Atheists should criticize religion, but how we do it matters

[Underseer]

I see your point underseer, but I also see far far less of a problem from the atheist side than from the religionist side. As near as I can tell, there are not droves of atheists out there looking to kill or wishing endless torture on religious people just for being religious.

I would also caution against tiptoeing around religious people and refraining from criticizing them if they merit criticism, beyond the mere religion that they hold. Tribal hatred and attacking people for their view is of course not cool, but failures of logic, wishful thinking, and mistaking obedience for morality are all traits of people themselves that need to be examined and criticized.

Of course there is less of a problem right now. There are far fewer of us.

Further, I could be completely off base. Maybe there is something about being atheists that makes us magically immune to the whole "us versus them" kind of thinking. Maybe there's some other reason I'm way off the mark.

However, it is at least possible or plausible, isn't this a valid reason to be more careful about our rhetoric?

 

[Angry Floof]

I see your point underseer, but I also see far far less of a problem from the atheist side than from the religionist side. As near as I can tell, there are not droves of atheists out there looking to kill or wishing endless torture on religious people just for being religious.

I would also caution against tiptoeing around religious people and refraining from criticizing them if they merit criticism, beyond the mere religion that they hold. Tribal hatred and attacking people for their view is of course not cool, but failures of logic, wishful thinking, and mistaking obedience for morality are all traits of people themselves that need to be examined and criticized.

Of course there is less of a problem right now. There are far fewer of us.

Further, I could be completely off base. Maybe there is something about being atheists that makes us magically immune to the whole "us versus them" kind of thinking. Maybe there's some other reason I'm way off the mark.

However, it is at least possible or plausible, isn't this a valid reason to be more careful about our rhetoric?

No, not magically immune, but we have a profound advantage in that we are not bound by religious beliefs about what we can talk about or criticize or how we should view the world and our fellow human beings and our own humanness. We are not bound by authoritarian ideology, and we fight against being punished for questioning.

Of course, I am talking about atheists in a world full of religionists whose sense of empathy, openness to change and to other ideas and people, and understanding of boundaries are greatly diminished by ideological disease. So you do make a good point, Underseer. In a world of all atheists, what's then prompting us to question? Would such a world automatically produce enlightened, self-aware humans? I don't know.

That's why it's good that some of us focus on the logical and cognitive pitfalls that give rise to dogmatism and us vs. them mentality. If such a religion-free world is possible, we would still need to be on our toes and mindful of those pitfalls because they come with the human package and they also give rise to non-religious ideologies as long as ignorance and fear are in play. Religion being so deeply and adulterously in bed with ignorance and fear doesn't mean religion created ignorance and fear. It just corners the market on hijacking and exacerbating them. Inhumane ideologies don't have to involve superstition or ancient texts to be destructive.

 

[Underseer]

Of course there is less of a problem right now. There are far fewer of us.

Further, I could be completely off base. Maybe there is something about being atheists that makes us magically immune to the whole "us versus them" kind of thinking. Maybe there's some other reason I'm way off the mark.

However, it is at least possible or plausible, isn't this a valid reason to be more careful about our rhetoric?

No, not magically immune, but we have a profound advantage in that we are not bound by religious beliefs about what we can talk about or criticize or how we should view the world and our fellow human beings and our own humanness. We are not bound by authoritarian ideology, and we fight against being punished for questioning.

Of course, I am talking about atheists in a world full of religionists whose sense of empathy, openness to change and to other ideas and people, and understanding of boundaries are greatly diminished by ideological disease. So you do make a good point, Underseer. In a world of all atheists, what's then prompting us to question? Would such a world automatically produce enlightened, self-aware humans? I don't know.

That's why it's good that some of us focus on the logical and cognitive pitfalls that give rise to dogmatism and us vs. them mentality. If such a religion-free world is possible, we would still need to be on our toes and mindful of those pitfalls because they come with the human package and they also give rise to non-religious ideologies as long as ignorance and fear are in play. Religion being so deeply and adulterously in bed with ignorance and fear doesn't mean religion created ignorance and fear. It just corners the market on hijacking and exacerbating them. Inhumane ideologies don't have to involve superstition or ancient texts to be destructive.

Atheism doesn't cause people to question. People who question have a greater chance of ending up atheist. Just to be clear.

 

[Angry Floof]

No, not magically immune, but we have a profound advantage in that we are not bound by religious beliefs about what we can talk about or criticize or how we should view the world and our fellow human beings and our own humanness. We are not bound by authoritarian ideology, and we fight against being punished for questioning.

Of course, I am talking about atheists in a world full of religionists whose sense of empathy, openness to change and to other ideas and people, and understanding of boundaries are greatly diminished by ideological disease. So you do make a good point, Underseer. In a world of all atheists, what's then prompting us to question? Would such a world automatically produce enlightened, self-aware humans? I don't know.

That's why it's good that some of us focus on the logical and cognitive pitfalls that give rise to dogmatism and us vs. them mentality. If such a religion-free world is possible, we would still need to be on our toes and mindful of those pitfalls because they come with the human package and they also give rise to non-religious ideologies as long as ignorance and fear are in play. Religion being so deeply and adulterously in bed with ignorance and fear doesn't mean religion created ignorance and fear. It just corners the market on hijacking and exacerbating them. Inhumane ideologies don't have to involve superstition or ancient texts to be destructive.

Atheism doesn't cause people to question. People who question have a greater chance of ending up atheist. Just to be clear.

Yes, but I'm saying that anyone calling themselves an atheist, if indeed they truly don't believe in any gods, that alone means they are free to think outside the bounds of the religious dogmas that prey on our cognitive pitfalls. So yes, just being atheist gives a person a cognitive and intellectual leg up! It doesn't mean every atheist will use that advantage wisely, or examine their own beliefs (religious or not) rigorously, but simply that they do not have religious chains on top of whatever perceptive or intellectual weaknesses they may already suffer.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

Further, I could be completely off base. Maybe there is something about being atheists that makes us magically immune to the whole "us versus them" kind of thinking. Maybe there's some other reason I'm way off the mark.

We are certainly not immune from tribalism. But I think the worst we are going to do to them is declare them as we already should: delusional. Why should we regard the man who believes underwear gremlins are living in his closet any different from the people in the church who think they are talking to a sky beast? We do and should see them all as delusional, the only remaining question is whether or not they are dangerous. Some are and some are not. I don't see us getting any worse towards them than that.

 

[iolo]

Beliefs in gods and total rejection of gods seem to me to belong in some different world - they are just very unlikely, but very few things are certain or totally false - they just have degrees of probability. In the real world we have to make to with hypotheses that haven't been shown to be obviously false, I think.

Gods (like the abrahamitic god) that hear prayers etc are utterly impossible. To act, to hear prayers etc, they need forces that simply isnt available in this universe.

No - like Trump, they are just extremely unlikely.

 

[DrZoidberg]

Beliefs in gods and total rejection of gods seem to me to belong in some different world - they are just very unlikely, but very few things are certain or totally false - they just have degrees of probability. In the real world we have to make to with hypotheses that haven't been shown to be obviously false, I think.

Gods (like the abrahamitic god) that hear prayers etc are utterly impossible. To act, to hear prayers etc, they need forces that simply isnt available in this universe.

According to current available scientific theories. But you can't say they'll never be possible. There's still plenty of gaps God can inhabit.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

^ Yes, like when you have a really good poop. That's God's work. Holy Shit! It's God of the Craps

 

[Juma]

Gods (like the abrahamitic god) that hear prayers etc are utterly impossible. To act, to hear prayers etc, they need forces that simply isnt available in this universe.

According to current available scientific theories. But you can't say they'll never be possible. There's still plenty of gaps God can inhabit.

The forces (and their particles and fields) are very well known. Distrusting this fact then you could equally well believe that the earth is flat.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

Gods (like the abrahamitic god) that hear prayers etc are utterly impossible. To act, to hear prayers etc, they need forces that simply isnt available in this universe.

According to current available scientific theories. But you can't say they'll never be possible. There's still plenty of gaps God can inhabit.

In fact those gaps are endless, and far outnumber the bits of knowledge we possess. So long as humans have imagination and curiosity those gaps will continue to expand. Maybe we all have 7 invisible heads and only one that is visible. Maybe there are angels. None of these can be proven or disproven because they're never defined in any testable way. Hardly means they're not real. Like my sister, a nurse, who buries little plastic statues of saints in her front yard upside down because she says it's good luck.

People do things and make claims because it feels good, not because these things are real. I can't prove there's no "good luck" involved in burying statues.

 

[Juma]

I can't prove there's no "good luck" involved in burying statues.

Of course you can.

As I already stated: for that to work you beed some sort of interaction we has not yet detected. Physics has shown that there are none.
Myth busted.

 

[DrZoidberg]

According to current available scientific theories. But you can't say they'll never be possible. There's still plenty of gaps God can inhabit.

The forces (and their particles and fields) are very well known. Distrusting this fact then you could equally well believe that the earth is flat.

Off the top of my head, another quantum dimension. Or a new mechanic by which quantum entanglement works. Or how about some sort of encoding in nature our brain subconsciously interprets? How's that for devil's advocating?

There's always something beyond what we're currently measuring. Whatever god is doing he is doing it there.

 

[Juma]

The forces (and their particles and fields) are very well known. Distrusting this fact then you could equally well believe that the earth is flat.

Off the top of my head, another quantum dimension. Or a new mechanic by which quantum entanglement works. Or how about some sort of encoding in nature our brain subconsciously interprets? How's that for devil's advocating?

There's always something beyond what we're currently measuring. Whatever god is doing he is doing it there.

Sorry, but wont wont help. Quantum entaglement dont help you, there are definitely no macroscopic quantum dimensions and what the heck "encoding in nature" would mean beats me.

Its about time to realize that we know too much to this kind of nonsens.