The simple brilliance of Darwin's revelation

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Now will you acknowledge that you would seriously hurt people if you could actually convince them their god doesn't exist? Is that what you want?

Who has to do that, when people aren't taught religion as children in the first place? No other action needed. Sea change.

At first you tried to suggest the majority of those people that think they need it don't actually need it, and I've got you quoted above if you want to deny it.

No, I did not. Never was my intention. You read it wrong. or maybe I could have been more clear.

"And many more just think they need it. Because it has been with them since birth."

Many more people, not "many more people than all the people you mentioned". Also read: many others. So this is a dumb tangent we can discard. It was not my intent to imply "most", and it is not germane to my point.


So: Who has to do that, when people aren't taught religion as children in the first place? No other action needed.

 

[Anomalism]

No, I did not. Never was my intention. You read it wrong.

"And many more just think they need it. Because it has been with them since birth."

Many more people, not "many more people than all the people you mentioned". Also read: many others. So this is a dumb tangent we can discard.

If that's the case then your observation is meaningless. You would still hurt a lot of people and destroy a lot of lives if you could successfully convince people that their religion is nonsense. It doesn't matter that some of them would be alright. That's just a deflection from the point.

So: Who has to do that, when people aren't taught religion as children in the first place? No other action needed.

How exactly are you going to prevent people from learning a religion that's passed down from parents to children, or even prevent them from starting a new religion in the absence of others? Do you not think more religions/spiritual outlets would arise if Christianity disappeared overnight?

 

[Anomalism]

or maybe I could have been more clear.

Humility. That defied my expectations. Perhaps I misjudged you.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

You would still hurt a lot of people and destroy a lot of lives if you could successfully convince people that their religion is nonsense.

I have no need of that, except in the specific cases where the beliefs are demonstrably false (YEC, for example). I won't be arguing that everything about their religion is nonsense. You wont catch me arguing that gods do not exist. So you have the wrong guy, there.

And remember, they are the ones who have malleable mythologies. They have to account for the facts, like everyone else. So there are Jews and Christians a plenty who accept evolution. Did Darwin "harm" them? Nope.

How exactly are you going to prevent people from learning a religion that's passed down from parents to children, or even prevent them from starting a new religion in the absence of others?

I wouldn't make any effort to do that. I am not doing it now, and people are leaving religion behind in droves. They have kids, too. Not to mention the many practically secular Christians and Jews, found all over the US and Israel.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Humility. That defied my expectations. Perhaps I misjudged you.

Well i promise, i will be honest about what i mean to say.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Anomalism

Because i think this is kind of related:

How many people do you suppose just pretend to be religious? Think: Saudi Royal Family (for example)

How much would you bet against me, if i bet most of them were atheists?

An odd bet, i know. Now, let's look at US politics. Do you REALLY think Obama was a Christian? I don't. How about the Republican debate stage, when every candidate but one raised his hand in response to "Who here does not believe in evolution?"

Those shameless liars, haha. I would make an even odds bet that every single one of them actually believes in evolution.

Anyway, just spitballin'. Make of it what you will.

 

[Anomalism]

I have no need of that, except in the cases where the beliefs are demonstrably false (YEC, for example). You wont catch me arguing that gods do not exist. So you have the wrong guy.

A whole bunch of shit in the Bible falls under this category. By doing what you said you are going to undermine the faith of many people. Let's be real man. You want to argue with people of faith. I've seen you do it numerous times.

And remember, they are the ones who have malleable mythologies. They have to account for the facts, like everyone else. So there are Jews and Christians a plenty who accept evolution. Did Darwin "harm" them?

Nope.

They still believe in god. God still gives them a sense of security in their universe. I actually think the reason you can rarely get through to them is because they need/rely on it. It's so central to their belief structure. It's probably impossible with most of them, or damn close to impossible. If you could convince them it would destroy their entire sense of morality and order.

I wouldn't make any effort to do that. I am not doing it now, and people are leaving religion behind in droves. They have kids, too. Not to mention the practically secular Christians and Jews, found all over the US and Israel.

On average it's going down, but in raw numbers it's still going up, particularly in places like Africa and the Middle East. It's going to be a long time before religion stops being extremely relevant to humans.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

A whole bunch of shit in the Bible falls under this category. By doing what you said you are going to undermine the faith of many people.

By teaching the scientific facts to children? Respectfully... That's their fucking problem. Not mine. You seem to exaggerate my "sinister" plans, haha

On average it's going down, but in raw numbers it's still going up, particularly in places like Africa and the Middle East

Yes, less.developed societies. Because they are very religious and have lots o' babies. You are kind of making my point for me.

What do you suppose happens, as they slowly develop into modern first world countries? It doesn't take a mind reader.

 

[Anomalism]

How many people do you suppose just pretend to be religious? Think: Saudi Royal Family (for example)

A lot, particularly elected people that rely on the confidence of the electorate. The Saud mafia? That's a tough one. Do you think their subjects would oust them if it was revealed that they are faithless? I actually don't understand Saudi Arabian culture well enough to answer that question clearly.

How much would you bet against me, if i bet most of them were atheists?

Most of the Saudi family? Atheist? I might take that bet. I definitely would not take the bet if you were saying the majority are not actually devout Muslims. I definitely believe that. I don't know if I believe they are atheists though.

An odd bet, i know. Now, let's look at US politics. Do you REALLY think Obama was a Christian?

No, in fact I was actually mentioning Obama in an earlier part of my response, but then I saw this. I've never believed him to be a man of heavy faith. Possibly very mild, but that's as far as I would go.

I don't. How about the Republican debate stage, when every candidate but one raised his hand in response to "Who here does not believe in evolution?"

LOL

Sadly I'd guess at least half of them are serious. But yeah, guys like Ted Cruz are pathalogical liars. I would eat my shoes if I learned he's truly a humble man of God. Give me a fuckin' break.

Those shameless liars, haha. I would make an even odds bet that every single one of them actually believes in evolution.

Anyway, just spitballin'. Make of it what you will.

Nah, you're spot on with that.

 

[Anomalism]

By teaching the scientific facts to children? Respectfully... That's their fucking problem. Not mine. You seem to exaggerate my "sinister" plans, haha

As you wish.

What do you suppose happens, as they slowly develop into modern first world countries? It doesn't take a mind reader.

Nah, I get it. You should see the way I harass PoliticalChic over the fact that her religion is dying along with social conservatism in the first world. I just think it's going to be way in the future before we can really call this stuff irrelevant.

EDIT: And before you call me a hypocrite for giving PC a hard time, well, maybe I am, but that dishonest nutbag deserves it.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

I definitely would not take the bet if you were saying the majority are not actually devout Muslims. I definitely believe that. I don't know if I believe they are atheists though.

Which is progress! I don't think the simple idea of theism, itself, poses the big problems. It's the baggage that comes with it. But I am not the one who has a problem separating these two things. That territory definitely belongs to the religious people.

But, to erode the dogma is to erode the religion. In many ways, they are interchangeable words. Nobody has to put aside theism to accept evolution, for example. But they may have to put aside their dogma.

 

[Anomalism]

Nobody has to put aside theism to accept evolution

They'd have to put aside creationism, which is a pretty significant part of it in my opinion. Maybe they could say God created the organisms that evolved into the organisms of today. To do that though they'd also have to accept that the Bible was probably actually the word of humans, not God, because God would not have been wrong about so much. It's a lot to get through. The intensity of religion is definitely going down a lot though. The dogma, as you say, is lessening for sure.

What would it take for you to not publicly criticize religion or religious people anymore? I'm just curious.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

They'd have to put aside creationism, which is a pretty significant part of it in my opinion.

But why? With ANY scientific finding, they can say God did it. Science doesn't refute or attempt gods or divine creation.

Criticize them how? Do you also mean, their ideas? What are they, special needs? Nobody gets to claim immunity from having their ideas or beliefs scrutinized or criticized.

 

[Anomalism]

But why?

Well, creationism in the sense that is described in the Bible. A lot of people actually believe Adam popped out of the dust and Eve came from his ribs. lol

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Well, creationism in the sense that is described in the Bible. A lot of people actually believe Adam popped out of the dust and Eve came from his ribs. lol

Again... Respectfully... That's their fucking problem. Keep your toys at home.

 

[Anomalism]

Again... Respectfully... That's their fucking problem. Keep your toys at home.

That's why it's hard though. Those aren't toys to them, and in their universe you are polluting the minds of children, their children. You're Satan to them. It's complicated.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

That's why it's hard though. Those aren't toys to them, and in their universe you are polluting the minds of children, their children. You're Satan to them. It's complicated.

If i am Satan to them because i will not let their toys in the science classroom by "force" of due process... Again, respectfully... You know the rest...

If they want to spend the extra to send the kiddos to Jesus school, they can.

But when they do... Well, they have made my point for me. They see the importance of indoctrinating those children. And the hopeful result.

 

[Anomalism]

If i am Satan to them because i will not let their toys in the science classroom by "force" of due process... Again, respectfully... You know the rest...

If they want to spend the extra to send the kiddos to Jesus school, they can.

But when they do... Well, they have made my point for me. They see the importance of indoctrinating those children. And the hopeful result.

I also draw the line at education. We are in agreement here. I just think you're a little more invested in the argument than just that. That's the impression I get anyway.

 

[Colin norris]

As far as I know not any multi-cellular organism was existing a billion years ago. But something was existing what leaded to this what we are now. So we were existing for sure as a concrete possibility of the future of our universe a billion years ago. Now we know which possibility became real - but we don't know anything about any other possibility which not became real. History knows not experiments - what on the other side also means the methods of natural science are not fully compatible with history.

When you started with "as far as I know" ,
I stopped there. I know what you don't know.

 

[Colin norris]

Look man. I have danced this pedantic dance with atheists before. Be honest and humble enough to see reality or don't; it makes no difference to me. Have a nice day.

Are you saying you believe there is a god?