Five Minute's Thought

[Asimov]

On the subject of apostates/non-believers, there's this thread, in which "I don't know" is branded irrational and incoherent. What would Socrates say, I wonder?

 

Well your criticism of that thread is irrational and incoherent since it has nothing to do with the topic, fuck-you-very-much.

 

Finally, maybe I should be ironic and end this list with your posts in this very thread, Asimov. You may have objections to what I am saying, you may believe that what I am posting about simply does not happen here. Fine and dandy. But I am hardly painting with a broad brush. That is quite obviously not the case. Painting with a broad brush would be saying that there isn't one coherent thought on the board. Or that atheists are by definition incapable of thinking things through rationally.

 

Asking for specific examples isn't saying it doesn't happen.

 

Why? Why do people assume that the only lie, the only illusion, the only myth out there is Religion - and politics, on a good day? That other elements of your life don't deserve the same critical, careful, reasoned examination?

 

Seems like painting with a broad brush to me.

 

Five minutes isn't that long. Stepping away, taking a deep breath, and looking at things from a calm, logical perspective can do wonders.

 

Yes it is...what's your point?

[Merlinfmct87]

What I see, and it isn't just here at Ex-C, it's pretty much everywhere, is inconsistency in applying fundamental principles across the board. I see it less here, because people generally are more clear-thinking here. Maybe that's why it hurts more when it happens here. Sure hurts me more, anyway.

 

It does hurt, doesn't it? Far more than you expect.

I'm sure everybody's guilty of it in one arena or another -- I certainly see it in myself -- but it would be great if we could all take the extra few minutes to present our views in a way that shows we're truly as open-minded as we like to think we are. And it would be helpful if we saw "support of Ex-Christians" as, in part, pointing out to one another, with kindness and generosity of spirit, flaws in rational thinking when we notice them. Being free of xianity doesn't guarantee being free from inconsistency in what one believes and it doesn't protect one from being incautious in spouting off about convictions ill-fitting a freethinker.

 

I adore this. Big surprise, I know, but I do. I do feel that taking five minutes(or longer, even) is part of the 'obligation' that comes with banding around the 'freethought' tag.

 

Something I hold very dear is that Christianity is not the moral, philosophical, or logical high ground. People do not leave it(at least, I hope not) because the responsability is 'too great.' They leave it because their own morality is greater - by orders of magnitude - than the diety they worship and the preachers they listen to.

 

They escape it because they know, in their bones that there is something better. Higher. A tougher, harder, more demanding, more rewarding standard to live by.

If a group of people as bright and courageous as we are isn't dedicated to helping each other to fully overcome clinging to contradictory positions, mutually exclusive beliefs, double standards, refusal to forfeit baseless biases, needless heartlessness and cavalier thoughtless judgments, we might as well go back to church, where that stuff is not only tolerated, it's worshipped

 

My 2 cents.

(emphasis mine, obviously)

 

A-fucking-men. What makes us different, the fact that we stay in Sundays?

 

If we're going to claim we're wiser, better, smarter, etc., we damn well better live up to it. Don't you think?

Maybe what you're actually seeing has less to do with beliefs and more to do with just being human. Human nature.

 

One shade of human nature, sure. Not the only one, not even the strongest, I'd venture to say - although certainly the easiest, for whavere that is worth. It's been said earlier(by Pandora I think) that Apostasy is not maturity. It's no defense against sophistry, to quote myself. It's quite easy to slip into old habits, changing only your surroundings, not the soul. C. S. Lewis leaps to mind - an 'atheist,' who, at the same times, believes in a bastardized trinity of emotions: comfort in that God - to him, an ultimate judge - doesn't exist, anger that God isn't there to make it all better, and a longing for God to come in and fix all his grief... unable to muster up the emotional maturity to just get over it.

 

'Human Nature' doesn't excuse it. Reforms have happened, progress has been made, steps have bene taken, both on a national and personal level. Slavery ended, an institution that plagued humanity for thousands of years. That took an action, a unification of both individuals and large social forces. MLK wouldn't have gotten far without the thousands that marched with him.

 

Put it this way: how many people here have utterly turned their life around after turning apostate?

 

How many haven't?

 

It can be done. I'm not asking for the moon(which, incidentally, has been done, despite the national delusion/opinion that science is meaningless). I also think it's something inherent in human nature. Don't we have a tendency to reach for that which is beyond us? To strive for something higher, something better?

 

I'm not some madman in the attic, here. I know I'm not crazy to ask - nay, to demand this.

 

It is within us. If we just try...

 

I'm sorry Merlin but reading through your IP and your responses here you just sound like a cross between a school marm and a judgemental prick to me. You seem to think that if others disagree with your position that they are not putting enough thought into their points. Get over yourself. You are not the board police.

 

I prefer 'ignorance police,' but hey. Judgemental prick works, too.

 

It's better than apathy.

 

Well your criticism of that thread is irrational and incoherent since it has nothing to do with the topic, fuck-you-very-much.

Five minutes, man.

 

Asking for specific examples isn't saying it doesn't happen.

 

No, it's implying it.

 

Seems like painting with a broad brush to me.

 

Specific examples, narrow complaints. Sorry, it just doesn't fit.

 

Yes it is...what's your point?

 

Five minutes is too much to ask?

 

That says it all right there in black and white.

 

you can't be bothered...

 

Merlin

[pitchu]

Another thought: Since we can't see or hear each other, can't sit down and shoot the breeze, notice the age, economic position, facial tics, worry lines, tremor or forcefulness in the voice -- since we have none of these indicators to guide us in our conversations at this site, isn't it even more incumbent upon us to exercise care?

[Merlinfmct87]

I fucking love you merlin haibibi! *smooch*

 

I could really get used to this

Another thought: Since we can't see or hear each other, can't sit down and shoot the breeze, notice the age, economic position, facial tics, worry lines, tremor or forcefulness in the voice -- since we have none of these indicators to guide us in our conversations at this site, isn't it even more incumbent upon us to exercise care?

 

Something that does need special note, especially in heated discussions.

 

Merlin

[Amethyst]

Another thought: Since we can't see or hear each other, can't sit down and shoot the breeze, notice the age, economic position, facial tics, worry lines, tremor or forcefulness in the voice -- since we have none of these indicators to guide us in our conversations at this site, isn't it even more incumbent upon us to exercise care?

 

Very good point. A lot of misunderstandings on the net happen due to the fact that it's words on a screen. Sometimes it can be hard to tell if someone's joking or not, especially if they don't use the smileys.

[Merlinfmct87]

 

 

Very good point. A lot of misunderstandings on the net happen due to the fact that it's words on a screen. Sometimes it can be hard to tell if someone's joking or not, especially if they don't use the smileys.

 

ALWAYS use the smileys!

 

Merlin

[Onyx]

I rarely use smilys.

 

[AtheistMommy]

 

One shade of human nature, sure. Not the only one, not even the strongest, I'd venture to say - although certainly the easiest, for whavere that is worth. It's been said earlier(by Pandora I think) that Apostasy is not maturity. It's no defense against sophistry, to quote myself. It's quite easy to slip into old habits, changing only your surroundings, not the soul. C. S. Lewis leaps to mind - an 'atheist,' who, at the same times, believes in a bastardized trinity of emotions: comfort in that God - to him, an ultimate judge - doesn't exist, anger that God isn't there to make it all better, and a longing for God to come in and fix all his grief... unable to muster up the emotional maturity to just get over it.

 

'Human Nature' doesn't excuse it. Reforms have happened, progress has been made, steps have bene taken, both on a national and personal level. Slavery ended, an institution that plagued humanity for thousands of years. That took an action, a unification of both individuals and large social forces. MLK wouldn't have gotten far without the thousands that marched with him.

 

Put it this way: how many people here have utterly turned their life around after turning apostate?

 

How many haven't?

 

It can be done. I'm not asking for the moon(which, incidentally, has been done, despite the national delusion/opinion that science is meaningless). I also think it's something inherent in human nature. Don't we have a tendency to reach for that which is beyond us? To strive for something higher, something better?

 

I'm not some madman in the attic, here. I know I'm not crazy to ask - nay, to demand this.

 

It is within us. If we just try...

 

My husband has talked about belief in God as an addiction. I agree with him to a point. He posted a very good article that explained the nature and nurture of belief. On most issues, nature vs nurture is about 50/50. I don't think many people would argue that Christianity is taught, you don't come out of the womb knowing about "God."

 

Some of us have reverted back to using tactics we've been taught as believers, sure. The nature part is when we carry on a debate and revert back to childishness. You know your wrong, why fight it?

 

Well, I'll tell ya this, I don't have all the answers and I can admit it. Now we move on, the frontal lobe. The biggest of the 4 lobes and it controls a lot. It is known for keeping "reason" in the mind. I think this quote sums it up:

There’s a part of the brain which, when it gets injured, something very interesting happens to us. I’m willing to bet, every day, everyone of us in this room has some thought that is boastful or lustful or petulant, or something weird, and we would die if anybody knew we were thinking that. Get this part of the brain damaged, and every time you think one of those things, you say it! Or you do it! [laughter] This is the frontal cortex (http://www.reverendatheistar.com/belief_and_biology.htm).

 

How does this connect to religion? Well, here's another quote to sum it up:

What is perfectly obvious here is that this entire picture applies just as readily to our western cultures. Western religions, all the leading religions, have this schizotypalism shot through them from top to bottom. It’s that same exact principle: it’s great having one of these guys, but we sure wouldn’t want to have three of them in our tribe. Overdo it, and our schizotypalism in the Western religious setting is what we call a “cult,” and there you are in the realm of a Charles Manson or a David Koresh or a Jim Jones. You can only do post-hoc forensic psychiatry on Koresh and Jones, but Charles Manson is a diagnosed paranoid schizophrenic. But get it just right, and people are gonna get the day of on your birthday for millennia to come.

 

OK, now I think I'm in danger of being totally off topic and I have lost my point. Sorry, I'm really tired.

 

But it goes something like this, consider that the frontal lobe doesn't fully mature until about the age of 30 and shortly after degrades. Consider that a hell of a lot of people who are devout, fundy and just love whatever they worship, also have some kind of frontal lobe damage. Consider the fact that drugs damage your frontal lobe.

 

I'm just saying, there is more to the picture than just past religious beliefs or just religious beliefs for that matter.

[Merlinfmct87]

My husband has talked about belief in God as an addiction. I agree with him to a point. He posted a very good article that explained the nature and nurture of belief. On most issues, nature vs nurture is about 50/50. I don't think many people would argue that Christianity is taught, you don't come out of the womb knowing about "God."

 

There is a way for it to be half nature and half nurture. The notion of 'God' could simply appeal to the lower reptile-brain within us, the same part that emphasizes submission to leaders, protection of territory, aggression, in general, the base instincts.

 

Think about it: Submission to an aggressive, violent leader. Ring any bells?

Some of us have reverted back to using tactics we've been taught as believers, sure. The nature part is when we carry on a debate and revert back to childishness. You know your wrong, why fight it?

 

This part has me a little confused. How do you mean 'you know your wrong, why fight it?' To reply to the first half of this, yes, I agree wholeheartedly, people have(and will, I fear) used the same kind of robotic/reflexive thinking to defend their own beliefs and assumptions, as pandora, pitchu, Chris Carrion and myself have commented and sounded off on earlier in this thread.

Well, I'll tell ya this, I don't have all the answers and I can admit it. Now we move on, the frontal lobe. The biggest of the 4 lobes and it controls a lot. It is known for keeping "reason" in the mind. I think this quote sums it up:

There’s a part of the brain which, when it gets injured, something very interesting happens to us. I’m willing to bet, every day, everyone of us in this room has some thought that is boastful or lustful or petulant, or something weird, and we would die if anybody knew we were thinking that. Get this part of the brain damaged, and every time you think one of those things, you say it! Or you do it! [laughter] This is the frontal cortex (http://www.reverendatheistar.com/belief_and_biology.htm).

 

How does this connect to religion? Well, here's another quote to sum it up:

What is perfectly obvious here is that this entire picture applies just as readily to our western cultures. Western religions, all the leading religions, have this schizotypalism shot through them from top to bottom. It’s that same exact principle: it’s great having one of these guys, but we sure wouldn’t want to have three of them in our tribe. Overdo it, and our schizotypalism in the Western religious setting is what we call a “cult,” and there you are in the realm of a Charles Manson or a David Koresh or a Jim Jones. You can only do post-hoc forensic psychiatry on Koresh and Jones, but Charles Manson is a diagnosed paranoid schizophrenic. But get it just right, and people are gonna get the day of on your birthday for millennia to come.

 

OK, now I think I'm in danger of being totally off topic and I have lost my point. Sorry, I'm really tired.

 

But it goes something like this, consider that the frontal lobe doesn't fully mature until about the age of 30 and shortly after degrades. Consider that a hell of a lot of people who are devout, fundy and just love whatever they worship, also have some kind of frontal lobe damage. Consider the fact that drugs damage your frontal lobe.

 

I'm just saying, there is more to the picture than just past religious beliefs or just religious beliefs for that matter.

 

I see the point you are making, but I think you are making too much out of far too little. The missions to the moon, for example. The people in Mission Control were all fresh out of college - average age was about 25. Often younger. And yet, they had stunning success, they were able to deal with crises, adapt to new problems, and get three people in what was essentially a glorified bullet to the moon and back - repeatedly! Also, maybe my memory is going, but I don't think the mind starts to 'deteriorate' shortly after 30. From what I understand(and this may be mistaken) it's closer to the truth to say it begin to atrophy, to wither away from disuse. Yes, memory does take a hit. We're not talking about memory, we're talking about critical thinking. People well over 30(twice that and more) have a starteling potential - think of all the neural connections, insights, discoveries, lessons learned, to say nothing of the raw experience to draw upon such a long life gives you.

 

There's a very good reason people who are 'up in years' are known for wisdom. Now, of course, there are exceptions. Old age does not guarantee wisdom. There are young people who are wise, there are old people who are, to put it gently, raving idiots. That's due to personality of the person in question, not human nature in general. Human Nature, I think, is too large an animal to understand in such broad statements. People do silly, crazy, sometimes even smart things. It's a mish-mash.

 

Two cases in point. Point one: My Mum started writing her book when she was 39. She is now almost 42. Her writing now is, by orders of magnitude, better and more captivating. She's in the process of re-writing the book, polishing up her old writing and she has been cringing at her writing.

 

Point two: When Mum was 30, she was married to a passive-aggressive sociopath. STUPID!

 

As she got older, wiser, and smarter, she wised up and divorced the bastard. And trust me, neither one of us has regreted it for a moment.

 

Do you see my point, AtheistMommy?

 

Merlin

[AtheistMommy]

I'm sure I am making a mountain out of a mole hill. However, I was just trying to think "out of the box."

 

My point (half asleep at the time) was that there is more than one reason for what you are noticing.