Don’t skip down the thread yet until you’ve posted please! Other people’s reponses might ruin it.
Below you’ll see two spoiler boxed texts. I’d like you please to pick just one box, highlight it so you can read the text, and answer the following questions about it. Imagine that the text you are reading is a post made by a poster whose name you don’t recognise in the middle of one of the generic “is religion right?” debates in GD.
So, the questions;
Looking at the post, and imagining the context it is in, what would you say would be the likely mood of the person posting it? Do they seem happy? Annoyed? Condescending? Confident?
If all you could go on was that post, but it was a good example of their character, would you say that the person who wrote it seemed like a nice person?
How provocative would you say the post was? Does the poster seem to be spoiling for an argument at all? Is it a simple statement of belief?
Are you yourself a religious person? Would you characterise your faith as believing in a monotheistic god, believing in no gods, or other (so faith in a pantheon of gods, some forms of agnosticism, etc would be “other” as relates to this)?
Remember, highlight just **one ** spoiler box, please.
Sample Post 1;
[spoiler]I think what a lot of us are forgetting here is that God exists. The evidence exists to make it clear. So when we’re debating these issues, I think we need to give credit to the people who are willing to accept the truth and then debate the hypothethical situations where God doesn’t exist with the people who honestly but wrongly think that’s the actual situation.
As a final point, though, we have to remember that there is a loving God; and in the end that makes all debate academic.[/spoiler]
Sample Post 2;
[spoiler]I think what a lot of us are forgetting here is that God doesn’t exist. The evidence exists to make it clear. So when we’re debating these issues, I think we need to give credit to the people who are willing to accept the truth and then debate the hypothethical situations where God does exist with the people who honestly but wrongly think that’s the actual situation.
As a final point, though, we have to remember that there is no loving God; and in the end that makes all debate academic.[/spoiler]
Looking at the post, and imagining the context it is in, what would you say would be the likely mood of the person posting it? Do they seem happy? Annoyed? Condescending? Confident?
Eh - somewhat condescending, certainly confident.
If all you could go on was that post, but it was a good example of their character, would you say that the person who wrote it seemed like a nice person?
Nice? Not really. Not someone I would hang out witj/
How provocative would you say the post was? Does the poster seem to be spoiling for an argument at all? Is it a simple statement of belief?
Provocative? Certainly - that kind of statement would have Dopers screaming CITE in two seconds. Not spoiling for an argument at all - it’s a firm statement of belief as well.
Are you yourself a religious person? Would you characterise your faith as believing in a monotheistic god, believing in no gods, or other (so faith in a pantheon of gods, some forms of agnosticism, etc would be “other” as relates to this)?
I don’t know WHAT I believe - I can’t answer with putting myself in a category like you say above. Revenant, what’s up? I’m intrigued.
Looking at the post, and imagining the context it is in, what would you say would be the likely mood of the person posting it? Do they seem happy? Annoyed? Condescending? Confident? I would say that the person is being confident but arrogant because of their stipulation of the “reality” or “truth” being the same for everyone when it comes to experiential things. Religion is heavily tied into personal experience, IMO.
If all you could go on was that post, but it was a good example of their character, would you say that the person who wrote it seemed like a nice person? I wouldn’t necessarily say whether or not the person was nice, but I’d definitely think of them as one incapable of thinking outside of their own experiences.
How provocative would you say the post was? Does the poster seem to be spoiling for an argument at all? Is it a simple statement of belief? The person in question does appear to be stating their own belief, but in a way that tells the reader that any contrary opinion to this belief is wrong, IMO. Why? They’re speaking in absolute terms and not using phrases such as “I believe” or “I think.”
Are you yourself a religious person? Would you characterise your faith as believing in a monotheistic god, believing in no gods, or other (so faith in a pantheon of gods, some forms of agnosticism, etc would be “other” as relates to this)? I’m a polytheistic animist. Not overly religious, but not leaning towards agnosticism or atheism.
ETA: After posting this response, I looked at the other spoiler box. I would probably answer the same way for both statements, regardless of my personal beliefs.
I read spoiler #1. If you don’t mind, I would like to play along. (Don’t know how I stack up with the regulars around here.)
I did not detect any strong emotion, but the poster appears to have made up his/her mind on the subject, and is pretty much saying that they will not be convinced by arguments from the opposing point of view.
However, I can see how someone from the “opposing” point of view might see there post as somewhat dismissive or possibly condescending.
Honestly, I dont feel that there is enough there for me to make that kind of a final determination on their character. (They may be taking a “close minded” approach to a debate forum, but I don’t feel that makes them eeville.)
Appeared to be a simple statement of belief to me.
No, just dazed and confused.
I call myself “undecided”. I have never had a spiritual, supernatural, paranormal, or extra-terrestrial (UFO) experience. But I understand that that does not mean such stuff could possibly exist. I realise, and believe, the limits of my own intelligence, perception, and experience (especially since experience can shape future perceptions) prevent me from knowing all there is to know.
*I think what a lot of us are forgetting here is that God exists. The evidence exists to make it clear. So when we’re debating these issues, I think we need to give credit to the people who are willing to accept the truth and then debate the hypothethical situations where God doesn’t exist with the people who honestly but wrongly think that’s the actual situation.
As a final point, though, we have to remember that there is a loving God; and in the end that makes all debate academic.* …what would you say would be the likely mood of the person posting it? Do they seem happy? Annoyed? Condescending? Confident? Mostly condescending, albeit not necessarily to the party they’re currently addressing. Smug, perhaps. Confident, yes, I’d say that.
If all you could go on was that post, but it was a good example of their character, would you say that the person who wrote it seemed like a nice person? Not particularly. Too certain of their own infallibility to be likably nice.
How provocative would you say the post was? Does the poster seem to be spoiling for an argument at all? Is it a simple statement of belief? Since we are to assume the post was placed in a GD thread, the poster knows it would be read by the folks who do not believe in God, and its very smug condescension makes it provocative.
Are you yourself a religious person? Would you characterise your faith as believing in a monotheistic god, believing in no gods, or other (so faith in a pantheon of gods, some forms of agnosticism, etc would be “other” as relates to this)? Yes, I am. Other: pantheistic rather than poly or mono.
I picked box 2. I thought the post was pedantic and dismissive, but not angry or annoyed.
The person who wrote it could very well be kind to children, animals and old ladies, though I get the impression that this poster fancies him or herself to be someone who doesn’t suffer fools. An interesting person, maybe. Possibly a bit of a bully, though.
To me, Post #2 says, ‘look, we can pretend otherwise for the sake of this silly conversation, but in the end, it is a silly conversation.’ Not argumentative, but not conducive to sharing or debating ideas, either.
FWIW, I am an agnostic who also does not believe in a “loving God.”
Looking at the post, and imagining the context it is in, what would you say would be the likely mood of the person posting it? Do they seem happy? Annoyed? Condescending? Confident? Confident. Not quite condescending, but at least dismissive of the possibility that believers might be correct.
If all you could go on was that post, but it was a good example of their character, would you say that the person who wrote it seemed like a nice person? The person seems at least polite. There are none of the snideness or snarkiness that often embellishes similar statements.
How provocative would you say the post was? Does the poster seem to be spoiling for an argument at all? Is it a simple statement of belief? It seems a polite but possibly unreasonable attempt to define a debate in such a way as to diminish the status of the other side.
Are you yourself a religious person? Would you characterise your faith as believing in a monotheistic god, believing in no gods, or other (so faith in a pantheon of gods, some forms of agnosticism, etc would be “other” as relates to this)?** I am a Christian believer.**
Looking at the post, and imagining the context it is in, what would you say would be the likely mood of the person posting it? Do they seem happy? Annoyed? Condescending? Confident? The person seems condescending, though I don’t consider that a mood, but an attitude. The mood seems neutral, neither happy, sad, nor angry.
If all you could go on was that post, but it was a good example of their character, would you say that the person who wrote it seemed like a nice person? No, they do not seem nice, as neither condescension nor passive-aggressiveness (see answer below) are nice. But I really can’t judge someone on a single post. And “nice” isn’t all it is cracked up to be. It is certainly different from "good."
How provocative would you say the post was? Does the poster seem to be spoiling for an argument at all? Is it a simple statement of belief? **Spoiling for an argument, in a passive-aggressive sort of way.
Meaning that if called on it, the person would deny it, and impugn the motives of the one who called them on it. **
Are you yourself a religious person? Would you characterise your faith as believing in a monotheistic god, believing in no gods, or other (so faith in a pantheon of gods, some forms of agnosticism, etc would be “other” as relates to this)? ** I am an atheist, as I do not believe in any gods. I do not consider this faith, however.**
- Looking at the post, and imagining the context it is in, what would you say would be the likely mood of the person posting it? Do they seem happy? Annoyed? Condescending? Confident?
It seems that the hypothetical poster here is calm and happy to engage in a debate, but the comment comes off as incredibly condescending. Its not really condescending because of what it actually says, but more because of the context. The poster is openly addressing only one side of the debate and kind of ignoring everyone else while insulting them.
- If all you could go on was that post, but it was a good example of their character, would you say that the person who wrote it seemed like a nice person?
I would imagine that this person is generally nice, but incredibly sure of themselves and perhaps a bit stubborn. Not the kind of person that you could convince to change their opinion in a debate.
**- How provocative would you say the post was? Does the poster seem to be spoiling for an argument at all? Is it a simple statement of belief? **
I honestly would have no idea how to respond to the post, it seems to be implying that the poster thinks that the other side of the debate is populated mostly by devils advocates rather than people who honestly hold those views. So I wouldn’t say that it is provocative, just naive.
- Are you yourself a religious person? Would you characterise your faith as believing in a monotheistic god, believing in no gods, or other (so faith in a pantheon of gods, some forms of agnosticism, etc would be “other” as relates to this)?
I am in no way religious, straight up atheist.
Looking at the post, and imagining the context it is in, what would you say would be the likely mood of the person posting it? Do they seem happy? Annoyed? Condescending? Confident?
I do not think that pointing out that there is no God is condescending, although pointing out that everybody else believing otherwise is wrong, is. That boils down to civility.
If all you could go on was that post, but it was a good example of their character, would you say that the person who wrote it seemed like a nice person?
No I think not. All this post tells me is that this person does not believe in a God. Although pointing out that all believers are wrong seems supercilious, it could just be a bad choice of wording. I like to believe the best of my fellow beings until proven otherwise. One post does not cut the cheese.
*How provocative would you say the post was? Does the poster seem to be spoiling for an argument at all? Is it a simple statement of belief? *
Its provocative in that it states as a fact that believers are wrong. But then again being told one is wrong in any aspect can seem shocking. He admits to the academic excercise in discussing the topic, so I wouldn’t say he is spoiling the debate.
Are you yourself a religious person? Would you characterise your faith as believing in a monotheistic god, believing in no gods, or other (so faith in a pantheon of gods, some forms of agnosticism, etc would be “other” as relates to this)?
No, I’m not a religious person, since I am convinced that it all can be scientifically deducted. Even though there are lots and lots of processes in nature that are yet to be described, we are getting there. But thats what science is for, our tool to look at how things work and nourish our curiosity. There is no challenge in believing that a God is behind things.
Looking at post #2, What would you say would be the likely mood of the person posting it? Do they seem happy? Annoyed? Condescending? Confident?
Friendly and willing to continue the discussion. Not condescending at all.
If all you could go on was that post, but it was a good example of their character, would you say that the person who wrote it seemed like a nice person?*
Seems nice enough
*- How provocative would you say the post was? Does the poster seem to be spoiling for an argument at all? Is it a simple statement of belief? *
Not spoiling for a fight, just making a simple statement in a way that shouldn’t hijack the discussion at all
- Are you yourself a religious person? Would you characterise your faith as believing in a monotheistic god, believing in no gods, or other (so faith in a pantheon of gods, some forms of agnosticism, etc would be “other” as relates to this)?
Difficult question. IRL, that is my day to day activities, I’m an atheist. In situations where it’s easier to claim a religion than fight about, pantheistic as all get-out.
Sample Post 2;
[spoiler]I think what a lot of us are forgetting here is that God doesn’t exist. The evidence exists to make it clear. So when we’re debating these issues, I think we need to give credit to the people who are willing to accept the truth and then debate the hypothethical situations where God does exist with the people who honestly but wrongly think that’s the actual situation.
As a final point, though, we have to remember that there is no loving God; and in the end that makes all debate academic.[/spoiler]
I read #2. - Looking at the post, and imagining the context it is in, what would you say would be the likely mood of the person posting it? Do they seem happy? Annoyed? Condescending? Confident?
None of the above. Sounds like he’s trying to sound reasonable, but if he’s in GD and isn’t clueless, he’s being disingenuous about that.
- If all you could go on was that post, but it was a good example of their character, would you say that the person who wrote it seemed like a nice person?
No idea. There isn’t much I can learn about a person as a person on a board.
**- How provocative would you say the post was? Does the poster seem to be spoiling for an argument at all? Is it a simple statement of belief? **
In GD, saying you have a hangnail is provocative, so yeah, it’s provocative. The poster has got to be after a flame war, or he’s clueless. But I have said things very much like this among friends, where it’s not at all provocative.
- Are you yourself a religious person? Would you characterise your faith as believing in a monotheistic god, believing in no gods, or other (so faith in a pantheon of gods, some forms of agnosticism, etc would be “other” as relates to this)?
I’m Buddhist.
Slightly annoyed, certainly confident in what they believe.
** - If all you could go on was that post, but it was a good example of their character, would you say that the person who wrote it seemed like a nice person?**
Hard to say. It sounds like they could be trying to diffuse a situation, while also interjecting their beliefs as fact. I would probably go with nice but misguided.
** - How provocative would you say the post was? Does the poster seem to be spoiling for an argument at all? Is it a simple statement of belief? **
Somewhat provocative, certainly the person is wrong as they are outright claiming that their position is correct when there is no possible evidence one way or the other. I would say this is a person set in what they believe without any actual factual basis.
**- Are you yourself a religious person? Would you characterise your faith as believing in a monotheistic god, believing in no gods, or other (so faith in a pantheon of gods, some forms of agnosticism, etc would be “other” as relates to this)? **
Yes, I would be an other.
ETA-I read the first one. After finishing my comments on that one I read them both and my responses would have been the same for either.
I’ll take box #1, please.
**- Looking at the post, and imagining the context it is in, what would you say would be the likely mood of the person posting it? Do they seem happy? Annoyed? Condescending? Confident?**Confident and some arrogance, but possibly not consciously so.
**- If all you could go on was that post, but it was a good example of their character, would you say that the person who wrote it seemed like a nice person?**Partly it would depend on the context of the board. Here, it would come off as more arrogant than it would on a board where everyone belongs to the same religion and tries to encourage one another (I’m thinking of another board I belong to; such a post there would strike me as a little odd, but not strange as it would here). However, for SDMB purposes, I’m going to say no.
**- How provocative would you say the post was? Does the poster seem to be spoiling for an argument at all? Is it a simple statement of belief? **It’s more a statement of certainty; argument is not going to change anything here.
**- Are you yourself a religious person? Would you characterise your faith as believing in a monotheistic god, believing in no gods, or other (so faith in a pantheon of gods, some forms of agnosticism, etc would be “other” as relates to this)?**I am quite religious–Christian. However, I would also not write this post; I’ve always been very careful on this board to say that I believe certain things. People who confidently state one way or the other in religious arguments on a board like this annoy me, because it quite simply can’t be proven either way. I have personal experiences that lead me to believe one way, but those do not constitute proof for anyone but myself. So to state that God is proven one way or the other is silly IMO.
Read the other box too and say pretty much the same.
Looking at the post, and imagining the context it is in, what would you say would be the likely mood of the person posting it? Do they seem happy? Annoyed? Condescending? Confident?
They sound upbeat and confident.
If all you could go on was that post, but it was a good example of their character, would you say that the person who wrote it seemed like a nice person?
Yes, I’d give them the benefit of the doubt and say they seem nice enough.
How provocative would you say the post was? Does the poster seem to be spoiling for an argument at all? Is it a simple statement of belief?
Pretty provocative, since they are basically baiting non-theists, but that’s pretty unavoidable in discussions of this nature. They are couching it in non-aggressive terms, but they are still saying non-theists are flat-out wrong.
Are you yourself a religious person? Would you characterise your faith as believing in a monotheistic god, believing in no gods, or other (so faith in a pantheon of gods, some forms of agnosticism, etc would be “other” as relates to this)?
I am an atheist who believes in no gods, but I try (sometimes unsuccessfully) to keep my mind open. If someone had hard, duplicatable evidence of the existence of God(s) I would not have much trouble accepting it.
I’m always leery of following orders before I know what I’m getting into, but here goes:
I despoilered box #2 ( I’m sure that alone tells you what kind of freak I am!)
Looking at the post, and imagining the context it is in, what would you say would be the likely mood of the person posting it? Do they seem happy? Annoyed? Condescending? Confident?
Mood seems a bit annoyed, as though a pet peeve has been stimulated. I detect this mood a lot in this type of thread. I take it as a result of the never ending rethread.
If all you could go on was that post, but it was a good example of their character, would you say that the person who wrote it seemed like a nice person?
A nice person?? Posting in GD?? Never!
Nice enough though.
How provocative would you say the post was? Does the poster seem to be spoiling for an argument at all? Is it a simple statement of belief?
Statement, yes, and most likely a belief, but stating outright that there is no G-d is more like peeing in the pool than looking for an argument, IMHO.
Are you yourself a religious person? Would you characterise your faith as believing in a monotheistic god, believing in no gods, or other (so faith in a pantheon of gods, some forms of agnosticism, etc would be “other” as relates to this)?
I am a religious person and would have to say other.