What is it

[Pete]

What is it that makes a person continue to believe something despite all the evidence to the contri. 

[Pete]

https://www.apa.org/monitor/2017/05/alternative-facts

[Jonathan H. B. Lobl]

46 minutes ago, Pete said:

What is it that makes a person continue to believe something despite all the evidence to the contri. 

 

 

Are you sure you want to open this can of worms?  I think this will produce a major argument, with much heat and little light.  Religious passions burn hot.  I expect you will regret.

 

[Pete]

I know. However I was referring to lots of illogical beliefs. If it cannot be supported by some evidence then why do people  believe these things?

You sound weary Jonathan.  

[Jonathan H. B. Lobl]

9 minutes ago, Pete said:

I know. However I was referring to lots of illogical beliefs. If it cannot be supported by some evidence then why do people  believe these things?

You sound weary Jonathan.  

 

 

The more irrational a belief is -- the more a true believer will fight for it.  This should not be so, but it is.  That is why it's belief and not facts.

 

Yes.  Weary is a good word.  I used to enjoy arguing for Atheism and sanity.  The wind has gone out of my sails.  People who are not concerned with evidence, facts, reason or reality -- are not going to be persuaded by anything I have to say.  So, I have to ask myself.  Why am I arguing?  I know it won't do any good.  I don't enjoy it.  Maybe it's time to just let it go and walk away.  Somebody has to walk away.  It might as well be me.

 

 

[Pete]

I have siblings who are JWs. After years of trying to convince me by them and members of their church the elders just asked them not talk to me about religion anymore. Things have been a lot better since. I get the occasional dig like " don't you think it strange that people believe in evolution just because they found a few bones?"

You can imagine my response to that 🤣🤪😀

[Jonathan H. B. Lobl]

5 hours ago, Pete said:

I have siblings who are JWs. After years of trying to convince me by them and members of their church the elders just asked them not talk to me about religion anymore. Things have been a lot better since. I get the occasional dig like " don't you think it strange that people believe in evolution just because they found a few bones?"

You can imagine my response to that 🤣🤪😀

 

 

As the saying goes:  "You can pick your friends.  You can pick your nose.  You can't pick your family."

 

JWs?  Well, you could do worse.  At least, they don't vote.

 

 

 

[Key]

On 7/29/2020 at 5:58 PM, Jonathan H. B. Lobl said:

 

 

The more irrational a belief is -- the more a true believer will fight for it.  This should not be so, but it is.  That is why it's belief and not facts.

 

Yes.  Weary is a good word.  I used to enjoy arguing for Atheism and sanity.  The wind has gone out of my sails.  People who are not concerned with evidence, facts, reason or reality -- are not going to be persuaded by anything I have to say.  So, I have to ask myself.  Why am I arguing?  I know it won't do any good.  I don't enjoy it.  Maybe it's time to just let it go and walk away.  Somebody has to walk away.  It might as well be me.

 

 

Especially true of those who simply will not accept the possibility of being wrong. Or won't accept defeat in a heated debate where all facts are presented.

No one likes to be the weaker person, but strength is greater in the one who can accept failure and learn from it to succeed later.

[Key]

On 7/31/2020 at 4:00 PM, Jonathan H. B. Lobl said:

 

 

As the saying goes:  "You can pick your friends.  You can pick your nose.  You can't pick your family."

 

JWs?  Well, you could do worse.  At least, they don't vote.

 

 

 

You can only assume. Some, like in other religions, may be in name only. And they may be compelled toward change after what we've been through with this administration.

[Jonathan H. B. Lobl]

25 minutes ago, Key said:

Especially true of those who simply will not accept the possibility of being wrong. Or won't accept defeat in a heated debate where all facts are presented.

No one likes to be the weaker person, but strength is greater in the one who can accept failure and learn from it to succeed later.

 

 

In Dan's case -- and others like him -- it's not about being "willing".  "Willing" is not relevant.  We are talking about a world view that is seamless.  For such a person to be wrong about any of it, means a complete shattering.  The terror of such a loss is not something easy for an outsider to understand, but it's real and it's deep.

 

Why then, do we argue with Dan?  Look at everything that Dan imagines he will lose, if he discovers that he was wrong about any of it.  It's like taking a piece out of a balloon.  You can't argue with that kind of terror.  Reason, facts and evidence are all doomed to fail. For Dan, failure is unthinkable.  He must be right.  About all of it.   It's time to let go.  After all, what do we have at stake?  Failure to persuade?  I can cope.

 

 

 

 

 

[Jonathan H. B. Lobl]

1 hour ago, Key said:

You can only assume. Some, like in other religions, may be in name only. And they may be compelled toward change after what we've been through with this administration.

 

 

Some things are core to JW ideology.  They will refuse a blood transfusion, even if it kills them or their children.  They will refuse to salute the flag, because it's idol worship.  They do not vote, because they "are in the world, but not of it.".  These are not small matters.  A JW who votes will be disfellowshiped.  

 

 

An evil government isn't really a problem for them.  They expect it.  In an odd way, I think they find it reassuring.  

 

 

 

 

 

Edited August 3, 2020 by Jonathan H. B. Lobl

[cuchulain]

People are stupid.  Their heads are full of tidbits facts and truths most of which are false, but they want to believe for whatever reason so they will use confirmation bias to sort through the supposed evidence and continue to hold false beliefs.  Nobody is immune and all you can do is try to observe it in yourself and correct it as you go.

[Jonathan H. B. Lobl]

2 hours ago, cuchulain said:

People are stupid.  Their heads are full of tidbits facts and truths most of which are false, but they want to believe for whatever reason so they will use confirmation bias to sort through the supposed evidence and continue to hold false beliefs.  Nobody is immune and all you can do is try to observe it in yourself and correct it as you go.

 

Yes.  I certainly have my own blind spots.  We also have collective blind spots.

 

As Atheists, we have to be careful of our own biases.  No.  Religious people are not stupid.  The Islamic world gave us Arabic numerals.  Including the zero.  Imagine trying to do math with the Roman numerals.  Sir Isaac Newton, who invented calculus, so that he could work out planetary orbits, was renowned as a Protestant theologian.  The astronomer who discovered that the Universe was expanding, was a Jesuit priest.  He was employed by the Vatican.  Plato and the ancient Greek Geometrists were outright mystics.  In their quest to describe reality, they created geometry.

 

In like manner, religious minds are not crazy.  The diagnostic manuals of mental health do not include religion.  Religion can complicate mental illness, but religion per se, is not mental illness.

 

Religious people can be irritating and annoying.  Even dangerous.  But if we start throwing around words like "stupid" and "crazy", we do them a disservice.  We also create a legitimate grievance for religious people.

 

You made no such statement.  I just felt a need to throw that in.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited August 3, 2020 by Jonathan H. B. Lobl

[Key]

5 hours ago, Jonathan H. B. Lobl said:

 

Yes.  I certainly have my own blind spots.  We also have collective blind spots.

 

As Atheists, we have to be careful of our own biases.  No.  Religious people are not stupid.  The Islamic world gave us Arabic numerals.  Including the zero.  Imagine trying to do math with the Roman numerals.  Sir Isaac Newton, who invented calculus, so that he could work out planetary orbits, was renowned as a Protestant theologian.  The astronomer who discovered that the Universe was expanding, was a Jesuit priest.  He was employed by the Vatican.  Plato and the ancient Greek Geometrists were outright mystics.  In their quest to describe reality, they created geometry.

 

In like manner, religious minds are not crazy.  The diagnostic manuals of mental health do not include religion.  Religion can complicate mental illness, but religion per se, is not mental illness.

 

Religious people can be irritating and annoying.  Even dangerous.  But if we start throwing around words like "stupid" and "crazy", we do them a disservice.  We also create a legitimate grievance for religious people.

 

You made no such statement.  I just felt a need to throw that in.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Just so. Religion gave rise to science and reason, ironically. Then when it inspired people to deduce things logically, as science requires, they tried to suppress it as heresy. Why? Because it reduced their influence and power.

It is one thing to honor and worship a deity. Quite another to control the masses. You'd think an all powerful deity wouldn't need subordinate handlers to do that. Especially, as He, supposedly, promotes the ability of free will. Right?

[Jonathan H. B. Lobl]

 

 

So much falls apart when we ask basic questions.  The god of the Bible created everything.  Everything.  How come this god can't produce it's own book, without human help?

 

As an Atheist, there are many gods that I don't believe in.  How strange, that my non-belief in only one god is ever challenged.  After all, I only believe in one god less, than a Monotheist.

 

 

 

 

 

[cuchulain]

I wasn't specifically saying religious people.  I meant people in general are stupid.  Obviously there are exceptions, but few and far between.  Creating something of worth doesn't negate a persons stupidity.  People will believe all sorts of nonsense even and maybe especially if they have an education.  I'm not exempt from this either.  I've discovered there are things I "know" that are false after all.  So what do I know that is false that I have not discovered?

[Jonathan H. B. Lobl]

1 hour ago, cuchulain said:

I wasn't specifically saying religious people.  I meant people in general are stupid.  Obviously there are exceptions, but few and far between.  Creating something of worth doesn't negate a persons stupidity.  People will believe all sorts of nonsense even and maybe especially if they have an education.  I'm not exempt from this either.  I've discovered there are things I "know" that are false after all.  So what do I know that is false that I have not discovered?

 

 

Yes.  That is the voice of reason.  We can go further.  If all religion were to vanish -- people would still be people and the world would still be a mess.  Just a different mess.

 

 

 

[RevBogovac]

On 7/30/2020 at 2:58 AM, Jonathan H. B. Lobl said:

[...] So, I have to ask myself.  Why am I arguing?  I know it won't do any good.  I don't enjoy it.  Maybe it's time to just let it go and walk away.  Somebody has to walk away.  It might as well be me.

 

 

 

Please don't (walk away). Although not everyone participates in the discussion doesn't mean they are not influenced by it. I know you(-r contributions) influenced my live. And it was for the better. So: thank you!

[Jonathan H. B. Lobl]

2 hours ago, RevBogovac said:

 

Please don't (walk away). Although not everyone participates in the discussion doesn't mean they are not influenced by it. I know you(-r contributions) influenced my live. And it was for the better. So: thank you!

 

 

I have not left ULC or the board.  What I have given up, is arguing with Dan.  Why would I want to argue with Dan?     My life is painful enough without him.  I will exchange ideas with anyone.  Arguing with blind faith is futile.  Arguing with a man, who thinks that Christians have a monopoly on the virtues, is beneath me.

 

 

 

 

 

Edited August 6, 2020 by Jonathan H. B. Lobl

[Dan56]

15 hours ago, Jonathan H. B. Lobl said:

What I have given up, is arguing with Dan. Arguing with blind faith is futile.  Arguing with a man, who thinks that Christians have a monopoly on the virtues, is beneath me.

 

Its only argumentative when you insist someone see's things the way you do. You think its an annoyance when Christians try to convert nonbelievers, but I'd suggest that your frustration could be construed as an attempt towards reverse conversion? Faith is based on something, its seldom blind, but your correct, its futile to discuss the virtues of a faith with someone who's committed to it, especially when you have nothing better to offer. I simply point out why I believe as I do, disagreement or nonacceptance doesn't bother me... I only chimed in here because my name was mentioned, no religion intended.