Theism doesn't corner the market on ignorance.

[The Reality Salesman01]

I love this Forum!

I just wanted to start with that. I've been in Key West FL for the past 12 days and while amazing, it's kept me from the trappings of what draws me to this forum time and time again. So, while there may only be a few of you that have noticed my absence, I just wanted to offer an explanation and assurance to whomever you may be...

While I enjoy the opportunity for the conversations and debates that this forum provides, it is not the only avenue through which I pursue them. I engage any, and in fact, everybody that holds a belief pertaining to a God. I have found these opportunities to be both entertaining and productive (in terms of opportunity). What I've noticed is that there is a clear and distinct similarity between Theists and Atheists.


On this forum, the Theists that have been here a while have heard all of the crippling objections to their beliefs, they can find no reconciliation for them, and opt for the fingers-in-the-ears method.
They have received thorough instruction on the concepts that strengthen their objectivity, yet they argue in spite of them. Meanwhile, outside of this forum, in face to face disputes, Theists are literally blindsided by such objections and arguments. They are incapable of grasping the flaws in their beliefs. They regularly say things that would be eternally plastered on The Hall of Shame if they uttered them on a thread within the confines of this forum. They do not understand terms such as...

subjective
Objective
Belief
Probability/Possibility/ Potentiality (3 very confusing "P" words for Theists)
Theory
Reasonable
Fact
Fallacy
Logic
Rationality
Truth
Knowledge
Opinion
...etc

and my arguments fall on deaf ears.

Coincidentally, and in the interest of full disclosure, I hear self-proclaimed Atheists propagating equally flawed justification for their rejection of religion that appear to be equally uninformed on the meaning of such terms.

I think it necessary to address all levels of inaccuracy, atheist or theist, and take no issue in doing so. As I began to contemplate this issue, A quote from Plato entered my mind-

"A man that holds a true belief without knowledge, is like a blind man that happens to find the right road"...

The Theists and Atheists on this forum have much less excuse for their pursuit of ignorance, should they persist. But, what hope is there for the Majority population of theists (at least Americans) that will NEVER understand those words. They will never be exposed to their value. They will never be taught the concepts and lessons that give them meaning. The Theists go through life in an unchallenged fear and conviction of pure absurdity, and the uneducated Atheists (while fortunate) exist as a matter of a lack of exposure to such things. The uneducated Atheist cannot impact his cause in valuable arenas as He, himself, does not understand it. There is a clear disconnect within the confines of our society that has alienated logic from the list of valuable skills expected from members of society.

The ones that are fortunate enough NOT to be brainwashed are Atheists, and the less fortunate ones are Theists. But this doesn't help the cause. The most impactful practice is that which is offered by the skill of critical thinking, that apply not only to religion, but to all facets of life.

My point, I guess, is this: It is easy to favor the uneducated Atheistic views that are heard because they happen to be right, but I feel it is important to correct their flaws, and give them the tools necessary to fight the ignorant insistence of stupidity. Because stupidity is not exclusive to religion, it just happens to be the safest place for it to reside. The propagation of bad, flawed, and unjustified ideas is the problem with society, and it must be challenged in ALL forms.


That being said...I missed y'all! Welcome to the new members I have not yet had the pleasure of meeting!

-Tommy

[Vincenzo Vinny G.]

Have to agree with the overall point, even though perhaps the generalizations are not 100% accurate. Maybe it's just my exposure that leads me to talk to some very intelligent theists.

[The Reality Salesman01]

Oh! I agree with your point. It's hard to write these types of thoughts without the appearance of over generalizing. That being said, I also don't think that intelligence and being susceptible to inefficient processes of knowledge are mutually exclusive. I was not attacking stupidity. I was addressing a vulnerability to untrained ignorance. I appreciate you drawing attention to a possible misnomer.

[Zazzy]

Have to agree with the overall point, even though perhaps the generalizations are not 100% accurate. Maybe it's just my exposure that leads me to talk to some very intelligent theists.

I agree. It's not just your exposure. I know some undeniably brilliant theists- who are badass scientists.

2 points;
1.) Education is not equal across the board, and some people are less able to express points which may be bad, but which may be good and are just expressed badly. We are all more prone to tolerate this from our own "kind."
2.) Many folks, but especially atheists, are new to their POVs, and are figuring it out as they go. The rough-and-tumble language of forums like this one causes defensiveness, which can inhibit refining of one's position. People tend to dig in their heels when called an idiot.

All of us need to be aware that all of us sometimes are wrong, sometimes express things poorly, and sometimes need space to backtrack. In the world of academic science, it's crucial to be able to admit a poor hypothesis or analysis of data without fear of being, well, basically accused of "flip-flopping." I think the same is true of discovering one's stance on anything of importance.

[Cato]

Have to agree with the overall point, even though perhaps the generalizations are not 100% accurate.

A generalization is not a 100% accurate? Holy fuck! I think someone needs to consult a dictionary for the definition of generalization.

[The Reality Salesman01]

I feel I need to post a relevant observation with regards to education and susceptibility to believing things on insufficient evidence:

We live in a world in which you can be prestigiously trained as a brain surgeon, yet still be susceptible to believing in a virgin birth. Education and intelligence are not mutually exclusive from believing stupid things...and vice versa. That was my intended sentiment.

---

Have to agree with the overall point, even though perhaps the generalizations are not 100% accurate.

A generalization is not a 100% accurate? Holy fuck! I think someone needs to consult a dictionary for the definition of generalization.

I knew what he meant...lol

[Vincenzo Vinny G.]

I suppose I expect more of atheists, who are so aggressive in their condemnation of religion. Particularly because they use such overtly intellectual terminology in describing themselves, whether it is "skeptic", "freethinker", "rationalist", etc.

When people portray themselves as intellectually enlightened and "freed from the shackles of religion", particularly by appealing to science and education, you expect more.

So when atheistic ignorance rears it's head, it looks even uglier for atheists than the group that we expect to be unenlightened.

Even Daniel Dennett seeks to call atheists "Brights", which makes all the broken bulbs look all the more ironic.

---

Have to agree with the overall point, even though perhaps the generalizations are not 100% accurate.

A generalization is not a 100% accurate? Holy fuck! I think someone needs to consult a dictionary for the definition of generalization.

Some generalizations can be warranted. Such as ones that go from "Some bachelor is unmarried" to "All bachelors are unmarried".

But thanks for the torrent of wisdom you bring to this thread. Certainly given your posting history, the OP's point about ignorance in the atheist community would never bring your name to mind.

[Zazzy]

I suppose I expect more of atheists, who are so aggressive in their condemnation of religion. Particularly because they use such overtly intellectual terminology in describing themselves, whether it is "skeptic", "freethinker", "rationalist", etc.

This, I think, is a prime example of the over generalization you were just bemoaning. Why would more be expected of atheists? They come from all walks of life like theists.

When people portray themselves as intellectually enlightened and "freed from the shackles of religion", particularly by appealing to science and education, you expect more.

I haven't seen a dearth of theists portraying themselves as intellectually enlightened here. And what's wrong with appealing to science and education? Creationists appealing to science and education is appalling, but this is nothing that well-educated theists don't do- and they should do it.

So when atheistic ignorance rears it's head, it looks even uglier for atheists than the group that we expect to be unenlightened.

So much for the point of the OP. I certainly don't expect theists to be unenlightened (although if you label yourself a YEC, I don't hold out much hope that you will be well-educated). As I've said many times- I don't care what you have religious faith in as long as you're not trying to legislate it.

[Cato]

Some generalizations can be warranted. Such as ones that go from "Some bachelor is unmarried" to "All bachelors are unmarried".

It's obvious you still don't understand the meaning of the word 'generalization'.

But thanks for the torrent of wisdom you bring to this thread. Certainly given your posting history, the OP's point about ignorance in the atheist community would never bring your name to mind.

My posting history? Please re-read what you typed. You asserted that the name Cato would never be associated with atheist ignorance. Thanks for the compliment.

[The Reality Salesman01]

I hope this thread doesn't get derailed. The focus was on the importance of reliable processes of discerning true beliefs instead of the conclusion held by the belief-holder.