What is worse, racism or rape?

[Jolly_Penguin]

I ignored that response from him, figuring he was trolling, as the fallacy was rather blatantly obvious. I'm still not convinced it wasn't a troll post. Nobody can be that dense.

It was already explained why the alleged fallacy was out of context interpretation of what he wrote. The counter from SB had no evidence to verify as some alleged additional point. Now you are going back to the misinterpretation while apparently brinking. Perhaps you could respond to the most recent post with actual content.

Now you are reading it out of context. It was addressed to me and quoted my text and the logic fail was so obvious I dismissed it as trolling, as often do for LD.

Yes, upbringing and culture shapes people's views and that manifests in the religions they choose to follow or the sect within religions that they choose to identify as. One Muslim will view Islam a little differently than another and one Christian will view Christianity so different from another that he will call the other a non-christian.

But, religion does shape behaviour, from diet rules to dress rules to bigotry. People don't become Jews because they want to chop penises or become muslims because they hate the taste of bacon. They get this from religion, and a lot of religion also makes them more bigoted and misogynist than they may otherwise be.

If religion shapes behavior, why don't all believers in a religion adapt and obey all the rules? Hmmm

Maybe it was the hmm that made me think he was joking. Or maybe it was because something shaping behaviour doesn't mean it will all by itself dictate all behaviour all the time. He appeared to be mocking binary thinking. Especially since he was responding to text that stated other factors that shape views.

 

[Toni]

It was already explained why the alleged fallacy was out of context interpretation of what he wrote. The counter from SB had no evidence to verify as some alleged additional point. Now you are going back to the misinterpretation while apparently brinking. Perhaps you could respond to the most recent post with actual content.

Now you are reading it out of context. It was addressed to me and quoted my text and the logic fail was so obvious I dismissed it as trolling, as often do for LD.

Logic fail? That's all yours.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

If you can't answer the question, then just say so. No need to go all high school debate club.

How the fuck should someone "answer" a personal attack followed by an illogical nonsense statement?

The irony of this post made me smile.

But I suppose the most appropriate way would be a large sarcastic image macro:

Maybe it was the hmm that made me think he was joking. Or maybe it was because something shaping behaviour doesn't mean it will all by itself dictate all behaviour all the time.

Which means religion is not a necessary or sufficient factor to shape human behavior, then. It's certainly an influence, to be sure, but it is neither the origin of bigoted/predatory behavior on its own, nor does bigoted/predatory behavior cease to exist in the absence of religion.

Which means from a casual factor, religion is as much to blame as Twitter or Television. Clearly these things ARE factors in the formation of destructive beliefs, but not causal factors, and probably not even highly relevant ones.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

So if religion doesn't get all the blame then it doesn't get any of the blame.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

So if religion doesn't get all the blame then it doesn't get any of the blame.

Yup. Like I said, binary thinking. I thought it laughable, but apparently its taken seriously here.

 

[Toni]

So if religion doesn't get all the blame then it doesn't get any of the blame.

Yup. Like I said, binary thinking. I thought it laughable, but apparently its taken seriously here.

Yes, you do.

 

[laughing dog]

Yup. Like I said, binary thinking. I thought it laughable, but apparently its taken seriously here.

Yes, you do.

The irony of the exchange between those two is completely lost on them.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

So if religion doesn't get all the blame then it doesn't get any of the blame.

That's binary thinking: "You're either responsible or you're not."

Religion is to blame for ALOT of things. Promoting bigotry, racism and sexism just aren't among them.

Mainly this is because religion is created by people in the same process that bigotry, racism and sexism are created. It is a PRODUCT of irrational thinking, not a PRODUCER thereof. Blaming religion for bigotry and sexism is like blaming karaoke bars for alcoholism.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

It is both a product of and a producer of irrational thinking. It goes both ways. Some people create the system, others learn from the system.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

It is both a product of and a producer of irrational thinking. It goes both ways.

No, it really doesn't. Religion can no more "produce" irrational thinking than a Selena Gomez album can produce terrible music. That is to say religion IS irrational thinking, not an irrational thinker.

Religion cannot actually THINK. That is the provenance of religious PEOPLE, whose thoughts are shaped by their emotions, experiences, biases, prejudices, beliefs and worldviews. We do not blame thoughts for behavior, though, we blame PEOPLE for their behavior.

Religion can produce emotional states and positive/negative reactions in the minds of religious people, which is why religion is not a helpful thing to introduce when dealing with someone who is already irrational or prone to violence.

Again, kind of like alcohol.

Some people create the system, others learn from the system.

The system doesn't have casual power like that. Even when religion was identical with the instruments of the state -- or maybe especially then -- it could only influence behavior through enforcement mechanisms like any other system. But in modern times, nobody blames the LEGALITY of guns for people wanting to own them, and there is no government law saying that everyone HAS to go to a fireworks show on the 4th of July. People do these things because they want to, not because the law says they should. Really, the only aspect of religion that has ever been compulsory regardless of anyone's disposition is the collection of tithes; this, again, is identical to political government, which compels the collection of taxes.

Religion isn't some magical series of incantations that can brainwash people into doing things they never would have done otherwise. It's a cultural artifact that distorts a person's already-existing impulses in various ways, but those impulses must already exist for any of that to happen. Religion doesn't cause gospel music or Christian Rock either; musicians do that, and they would probably still be musicians even if they never decided to make religious music (in fact this is usually exactly what happens once musicians figure out that churches are absolutely terrible at paying their bills on time).

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

It is both a product of and a producer of irrational thinking. It goes both ways. Some people create the system, others learn from the system.

Exactly. And were that not so, if Religion was the mere product of irrational thinking and wasn't a cause and contributor to creating irrational thinking, we would have far more people religious people becoming atheists, and far more atheists becoming religious. Religious upbringing instills irrational ideals and ways of thinking. Faith. Vicarious redemption. Encouragement of tribalism. Misogyny. Homophobia. And the list goes on.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

Religion cannot actually THINK. That is the provenance of religious PEOPLE, whose thoughts are shaped by their emotions, experiences, biases, prejudices, beliefs and worldviews.

Which religion involves.

We do not blame thoughts for behavior, though, we blame PEOPLE for their behavior.

And those people act on those thoughts, emotions, biases, prejudices, beliefs, and worldviews.

Religion can produce emotional states and positive/negative reactions in the minds of religious people, which is why religion is not a helpful thing to introduce when dealing with someone who is already irrational or prone to violence.

A person's genetics does contribute to their behaviour, yes, absolutely, but so does their programming. Religion is part of their programming.

nobody blames the LEGALITY of guns for people wanting to own them

And they want to because they were conditioned to want to. Children of gun enthusiasts are more likely to want to go to a gun range and shoot guns.

And nobody is blaming the LEGALITY of religion for religion's influence on behaviour.

Religion isn't some magical series of incantations that can brainwash people into doing things they never would have done otherwise.

Oh but it can get people to do things they wouldn't otherwise do, and had no wish to do before the religious programming. Do you think that absent any cultural tradition or religious influence people would look at a baby's penis and say "We need to chop that up a bit"? How about Bacon? You think so many would resist it if not programmed to think it is evil? When people actually believe that a supreme dictator is telling them to kill people, and they are trained to confuse obedience for morality, do you think they would kill people without that decree and programming?

You need to study up on psychology and on cults. It is amazing the things that humans will do, that they had absolutely no idea they ever could do, when the social programming is strong enough, and religion is the most effective way to do it. It isn't merely like alcohol that lowers inhibitions for anti-social behaviour people want to do anyway. It actually creates new compulsions and actions they would not have wanted to do before.

 

[Toni]

Absolutely every single thing you've laid at the door of religion exists as a product of other social institutions.

 

[TSwizzle]

Oh but it can get people to do things they wouldn't otherwise do, and had no wish to do before the religious programming. Do you think that absent any cultural tradition or religious influence people would look at a baby's penis and say "We need to chop that up a bit"? How about Bacon? You think so many would resist it if not programmed to think it is evil?

One of my favorites is having two refrigerators so that meat and dairy can be stored separately. Yahweh must have stock in Whirlpool.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

Absolutely every single thing you've laid at the door of religion exists as a product of other social institutions.

Yes, and not everyone gets to that point by those other social institutions. Some get there by religion.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

Absolutely every single thing you've laid at the door of religion exists as a product of other social institutions.

Yes, and not everyone gets to that point by those other social institutions. Some get there by religion.

But Jason, if Religion doesn't 100% cause every social evil all by itself, and with no other way for that social evil to happen, then religion is good and pure and can't have anything to do with shaping any negative behavior! No gosh golly, religion doesn't poison anything.

 

[skepticalbip]

Yes, and not everyone gets to that point by those other social institutions. Some get there by religion.

But Jason, if Religion doesn't 100% cause every social evil all by itself, and with no other way for that social evil to happen, then religion is good and pure and can't have anything to do with shaping any negative behavior! No gosh golly, religion doesn't poison anything.

You've been reading too many of LD's posts...

 

[laughing dog]

But Jason, if Religion doesn't 100% cause every social evil all by itself, and with no other way for that social evil to happen, then religion is good and pure and can't have anything to do with shaping any negative behavior! No gosh golly, religion doesn't poison anything.

You've been reading too many of LD's posts...

No one here is claiming that religion does not enable people to act on their instincts and desires. No one here is claiming that religion does not sometimes inculcate those desires or views. What these people are saying is that religion is not an unique social institution in that regard, and that if religion did not exist, other social institutions would arise that do the same thing.

I can understand why someone who is obsessed with penis chopping is incapable of grasping such an argument, but I cannot understand why someone who is supposedly intelligent and open-minded cannot grasp such an argument, even if he or she does not agree with it. Can you explain that? If so, please do.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

No one here is claiming that religion does not enable people to act on their instincts and desires. No one here is claiming that religion does not sometimes inculcate those desires or views.

Doesn't look that way at all.

Do you really think that if we remove all religion that there would be no more bigotry or sexism?

This highlights the false-dichotomy and strawman behind your entire argument. No one has said or implied that religion is the sole causal factor, but merely that it is a significant causal factor, especially when it is not surrounded by a secular context which does not merely change by weakens religious belief at both the collective and individual level and thus lessens its harms.

And religion is not required.

Virtually nothing is required for bigotry, and yet it is still most certainly causally influenced by countless things. Almost none of the causes of complex human cognition and action are "neccessary" or "sufficient". So, it is a strawman to point that out as though it implies that it isn't a cause at all.

Religion doesn't catalyze bigotry, bigotry catalyzes the formation of radical/militant religions. Bigotted people gravitate towards religious interpretations that encourage and approve of their worldview and then contribute to those interpretations in their own ways.

The argument is that religion is simply an excuse for bigotry that would have occurred in the absence of religion. Hence your entire response is based on a misunderstanding and is completely off point.

You wrote would have occurred, not could have occurred. And Skeptical Lib called you on it.

Bullshit.

Religion in many cases creates, unifies, and leads bigotry and hatred. Why else would a group of Semites almost universally dislike another group of Semites?

Yes, upbringing and culture shapes people's views and that manifests in the religions they choose to follow or the sect within religions that they choose to identify as. One Muslim will view Islam a little differently than another and one Christian will view Christianity so different from another that he will call the other a non-christian.

But, religion does shape behaviour, from diet rules to dress rules to bigotry. People don't become Jews because they want to chop penises or become muslims because they hate the taste of bacon. They get this from religion, and a lot of religion also makes them more bigoted and misogynist than they may otherwise be.

If religion shapes behavior, why don't all believers in a religion adapt and obey all the rules? Hmmm.

.....

What these people are saying is that religion is not an unique social institution in that regard, and that if religion did not exist, other social institutions would arise that do the same thing.

As Skeptical Lib wrote above, there are plenty of bigotries and negative behaviours that would NOT arise without religion. Religion isn't the only source of bad actions, but it is a very potent one. It is the best force there is to get people to do horrible things and feel proud of it.

 

[laughing dog]

You wrote would have occurred, not could have occurred. And Skeptical Lib called you on it.

His argument is based on shallow thinking - as others pointed out.

As Skeptical Lib wrote above, there are plenty of bigotries and negative behaviours that would NOT arise without religion. Religion isn't the only source of bad actions, but it is a very potent one. It is the best force there is to get people to do horrible things and feel proud of it.

First, you should be able to get a poster's name correct - it is Skepticalbip. 2nd, his assertion is not undisputed. Neither he nor you have any idea what might or might not have arisen without religion. However, we do observe the same type of bigotries even though there is no religion involved.

If Islam or Christianity or any other religion had not shaped some of these bigotries and stupidness, some other social institution would have evolved to serve the same purpose because religion was created by people and shaped by people.