6:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-with-the-entrenched-anti-religion-groupthink-around-here/478365/291 "2008-12-25T18:18:27Z")
> [@coffeecat](#): > > People have been tortured to death rather than change their faith, you know. Some people confident in their faith have tortured others to death, you know. Both facts are of questionable reverence. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [December 25, 2008, 6:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-with-the-entrenched-anti-religion-groupthink-around-here/478365/292 "2008-12-25T18:30:25Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > Both facts are of questionable reverence. Ahem, I meant _relevance_, of course. ---
**Author:** ![coffeecat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/coffeecat/32/3405_2.png) [@coffeecat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/coffeecat)\ **Post date:** [December 25, 2008, 6:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-with-the-entrenched-anti-religion-groupthink-around-here/478365/293 "2008-12-25T18:44:16Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > What’s the minimum degree of reverence he need have shown? Reverence has nothing to do with it. It means he was using “arbitrary” to mean “coming about seemingly at random.” And the death-by-torture thing is relevant to **Kalhoun** ’s contention that people choose their religion based on what fits in their daytimer. Death by torture would wreck _my_ schedule. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [December 25, 2008, 6:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-with-the-entrenched-anti-religion-groupthink-around-here/478365/294 "2008-12-25T18:54:32Z")
> [@coffeecat](#): > > Reverence has nothing to do with it. I know, but a lack of reverence is being used as an argument point, i.e. our irreverence shows our bias. Putting aside all imagery of darts, let me ask this: suppose someone advances a religious idea that came to him after ten years of meditation. Suppose someone else advances a contradicting religious idea that came to him after twenty years of meditation. Is the amount of mediation each person put in indicative in any way of the relative merit or truth of their ideas? For that matter, compare a religion that has been around in a more-or-less consistent state for ~2000 years (albeit with numerous internal disputes and divisions) with one that has been around for ~40 years. Are these amounts of time indicative of anything? Can they be used to compare merit or truth? ---
**Author:** ![SmartAleq](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/smartaleq/32/163_2.png) [@SmartAleq](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SmartAleq)\ **Post date:** [December 25, 2008, 7:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-with-the-entrenched-anti-religion-groupthink-around-here/478365/295 "2008-12-25T19:00:02Z")
> [@coffeecat](#): > > Reverence has nothing to do with it. It means he was using “arbitrary” to mean “coming about seemingly at random.” > And the death-by-torture thing is relevant to **Kalhoun** ’s contention that people choose their religion based on what fits in their daytimer. Death by torture would wreck _my_ schedule. Well, randomness is very much a function of perception. The more information one has the less random something is likely to seem. To someone who does not include religion as part of their basic cognates, the actions of the religiously minded do appear very random and extremely arbitrary. Nothing pejorative about it, it’s just the way it looks to us, sorry. I hear similar comments from the religious about atheists, FTR. It’s a function of cognitive dissonance on a fundamental level. And if torture would wreck your schedule, you’re much more likely to choose an inoffensive religion that doesn’t go in for drama and controversy. Someone with a strong need to be persecuted in order to bolster their self image is more likely to join a minority fringe religion that pisses people off. Someone else who needs lots of tiny rules for every facet of life joins the JW’s or becomes a Catholic or the like. So yes, all religions are chosen by how well they suit the needs of the individual, which can include how much time you have or are willing to spend at it. If you want one hour a week, be an Episcopalian–being an evangelical or a JW or a Muslim is going to require a heavier time commitment. ---
**Author:** ![cosmosdan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a6a055/32.png) [@cosmosdan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cosmosdan)\ **Post date:** [December 25, 2008, 7:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-with-the-entrenched-anti-religion-groupthink-around-here/478365/296 "2008-12-25T19:31:53Z")
> [@coffeecat](#): > > If by “arbitrary” you mean “subject to individual discretion,” I agree, religion, like all matters of opinion, is arbitrary. That’s not what all your co-irreligionists meant by it. **Q.E.D.** said something about throwing darts at a dartboard. Yes, that’s what I mean since it is part of the definition of arbitrary. I have no co-irreligionists. Let’s not lump posts together and assume different posters are expressing the same idea. BTW throwing darts at a dartboard doesn’t mean you don’t have a goal in mind. The analogy doesn’t have to mean “who cares and it doesn’t matter” My point here was to point out the arbitrary content of all belief systems religious and non religious. I wasn’t trying to diminish anything. ---
**Author:** ![FinnAgain](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/finnagain/32/12500_2.png) [@FinnAgain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FinnAgain)\ **Post date:** [December 25, 2008, 7:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-with-the-entrenched-anti-religion-groupthink-around-here/478365/297 "2008-12-25T19:34:12Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > One can impart the ethical and philosophical desire to make the world a better place without also saying we do so to please God, though. I was never taught it was to please God, but that it was my responsibility as a human being. ---
**Author:** ![coffeecat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/coffeecat/32/3405_2.png) [@coffeecat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/coffeecat)\ **Post date:** [December 25, 2008, 9:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-with-the-entrenched-anti-religion-groupthink-around-here/478365/298 "2008-12-25T21:26:19Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > I know, but a lack of reverence is being used as an argument point, i.e. our irreverence shows our bias. Some people will call you irreverent–or irrational, evil, or insane, for that matter–if you do anything but agree with them. Fuck 'em. For the rest, politeness is nice. People are more apt to listen to reason when they’re not pissed off. Even a rationalist might decide that someone who never learned that, didn’t learn much else from the wolves who raised him, and it’s not worth the effort of listening while gritting your teeth just in case he does have a good idea. It’s OP deja vu all over again. > [@](#): > > Putting aside all imagery of darts, let me ask this: suppose someone advances a religious idea that came to him after ten years of meditation. Suppose someone else advances a contradicting religious idea that came to him after twenty years of meditation. Is the amount of mediation each person put in indicative in any way of the relative merit or truth of their ideas? No, the ten-year prophet might just be faster. > [@](#): > > For that matter, compare a religion that has been around in a more-or-less consistent state for ~2000 years (albeit with numerous internal disputes and divisions) with one that has been around for ~40 years. Are these amounts of time indicative of anything? Can they be used to compare merit or truth? I think the older religion has a little bit of an edge, because garbage, in any field, tends to fall by the wayside with time. If you’re wondering how I _would_ judge a religion: by asking, is it reasonable? Is it moral? Does it agree with my experiences? (And remember, some of a believer’s experiences may be experiences of God.) Does it make me think, “Oh yeah, that’s right! I never saw that before!” Just like any system of thought. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [December 25, 2008, 10:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-with-the-entrenched-anti-religion-groupthink-around-here/478365/299 "2008-12-25T22:15:15Z")
Can this thread get moved to GD yet? ---
**Author:** ![JThunder](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/e95f7d/32.png) [@JThunder](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JThunder)\ **Post date:** [December 25, 2008, 11:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-with-the-entrenched-anti-religion-groupthink-around-here/478365/300 "2008-12-25T23:19:10Z")
> [@Kalhoun](#): > > It’s personal preference, based on nothing but what sounds good to the chooser. And what evidence have skeptics provided to demonstrate that this is how religionists choose their beliefs? **NONE.** Zero, zip, nada. Rather, they simply assert it to be true, even as they accuse advocates of religion of believing things without evidence. I, for one, did NOT choose my religious beliefs “based on nothing but what sound[ed] good.” Heck, transcendental meditation sounded mighty appealing to me, as did various aspects of Buddhism. Instead, I choose evangelical Protestantism because I concluded that this position was the most defensible one based on historical and philosophical grounds. Heck, if I were to go by what sounds good, atheism would be _extremely_ appealing to me. Why submit yourself to a god if you don’t have to? I reject atheism, however, precisely because I do NOT consider it to be logical or supportable. Look, if you’re going to denounce advocates of religion for believing in things that they cannot prove, then you had better avoid making overly broad claims that you cannot prove either. I don’t doubt that you can find _some_ religious folks who believe for no particular reason, just as you’ll find atheists who employ careless reasons for rejecting theism. If you’re going to place this fault at the feet of religion in general though, you need to do much more than simply assume it to be true. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-with-the-entrenched-anti-religion-groupthink-around-here/478365.md?page=14) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-with-the-entrenched-anti-religion-groupthink-around-here/478365.md?page=16)