dibby Posted March 5, 2006 Share Posted March 5, 2006 I was just wondering whether people embraced fundamentalist christianity because it "fitted" well with their mindset at the time? Not everyone who hears the christian message will convert and even people brought up with it don,t all embrace it, quickly growing out of it in their teens. Do you think there has to be a certain sense in which people are looking for security and so fix on christianity? If they were brought up in a muslim country then they would have converted to fundamentalist Islam. In other words its not so dependent on what "certainty" some people are presented with, but rather their mindset of looking for certainty that attracts them to the message. Some people on here seem to have embraced fundamentalist science as readily as they did christianity. Is it that some people simply cannot tolerate doubt in their lives? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkepticOfBible Posted March 6, 2006 Share Posted March 6, 2006 Some people on here seem to have embraced fundamentalist science as readily as they did christianity. Is it that some people simply cannot tolerate doubt in their lives? Define Fundamentalist Science? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thurisaz Posted March 6, 2006 Share Posted March 6, 2006 My thoughts exactly. Let's oversimplify for this posting and assume that there's exactly the two choices of fundie jebus cult or atheism/science. Technically speaking, we don't know of either that it's true. Both ways you might just be fooled by your senses or suffer a trick of the mind. However, one of the two options is supported by much more evidence than the other. Now what to choose? I leave it up to you... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dibby Posted March 6, 2006 Author Share Posted March 6, 2006 Some people on here seem to have embraced fundamentalist science as readily as they did christianity. Is it that some people simply cannot tolerate doubt in their lives? Define Fundamentalist Science? Science can also degenerate into literalism, as much as religion. The original, open, questioning that leads to so much evidential based ideas and theories can also become dogmatic in the end. Some scientists can begin to declare their opinions as the absolute truth; science can have its own authoritarian tradition, career structures etc. Scientists who dare to question the status quo can find themselves ostracized and declared "heretical". It is underpinned with its own paradigm of materialism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amethyst Posted March 6, 2006 Share Posted March 6, 2006 Science can also degenerate into literalism, as much as religion. The original, open, questioning that leads to so much evidential based ideas and theories can also become dogmatic in the end. Some scientists can begin to declare their opinions as the absolute truth; science can have its own authoritarian tradition, career structures etc. Scientists who dare to question the status quo can find themselves ostracized and declared "heretical". It is underpinned with its own paradigm of materialism. Define opinion. Do you think evolution is just an opinion? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dhampir Posted March 7, 2006 Share Posted March 7, 2006 As I understand it, no scientist worth his or her salt would consider their opinions, or any amassment of actual facts to be absolute truth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Curtdude Posted March 7, 2006 Share Posted March 7, 2006 ....In other words its not so dependent on what "certainty" some people are presented with, but rather their mindset of looking for certainty that attracts them to the message.... This is a good point, dibby. I think "bullheaded" is another word for it. Any type of assertion, if presented too strongly and dogmatically, fits this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lycorth Posted March 7, 2006 Share Posted March 7, 2006 I was just wondering whether people embraced fundamentalist christianity because it "fitted" well with their mindset at the time? Not everyone who hears the christian message will convert and even people brought up with it don,t all embrace it, quickly growing out of it in their teens. Do you think there has to be a certain sense in which people are looking for security and so fix on christianity? If they were brought up in a muslim country then they would have converted to fundamentalist Islam. In other words its not so dependent on what "certainty" some people are presented with, but rather their mindset of looking for certainty that attracts them to the message. Some people on here seem to have embraced fundamentalist science as readily as they did christianity. Is it that some people simply cannot tolerate doubt in their lives? Heh... I embraced fundy Xianity because it did suit my mindset very well. Even though it was only a year that I was a fundy Xian, it was enough. It spoke to my fervent Xianity that I was practicing at the time (I was still a staunch Roman Catholic) and the preachers of course came across as if they really knew their stuff. I was still living in my little Xian bubble, and so I ate it all up - hook, line, and sucker. It also spoke to the angry youth that I was inside, looking for "evil" people to hate so I could vent my anger and also feel like I was right with Gawd at the same time. And you know the routine - non-Xians, gays, Xian heretics and the like all provided a smorgasboard of petty grievances for me to take on myself, even though not one of those groups of people did a thing personally against me. I was so caught up in being a zombie for Jesus that I really fell for the routine about anything being done contrary to Christ was like an attack against myself. Fundy Xianity speaks to that human desire many folks have to get all fired up for a cause and really feel as if they are doing something important with their lives. Most people want to feel useful and live like they're really accomplishing something. Add Xianity to that and you have a ripe and fertile field to sow the seeds of fundyism, no matter the sect. People, even good and intelligent ones, get swept up along in it and eventually they are living their lives fighting for an endless cause and a war they cannot win - all for a god that does not exist. Sad, really... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mythra Posted March 7, 2006 Share Posted March 7, 2006 Some people on here seem to have embraced fundamentalist science as readily as they did christianity. Is it that some people simply cannot tolerate doubt in their lives? That is complete bullshit. So is the Bible. So is the idea of the soul. So is the ridiculous concept of an afterlife. I'm absolutely positive. It's so obvious. Hey.... did I just prove your point? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
godlessgrrl Posted March 7, 2006 Share Posted March 7, 2006 I embraced fundie-mentalist xianity because I was scared, and because I had no self-esteem at the time. I thought I was dirty and worthless, and was desperately looking for something to make me "clean" and whole. I was also trying to find a way to please an abusive parent - I was trying to make myself perfect and wonderful enough that they would stop treating me like shit and start treating me like a human being. So in some sense I suppose I became a fundie-mentalist because I was trying to both feel better about myself, and to gain some control over the chaotic world around me. I don't know how true that might be for any other given fundies. Though many seem definitely to be controlling and insecure, so who knows. And I've encountered at least a couple that have a deep-seated, fundamental shame lodged at the very core of who they are - such a shame that they're ashamed to even be alive and breathing. But I suppose it just depends. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evelyn Posted March 7, 2006 Share Posted March 7, 2006 I found I was/am very susceptible to a fundy mindset. I'm surpised I didn't get sucked into a cult, tho' the small fundy group I was part of before it split was almost a cult. I'm not sure why I'm susceptible. I seem to want to be part of an exclusive group that has "THE TRUTH". Could this be because I was a loner in school and was rejected and picked on by the popular people? I haven't thought about this before. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dibby Posted March 7, 2006 Author Share Posted March 7, 2006 Yes Evelyn I know what you mean. I was susceptible to the fundamentalist message because I was basically looking to feel secure in a scary world. No going through all the pain of trying to figure things out and think for myself. Just listen to Big God and everything will be ok.........only it wasn,t. I was not comfortable with the liberal anglican church as they were not "dynamic" or "certain" enough, for me I needed that certainty to hold on to. However I let it go coz thinking for myself was far more rewarding in the long run. Amethyst, the theory of evolution is just a theory and not the absolute truth. A simple, well researched, well evidenced theory that has stood the test of time. It may one day have to be adapted (or even abandoned ) if compelling, new evidence comes to light, but thats the beauty of science, it can never be static. There is always more to discover. I just think that some (not all though) scientists can be just as dogmatic as any religious fundamentalist. Maybe its the minds' search for absolutes thats the primary cause of fundamentalism in all its forms? What you guys think? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amethyst Posted March 7, 2006 Share Posted March 7, 2006 Amethyst, the theory of evolution is just a theory and not the absolute truth. A simple, well researched, well evidenced theory that has stood the test of time. It may one day have to be adapted (or even abandoned ) if compelling, new evidence comes to light, but thats the beauty of science, it can never be static. There is always more to discover. I just think that some (not all though) scientists can be just as dogmatic as any religious fundamentalist. Maybe its the minds' search for absolutes thats the primary cause of fundamentalism in all its forms? What you guys think? A good scientist never defines anything as absolute truth, and you're right, that is the beauty of science. Whenever new facts come out, the vast majority of scientists don't stick their heads in the sand and ignore them. However, evolutionary theory has got pretty strong evidence, more so than any other theory so far. Unless some really compelling evidence for another theory is discovered, evolution will be the leading theory and the one most frequently taught in schools. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dibby Posted March 7, 2006 Author Share Posted March 7, 2006 However, evolutionary theory has got pretty strong evidence, more so than any other theory so far. Unless some really compelling evidence for another theory is discovered, evolution will be the leading theory and the one most frequently taught in schools. Amen Amethyst. Hopefully teaching this kind of science will get the kids to form ideas based on evidence and reason, and steer them away from superstition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lorena Rodriguez Posted March 8, 2006 Share Posted March 8, 2006 I found I was/am very susceptible to a fundy mindset. I'm surpised I didn't get sucked into a cult, tho' the small fundy group I was part of before it split was almost a cult. I'm not sure why I'm susceptible. I seem to want to be part of an exclusive group that has "THE TRUTH". Could this be because I was a loner in school and was rejected and picked on by the popular people? I haven't thought about this before. Ditto that! I was a geeky loner...still am... and those new testament stories about the believers sharing everything and moving in together as a big family sounded great to me. I kept of changing churches hoping to find one with people devoted enough to give me the community I was looking for. In the end, christianity failed all the promises it made me, so I dumped it and moved on. Like a woman who marries a man thinking he is stinking rich to find out he doesn't have a penny. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkepticOfBible Posted March 9, 2006 Share Posted March 9, 2006 Science can also degenerate into literalism, as much as religion. The original, open, questioning that leads to so much evidential based ideas and theories can also become dogmatic in the end. Some scientists can begin to declare their opinions as the absolute truth; science can have its own authoritarian tradition, career structures etc. If they turn dogmatic, then it is there for a reason. The reason being to prevent false and psuedo science in entering mainstream science, eg scientolgy and young earth creationism. I agree the system is not perfect, but it has a pretty good track record. If you have better ideas to improve it, I would be glad to listen to them Scientists who dare to question the status quo can find themselves ostracized and declared "heretical". It is underpinned with its own paradigm of materialism. They are declared "heretical" because there usually is no evidence behind their theory. It could be that it might not be possible at that time, eg Einstein theory of relativity wasn't even recognised until like after his death. A theory remains false untill proven true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dibby Posted March 9, 2006 Author Share Posted March 9, 2006 A theory remains false untill proven true. [/ quote] But a theory can,t be formed until the evidence is there to support it; it is , therefore, considered true until evidence occurs which contradicts it. In which case it is either adapted to incorporate the new evidence, or falls apart completely. In the case of Einstein, he based his Theory on the evidence that he had. As technology developed scientists were able to make further observations, over the years, which confirmed the Theory. I guess I find some people dogmatic when they say things like, "Science has disproved the after life", "Science says that consciousness is just the result of the brain", etc. Science has done no such thing. SOME scientists say these things. Some do not. The verdict is out, the evidence is still coming in. In fact science must continually update its ideas as evidence is uncovered, otherwise it becomes static and stale. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrmarlin Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 I was just wondering whether people embraced fundamentalist christianity because it "fitted" well with their mindset at the time? Not everyone who hears the christian message will convert and even people brought up with it don,t all embrace it, quickly growing out of it in their teens. Do you think there has to be a certain sense in which people are looking for security and so fix on christianity? If they were brought up in a muslim country then they would have converted to fundamentalist Islam. In other words its not so dependent on what "certainty" some people are presented with, but rather their mindset of looking for certainty that attracts them to the message. Some people on here seem to have embraced fundamentalist science as readily as they did christianity. Is it that some people simply cannot tolerate doubt in their lives? Psychology has done a lot of studies on "cult-like personalities." You may be on to something when you said that it might be an already set mindset. If it weren't for Christianity, it would be for some other cult religion. The actual belief is inconsequential. It is the "rush" of the mass thinking, the cult-like surroundings and dogmatic behaviors - that what gets some people into it on a deep level. Obviously, looking around at all the ex-Christians, not everyone has a cult-like personality.. Some were born into and lost their taste for it.. some Woke Up and started thinking for themselves. But I do feel there is a sense of cult-tendancies with some of the people in Xianity. For the most part, it's a thing they have been doing for so long, that until they wake up they just continue to do it. Everyday is the Same type of routine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkepticOfBible Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 A theory remains false untill proven true. But a theory can,t be formed until the evidence is there to support it; it is , therefore, considered true until evidence occurs which contradicts it. In which case it is either adapted to incorporate the new evidence, or falls apart completely. I see, but if there is no evidence for a theory, then it is considered false. eg, the theory of aliens visiting earth. Such things would be considered false untill there is substancial evidence. In the case of Einstein, he based his Theory on the evidence that he had. As technology developed scientists were able to make further observations, over the years, which confirmed the Theory. But what I can recall, his theory wasn't accepted during his time period. It was afterwards I guess I find some people dogmatic when they say things like, "Science has disproved the after life", "Science says that consciousness is just the result of the brain", etc. Science has done no such thing. SOME scientists say these things. Some do not. The verdict is out, the evidence is still coming in. In fact science must continually update its ideas as evidence is uncovered, otherwise it becomes static and stale. no arguements there. I do know, when it comes to the brain, we really know jack about it. For starters scientist don't even know how memory are formed. I do think science is updating its ideas as evidence is being uncovered. However the same cannot be said of religion, I suppose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dibby Posted March 11, 2006 Author Share Posted March 11, 2006 I do think science is updating its ideas as evidence is being uncovered. However the same cannot be said of religion, I suppose. Yes. The only evidence for life is growth. Anything that has stopped the possibility of developing is DEAD. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts