Aethiest sister vs intellectually lazy relgious sister

[Swordfish]

[quote name='thebadlady' post='1647793' date='Jan 13 2009, 17.52']I'd counter with the way people tend to stay where they are religious wise and the majority are likely only religious because that is the way they were raised. Do you really think the intellectual greats from our past were deeply religious?[/quote]


Um. Yes. many were undeniably so.

[quote]I think they belonged to the Church so they didn't get burned at the stake, etc. The concept of a god can easily be meshed into the realities of the universe but it doesn't mean there is such a force (or that there isn't tbh) but the likelihood is minimal. Do you have any examples of where religion has *increased* intellectualism rather than crushing anything that kept people ignorant and poor (and ofc more open to the claims that the poor were going to get theirs someday while the lords burned)?

And, ofc, that is the same old boring argument that comes up with every atheist thread - did religions do more harm or good throughout the ages?

Take the Ottoman Empire for example. They were so far beyond the western world in science and medicine until they lost their hills and their minds to religion (and having a series of really shitty rulers who got beat down by their religious advisers sure didn't help either).[/quote]

Again, the problem here is your rabidly anti religious, and it's making you seem a bit pretentious and more than a bit presumptuous.

People get told all kinds of fucked up stuff over the course of their lives.

But your continued assertion that anyone who is raised religious is going to be dumber than you merely because you are an athiest is pretty........ well, let's just say 'indefensible'.

[The Khaleesi]

heehee.....
Sounds abit like a Nigerian scammer.

Anyhoo..... about sticking one's oar in to other people's parenting.... I have a couple of friends who refused to immunise their kids. (Rather the mother refused, the father was keen, but she won). I spent ages talking, being reasonable etc etc to them about how immunisation is a GOOD THING. It didn't change their (her) mind, but, at the very least, I felt I tried.
So, I guess it's OK to talk to the parents about parenting, but not undermine them in front of the kids. (Unless the kids are being abused, of course)

[Swordfish]

[quote name='TerraPrime' post='1647803' date='Jan 13 2009, 17.58']thebadlady can argue for herself, but my take is that telling a child that snow is an act of God is, indeed, anti-intellectual, in the sense that you are attributing a natural phenomenon to a supernatural force. Raising kids to be religious is not, imo, and thebadlady may disagree, in itself going to end up with adults who are anti-intellectual. But raising kids in the manner that her sister is will, more than likely, impede the intellectual curiosity of the child.[/quote]


Possibly.

But i don't see how giving the kid an explanation, even a faulty one, will rob him of his curiosity.

Either way it's a matter of degree.

I don't think telling a kid it's snowing because of gods will is the kind of intellectually crippling event that it's being made out to be.

[Mackaxx]

Those bus adds that are being mentioned in the initial post were actually tried in Australia recently too. By tried I mean an advertising company was offered money to do just the same thing, except refused on the grounds they may be considered offensive. This is odd given they've been putting churchy adds on buses for quite some time. Not sure if this went anywhere or not.

Australia will have to stick with my Darwin bumper fish for now.

here's the article

[url="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/australiaandthepacific/australia/4159715/Atheist-bus-Sleep-in-on-Sunday-morning-adverts-banned.html"]http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/...rts-banned.html[/url]

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

Rhelle,

Sir Issac Newton, one of the greatest scientists to ever live was deeply religious.

[Guest thebadlady]

[quote name='Swordfish' post='1647816' date='Jan 13 2009, 19.09']Um. Yes. many were undeniably so.



Again, the problem here is your rabidly anti religious, and it's making you seem a bit pretentious and more than a bit presumptuous.

People get told all kinds of fucked up stuff over the course of their lives.

But your continued assertion that anyone who is raised religious is going to be dumber than you merely because you are an athiest is pretty........ well, let's just say 'indefensible'.[/quote]

Thank you for your honesty - I really do not mean to be a pretentious presumptuous asshole. :P And I don't think that anyone is going to be dumber than me due to religion - I do not have that great an opinion of my own intelligence. And its not really religion that bothers me - like with the flat earthers, I don't really care what spend their brainpower on. Seriously, I play WoW and thats a huge waste of brainpower. :P I simply do not like the way religion suppresses individual critical thinking and makes people crave approval of others.

Maybe I should use more smilies? I used to use them like a cheap whore and have been trying to cut back.

Khals, no shots? Why in the world? I didn't want my daughter to get the chickenpox shot since its not lifelong but once she didn't catch it from another germy wee bastard I gave in.

[Guest thebadlady]

[quote name='Ser Scot A Ellison' post='1647830' date='Jan 13 2009, 19.19']Rhelle,

Sir Issac Newton, one of the greatest scientists to ever live was deeply religious.[/quote]


Scot, shit fell on his head and he got brain damage.










No really, he didn't but it would explain some things. Besides, I would still bet the majority of scientists are not of ye true faithe.

[G'Kar]

[quote name='thebadlady' post='1647838' date='Jan 13 2009, 20.24']No really, he didn't but it would explain some things. Besides, I would still bet the majority of scientists are not of ye true faithe.[/quote]

Do you have any evidence of this, or do you just believe it to be true? Your sounding very much like a religious person right now.

[Guest thebadlady]

[quote name='G'Kar' post='1647839' date='Jan 13 2009, 19.25']Do you have any evidence of this, or do you just believe it to be true? Your sounding very much like a religious person right now.[/quote]


A simple google finds the many many sources and polls and shit. Here is just [url="http://www.physorg.com/news102700045.html"]one![/url]

[quote]They concluded that academics in the natural and social sciences at elite research universities are significantly less religious than the general population. Almost 52 percent of scientists surveyed identified themselves as having no current religious affiliation compared with only 14 percent of the general population.

And while nearly 14 percent of the U.S. population who responded to the GSS describe themselves as "evangelical" or "fundamentalist," less than 2 percent of the RAAS population identifies with either label.

The only traditional religious identity category where the RAAS population has a much higher proportion of religious adherents than the general population is among those who identify as Jewish -- 15 percent compared to 2 percent of the general population.[/quote]

Or, religious people baffle scientists.

[quote]"In order to have the meaningful dialogue between scientists and the general population important to the advancement of science," Ecklund says, "we need comprehensive information about the religious beliefs and practices of scientists themselves. Although academic scientists at elite universities teach and train future leaders of American universities, media, primary and secondary education, medicine and government, there actually has been little systematic study of their religious beliefs and identities."[/quote]


ANNNNDDD!!! I totally should have googlefu'd earlier:

[quote]Among scientists, as in the general population, being raised in a home in which religion and religious practice were valued is the most important predictor of present religiosity among the subjects.

Ecklund and Scheitle concluded that the assumption that becoming a scientist necessarily leads to loss of religion is untenable.

Ecklund says, "It appears that those from non-religious backgrounds disproportionately self-select into scientific professions. [b]This may reflect the fact that there is tension between the religious tenets of some groups and the theories and methods of particular sciences and it contributes to the large number of non-religious scientists."[/b]

Foreign-born scientists are more likely to say "there is little truth in religion" and less likely to attend religious services, according to the authors. But being foreign-born had no significant impact on the odds of believing in God. This is interesting, they say, in light of the high percentage (25 percent) of foreign-born scientists among those surveyed.

The oft-discussed distinction between natural and social scientists with regard to religious belief is inconsistent and weak, Ecklund says.[/quote]

Now, that totally does not mean that non-religious households are inherently more intelligent than religious ones ofc, it just means they are more inclined to be a scientist.

[Ser King]

Science is highly efficient at explaining how things work, it is a trmendous edifice of the use of Reason to look at the universe as it is. It can not in principle explain why The universe is there in the first place, or what, if any, is it’s purpose. Science gives prose to our understanding of the universe, but no poetry, no meaning.The fundamental question that must be asked by any person who studies the Sciences is simple, Is the Universe all their is, or is there a superset to the Universe, something greater from which the Universe proceeds? This is a difficult question, in that, by definition, the universe is defined as that set of points that one can interact with, in principle, by bouncing a particle against it, whether a photon or other particle. From this viewpoint, the universe is a hugh physics engine.

That which we can not, IN PRINCIPLE, interact with in such a way is by definition not in our Universe, and Science cannot make any statements about it. Such is the pervue of Metaphysics, the attempt to understand why the Universe is here, or even if the question itself is meaningless. Each metaphysics establishes with it a set of symbols by which the person then “Sees” the Universe.

The Secular Humanists who are commented on make the Metaphysical statement that the Universe is all there is and has no intrinsic “Meaning”. This is the underlying assumption. What I would clearly state is that one must Always questions their assumptions and never forget that their assumptions underpin all subsequent statements.

[G'Kar]

No, no, no. Your were making several normative claims including:

1. Most scientists aren't religious.
-I'll give you this one. For modern scientists at least.

2. "I'd counter with the way people tend to stay where they are religious wise and the majority are likely only religious because that is the way they were raised. [b]Do you really think the intellectual greats from our past were deeply religious?"[/b]
-Good luck proving this one. ;)
-To be fair, I feel what you say is true, but it is impossible to prove. Its an [b]amazing[/b] coincidence how so many of the religious worship the same god as their parents. Its more of a learned cultural thing then honest belief, but that is only my belief and I couldn't prove it, so it is just empty rhetoric.

[Guest thebadlady]

I have no idea what you just said. (Ser Wolf King)



:leaving:

G'Kar - there is no 'proof' either way. I look at it like this: back in the day if you proposed shit like the sun was the center of the universe instead of the earth, the church would cut off all your bits unless you recanted your heresy. In this day, there isn't a death threat for being a scientist. I think its quite likely that manya scientist faked it but good rather than dying. I think the current percents of non-religious scientists aren't a fluke and probably go back for, like,...ever. How can you really prove someone/a group of someones was religious when they had serious cause to be afraid for their lives if they said otherwise?

But shiiiit, people are going to believe what they want to, eh?

Wait, amazing that people worship the same gods as their parents? I think thats the least amazing thing of all. Its not like people go from worshiping 'God' to worshipping Zeus. If you grow up indoctrinated in something, you aren't likely to change. Check [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claims_to_be_the_fastest_growing_religion"]this.[/url] (Yes, I am too lazy to find anything more specific. You can if you'd like.)

[Annelise]

[quote name='thebadlady' post='1647735' date='Jan 13 2009, 18.52']/sidebar

Fellow parents - would you interfere with another parent's parenting choices as long as they didn't involve serious immediate physical harm?[/quote]

Narrowing that down to this example... I would not feel obligated to answer as the parent did, if asked. And since both answers are not, IMO, incompatible, I don't feel interjecting is an automatic case of underminding the parent. I would not say they were wrong about it being God's will, but I might add something re: the scientific answer. Obviously this does not account for personal dynamics.

[Lany Freelove Cassandra]

[quote name='thebadlady' post='1647735' date='Jan 13 2009, 18.52']/sidebar

Fellow parents - would you interfere with another parent's parenting choices as long as they didn't involve serious immediate physical harm?


Shryke, I don't think you get it. Somethings are just not done and that is one of them. Its not rabidity, its respect for the other person as a parent and just common sense.

And you are not getting my point at all. I don't believe in god and I think its fucking retarded to believe and proselytize. I believe its completely and totally disrespectful to even imply in some way to another human that you are better than they are for having an imaginary friend and this imaginary friend is going to put you on a cloud with 72 fluffers because you believe and someone else is going to be burning in hell while being fucked with Satan's tail due to their non-belief.

If someone chooses to believe this sort of bullshit there is nothing I can do or say to change that. I just write them off as crazy bastards and they write me off as Satan's handmaiden.

Witness on.[/quote]

I have had teenagers come to me for advise about religion and such. I have asked them how their parents felt about them coming to me for advise. No matter how they answered, I have still helped them but I always advised them to try and talk to their parents as well.

Without being asked by the child I would not say something to them that deliberately contridicted things I knew their parents had taught them.

Parents have a right to teach their kids as they best see fit even if we don't agree with it. The best you can hope for is during the teenage years they will look for answers elsewhere.

[G'Kar]

[quote name='thebadlady' post='1647871' date='Jan 13 2009, 20.43']I have no idea what you just said. (Ser Wolf King)



:leaving:

G'Kar - there is no 'proof' either way. I look at it like this: back in the day if you proposed shit like the sun was the center of the universe instead of the earth, the church would cut off all your bits unless you recanted your heresy. In this day, there isn't a death threat for being a scientist. I think its quite likely that manya scientist faked it but good rather than dying. I think the current percents of non-religious scientists aren't a fluke and probably go back for, like,...ever. How can you really prove someone/a group of someones was religious when they had serious cause to be afraid for their lives if they said otherwise?

But shiiiit, people are going to believe what they want to, eh?[/quote]

Fair point, but I'm saying we are just bad as the religious because we believe in something that can't be proven, which is what we condemn the religious for doing.


ETA: Wolf King is on a higher level, so don't worry if you can't understand him.

[Ser Maynard of Mountainview]

Yeah being told that God makes it snow is not really striking a huge blow for anti-intellectualism all on its own. What's the big deal? I used to think thunder was angels bowling when I was like 4 or 5 but then I learned about how it works in Science class.

Also I would have to disagree pretty strongly about Science and Religion being anathema to each other, and religion automatically making you dumber. Heck, one of my favorite quotes is from Babylon 5 about that very thing: "Faith and Reason are the shoes on your feet. You can travel further with both than you can with just one."

[G'Kar]

[quote name='Ser Maynard of Mountainview' post='1647902' date='Jan 13 2009, 20.54']Yeah being told that God makes it snow is not really striking a huge blow for anti-intellectualism all on its own. What's the big deal? I used to think thunder was angels bowling when I was like 4 or 5 but then I learned about how it works in Science class.

Also I would have to disagree pretty strongly about Science and Religion being anathema to each other, and religion automatically making you dumber. Heck, one of my favorite quotes is from Babylon 5 about that very thing: "Faith and Reason are the shoes on your feet. You can travel further with both than you can with just one."[/quote]

B5 quote? Very nice! :thumbsup:

Welcome to the board. :cheers:

ETA: Although you are not really new of course. ;)

[Guest thebadlady]

[quote name='G'Kar' post='1647899' date='Jan 13 2009, 19.53']Fair point, but I'm saying we are just bad as the religious because we believe in something that can't be proven, which is what we condemn the religious for doing.


ETA: Wolf King is on a higher level, so don't worry if you can't understand him.[/quote]


I like higher levels myself sometimes. :P And aye, militant atheists like me suck as bad as fundie christians, but who is more dangerous? My kids will grow up to be scientists, not fry cooks. :lol:

And why is it a big deal? Every family has its thing and weird dynamics. (To make it even better, my BiL is as rabidly atheist as I am and my sis is making him crazy. :rofl:)

[Serious Callers Only]

[quote name='Ser Scot A Ellison' post='1647830' date='Jan 14 2009, 01.19']Rhelle,

Sir Issac Newton, one of the greatest scientists to ever live was deeply religious.[/quote]


Just to be a devil advocate, Newton was also nuts.

[Ser Maynard of Mountainview]

[quote name='G'Kar' post='1647906' date='Jan 13 2009, 20.55']B5 quote? Very nice! :thumbsup:

Welcome to the board. :cheers:

ETA: Although you are not really new of course. ;)[/quote]

Thanks! Your name's pretty awesome too. :) He has some really interesting stuff to say about religion and the universe also.

And yeah, I've been around awhile (since the old board even) but I've been pretty much a professional lurker, heh.