Recovery from atheist abuse
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
03-03-2017, 02:54 AM
RE: Recovery from atheist abuse
(03-03-2017 02:45 AM)Robvalue Wrote:  Yeah, you're right. I'm speaking too ideally, rather than realistically.

The good ideas don't need protecting from discussion, though. All topics should be on the table. I'm not communicating well this morning Tongue

Maybe not all - if I'm not mistaken Deborah Lipstadt don't speak with Holocaust denialists cause they don't deserve recognition that such discussion would give them. And similar case is with Dawkins who don't talk with creationists if I recall correctly. I can see merits of such approach.

I'm conflicted about this though - cranks does not deserve being talked with, but audience might think that avoiding of dispute is plus in cranks favor. However if audience is so uneducated as to think that shit like creationism is real there is no need for care about what it thinks. And so it goes on.

The first revolt is against the supreme tyranny of theology, of the phantom of God. As long as we have a master in heaven, we will be slaves on earth.

Mikhail Bakunin.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Szuchow's post
03-03-2017, 03:23 AM
RE: Recovery from atheist abuse
All I know is that geekgroupie didn't act like any sane 61 year old female I know, sounded proper crazy.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-03-2017, 03:40 AM
RE: Recovery from atheist abuse
(03-03-2017 02:54 AM)Szuchow Wrote:  
(03-03-2017 02:45 AM)Robvalue Wrote:  Yeah, you're right. I'm speaking too ideally, rather than realistically.

The good ideas don't need protecting from discussion, though. All topics should be on the table. I'm not communicating well this morning Tongue

Maybe not all - if I'm not mistaken Deborah Lipstadt don't speak with Holocaust denialists cause they don't deserve recognition that such discussion would give them. And similar case is with Dawkins who don't talk with creationists if I recall correctly. I can see merits of such approach.

I'm conflicted about this though - cranks does not deserve being talked with, but audience might think that avoiding of dispute is plus in cranks favor. However if audience is so uneducated as to think that shit like creationism is real there is no need for care about what it thinks. And so it goes on.

Sure, I respect individuals may not want to talk about certain things.

Personally, I'll talk about anything, with anyone, as long as they are being respectful and making an effort to be honest. I'm open to any viewpoint, as long as it can be backed up. Assuming that it can't possibly be backed up is to become closed minded; although obviously we've only got so much time to debate people and endlessly debating the same subject can end up being pointless.

I have a website here which discusses the issues and terminology surrounding religion and atheism. It's hopefully user friendly to all.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-03-2017, 03:50 AM
RE: Recovery from atheist abuse
When I say everyone, I mean I'll give everyone a chance. If I observe someone being regularly dishonest or abusive, then I won't waste my time talking to them.

I have a website here which discusses the issues and terminology surrounding religion and atheism. It's hopefully user friendly to all.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-03-2017, 04:07 AM
RE: Recovery from atheist abuse
(03-03-2017 03:50 AM)Robvalue Wrote:  When I say everyone, I mean I'll give everyone a chance. If I observe someone being regularly dishonest or abusive, then I won't waste my time talking to them.

Isn't that just 'best practices' for interacting with the whole world? Consider

[Image: E3WvRwZ.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes EvolutionKills's post
03-03-2017, 04:20 AM
RE: Recovery from atheist abuse
(03-03-2017 04:07 AM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  
(03-03-2017 03:50 AM)Robvalue Wrote:  When I say everyone, I mean I'll give everyone a chance. If I observe someone being regularly dishonest or abusive, then I won't waste my time talking to them.

Isn't that just 'best practices' for interacting with the whole world? Consider
True but sometimes the level of crazy can be such as you just can't take your eyes off it and you kinda have to see what's going to happen next, we haven't had one this bad for a while, she really needs to get help.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-03-2017, 04:41 AM
RE: Recovery from atheist abuse
(03-03-2017 03:40 AM)Robvalue Wrote:  
(03-03-2017 02:54 AM)Szuchow Wrote:  Maybe not all - if I'm not mistaken Deborah Lipstadt don't speak with Holocaust denialists cause they don't deserve recognition that such discussion would give them. And similar case is with Dawkins who don't talk with creationists if I recall correctly. I can see merits of such approach.

I'm conflicted about this though - cranks does not deserve being talked with, but audience might think that avoiding of dispute is plus in cranks favor. However if audience is so uneducated as to think that shit like creationism is real there is no need for care about what it thinks. And so it goes on.

Sure, I respect individuals may not want to talk about certain things.

Personally, I'll talk about anything, with anyone, as long as they are being respectful and making an effort to be honest. I'm open to any viewpoint, as long as it can be backed up. Assuming that it can't possibly be backed up is to become closed minded; although obviously we've only got so much time to debate people and endlessly debating the same subject can end up being pointless.

Some things can not be backed - everyone can have opinions, but facts are the same for each of us and no amount of special pleading, obfuscation and crying about how someone don't want The Truth will change this. That said creationists or denialists aren't necessarily ignorant or irrational, they could have an agenda.

Also it isn't about don't wanting to talk about x, but rather about thought that dispute validate opinion of other side. Shit like creationism does not deserve validation of such kind, only laughter and contempt I think.

The first revolt is against the supreme tyranny of theology, of the phantom of God. As long as we have a master in heaven, we will be slaves on earth.

Mikhail Bakunin.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-03-2017, 06:45 AM
RE: Recovery from atheist abuse
Agreed, some things can't be backed because they contradict facts. But, technically speaking, we can't be certain what those facts are. It's always possible our current models are wrong somehow. Maybe someone has something crucial which would alter how we look at things.

Of course, for subjects like creationism, the probability of this seems to be negligible. The fact that no one has produced anything vaguely representing a case in 2,000 years means that there probably is nothing to present. But I'm always willing to hear someone out, within reason, if they think they have something new. If it turns out to be the same old shit, then there's no need to continue the discussion of course.

But realistically speaking, I agree, creationism deserves to be mocked. I don't consider that I'm validating it by being willing to consider "new evidence", I just see it as part of being open minded. If they don't have any new evidence, then it is indeed a waste of time.

I have a website here which discusses the issues and terminology surrounding religion and atheism. It's hopefully user friendly to all.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-03-2017, 06:53 AM
RE: Recovery from atheist abuse
(03-03-2017 06:45 AM)Robvalue Wrote:  Agreed, some things can't be backed because they contradict facts. But, technically speaking, we can't be certain what those facts are. It's always possible our current models are wrong somehow. Maybe someone has something crucial which would alter how we look at things.

Technically speaking we can't be certain that our civilization isn't controlled by unicorns as it is always possible that everything we see and experience is illusion made by them to hide their dominion over us.

I find such technicalities to be meaningless. Someone don't like the facts? Tough shit.

Quote:Of course, for subjects like creationism, the probability of this seems to be negligible. The fact that no one has produced anything vaguely representing a case in 2,000 years means that there probably is nothing to present. But I'm always willing to hear someone out, within reason, if they think they have something new. If it turns out to be the same old shit, then there's no need to continue the discussion of course.

But realistically speaking, I agree, creationism deserves to be mocked. I don't consider that I'm validating it by being willing to consider "new evidence", I just see it as part of being open minded.

Entertaining the absurd ideas does not make to my definition of open-mindedness. Some people just have problem with accepting facts and in my opinion that does not make them worth listening for the sake of above mentioned open-mindedness.

The first revolt is against the supreme tyranny of theology, of the phantom of God. As long as we have a master in heaven, we will be slaves on earth.

Mikhail Bakunin.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Szuchow's post
03-03-2017, 06:58 AM
RE: Recovery from atheist abuse
So really the title of this thread could be changed to..
"Recovery from hearing the truth"

Insanity - doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Rahn127's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: