Just A Reminder About Religious People

[willie24]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think you're right, at least if you consider the western society only.

However you should also remember that most of these people also believe that believing what they believe is good, and that not believing it is bad.

So while they don't really believe they have good arguments, they think whoever doesn't believe the same as them is bad. Especially those who don't have another simlar belief instead.

Also, most of these people encourage others to be in the second group, because they think that's the right position to hold, even if they themselves "lack the faith".

[/ QUOTE ]

Disagree with last sentence. Actually your last sentence was contradictory because the second group need not have as much faith as the first.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think I must be missing something here. Do you mean that the second group actually believes they have good evidence for their beliefs, so they don't need faith?

I would agree with that, if it wasn't because these people are much less willing to evaluate or accept evidence against their beliefs. I would say that it's faith that produces this, but I can see how you can disagree with that.

Or maybe you didn't mean that kind of people at all when talking about the second group?



[/ QUOTE ]

i think sklansky misinterpreted the post he was reading.
in the passage, "that's the right position to hold, even if they themselves 'lack the faith,'" he took "they" to mean "the believers", when the OPer meant it to mean "others"

[soon2bepro]

I meant all others, but especially other believers. What's the difference here?

[madnak]

[ QUOTE ]
Once every few months I have to repost this because people keep on staring threads without making mention of it.

Their are two types of "believers". Those who believe the Packers would win today because they just "know it in their hearts" (and also have some good, but what they realize are non convincing reasons), and those who cannot believe that any non biased fan could possibly think the Cowboys should be favored.

Most religious people are the first type. The ones who are members of a religion that allow such an admission usually admit it. Members of other religions are less apt to. But even most of them are deep down the first type. At least I think so. God help us if I'm wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]

David, this is only relevant in some cases. (Also, I agree with tame that dichotomies almost always indicate sloppy logic.)

When a theist acts on a set of beliefs, it's generally acceptable to assume that he really does hold those beliefs. Even if he only hopes the beliefs are true, arguments based on those beliefs still tend to apply. Particularly when one of the beliefs is that those who disagree will be tortured forever. In this case, the former group of theists "know in their hearts," or at least hope fervently, that those who think differently deserve to suffer the most extreme torments imaginable.

This is a shocking and ugly belief. And they don't get a pass on it because they only pay lip service, either.