I get the impression that this board is one that promotes skepticism and rational thinking. Question for you: why do you think that honest, well-meaning skeptics will debunk many unfounded superstitions but steer away from the belief in God? I’ve been in many discussions where the person claiming “I see ghosts” or “Aliens are sending spaceships to watch us” is quickly dealt with, but when the boast is “I know there’s a God” the supposed skeptics hem and haw, saying “well, we can’t know either way.” This never made sense to me.
Have you actually been reading this board?
Because, unlike astrology or cold reading, belief in God is not falsifiable.
Fine then. Prove there is no god.
I think there’s a difference between “I KNOW there’s a God,” and “I BELIEVE in God.” I think that anyone who tries to assert as fact that God exists does get the full “skeptic” treatment.
Belief in God, in itself, is so nebulous and unfalsifiable that there isn’t much point in trying to attack it. What does tend to get attacked (at least by me) is specific claims about supernatural influences on the physical universe. That includes stuff like psychics and ghosts but also includes such things as miracles or demonic possession which are more religious in nature.
“I believe in God” is not worth arguing with. “God can miraculously work through faith healers” is a specific claim about the physical universe which can be challenged.
I can pretty easily prove that prayer does no good. But that’s not an indication of whether there’s a god, of course.
To answer the OP, I think it has to do with the fact that we are a diverse community, and generally try to respect each other. Despite that, we get plenty of threads where the issue is argued endlessly.
But I for one am glad for the diversity. It keeps us generally polite. I’m a member of another board where probably 99% of the posters are atheists. The theists that frequent there tend to be off-the-scale loony, but the few who aren’t don’t often get a fair shake. Any mention of the remote possibility of a god is met with a pile-on of the cruelest and unthinking sort.
Beliefs are different than facts, and must be treated as such. The belief in God, or the equivilent, is for believers a central core of their being; one not to be attacked without the expectation of a firm resistance and argument. Combine this with the simple fact that there is no quatifiable way to prove or disprove the existence of God, “skeptics” see no profit in an extended argument on the matter.
Ghosts and alien visitors can, on the other hand, be quantifiably and systematically disproven, as can most “miracles” and other things (like prayer as noted on preview by tdn) associated with God.
So you believe everything that hasn’t been proven false? You admit that the Flying Spaghetti Monster may very well exist?
To expand on what other people have said:
Religions are belief systems, not isolated beliefs. Some aspects of most religions are falsifiable and some are not. If you debunk the falsifiable parts believers just retreat into the the non-falsifiable parts.
After a while you realize that it’s pointless to try to reason someone out of an irrational belief.
I was talking about skeptics in general. I’m not that familiar with this board yet.
Not that I disagree with you, but I would be interested in hearing your argument. What if the aliens have the Romulan cloaking technology?
Sorry people, didn’t expect the conversation to move so fast. I’m going to have to be away for awhile but I’ll be back later in the day.
I see someone’s been reading Richard Dawkins. Good on you, mate.
Sorry, that was the wrong response. Let me try again.
Of course! It all makes sense now! Evolution is true, and God’s a flying spaghetti monster! It’s so simple!
Well, there are worse things to do with my time than read Richard Dawkins. I see that you have been watching Comedy Central! Kudos.
I don’t think believers do get any sort of pass, and certainly not here. But there is a real difference between beliefs and claims made, and I think most skeptics get that. That doesn’t mean we don’t occasionally needle believers at bit, but hey, they needle us too, and I think that as long as it’s just between non-believing skeptics and religious moderates, it’s all in good fun.
I don’t think you’ll find too many skeptics around here who would disagree with on on principle about the lack of demonstrable difference between belief in God and belief in Romulans, elves, the Invisible Pink Unicorn, etc. I also don’t think you’ll find that many who would seriously consider the existence of God to be a strong possibility. It’s merely acknowledged as a technicality, that God cannot be falsified. That means it’s not a subject that lends itself well to critical analysis without specific claims, and beyond that, it’s not worth ruffling feathers or insulting people who express belief or faith but do not make falsifiable claims or insist that anyone else believe the same thing.
My point is simply that if you think you’re going to convince a theist that there is no god by trotting out the tired old “But what about the flying spaghetti monster?” routine, you’re not going to have a lot of success.
Around here, we have a few posters who are hostile to religion and attack belief in God any chance they get. We also have a far larger number of atheists and agnostics, some of which are perfectly willing and able to argue against religious beliefs, others of whom take a “live and let live; if they want to believe, it’s fine with me” approach. We also have quite a few knowledgeable and eloquent believers.
Challenges to religion come up pretty frequently around here. One of the most recent is here: Why do we believe in God, when there is no scientific evidence of its existance.
I think the reason why some people tend to be “gentler” when face-to-face with a religious believer is because there are emotional issues involved. Someone who believes in ghosts or UFOs doesn’t generally derive comfort or support from it in the same way people do with religion. In other words, I may debate with my mother as to why what she saw wasn’t a ghost, but I’m not about to argue with my grandmother that her dead children aren’t waiting for her in heaven.
Regardless of the reasons, or lack there of, many many highly intelligent people believe in god. Even if they can’t prove god’s existence, they still do. I believe that this opinion must be respected however nonsensical it may seem to me. And oftentimes, these people are also those who you respect on most other matters. I give my father as an example. He is a scientist to his very core. He is one of the most intelligent people I have ever known. I take everything he believes seriously. So while I may disagree on his belief in god, I still have to respect it.