Fallible wrote:My mum (77) was accosted in the street by a woman with a leaflet. The woman asked my mum if she reads the Bible. My mum said no. The woman asked why. My mum said because she doesn't enjoy fairy stories. I'm proud. Does that count?

Similar to when someone tries to sell me a subscription to the Dutch Telegraph: "I don't read gossip magazines."

Keep It Real wrote:Your mum scores points, but I'm afraid you get no credit for that one lol

If people come to my door, they get the same. I don't go out looking for people to convert, because my view is the same for everything - in order to change, somebody has to be ready to do so. It has to come from then. However if the conversation turns to religion and people start stating their views, I will state mine, and sometimes that leads to people going 'oh, I hadn't thought of it like that'.

These people who say "oh, I hadn't thought of it like that" still needed the new information in order to reconsider. There may be millions of brits out there primed for atheism if only they got the right piece of dialogue. I guess it's impossible to know if somebody is ready to listen/think/change so I reckon it's best to assume every theist is - that way none slip through the net. Yes, one would be bashing ones head against a brick wall a lot of the time but there should be at least some successes.

I take it you think a skeptical world view is preferable? Or do you share the view of some in this thread that without the carrot of heaven and the stick of hell many theists would go on the rampage killing and raping?

Keep It Real wrote:Or do you share the view of some in this thread that without the carrot of heaven and the stick of hell many theists would go on the rampage killing and raping?

Who in this thread has shared that view? I don't believe anyone has, quite the contrary in fact. You might want to consider how tongue-in-cheek some of the earlier comments in this thread were.

It's theists, mainly Christians who make that argument KIR.

Sendraks wrote:

Keep It Real wrote:Or do you share the view of some in this thread that without the carrot of heaven and the stick of hell many theists would go on the rampage killing and raping?

Who in this thread has shared that view? I don't believe anyone has, quite the contrary in fact. You might want to consider how tongue-in-cheek some of the earlier comments in this thread were.

Laklak and safeasmilk. Here and here.

You think those comments were tongue in cheek? SAM argues on for several posts...

Keep It Real wrote:You think those comments were tongue in cheek? SAM argues on for several posts...

Because that's the argument theists keep making: If you don't believe in god/don't follow the bible, how can you be moral?
Or: You just want to deny god so you can sin and commit crimes without reprecussions.

So he and Laklak were just playing devil's advocate? Simple me then, I guess, for not spotting it. I'd like them to fess up still - a poe is always hard to identify 100%.

Keep It Real wrote:These people who say "oh, I hadn't thought of it like that" still needed the new information in order to reconsider. There may be millions of brits out there primed for atheism if only they got the right piece of dialogue. I guess it's impossible to know if somebody is ready to listen/think/change so I reckon it's best to assume every theist is - that way none slip through the net. Yes, one would be bashing ones head against a brick wall a lot of the time but there should be at least some successes.

You might have time for that, but I don't. Seems a much better use of my limited resources to just take advantage of situations as they present themselves to me, meaning when people want to discuss religion. Anyway, due to my personal values I take issue with anyone intruding on someone's privacy in this way, much as I take issue with a Christian accosting a 77 year old woman in the street. It doesn't matter what I think is 'better' for them. I'm not them. I may have a different view of what's 'good', but if someone is desperate to cling to their faith in the face of reality, they probably need it.

I take it you think a skeptical world view is preferable? Or do you share the view of some in this thread that without the carrot of heaven and the stick of hell many theists would go on the rampage killing and raping?

You could have just asked me without the 'I take it' part. My actual view is neither. I think that some people do need religion. Not because they would be monsters without it, but because whether God is real or not, some people need religion to prop them up and give them a reason to go on. What's behind it might be shit, but the comfort of the community and of the belief in something better is a thing that certain people need in their lives. I seem to remember you attending church for similar reasons.

Fallible wrote:

Keep It Real wrote:These people who say "oh, I hadn't thought of it like that" still needed the new information in order to reconsider. There may be millions of brits out there primed for atheism if only they got the right piece of dialogue. I guess it's impossible to know if somebody is ready to listen/think/change so I reckon it's best to assume every theist is - that way none slip through the net. Yes, one would be bashing ones head against a brick wall a lot of the time but there should be at least some successes.

You might have time for that, but I don't. Seems a much better use of my limited resources to just take advantage of situations as they present themselves to me, meaning when people want to discuss religion. Anyway, due to my personal values I take issue with anyone intruding on someone's privacy in this way, much as I take issue with a Christian accosting a 77 year old woman in the street. It doesn't matter what I think is 'better' for them. I'm not them. I may have a different view of what's 'good', but if someone is desperate to cling to their faith in the face of reality, they probably need it.

I do have time for it. I have time coming out of my ears. I don't think anybody really needs theism, and that the world would be better off without it. It might be a painful operation for some theists in the short term but ultimately they, and everybody else, will be better off.

Fallible wrote:

Keep It Real wrote:I take it you think a skeptical world view is preferable? Or do you share the view of some in this thread that without the carrot of heaven and the stick of hell many theists would go on the rampage killing and raping?

You could have just asked me without the 'I take it' part. My actual view is neither. I think that some people do need religion. Not because they would be monsters without it, but because whether God is real or not, some people need religion to prop them up and give them a reason to go on. What's behind it might be shit, but the comfort of the community and of the belief in something better is a thing that certain people need in their lives. I seem to remember you attending church for similar reasons.

I can't go to church - tried it but there's just too much nonsense. The only reason I went was for the community and as has been pointed out to me many times, one can find that elsewhere. On this website, for example. Again, I don't think anybody really needs theism - just like nobody really needs to smoke, drink or take drugs. The desire for it might be strong but it's not essential.

Well if you have time, good. I don't agree with actively looking for theists to convert, but that's just my personal values. I said I think people need theism because you asked for my view. I do think some people need it, for comfort and hope. Do I think they could find that elsewhere? Yes. But as I said, it's not important what I think. If a person leans heavily on their faith and doesn't want to let go, I'm not going to try to take perhaps their only method for coping with life away from them. It's not my job or my place. That would be like telling someone I know what's good for them at a given time better than they do, and I'm not into that.

SafeAsMilk wrote:

Keep It Real wrote:I think everybody has been told by an authority figure at one time or another "rape is wrong". What's the difference between living by that instruction rather than the words of a preacher? Nobody needs the ten commandments IMO - I'm surprised you disagree!

Difference is, I can tell you why rape is wrong. As I said, I've seen some startling shit on this forum, theists claiming there's no reason for them to not go out and rape and murder unless there was the rules of God hanging over them.

Speaking as an ex-theist, they don’t mean that literally. Obviously I can’t speak for them all, but I can speak from experience.

It’s not that a theist looking at atheism contemplates all of the evil that they can now do if they reject god, it’s more along the lines of the futility of life without a god. What we do in the here and now won’t count for beans a 100 years from now. Whether one has been good or bad will be totally irrelevant.

Theists aren’t kept in check by the fear of god, the goodness in their hearts is, and was, always there, but once god is out of the picture then hopelessness sets in since they now know that the end of life really is the end. It’s quite a shattering blow since they once had (and knew with 100% certainty) that they were going to live forever.

The question they ask of what stops them from killing, looting, etc. is rhetorical because it means they’re looking at the world in a totally different manner and realizing that life is bookended by long periods of sleep with one never waking again. However, doing evil for the sake of evil, and with the freedom to do it, goes as much against their nature as it would for any rational human being. It’s like a child that finds out there’s no Santa Claus, they react (in some cases) with sadness, a dire sense of loss and they can (or may) lash out verbally making nonsensical statements, but that’s a natural reaction and they aren’t meant to be taken seriously.

Skinny Puppy wrote:

SafeAsMilk wrote:

Keep It Real wrote:I think everybody has been told by an authority figure at one time or another "rape is wrong". What's the difference between living by that instruction rather than the words of a preacher? Nobody needs the ten commandments IMO - I'm surprised you disagree!

Difference is, I can tell you why rape is wrong. As I said, I've seen some startling shit on this forum, theists claiming there's no reason for them to not go out and rape and murder unless there was the rules of God hanging over them.

Speaking as an ex-theist, they don’t mean that literally. Obviously I can’t speak for them all, but I can speak from experience.

Maybe in your experience, mine's different
I've met and seen discussion with plenty of theists who seriosuly argue that without belief in god/following the bible, you cannot possibly act moral.
Or that we are atheist just so we don't have to take responsibility for our behaviour.

Skinny Puppy wrote:
It’s not that a theist looking at atheism contemplates all of the evil that they can now do if they reject god, it’s more along the lines of the futility of life without a god.

Not always.
There are genuinly theist who sincerely argue that you cannot act morally without god given dogmatic rules. Or who believe we know a god exists, but are atheist so we don't have to obey the aformentioned dogma.

Skinny Puppy wrote: What we do in the here and now won’t count for beans a 100 years from now. Whether one has been good or bad will be totally irrelevant.

Or; without a god to set down the law there can be no objective morality. Completely failing to realise that moral reasoning is far superior to moral dogma.

Skinny Puppy wrote:
Theists aren’t kept in check by the fear of god,

Some of them claim they are, through the arguments they use.

Keep It Real wrote:Do you think theism is bad for civilisation?

:edit: typo

Theism is a conservative force and fits in with the Crap Ideas Department. As ideas they're crap, but there're trade offs. Theism is an exchange, of truths for wishes. People need to feel safe to continue, they need to feel the world is just even when it's not, and to feel hope when there's none. Civilization is what we all do together - it's what humans do. Our civilization is not going to be great, ever.

Keep It Real wrote:
I do have time for it. I have time coming out of my ears. I dont think anybody really needs theism and that the world would be better off without it. It might be a painful operation for some theists in the short term but ultimately they and everybody else will be better off

A theist could say exactly the same thing about atheism. I dont think anybody really needs atheism and that the world would be better of without it. But as Fallible and I have said change must come from within not without. I also have all of the time in the world but I do not spend it trying to convert the world to my way of thinking. As I do not want anyone thinking like me Since when did I acquire a monopoly on wisdom ? No. If someone thinks like me they do so entirely of their own free will and not because I want them to. I only impose upon myself. No one else

Keep It Real wrote:Promoting atheism might also run foul of the "promoting religious hatred" laws too. I think promoting ratioinal skepticism is the way to go now. And what do you know; that's the name of this website! Would promoting this website promote skepticism?

I like promoting human rights, issues related to environment and technology.

Way to go .. but not the only one way to go. Diversity - of opinions, causes, priorities, interests etc - keeps society in check as history tells us that those times when there was only one way to go were not happy times.

I think I promote atheism itself; I find it hard to make the distinction when promoting respecting reality.

Here Anthony Magnabosco promotes the street epistemology approach (well worth the watch, I think). Can't say it is zero percent promoting atheism
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zy0YQRrY5GU

Bert

No, no one pays me for that.

I'm a devangelist.


Sent from my iPad Pro using Tapatalk.