Religion invokes a One-sided World View

[paulpablo]

From what I've observed, I believe that religion invokes a one sided world view.

This is not true for all religious, but a large majority, you can see it prominently in the US. 

For the religious, let's say there's a christian for example. This Christian likely views the world by religions, or identifies them, but most likely he will have little knowledge of what Muslims believe[for ex.]. This creates a distance between those two people. I can garuntee most religious see the world as whatever they believe, and then some other weird people that believe something else. That's at least what I observed in my Bible class. It creates a one-sidedness, where you pay attention to those who follow your religion, and it's not that you don't like the others, but you disregard them because you don't understand their beliefs, this is what believing one religion over another creates, it creates this gap of understanding, whereas Atheists and others see all religions as equal reason to believe based on the lack of evidence for all of them, a religious person won't see it that way. They will see it as people who believe what they believe, but fail to understand how someone can believe something else because of their pre-conceived bias and communal acceptance of their religious preference, not considering other religions as equal reason to believe in.

Thoughts?


(PS: Sorry if I generalized. Normally I can always find the right words, but I kinda lost track of where I was going after feeling like I knew what to say at the start, and wasn't really feeling it, so go easy on me, hopefully you understood what I was saying.) 

I think it might be more accurate to say that a one sided world view invokes religion, and an open mindedness to all religions usually invokes Atheism.

How many religious people would be religious now if their parents hadn't already told them what they're supposed to believe in before they even know about the contents of holy books?
How many of them independent of cultural/social pressure would pick up a quran or bible and think "Wow, I need to show this to my friends, obviously god wrote this".

I think one sided views are pretty common among people over a certain age.  Muslims view all beliefs as equal, except their own, which is the one that they believe in. Atheists might see all religions as equal but they usually favour the side of disbelief over the side of belief.  So in this way once you have decided disbelief is the most logical conclusion to religions it's Atheism which is invoking a one sided world view.

  Not that it's necessarily a bad thing, time is a very important resource and if you remain open minded to every proposition every nut job puts forward to you you're going to spend your life debunking information that it would be wiser just to ignore.

My one sided view is that people have tried to make supernatural related claims all throughout history. With a constant production of books written with the supervision of god since the invention of the written word, and none of these books or claims has enough evidence to back it up as actually being supernatural or from god.

But I only came to this one sided world view after judging the religions local to me (Islam and Christianity) with open mindedness and equality, and with a bit of reading about the history of civilization, religion and cults in the world.

If someone comes to me with their new religion and book now though I might have a read of it to make fun of it, then maybe use it as toilet paper or have fun seeing how far I can throw it.  It's safe to say that these days I do have a one sided world view when it comes to religion and that's the side of disbelief.

[Dystopia]

Honestly I think every identify element of oneself influences a one sided view. Whether that means being a Christian, an American, a liberal, a conservative, an extrovert or an introvert it will inevitably contribute to a narrow view of the world

[Minimalist]

Indeed. What this actually points to is two distinct gods with limited areas of influence. That's the only sensible way to reconcile the very high correlation between geography and religion.

Actually, there are two even more sensible ways:

1) There is only one God, but all religions contain woefully inaccurate representations.

2) There are no gods outside of people's minds.

#2... always.

[Heat]

From what I've observed, I believe that religion invokes a one sided world view.

This is not true for all religious, but a large majority, you can see it prominently in the US. 

For the religious, let's say there's a christian for example. This Christian likely views the world by religions, or identifies them, but most likely he will have little knowledge of what Muslims believe[for ex.]. This creates a distance between those two people. I can garuntee most religious see the world as whatever they believe, and then some other weird people that believe something else. That's at least what I observed in my Bible class. It creates a one-sidedness, where you pay attention to those who follow your religion, and it's not that you don't like the others, but you disregard them because you don't understand their beliefs, this is what believing one religion over another creates, it creates this gap of understanding, whereas Atheists and others see all religions as equal reason to believe based on the lack of evidence for all of them, a religious person won't see it that way. They will see it as people who believe what they believe, but fail to understand how someone can believe something else because of their pre-conceived bias and communal acceptance of their religious preference, not considering other religions as equal reason to believe in.

Thoughts?


(PS: Sorry if I generalized. Normally I can always find the right words, but I kinda lost track of where I was going after feeling like I knew what to say at the start, and wasn't really feeling it, so go easy on me, hopefully you understood what I was saying.) 

I think it might be more accurate to say that a one sided world view invokes religion, and an open mindedness to all religions usually invokes Atheism.

How many religious people would be religious now if their parents hadn't already told them what they're supposed to believe in before they even know about the contents of holy books?
How many of them independent of cultural/social pressure would pick up a quran or bible and think "Wow, I need to show this to my friends, obviously god wrote this".

I think one sided views are pretty common among people over a certain age.  Muslims view all beliefs as equal, except their own, which is the one that they believe in. Atheists might see all religions as equal but they usually favour the side of disbelief over the side of belief.  So in this way once you have decided disbelief is the most logical conclusion to religions it's Atheism which is invoking a one sided world view.

  Not that it's necessarily a bad thing, time is a very important resource and if you remain open minded to every proposition every nut job puts forward to you you're going to spend your life debunking information that it would be wiser just to ignore.

My one sided view is that people have tried to make supernatural related claims  all throughout history. With a constant production of books written with the supervision of god since the invention of the written word, and none of these books or claims has enough evidence to back it up as actually being supernatural or from god.

But I only came to this one sided world view after judging the religions local to me (Islam and Christianity) with open mindedness and equality, and with a bit of reading about the history of civilization, religion and cults in the world.

If someone comes to me with their new religion and book now though I might have a read of it to make fun of it, then maybe use it as toilet paper or have fun seeing how far I can throw it.  It's safe to say that these days I do have a one sided world view when it comes to religion and that's the side of disbelief.

There is no "Side of disbelief". It is a rejection of belief, until proven, which is actually the opposite, atheism is treating all beliefs as false until proven otherwise, which is entirely equal, whereas religious peoples will treat other beliefs false except their own without even considering them to be true. You can't use that argument, or else you can say anyone and any position is a one sided view. Oh well you don't believe in my unicorn fairy astronaut? Well you're just being one sided with disbelief.

[paulpablo]

.

You can't use that argument, or else you can say anyone and any position is a one sided view.

I do think most people have a one sided view so why could I not use that argument?  Surely disbelief is a view, and belief is a view.  My view is that religions are unbelievable.

I'm not a person who believes atheism is a belief that god doesn't exist or a religion but I definitely think it is a view that religions are not believable, a rejection of belief in religions, whatever you want to call it.

Oh well you don't believe in my unicorn fairy astronaut? Well you're just being one sided with disbelief.

It is my view that unicorn fairy astronauts probably don't exist.  Yeh I am being one sided with disbelief about unicorn fairy astronauts because I don't want to waste my time researching something which is very very likely to not exist or effect me.

To me this seems like one of those instances where a phrase has been thrown around as being bad, even though it is common.

Just like people who say they are open minded and don't judge people by their past.  It doesn't actually have any true meaning and is just used by people when trying to sound cool and modern.  It's actually very useful to judge people based on their past and a common thing to have a one sided view, and only bad if this view is detrimental to other people or just purely illogical.

Your train of thought seems to be that having a one sided view is bad just because it is, so therefore atheism can't possibly be a one sided view otherwise that would be bad and that can't possibly be.

[orangebox21]

From what I've observed, I believe that religion invokes a one sided world view.

This is not true for all religious, but a large majority, you can see it prominently in the US. 

For the religious, let's say there's a christian for example. This Christian likely views the world by religions, or identifies them, but most likely he will have little knowledge of what Muslims believe[for ex.]. This creates a distance between those two people. I can garuntee most religious see the world as whatever they believe, and then some other weird people that believe something else. That's at least what I observed in my Bible class. It creates a one-sidedness, where you pay attention to those who follow your religion, and it's not that you don't like the others, but you disregard them because you don't understand their beliefs, this is what believing one religion over another creates, it creates this gap of understanding, whereas Atheists and others see all religions as equal reason to believe based on the lack of evidence for all of them, a religious person won't see it that way. They will see it as people who believe what they believe, but fail to understand how someone can believe something else because of their pre-conceived bias and communal acceptance of their religious preference, not considering other religions as equal reason to believe in.

Thoughts?


(PS: Sorry if I generalized. Normally I can always find the right words, but I kinda lost track of where I was going after feeling like I knew what to say at the start, and wasn't really feeling it, so go easy on me, hopefully you understood what I was saying.) 

What is substitutionary atonement?

[Heat]

From what I've observed, I believe that religion invokes a one sided world view.

This is not true for all religious, but a large majority, you can see it prominently in the US. 

For the religious, let's say there's a christian for example. This Christian likely views the world by religions, or identifies them, but most likely he will have little knowledge of what Muslims believe[for ex.]. This creates a distance between those two people. I can garuntee most religious see the world as whatever they believe, and then some other weird people that believe something else. That's at least what I observed in my Bible class. It creates a one-sidedness, where you pay attention to those who follow your religion, and it's not that you don't like the others, but you disregard them because you don't understand their beliefs, this is what believing one religion over another creates, it creates this gap of understanding, whereas Atheists and others see all religions as equal reason to believe based on the lack of evidence for all of them, a religious person won't see it that way. They will see it as people who believe what they believe, but fail to understand how someone can believe something else because of their pre-conceived bias and communal acceptance of their religious preference, not considering other religions as equal reason to believe in.

Thoughts?


(PS: Sorry if I generalized. Normally I can always find the right words, but I kinda lost track of where I was going after feeling like I knew what to say at the start, and wasn't really feeling it, so go easy on me, hopefully you understood what I was saying.) 

What is substitutionary atonement?

I'm sorry are you attempting to prove me wrong by claiming to be jesus?

Otherwise I have little understanding of the point you're trying to make, as even if you believe that Jesus was this "almighty savior" who made a completely selfless sacrifice "for the greater good of humanity" it holds no value, as that is someone else, not you. Also, that is completely irrelevant because even if that was somehow a valid point, it still does not mean a person still can't be completely one sided. In fact, it would probably invoke exactly what's addressed in this thread, because that person would look on to all others who don't appreciate this supposed sacrifice to the extent they do, or don't appreciate it at all and would never be able to understand that position, as it would create an even greater division due to the fact they have deluded themselves in to thinking this is indisputably true.

But all that's irrelevant, and I only elaborated for the sake of entertaining myself, as you failed to meet the first criteria. And with that, your pathetic attempt at trying to act intellectually superior, or claim that I had somehow missed something entirely is in vein, as it doesn't even address the prompt.

[Neo-Scholastic]

Thoughts?

And how is atheism any different in this regard? We see the posts everyday. Those posts say that believers are illogical, stupid, and/or deluded. There doesn't seem to be much bridge-building in those kinds of sentiments.

[Heat]

Thoughts?

And how is atheism any different in this regard? We see the posts everyday. Those posts say that believers are illogical, stupid, and/or deluded. There doesn't seem to be much bridge-building in those kinds of sentiments.

Because Atheists cast all beliefs in the supernatural as illogical, and do not favor one over the other.

Just because we don't believe in your religion, doesn't mean we don't understand why you believe it.

I'm talking about a gap of understanding. The difference is that atheism tackles and addresses all views of god as equal, and illogical. However, since you have chosen your religion as more probable than all the others on no basis, you instantly create a gap as you fail to understand your own beliefs origin and that it is not of any reason to believe in over any other religion.

[orangebox21]

What is substitutionary atonement?

I'm sorry are you attempting to prove me wrong by claiming to be jesus?

Otherwise I have little understanding of the point you're trying to make, as even if you believe that Jesus was this "almighty savior" who made a completely selfless sacrifice "for the greater good of humanity" it holds no value, as that is someone else, not you. Also, that is completely irrelevant because even if that was somehow a valid point, it still does not mean a person still can't be completely one sided. In fact, it would probably invoke exactly what's addressed in this thread, because that person would look on to all others who don't appreciate this supposed sacrifice to the extent they do, or don't appreciate it at all and would never be able to understand that position, as it would create an even greater division due to the fact they have deluded themselves in to thinking this is indisputably true.

But all that's irrelevant, and I only elaborated for the sake of entertaining myself, as you failed to meet the first criteria. And with that, your pathetic attempt at trying to act intellectually superior, or claim that I had somehow missed something entirely is in vein, as it doesn't even address the prompt.

Why have you misrepresented the Christian position? Was it on purpose? Are you ignorant of what it teaches?