|
TEAYCHES posted:Yeah like most people in the world. Wait let me guess, you don't get out much and jack it to cartoon ponies. True fact : If you look at the etymology of "gullible", it comes from the German "Gott liebe" which means "Love God"
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 18:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 07:17 |
|
|
Flowers For Algeria posted:True fact : If you look at the etymology of "gullible", it comes from the German "Gott liebe" which means "Love God" :thatsmileywiththepoppingeyes:
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 19:30
|
|
|
Flowers For Algeria posted:True fact : If you look at the etymology of "gullible", it comes from the German "Gott liebe" which means "Love God" And here I thought gullible wasn't in the dictionary.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 20:13
|
|
|
Who What Now posted:Not currently having an explanation is not an excuse to just make poo poo up. I think that one big reason for this* is that we frequently see scenes like this in media (movies, tv, books, etc): Guy who is portrayed as Good looks wistfully into the distance after experiencing paranormal phenomenon: "Heh, I guess there's just some things science can never explain." And conversely people who are skeptical of paranormal phenomenon are often portrayed in a negative light. Basically what I'm saying is that people generally want to have positive images of themselves, and they compare those images to what they see in media. So because a person has been told that "guy wistfully talking about the mysteries of the universe" is Cool and Good, they also want to mimic that sort of behavior. *I'm more specifically talking about people who use this rationale to justify their belief in the paranormal, not the belief itself
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 20:44
|
|
|
Flowers For Algeria posted:True fact : If you look at the etymology of "gullible", it comes from the German "Gott liebe" which means "Love God" hosed up but true.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 20:46
|
|
|
Ytlaya posted:I think that one big reason for this* is that we frequently see scenes like this in media (movies, tv, books, etc): This is literally the dynamic of Mulder and Scully. So you're not wrong with how things are portrayed in most media.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 20:52
|
|
|
Who What Now posted:This is literally the dynamic of Mulder and Scully. So you're not wrong with how things are portrayed in most media. Sun comes up, sun goes down.Tides roll in, Tides roll out. You can't explain that.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 20:54
|
|
|
Cakebaker posted:Can't speak for that dude but outside of the elderly I've only really encountered actively religious people in America and the developing world. so the parts of the world that aren't rapidly dying off, cool
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 22:10
|
|
|
atheism is like any other disease, at first it seems virulent but over the generations people will build resistance to it and then it will go away
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 22:11
|
|
|
Of course atheism is a choice. One must choose to think past the fallacies which beget the concept of supernatural beings and arrive at the only rationally apparent reality.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 22:16
|
|
|
Judakel posted:Of course atheism is a choice. One must choose to think past the fallacies which beget the concept of supernatural beings and arrive at the only rationally apparent reality. lmao good one, i can almost see the fedora
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 22:47
|
|
|
What's the theist version of a fedora?
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 22:49
|
|
|
Who What Now posted:What's the theist version of a fedora? Tonsure?
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 22:54
|
|
|
Judakel posted:Of course atheism is a choice. One must choose to think past the fallacies which beget the concept of supernatural beings and arrive at the only rationally apparent reality. I mean personally it would be kind of backwards, much as I'd like it to, religion just won't stick for me.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 23:06
|
|
|
Modern anti-theism is a failure to grasp the excellent analysis given by Karl Marx in Critique of Hegel's Philosophy of Right. This argument has not been improved on, with New Atheists repeatedly embarrassing themselves with racist rants and TSA seizures of small jars of honey.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 23:15
|
|
|
Who What Now posted:What's the theist version of a fedora? Still a fedora.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 23:15
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:Still a fedora. Is it at least worn backwards or something to signify they aren't your average lovely neckbeard?
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 23:22
|
|
|
Who What Now posted:Is it at least worn backwards or something to signify they aren't your average lovely neckbeard? Embroidered cross handkerchief hanging out of the back pocket.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 23:27
|
|
|
Almost nobody care about his god(s). It's only when they need something or when they're asked the question that they do believe in it anyways v v
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 23:34
|
|
|
TEAYCHES posted:Embroidered cross handkerchief hanging out of the back pocket. I'm pretty sure that's only in prisons.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 23:36
|
|
|
Morkies posted:lmao good one, i can almost see the fedora I have never worn hats of any type. Anyway, supernatural explanations are pretty common ways of making sense of things which humanity has yet to understand more fully, or which it misinterprets.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2016 02:04
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:I mean personally it would be kind of backwards, much as I'd like it to, religion just won't stick for me. You misunderstand my point. It is not so much about religion, which is born out of much thought, but the nature of the false axioms which support these thoughts. More specifically, how prone we are as human beings to commit fallacies in our thinking that, when uncorrected, lead to the thought that there may be a supreme being, a series of supreme beings, or any sort of magical thinking.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2016 02:15
|
|
|
Judakel posted:I have never worn hats of any type. lmao fag Judakel posted:supernatural explanations are pretty common ways of making sense of things which humanity has yet to understand more fully, or which it misinterprets. for good reason
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2016 03:43
|
|
|
Garbage man are my god Ask yaweh to do it, can't even do that Ask allah to fix sprinkler, can't do what repairman does
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2016 07:12
|
|
|
The Answer to the Titular Question is Yes.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2016 07:14
|
|
|
Judakel posted:You misunderstand my point. It is not so much about religion, which is born out of much thought, but the nature of the false axioms which support these thoughts. More specifically, how prone we are as human beings to commit fallacies in our thinking that, when uncorrected, lead to the thought that there may be a supreme being, a series of supreme beings, or any sort of magical thinking. Skepticism is as much a habit as credulousness, though. It takes more effort for me not to doubt a lot of things than it does to doubt them. It's really more to do with how you were born and how you were raised as to what sort of outlook you have, which informs which viewpoint will come naturally to you.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2016 11:01
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:Skepticism is as much a habit as credulousness, though. It takes more effort for me not to doubt a lot of things than it does to doubt them. It's really more to do with how you were born and how you were raised as to what sort of outlook you have, which informs which viewpoint will come naturally to you. Surely you arrived at a skeptical mindset after some thought. I would argue that jumping to a supernatural conclusion takes less thoughtfulness and more instinct.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2016 11:13
|
|
|
Morkies posted:lmao fag I have gorgeous hair.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2016 11:14
|
|
|
Judakel posted:Surely you arrived at a skeptical mindset after some thought. I would argue that jumping to a supernatural conclusion takes less thoughtfulness and more instinct. I was raised to be analytical and my side of the family has a strong depressive streak which makes us all rather somber and prone to assuming the worst. Broadly, you could describe my agnosticism as the conscious result of me trying to be less antitheist, which would be my default position. Though as that also came with age and is also now rather habitual, I don't know if that would even be correct, given that agnosticism is much easier for me than any other position at the moment. If you were raised religious then I can see why other standpoints might be a feat of effort for you, but it's quite possible to have other default positions, so my argument would be that your religious views are largely a product of your environment. As is most everything else about you. OwlFancier fucked around with this message at 11:20 on Jan 26, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2016 11:16
|
|
|
Judakel posted:Surely you arrived at a skeptical mindset after some thought. I would argue that jumping to a supernatural conclusion takes less thoughtfulness and more instinct. No, some people don't have much of that instinct. If you didn't see and hear people in your early life turn to supernatural explanations (other than the kid fantasy stuff like Santa) why would that habit necessarily take root? A modern human raised more or less without religion is substantially less likely to generate supernatural beliefs spontaneously than pre-modern folks, even without a conscious decision to be skeptical of the supernatural, since much less of the world is unexplainable, too.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2016 11:22
|
|
|
If atheism is a choice then it isn't a logically necessary conclusion and therefore lacks the rational level of scrutiny atheists claim it has if atheism isn't a choice then criticising non-atheists is analogous to homophobia. Seems like atheism is pretty bad, either way?
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2016 14:59
|
|
|
les fleurs du mall posted:If atheism is a choice then it isn't a logically necessary conclusion and therefore lacks the rational level of scrutiny atheists claim it has Not being a choice does not make it immutable.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2016 15:03
|
|
|
Who What Now posted:Not being a choice does not make it immutable. Like bad opinions about homosexuals, then
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2016 15:04
|
|
|
les fleurs du mall posted:Like bad opinions about homosexuals, then What?
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2016 15:08
|
|
|
les fleurs du mall posted:If atheism is a choice then it isn't a logically necessary conclusion and therefore lacks the rational level of scrutiny atheists claim it has That presupposes that humans are inherently logical. And while you can certainly make a determinisitc argument that everything is predetermined, that a viewpoint is environmentally derived does not mean it is impossible to change a person's environment (such as exposing them to information) such that they change their views. However this does not appear to be the case with sexuality for the most part, so the two are not commensurate.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2016 15:14
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:That presupposes that humans are inherently logical. If you'd been exposed to god as some claim to have been, there would be no environmental change which could convince you to be an atheist?
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2016 15:18
|
|
|
If you learned that others had the same experience, they contradict each other, and could be induced chemically with psychotropic substances, that would be environmental evidence against that experience ever being legitimately religious.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2016 15:21
|
|
|
les fleurs du mall posted:If you'd been exposed to god as some claim to have been, there would be no environmental change which could convince you to be an atheist? I'm not sure if that is a statement or a question, but I would assume that, unless there actually is a god and it gets a logical trump card, then yes, there would be some way to change that. Materialistically, there is nothing stopping you doing the same with, to use your example, sexuality, except that 1. sexuality is demonstrably harder to change than religious beliefs to the point that, 2. we don't know how to do it, at all, and also that 3. attempts to do so tend to be actively harmful to the mental wellbeing of the people they're used on. None of those three apply to religious viewpoints. You can argue that yelling at people on the internet is not an effective method of conversion and may upset people, but the concept of conversion itself does not appear objectionable or impossible.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2016 15:24
|
|
|
Who What Now posted:What's the theist version of a fedora? gold cross necklace.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2016 15:56
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 07:17 |
|
|
The Kingfish posted:gold cross necklace. Or any relgious symbol, it's almost like people are typically Atheist to every other kind of god other than their own. So by that definition you can say the same stances in this thread for Judaism and nothing would change.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2016 16:58
|
|