The respecting of irrespectable beliefs

[Brian63]

When some theist proselytizes to you using some extremely bad argument, for example Pascal's Wager, how do you respond to such an argument? There are some religious arguments that show the person has thought about the subject and reviewed various philosophical positions on it to some basic level of depth...then there are some arguments that show the person has not done even the most basic investigating into the matter at all, they hold extremely naive opinions, etc. When the person who is proselytizing is someone that I care about (family, friends, etc.) then I a lot of trouble figuring out how to respond to those un-informed arguments. If I was just debating strangers on the internet we would often be having a more abrasive and hostile debate about the subjects, and I would respond by making fun of the position in addition to refuting it, and I would point out how the belief is not only false or illogical but also morally revolting. If you are having a combative conversation with another person, it is not enough to just point out logical flaws in their positions, you also have to show why the positions deserve rejection on other intellectual and ethical grounds.

When the person means well for me and is someone I have a great relationship with, but they still espouse these silly and morally reprehensible views, I have a lot of trouble knowing how to respond *without* also demeaning their views. I try to fake having respect for beliefs that are actually disgusting and silly to me. Recently, I had a religious family member bring up the simple design argument to me (everything looks like it was designed, therefore it was designed, therefore God) and he thought he stumped me and brought up some point-of-view that we atheists had just never considered. I was pretty slow and silent and delayed in responding to him. That was not because it was actually a good argument, but just because it was an extremely bad argument and I had to figure out how to rebut the argument without also making fun of it and pointing out how morally disgusting it also was.

When someone who you having a loving and caring relationship with also makes some religious argument which is both intellectually silly and also ethically sickening, how do you still respond to it in a courteous manner? That is a bit of a dilemma I sometimes encounter. I just do not know how to respond in a polite, respectful, and courteous way---when I actually find their beliefs to be completely bullshit.

We have to diminish the auto-respect that religious beliefs receive, and we do that by not giving them a respect that they have not earned. When you genuinely care about the person too, you also just have to hide your own true thoughts on the matter to some extent, and it is difficult for me to balance those 2 opposing feelings I have.

Brian

 

[Keith&Co.]

The first and only thing that comes to mind is Patton Oswalt.
You have to acknowledge beliefs. You should respect their right to a belief.
You have to sometimes say that's the stupidest fucking thing I've ever heard.

Such as the Shit-Piranhas... http://www.cc.com/video-clips/xv7ng0/stand-up-patton-oswalt--acknowledging-beliefs

 

[Ramaraksha]

When some theist proselytizes to you using some extremely bad argument, for example Pascal's Wager, how do you respond to such an argument? There are some religious arguments that show the person has thought about the subject and reviewed various philosophical positions on it to some basic level of depth...then there are some arguments that show the person has not done even the most basic investigating into the matter at all, they hold extremely naive opinions, etc. When the person who is proselytizing is someone that I care about (family, friends, etc.) then I a lot of trouble figuring out how to respond to those un-informed arguments. If I was just debating strangers on the internet we would often be having a more abrasive and hostile debate about the subjects, and I would respond by making fun of the positio
Brian

Pascal's Wager does actually make sense - it is a matter of perspective. The Coward doesn't understand why the Warrior would choose to rush into pain and suffering(that's why few get Reincarnation) and the Warrior doesn't get the coward running away(Heaven).

you are in a different time and place, that's the problem. You live in the 21st century, in a free society that is radically different from what Pascal faced. Pascal lived when kings ruled, brutally. Violence was everywhere. These were not democracies. Kings demanded loyalty and obedience. If you spoke out against the king, the king would kick you out of his kingdom or worse! Makes sense, right? His crown depended on loyal subjects. A good general could be a cad, a rapist but his king might choose to look the other way, the general was useful. Whereas if you spoke out against the king, no matter how good a person you are, no king would allow you to remain in the kingdom

That is what Pascal was talking about - that is the life they had and they made God using the life they had. A King-like God rules the heavens. Religious people have no trouble telling me that me being a good person does not matter, the only thing that matters is which God do i pray to? ie do i swear loyalty to the king? Since i do not swear loyalty to the king, i am not allowed in Heaven, his kingdom

You see they talk about forgiveness - that is the cad, rapist general - God will forgive, you belonged to the right religion ie you are a loyal person & the king(God) will overlook your deficiencies.

Makes perfect sense for Pascal to say get down on your knees and grovel before the King(God), he will reward you(Heaven). If you do not swear loyalty, not get down on your knees and pay your proper respects, the least the king will do is kick you out of his kingdom(Unbelievers sent to Hell)

Very primitive backward ideas that make me cry

 

[Jobar]

I usually warn anyone trying to evangelize me with bad arguments that my answers may disturb their own faith, that I have been thinking deeply about the subject for several decades, and are they really sure they want to discuss it with me?

If they keep preaching, I preach back. Usually, though, mighty few people IRL take me up on it.

 

[sharon45]

If they keep preaching, I preach back. Usually, though, mighty few people IRL take me up on it.

Right, and people are not interested in paying attention to the counter.

 

[rousseau]

Canada tends to be less militaristic when it comes to religion. Mostly, people just don't talk about it, but when they do, if people know you're spouting bullshit they'll usually just smile, nod, and change the subject.

Probably because there are far less religious nut-jobs here, and religion, on the whole, is less of a problem than it is in the U.S.

(caveat: I've never spent any time in 8 of our 10 provinces, and none of the territories, but Ontario, as we all know, is the centre of the universe)

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

You can simply state that your intellect has matured to the point where things like invisible, magic sky people and tooth fairies just aren't real anymore.

Then ask them why they think their's has not.

 

[Brian63]

I had a phone chat with a family member who is very caring and helpful, but just also holds very conservative religious views that are exactly what I oppose. Our conversation basically ended with her making a plea to her god to stop making me suffer as much as it has already been making me suffer, as a sign of its kindness and goodness. ??? I love the woman, just as much I reject her cultish and repulsive thinking. How can you show respect for a person, while not showing respect for this major part of her personality?

Brian

 

[iolo]

I don't understand the notion that we have to 'respect' other people's beliefs, since they are mostly nonsense. What we have to respect is a deal which allows us to hold ours, they theirs. In the long run, if the species is to survive (which I doubt more and more, alas), facts will convince the confused. Meanwhile I don't want any Inquisitions or McCarthys bullying me to suicide point, and that's about it.

 

[Valjean]

Pascal's Wager does actually make sense - it is a matter of perspective. The Coward doesn't understand why the Warrior would choose to rush into pain and suffering(that's why few get Reincarnation) and the Warrior doesn't get the coward running away(Heaven).



Makes perfect sense for Pascal to say get down on your knees and grovel before the King(God), he will reward you(Heaven). If you do not swear loyalty, not get down on your knees and pay your proper respects, the least the king will do is kick you out of his kingdom(Unbelievers sent to Hell)

But that's making it a game of chance. You're being too lazy to actually investigate the subject -- a subject you maintain your eternal life depends on.
There are hundreds of choices on the religious roulette wheel, yet you advocate choosing one at random. How is that a reasonable approach?

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

I had a phone chat with a family member who is very caring and helpful, but just also holds very conservative religious views that are exactly what I oppose. Our conversation basically ended with her making a plea to her god to stop making me suffer as much as it has already been making me suffer, as a sign of its kindness and goodness. ??? I love the woman, just as much I reject her cultish and repulsive thinking. How can you show respect for a person, while not showing respect for this major part of her personality?

Brian

She's unaware that her behavior is 100% emotionally based and not based on observation and reason. So there's not much you can do to affect it. You will simply have to make your peace with it, and make the best of the situation.

To me religious belief is a kind of insanity that allows some people to continue to understand their world and therefore continue to survive. It's just a form of pretending in the end. I'm certain that in the future it will disappear from the species. Consider yourself ahead of your time.

 

[DrZoidberg]

When some theist proselytizes to you using some extremely bad argument, for example Pascal's Wager, how do you respond to such an argument? There are some religious arguments that show the person has thought about the subject and reviewed various philosophical positions on it to some basic level of depth...then there are some arguments that show the person has not done even the most basic investigating into the matter at all, they hold extremely naive opinions, etc. When the person who is proselytizing is someone that I care about (family, friends, etc.) then I a lot of trouble figuring out how to respond to those un-informed arguments. If I was just debating strangers on the internet we would often be having a more abrasive and hostile debate about the subjects, and I would respond by making fun of the position in addition to refuting it, and I would point out how the belief is not only false or illogical but also morally revolting. If you are having a combative conversation with another person, it is not enough to just point out logical flaws in their positions, you also have to show why the positions deserve rejection on other intellectual and ethical grounds.

When the person means well for me and is someone I have a great relationship with, but they still espouse these silly and morally reprehensible views, I have a lot of trouble knowing how to respond *without* also demeaning their views. I try to fake having respect for beliefs that are actually disgusting and silly to me. Recently, I had a religious family member bring up the simple design argument to me (everything looks like it was designed, therefore it was designed, therefore God) and he thought he stumped me and brought up some point-of-view that we atheists had just never considered. I was pretty slow and silent and delayed in responding to him. That was not because it was actually a good argument, but just because it was an extremely bad argument and I had to figure out how to rebut the argument without also making fun of it and pointing out how morally disgusting it also was.

When someone who you having a loving and caring relationship with also makes some religious argument which is both intellectually silly and also ethically sickening, how do you still respond to it in a courteous manner? That is a bit of a dilemma I sometimes encounter. I just do not know how to respond in a polite, respectful, and courteous way---when I actually find their beliefs to be completely bullshit.

We have to diminish the auto-respect that religious beliefs receive, and we do that by not giving them a respect that they have not earned. When you genuinely care about the person too, you also just have to hide your own true thoughts on the matter to some extent, and it is difficult for me to balance those 2 opposing feelings I have.

Brian

It depends what you want. If you want to convince them of the errors of their ways, you have to respect their beliefs, or they won't listen. Basic psychology. If you want to offend them, then don't respect their beliefs. Elementary really.

 

[Brian63]

She's unaware that her behavior is 100% emotionally based and not based on observation and reason. So there's not much you can do to affect it. You will simply have to make your peace with it, and make the best of the situation.

That is a common atheist point of view, and one that I used to hold myself for a long while, but then learned a bit more about the actual neurological, evolutionary, and psychological motivations and functions for the beliefs we hold and it drastically altered my worldview, and so changed how I understood, and interact with, religious people especially. It is very interesting and helpful stuff. If you ever have the time and the interest, here are some very thoughtful links on these matters. The first one really blew my mind when I started to absorb it---

Why Bad Beliefs Don't Die

Why We Believe in Gods

Brian

 

[ideologyhunter]

Isn't this a Mencken?: You owe the same respect to a neighbor's religious beliefs as you owe to his conviction that his wife is beautiful and his children are intelligent. (That's probably slightly off from the original wording.)
I have a barrel of born-again cousins and I NEVER bring up religion with them. What's to be gained? There is no common footing for a discussion. What they believe in is 'sacred' and 'holy' to them -- concepts that I rule out entirely. My disrespectful attitude toward scripture and dogma would create an instant and irreparable rift. (Since they live out of state and I rarely see them, the religious content they send my way is mainly in holiday cards. Very easy to disregard.)

 

[sharon45]

It is fear and greed and downright hateful. Sure, one can be polite, but actual respect is a joke, especially when they do not honestly respect the nonbeliever.

 

[Brian63]

...I have a barrel of born-again cousins and I NEVER bring up religion with them. What's to be gained? There is no common footing for a discussion. What they believe in is 'sacred' and 'holy' to them -- concepts that I rule out entirely. My disrespectful attitude toward scripture and dogma would create an instant and irreparable rift. (Since they live out of state and I rarely see them, the religious content they send my way is mainly in holiday cards. Very easy to disregard.)

What it would gain is that theists (especially the Christian religion, for those of us immersed in it) would moreso understand that we atheists are real, we exist, we have given the topic of religion/philosophy some serious thought and just come to different conclusions from them, that their religious beliefs will not be given an automatically-privileged status anymore in our culture, that their harmful views on the world are going to be challenged by us, that they cannot impose their religious views on us, etc.

We atheists are growing in size, in population, and volume. To have achieved that, it certainly has helped us that atheists (and other secularists, like agnostics, secular humanists, etc.) have found community with each other here on the internet. It is also important that atheists speak out in the physical, real world too. That brings about benefit to our world.

The question is not if it brings about any benefit---it certainly will. Like most things in life though, it also has a cost, and so it is just a matter of determining of whether the benefits would exceed the costs, or the costs would exceed the benefits, strategizing to maximize the benefits and minimizing the costs, and then going from there.

Brian

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

The primary reason these silly beliefs continue in people is because they don't meet enough people who think they're silly. We're like kids who think Santa is real until we meet other kids who say Santa isn't real. It's absolutely no different. I'd have discovered my atheism in 5th grade except for the fact that there weren't any atheists around. And that's because it was so demonized, not because there is anything wrong with it.

Magic space people are not real. They're not up there interested in our lives. And all the pretending isn't going to bring them to life. It's that simple. You don't have to be preachy, just direct, like when you first heard about Santa maybe not being real from your buddy.

 

[sharon45]

The primary reason these silly beliefs continue in people is because they don't meet enough people who think they're silly. We're like kids who think Santa is real until we meet other kids who say Santa isn't real. It's absolutely no different. I'd have discovered my atheism in 5th grade except for the fact that there weren't any atheists around. And that's because it was so demonized, not because there is anything wrong with it.

Magic space people are not real. They're not up there interested in our lives. And all the pretending isn't going to bring them to life. It's that simple. You don't have to be preachy, just direct, like when you first heard about Santa maybe not being real from your buddy.

That is so funny, because when I was a child, I did not buy into the idea of Santa, but my older sisters kept trying to push it on me.

 

[Tigers!]

What it would gain is that theists (especially the Christian religion, for those of us immersed in it) would moreso understand that we atheists are real, we exist,

Brian

Have you really met people who think atheists don't exist or aren't real?

 

[Keith&Co.]

What it would gain is that theists (especially the Christian religion, for those of us immersed in it) would moreso understand that we atheists are real, we exist,

Have you really met people who think atheists don't exist or aren't real?

Yes.
Someone who wanted to make atheism illegal, insisting it wasn't a violation of the constitution because 'no one's really atheist,' and there's no constitutional protection for an affectation.

The various people who insist there're no atheists in foxholes and that proves there aren't really any atheists.

The people who insist that deep down, we really know there's a God, because no one can deny their creator, not really.