are you an atheist?

I just have a problem with how critical thinking isn't applied to religion. Lots of people that believe in that stuff would never believe in other things that have the same exact standard of evidence

the space that religion inhabits has been shrinking steadily. a logical conclusion would be that one day, MAYBE, it will inhabit no space

re: "why do you think that is?"...because I think overall religion is a negative force in the world. I would be happy to see it go.

― A True White Kid that can Jump (Granny Dainger), Tuesday, February 11, 2014 5:32 PM Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

And this is exactly the kind of statement that you could never fully back up with scientific evidence, even if you could set up clear, objective parameters for what is meant by "overall a negative force in the world" which you can't

I don't think anyone believes science will answer every question.

xp

My whole focus here was on the misleading nature of subjective experience and how that relates to the explanatory aspects of religion. Going "well people 'believe' for other reasons" is a retort for an entirely different conversation.

man is there anything you can't suck all of the fun out of

― Lesbian has fucking riffs for days (Neanderthal), Tuesday, February 11, 2014 5:29 PM (6 minutes ago) Bookmark

sorry for sucking the fun out of acid reflux for u

actually, it's the conversation we were having when you showed up in the thread

that's why I put the words "I think" in there

It would be a better world if critical thinking were applied in not just religion but everywhere else.

and how was that conversation going? "oh hai did you guys know some people get emotional benefits from believing in a supernatural creator?" "oh no way? seriously? link please??"

xp
Then to be blunt surely if there will always be gaps in what we can know then there will always be room for religion.

And this is exactly the kind of statement that you could never fully back up with scientific evidence, even if you could set up clear, objective parameters for what is meant by "overall a negative force in the world" which you can't

What would the world be like without science? Would we all be running around naked eating vegetables and living to 200?

I don't think anyone believes science will answer every question.

this was kinda the beginning of the whole discussion - the lacuna between the neurology + the content, one ultimately accessible and the other not?

sorry for sucking the fun out of acid reflux for u

― Mordy , Tuesday, February 11, 2014 5:38 PM Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

is there like a bat signal that you respond to

(ftr, I not only know what reflux is, but have regurgitated in my sleep many times as a result of it.....)

then wtf are you talking about if u have personal experience? it feels like someone splashing acid against the inside of your chest.

- Bob Marley

Xp

actually, it's the conversation we were having when you showed up in the thread

Then myself and Evan showed up and started talking about explanatory stuff. keep up, pal!

Then to be blunt surely if there will always be gaps in what we can know then there will always be room for religion

Eh I don't think religion is going anywhere bit this is kinda question-beggy; i.e. assuming that "religion" (if we can even agree on what we mean by that - surely it means something other than just "not-science") will remain among the set of potential gap-fillers.

while we're being all 'durrrrrrr' theologically faith doesn't often rest on proof; sometimes faith despite evidence to the contrary is praiseworthy, etc.

otm

It would be a better world if critical thinking were applied in not just religion but everywhere else.

― Emperor Cos Dashit (Adam Bruneau), Tuesday, February 11, 2014 5:38 PM (9 minutes ago)

Agreed!

Does the knowledge of how a film is actually made prevent you from getting engrossed in the story? Like do you sit there going "that's an over-the-shoulder shot -- he's not even in the same room as Nicole Kidman and that's the back of a double's head"?

sometimes faith despite evidence to the contrary is praiseworthy, etc.

yep, it's a totally irrational way of thinking, we're in agreement

Are you saying you've never engaged in such?

where all my alchemy believers at!??!

― A True White Kid that can Jump (Granny Dainger), Tuesday, February 11, 2014 10:23 PM (28 minutes ago) Bookmark

Feel like alchemists can look back at the US retitling the first Harry Potter film as "The Sorcerer's Stone" as the moment when they were truly relegated to irrelevancy

Are you saying you've never engaged in such?

Did I say that? Lemme check...nope, I didn't.
Sure I have. And I would hope that when such instances are pointed out to me, I would agree they were irrational.

we're in agreement that it's irrational, we're not in agreement about the exclusivity of rationality

Like the other day, I BELIEVED my brakes would allow me to stop from 75mph to make an exit. They, in fact, were not capable of such a thing. It was somewhat irrational for me to think they would. Next time that situation occurs, I will not believe the same thing again.

we're in agreement that it's irrational, we're not in agreement about the exclusivity of rationality

I think you're thinking I'm saying "apart from religious thought, no person ever acts irrationally". Obviously that is false (scientifically-proven to be!). However, religion is "safe" from the checks science can make on its claims. Studies can show how going outside in the cold while wet doesn't actually cause a cold...a mechanic or engineer could've presented me evidence beforehand that, dude, you're not gonna be able to stop. Thus, irrational behaviors made in the specific (ie by single persons, groups of people, acting in the real world) can be exposed as irrational under the glare of scientific inquiry.

it sounds like you're trying to argue that belief in god insulates itself against charges of irrationality by being unknowable (unlike whether you can stop your vehicle). being non-falsifiable maybe needs a term other than irrationality, but even if you say belief in god is irrational - who cares? so let it be irrational. god is also supposed to be paradoxical + ultimately unknowable so it's all cool.

like i have way more problem w/ some scientifically explicable god (or even the concept of it - i don't like the 'god particle' re hoggs boson for this reason) than a scientifically utterly knowable god

unknowable i mean in that final clause

it's irrationality, I have no problem with. How could I? people maintaining that it is rational, that I have a problem with.

the ether is supposed to be unknowable to. if it cannot be measured or observed, if it matters none whether one believes in it or not, then what's the point of it? oh, it provides emotional succor. Ok cool, but I find it a bit condescending to be a nonbeliever and view believers to be dependent on such a thing. "aww they're so cute with their irrational beliefs, but hey they'd be a total wreck without it." Sets the bar low for humanity imo.

its irrationality not it's

other means of explanation may not pass scientific scrutiny, but that doesn't mean they've failed on their own terms.

― CANONICAL artists, etc., etc. (contenderizer), Tuesday, February 11, 2014 3:50 PM (8 minutes ago)

Like what?

― Evan, Tuesday, February 11, 2014 1:01 PM (2 hours ago)

depends on the means, right? if a spiritual belief system purports to describe purely supernatural (metaphysical, w/e) aspects of ostensible "reality", then the success or failure of that system can't be evaluated scientifically. science doesn't concern itself with the supernatural/metaphysical, with things that can't be observed and measured. science doesn't decisively deny such things, it simply ignores them as non-germane.

the belief system itself, however, can still be evaluated on own terms. does it seem to work? does it offer useful insight into spiritual matters (however such things might be constructed)? does it satisfy the needs & square with the perceptions of perceptions of those that employ it?

Or even, what does it tell about the culture that gave birth to it? What morals are most important? How are stories structured? Why do they decorate their houses the way they do?

by those criteria, a sugar pill is an effective treatment for a multitude of conditions. which in a way, it is...but it is not having any direct effect on any symptom or cause. same with religion.

bitcoins are a self-consistent thing, and can be thought of as a spiritual belief system, but once it interacts with our "real" world, we have something approaching a duty to debunk it.

i don't think the value of believing in god is that you get emotional relief. maybe it's true, but it's secondary. the value of believing in god is that you get to have a relationship w/ god.

the value of believing in smurfs is you get to have a relationship with smurfs.
uh ok?

yep u got it

"i've created this little thing in my head i call god, and we can chat"...how is this different from insanity?

very strong links in canonical texts between insanity + prophetic vision

smurfs are a race engineered by the evil scientist yakob gargamel!

if you really and truly did believe that smurfs existed and could be spiritually apprehended, then sure, by believing in them you might be able to gain access to some kind of relationship w them. ur hypothetical has unclear parameters tho.

like i try to stay pretty lucid so i can work + take care of my kids but it's not like i'm uninterested in extreme psychologically atypical religious experiences

it's not like i'm uninterested in extreme psychologically atypical religious experiences

by those criteria, a sugar pill is an effective treatment for a multitude of conditions. which in a way, it is...but it is not having any direct effect on any symptom or cause. same with religion.

― A True White Kid that can Jump (Granny Dainger), Tuesday, February 11, 2014 3:26 PM (6 minutes ago)

sugar pills can have a real & valuable effect. to elevate blood sugar or make things taste sweet or w/e. if you proceed from bedrock assumption that any belief that can't be scientifically validated is not worth having, then sure, the belief in god seems unsustainable. but i don't personally accept that intelligent, reasonable, "sane" people are obligated to proceed from that point.

well you're the one who got all worried about insanity + irrationality xp

ur hypothetical has unclear parameters tho.

there's something else similar that has "unclear parameters"