Closed mindedness

[MidGe]

The question asked can be answered in another way.

The nenial of concept comes after its generation which comes after an emptiness.

blank space or emptiness = open mindedness
belief in a god concept = close mindedness
eliminating the belief in a concept = back to open mindedness

Note that I am saying eliminating or eradicating the belief, which is not the same as believing the opposite of the original belief.

To start there is a total unconcern with god, since the concept does not yet exist.

Edited:

It seems to me that atheism is there only to point out to theists the way in which they are close minded. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[surftheiop]

"If you mean open to new ideas, you can't tell anything."

Thats point im trying to get across - why are the religous sterotyped as being closeminded.

[surftheiop]

The thing is there isnt any scientific evidence of god so therefore they are not open minded to believing in god.

[chezlaw]

[ QUOTE ]
The thing is there isnt any scientific evidence of god so therefore they are not open minded to believing in god.

[/ QUOTE ]
That's not quite right. They don't belive in god because there isn't any reason to. Its being skeptical rather than being credulous.

I would have thought that close-minded means being unopen to reason.

[edit: being closed or open-minded is independent of believing in god]

chez

[hyde]

[ QUOTE ]
but why is it that the religous are often portrayed as being closedminded ?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think it may be the stridency with which the religious often espouse their view.
Add the flaws of religious instiutions to which the religious must profess faith to the mix and their position becomes threatened.

[luckyme]

[ QUOTE ]
I would have thought that close-minded means being unopen to reason.

[/ QUOTE ]

Closed-minded is also used as being unopen to appeals of emotion. People reach a way of feeling about a topic and changing their mind would mean destruction of their worldview, admitting to themselves, never mind others, that they were w-w-wronggg.

Endless examples in family situations and workplace 'I've been done wrong' viewpoints where no appeal, reason or emotional can break through.

Religion is a psychological position ( not a totally negative one) people arrive at down various roads. Like other emotional attachments, like prefering dogs to cats, it doesn't depend on rationality. No amount of logical argument can convince a doglover that cats are just as deserving. They don't like cats !!

Non-theists/deists, for the most part, arrive at their positions from various logical or semi-logical routes, not all of them very valid. You can change their worldview 3 times before breakfast by laying out some evidence...

It's steadystate universe. "uh, seems right."
Oh, it doesn't have black holes. "nope, seems not."
Looks like there could be several universes. "Yeah, it sorta does, doesn't it."

You can't do that with a religious viewpoint, because evidence isn't 100% they don't have to say "looks like it" about anything that goes counter to their basic worldview ( they may tinker with the trimmings).

It's That difference, and not the hardnosedness of the attack and counterattack that underlies the 'closed-minded' label that some religious views receive. A person with a, let's call it, "zen-based" religious viewpoint would rarely be looked at as closed-minded.


[ QUOTE ]
[edit: being closed or open-minded is independent of believing in god]

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, but only in that broad statement way. Certain routes to belief and certain beliefs demand closedmindedness. So, even if a non-theist/deist is by nature quite closeminded, it's not a feature of the end position itself.

luckyme

[DougShrapnel]

[ QUOTE ]
Thats point im trying to get across - why are the religous sterotyped as being closeminded.

[/ QUOTE ] Actually the question you asked, or at least implied, was why aren't people that make the positive claim there is NO god considered close minded.

There are many reasons. Probably a good one is that the bread of atheist you are taking about rarely exists. Another reason is that there just isn't any new information about God. The position is normally taken in an extreme form of skepticism and not close mindedness. And lastly a Strong athiest doesn't like take his close mindedness outside of the belief in gods and the like.

[chezlaw]

[ QUOTE ]
Religion is a psychological position ( not a totally negative one) people arrive at down various roads. Like other emotional attachments, like prefering dogs to cats, it doesn't depend on rationality. No amount of logical argument can convince a doglover that cats are just as deserving. They don't like cats !!

[/ QUOTE ]
I prefer a big dog to a cat and a cat to a small dog but I struggle to see in what way that makes me closed-minded. Its just a statement of fact about what I have discovered to be my personal preference.

I went on holiday to Amsterdam with friend some years ago, one of which had a new partner. She refused to try Indonesian food (which is one of the local cuisines) because 'she might not like coconut'. Is that being closed-minded or just being very unadventurous?

[ QUOTE ]
Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[edit: being closed or open-minded is independent of believing in god]


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Yes, but only in that broad statement way. Certain routes to belief and certain beliefs demand closedmindedness. So, even if a non-theist/deist is by nature quite closeminded, it's not a feature of the end position itself.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with that but its not quite what I meant. Can we use one to predict the other. Politics is where I see the most closedmindedness. Can we make a better prediction of whether someone is religous by discussing a non-religous political issue with them?

chez

[luckyme]

[ QUOTE ]
I prefer a big dog to a cat and a cat to a small dog but I struggle to see in what way that makes me closed-minded. Its just a statement of fact about what I have discovered to be my personal preference.

[/ QUOTE ]

I grabbed the first analogy that went by me, not necessarily a good one, but you did seem to capture the flavour of it. Your ‘personal preference’ is not likely open to rational argument by me. You’ll have reasons for having them but not logical ones necessarily. The ‘leap of faith’ required for the initial premise in a religious belief is also not open to rational challenge.

The closed-mindedness you’d exhibit if I tried to convince you in some logical way that you should prefer cats is closed-mindedness … not receptive to alternative ideas on it.

[ QUOTE ]
Can we use one to predict the other. Politics is where I see the most closedmindedness. Can we make a better prediction of whether someone is religous by discussing a non-religous political issue with them?

[/ QUOTE ]

It’s not as if there's a direct causation in either direction or even a solid correlation between religousity and closed-mindedness in general, but it’s not non-existant either.

Here’s a topic that may fit your question, perhaps too simplistic but a start. ‘Mandatory sentencing’. Keeping in mind the very different psychological reasons people may need a religious worldview ( the religious right and the new-agers are examples of that), wouldn’t probing the ‘reasons’ they give for their position on that issue reveal something about the nature of their religious beliefs? Did you have a topic in mind?

luckyme

[chezlaw]

[ QUOTE ]
The closed-mindedness you’d exhibit if I tried to convince you in some logical way that you should prefer cats is closed-mindedness … not receptive to alternative ideas on it.

[/ QUOTE ]
hmm I'm open to this idea but don't think its reasonable. Throw all the ideas you like at me and I'll be receptive to thinking about them, I might even try some of them but if I find I prefer A to B then it would be perverse to chose A rather than openminded.

[ QUOTE ]
Here’s a topic that may fit your question, perhaps too simplistic but a start. ‘Mandatory sentencing’. Keeping in mind the very different psychological reasons people may need a religious worldview ( the religious right and the new-agers are examples of that), wouldn’t probing the ‘reasons’ they give for their position on that issue reveal something about the nature of their religious beliefs? Did you have a topic in mind?

[/ QUOTE ]
I think view on a matter of fact is better than a policy. heres an idea:

In the uk support for the Iraq war doesn't particularly divide along religous lines. Also support for political parties doesn't fall along religous lines. Lets assume supoport for the war and support for parties is equal amongst religous people (we could allow for a bias anyway but its simpler).

Then a much debated topic we could use is: Did Tony Blair deliberately mislead the country in the lead up to the war?

I claim people are closedminded about politics because there will be a strong correlation between:

Those who previously supported Tony Blair and think the answer is no.
Those who disliked Tony Blair and think the answer is yes.
Those who were against the war and think the answer is yes.
Those who were for the war and think the answer is no.

A large part of this correlation will be down to closedmindedness so if we take all the people who fall into these groups and there's a correlation between closedmindeness and religon then we would expect the proportion of religous people found to be higher than in the general population.

My guess is that it wouldn't be.

chez