Only By Under The Table Means Would This...
Crosswords8 mins ago
Religious Fundamentalists
111 Answers
After years of debate on here (and elsewhere, both online and in person) with religious fundamentalists, there's only one conclusion that can be reached.
Their brains are switched off!
Im not talking about the average person who happens to have a religious belief. I mean the fundies. Those who believe whole heartedly in a given dogma and wont make any concession that they may be wrong, despite been shown evidence to the contrary.
I remember reading an Arthur C Clarke article once where he talked about a team of scientists who set up an observatory in a muslim country to observe a solar eclipse. The team of scientists were ridiculed by the local clerics who said that only Allah knows the timing of such things. After the eclipse, the clerics accepted that it had happened but said that it was nothing more than an amazing coincidence...
I have no problem at all with religious believers, but some (like the clerics above) cant accept the bloody obvious even when its been presented to them right before their eyes.
It gets passed over like its never even been read!!!
Their brains are switched off!
Im not talking about the average person who happens to have a religious belief. I mean the fundies. Those who believe whole heartedly in a given dogma and wont make any concession that they may be wrong, despite been shown evidence to the contrary.
I remember reading an Arthur C Clarke article once where he talked about a team of scientists who set up an observatory in a muslim country to observe a solar eclipse. The team of scientists were ridiculed by the local clerics who said that only Allah knows the timing of such things. After the eclipse, the clerics accepted that it had happened but said that it was nothing more than an amazing coincidence...
I have no problem at all with religious believers, but some (like the clerics above) cant accept the bloody obvious even when its been presented to them right before their eyes.
It gets passed over like its never even been read!!!
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by nailit. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Old_Geezer, I agree with your premise 100% , but would de-religious "for the grace of something" to 'exit from which specific birth canal' and the inevitable subsequent nurture.
Evidence, irrespective of quantity or quality, is often difficult to procure.
Theland, some peculiar attacks on religion are claimed to be of a supernatural scale now
Evidence, irrespective of quantity or quality, is often difficult to procure.
Theland, some peculiar attacks on religion are claimed to be of a supernatural scale now
Theland, //Their evidence ends in a dead end. //
But your ‘evidence’ doesn’t just end in a dead end - it’s a complete non-starter. What you’re really saying is ‘I don’t know how it happened so God must have done it’. Since there is no evidence that your God exists it follows that your conclusion is not the product of logical thought processes.
//They all believe in no first cause.
Do you?//
I don’t ‘believe’ in anything. Like you, and them, I don’t know how the universe began - that’s if it ever had a ‘beginning’. Maybe it just ‘is’ as you say your God just ‘is’. If you can apply that to something you can only imagine, why not to something proven to exist?
But your ‘evidence’ doesn’t just end in a dead end - it’s a complete non-starter. What you’re really saying is ‘I don’t know how it happened so God must have done it’. Since there is no evidence that your God exists it follows that your conclusion is not the product of logical thought processes.
//They all believe in no first cause.
Do you?//
I don’t ‘believe’ in anything. Like you, and them, I don’t know how the universe began - that’s if it ever had a ‘beginning’. Maybe it just ‘is’ as you say your God just ‘is’. If you can apply that to something you can only imagine, why not to something proven to exist?
What one gets from a religion is fundamentally what some man in a funny hat tells them to believe.
Science comes from a lifetime of work and research from thousands of people far smarter than those people in funny hats.
Amount of wars started by religious differences: many.
Amount of wars started by scientific disagreements: not a one.
I know what side I'm on.
Science comes from a lifetime of work and research from thousands of people far smarter than those people in funny hats.
Amount of wars started by religious differences: many.
Amount of wars started by scientific disagreements: not a one.
I know what side I'm on.
Fundamentalism speaks to the basic insecurity of the human condition.
We all live with this insecurity, but most people manage to adapt, and weave it seamlessly into their lives.
Others spend their lives constantly masking and propping up their insecurity, by latching onto something of a 'cause' that comforts them.
It's a 'gang' mentality - it's 'us against the world', it's 'we believe in this, and we are right, so we are a select group of correct people and the rest of the world is wrong.
Some fundamentalists affirm themselves by faintly pitying others, and spending time telling others who think otherwise that that are simply missing the point, and are lesser people for it - fundamentalist Christians do this.
Other fundamentalists affirm themselves by seeking to destroy others who think otherwise, seeing them as unfit to occupy the same piece of earth - fundamentalist Muslims do that.
But the root cause is exactly the same, a deep-seated fear of abandonment, and not 'belonging'.
As I said, it is part of the human condition - a need to feel a bond with others, and in extreme cases, to believe in utter self-righteousness.
It's easy to live with one set, harder to live with the other -
I was always able to ignore and laugh at Mary Whitehouse and her belief that only she and her select band of cohorts were immune to the tide of filth sweeping the nation via its televisions.
I can't ignore and laugh at the daughter of a terrorist who advises that innocent people must pay with their lives for the death of her father.
But the root human condition is identical - we either learn to accept and adapt, or we wander into the extremes of thinking in our deep-seated desire to be connected to others.
We all live with this insecurity, but most people manage to adapt, and weave it seamlessly into their lives.
Others spend their lives constantly masking and propping up their insecurity, by latching onto something of a 'cause' that comforts them.
It's a 'gang' mentality - it's 'us against the world', it's 'we believe in this, and we are right, so we are a select group of correct people and the rest of the world is wrong.
Some fundamentalists affirm themselves by faintly pitying others, and spending time telling others who think otherwise that that are simply missing the point, and are lesser people for it - fundamentalist Christians do this.
Other fundamentalists affirm themselves by seeking to destroy others who think otherwise, seeing them as unfit to occupy the same piece of earth - fundamentalist Muslims do that.
But the root cause is exactly the same, a deep-seated fear of abandonment, and not 'belonging'.
As I said, it is part of the human condition - a need to feel a bond with others, and in extreme cases, to believe in utter self-righteousness.
It's easy to live with one set, harder to live with the other -
I was always able to ignore and laugh at Mary Whitehouse and her belief that only she and her select band of cohorts were immune to the tide of filth sweeping the nation via its televisions.
I can't ignore and laugh at the daughter of a terrorist who advises that innocent people must pay with their lives for the death of her father.
But the root human condition is identical - we either learn to accept and adapt, or we wander into the extremes of thinking in our deep-seated desire to be connected to others.
// The team of scientists were ridiculed by the local clerics who said that only Allah knows the timing of such things.//
hi nailie - if you can find the arthur c clarke piece I would be grateful
odd, that the clerics were so anti science considering the considerable advances in science in Muslim countries whist Europe slept ( 600- 800 AD). Those were mutazilites ( god wanted you to find out why occurred) and were put out of business by - the others (who said that it was enough that it was god's will that something occurred)
the bit I cant understand is why or how Qsseem S ( dead Iran general for those with short attention spans) was such a good organiser ? organising mega death all over the world etc ?
because if he hadnt lifted a finger and just sat in his office drinking tea ( which people have noticed arab civil servants seem to do alot) - it wouldl have happened anyway by gods will....
hi nailie - if you can find the arthur c clarke piece I would be grateful
odd, that the clerics were so anti science considering the considerable advances in science in Muslim countries whist Europe slept ( 600- 800 AD). Those were mutazilites ( god wanted you to find out why occurred) and were put out of business by - the others (who said that it was enough that it was god's will that something occurred)
the bit I cant understand is why or how Qsseem S ( dead Iran general for those with short attention spans) was such a good organiser ? organising mega death all over the world etc ?
because if he hadnt lifted a finger and just sat in his office drinking tea ( which people have noticed arab civil servants seem to do alot) - it wouldl have happened anyway by gods will....
13:57 Tue. I disagree with that entirely. The reason is nothing nearly so complex. In my opinion the faithful cling to religion because they are afraid to acknowledge their own mortality. Religion promises the prospect of life after death - and instils the fear of punishment after death for those who fail to meet the criteria. Quite simply, without any of that 'God' would be redundant.
Naomi - // 13:57 Tue. I disagree with that entirely. The reason is nothing nearly so complex. In my opinion the faithful cling to religion because they are afraid to acknowledge their own mortality. Religion promises the prospect of life after death - and instils the fear of punishment after death for those who fail to meet the criteria. Quite simply, without any of that 'God' would be redundant. //
I don't perceive that you are disagreeing with me.
My point is about the concept of fundamentalism, your point is about religion, and although the two are connected, they are not the same.
Your point about religion is entirely valid in my view, but it does not address my point about fundamentalism, so it can't be read as disagreeing with the point I made.
I don't perceive that you are disagreeing with me.
My point is about the concept of fundamentalism, your point is about religion, and although the two are connected, they are not the same.
Your point about religion is entirely valid in my view, but it does not address my point about fundamentalism, so it can't be read as disagreeing with the point I made.
Latest Posts
Quizzes & Puzzles30 mins ago
ChatterBank71 mins ago
ChatterBank77 mins ago
It’s Christmas Eve! What Are We...
ChatterBank85 mins ago
Crosswords87 mins ago
