The best approach to achieve one's goals (medium sized)

[MaxWeiss]

Upon reflection, it occurs to me that most of my posts do not serve a useful purpose, other than the immediate gratification of out-arguing somebody. I strongly feel with regards to the issues of faith and science, especially in current affairs, that faith in itself, believing something without evidence or in the face of evidence is not only irrational but inherently has "evil", for lack of a better word, in it because the line of thinking allows the justification of virtually anything, and targets others as good or evil not based on their actions in the world, but on their views upon things which nobody can prove. And in fact many atheists, including myself (now a registered Bright (http://the-brights.net/)), have been or are guilty of committing this crime in our discourse.

I also feel that despite all the enormous good organized religion has done and despite the personal happiness and growth it provides many individuals, that more violence and evil come from it and do not make up for the good.

It is thus my goal when I dedicate my time to this topic to convince others not only that belief is irrational, but that it is dangerous in a day and age where a person can simultaneously smart enough to build an atom bomb and religious enough to believe that going to heaven, the rapture, killing himself and/or many others, IS A GOOD THING.

I often shoot myself in the foot with such a confrontational method of posting whereby I immediately alienate my target audience by being so mean.

Also, I believe that the best way to achieve my gaol on a global level is to increase education and in particular science, math, and the arts. I am not at all surprised by the fact that proportionally far fewer scientists are religious, in whatever sense you want to define it, and I think the best way to achieve my goal would then be to "play nice" with religion towards the end that I achieve cooperation in regards to education. Certainly I will oppose Intelligent Design and all such nonsense, but beyond that, I figure that at least displaying respect, even if I don't actually have it, is the best approach to get what I think is best for the world.

The problem is then that I would feel that I am sacrificing core values in order to give respect where I feel none is deserved; however in this instance, with such a large amount of religious people in the world and myself being in the minority, it may be the only plausible thing to do.

I will try to keep that in mind.


What are your goals in posting here and in life, and what do you think the best way to achieve them would be?

[luckyme]

[ QUOTE ]
Certainly I will oppose Intelligent Design and all such nonsense, but beyond that, I figure that at least displaying respect, even if I don't actually have it, is the best approach to get what I think is best for the world.

The problem is then that I would feel that I am sacrificing core values in order to give respect where I feel none is deserved; however in this instance, with such a large amount of religious people in the world and myself being in the minority, it may be the only plausible thing to do.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's a tricky line to walk. I differentiate between respect for a person and respect for their ideas. Many want to shield their ideas behind the respect for the person.

We've had posts on here stating that directly - their ideas should be respected because they are theirs.

If somebody wants to claim it's a good idea to wear sandals in a snowstorm we should be able to argue it's idiocy while respecting their right to do it and believe it. Although it does seem reasonable that idiotic ideas are held by idiots, it's not always true and we should give lots of leeway to avoiding that leap. It's the flip side of thinking that idiots have only idiotic ideas.

That covers the foundation of the 'approach' part of your question. I certainly think faking liking their ideas is a poor and dishonest road, however the actual contact is handled specifically.
I'll answer the 'goals' part in a later one.

luckyme

[madnak]

Existential boredom?

It really varies. Sometimes it's to let off steams, other times to explore ideas. Often it's to communicate, to learn how other people think and feel or express some of my own thoughts and feelings. Occasionally it's to clarify something or get advice.

[luckyme]

[ QUOTE ]
What are your goals in posting here and in life, and what do you think the best way to achieve them would be?

[/ QUOTE ]

Goals - it's not an approach that fits well with me. "Paths" is a better description. So, flushing out chez on belief ( not religious) or bunny on existance or even DS on life and numbers are interesting paths. Perhaps 'a better understanding' is the goal but that'd be forcing it a bit, I simply enjoy learning and trying to understand, goals need not apply.

luckyme

[RJT]

ck,

[ QUOTE ]
…What are your goals in posting here…

[/ QUOTE ]

To make sure that thoughts like the following do not go unanswered:

[ QUOTE ]
…I also feel that despite all the enormous good organized religion has done and despite the personal happiness and growth it provides many individuals, that more violence and evil come from it and do not make up for the good…

[/ QUOTE ]

You readily admit that you “feel” this to be the case You have no proof that it is so. Yet you set as a goal:

[ QUOTE ]
…It is thus my goal when I dedicate my time to this topic to convince others not only that belief is irrational, but that it is dangerous…

[/ QUOTE ]


You start out with a premise that is, at best, a hunch. Now, who is the irrational one?

Btw, If you haven’t read the recent thread here on SMP titled “A Free-for-All on Science and Religion” you should. Your fellow scientists just spent a few days discussion your very point.

RJT

[MaxWeiss]

[ QUOTE ]

You readily admit that you “feel” this to be the case You have no proof that it is so.

...

You start out with a premise that is, at best, a hunch. Now, who is the irrational one?

[/ QUOTE ]

First I will definitely look over the Science and Religion Free For All thread, which I have not yet done.

Also, I do have lots of data to back up my "feeling". (Again, problems seem to arise when I use a particular word in trying to express myself.) This is not just a feeling. I have gathered, and can gather much more data to support this. The issue will arise however that you can also gather much data to support all the good religion does and data which may even contradict what I find. HOWEVER, when we universally look at all of the collection, I would definitely put my money where my mouth is in saying that the acts of destruction and violence done in the name of faith or religion, while maybe not as numerous, are collectively more physically and psychologically destructive than the good can make up for. But a lot of this would also do in what I think is bad, like brainwashing children and teaching people how to NOT think for themselves. So it's at the core a subjective debate--BUT it's one that I truly think you fight with a clouded mind.

That being said, I will concede because there's just too much data to go over, and frankly I just don't want to do it! I do understand your point on my "feeling" and there is enough evidence which is ambiguous or which supports you for me to say that I cannot be anywhere near certain on the goods vs. the bads. The problem however is that just one bad, like say global thermonuclear war, is MUCH MORE PROBABLE in s society who TRULY BELIEVES that the end of the world is GOOD because of nonsense religion.

I get my "feeling" because the nature of viewing death as a good thing, as a transition to something better, and the conflict we have with each other in life, necessitates that death is more likely to be considered as a GOOD option.

It is specifically that line of thinking which leads to badness. no matter how much good religion does, there is always a MUCH STRONGER chance that it will end up in something terrible, due to the nature of beliefs about death, martyrdom and so on and so on. This is not just for other nations and religions; many christians believe that armageddon would be wonderful.

I hope that despite all the data we can get or do have, you can understand why I think that believing death results in eternal happiness, a core of many religions, necessitates bad things. And that's just one of the lines of thinking that religion has promoted. The very nature of religion is making claims which are fundamentally wrong, or destructive, or just currently unprovable. That is appalling as well.

[madnak]

[ QUOTE ]
To make sure that thoughts like the following do not go unanswered:

[/ QUOTE ]

This is one of the most blatant hijacks I've ever seen.

[Mickey Brausch]

NM