False equivalency

[brewer]

I'm a "religion person", does that mean yall think I'm a con man?

Nope. Maybe to cute for your own good (and don't tell us you've not heard that before), but not a con artist.

You're welcome to your belief that I don't accept, I'm welcome to mine that you don't accept.

[Simon Moon]

If conning yourself qualifies, yes.

But you have stated many times that you are not trying to convince others to joiin you in your irrational beliefs, so by that definition, you are not a con [wo]man.

My bold.

So are you saying I actually know I'm wrong about God and am just lying to myself?

You are conning yourself, but not intentionally. I accept that you actually believe what you believe.

The main tool of your con is one of omission. You are purposely omitting the only known methods of determining fact from fiction. 

And you are basing your beliefs on faith and wishful thinking. Faith and wishful thinking are not virtues, nor are they paths to truth. They are tantamount to gullibility.

[Catholic_Lady]

My bold.

So are you saying I actually know I'm wrong about God and am just lying to myself?

You are conning yourself, but not intentionally. I accept that you actually believe what you believe.

The main tool of your con is one of omission. You are purposely omitting the only known methods of determining fact from fiction. 

And you are basing your beliefs on faith and wishful thinking. Faith and wishful thinking are not virtues, nor are they paths to truth. They are tantamount to gullibility.

By definition of the word conning, it isn't something that can be done "accidentally." Like lying. People don't accidentally lie.  


And respectfully, you don't really know what I'm basing my beliefs on.

[Clueless Morgan]

You are conning yourself, but not intentionally. I accept that you actually believe what you believe.

The main tool of your con is one of omission. You are purposely omitting the only known methods of determining fact from fiction. 

And you are basing your beliefs on faith and wishful thinking. Faith and wishful thinking are not virtues, nor are they paths to truth. They are tantamount to gullibility.

By definition of the word conning, it isn't something that can be done "accidentally." Like lying. People don't accidentally lie.

A "con" or "confidence trick" is when a person gains another's confidence in order to take advantage of or defraud the other person, so in that respect I agree with Cathy that one cannot "con" oneself.

What Simon is describing sounds more like self-deception.

And respectfully, you don't really know what I'm basing my beliefs on.

Since you brought it up, what are your beliefs based on?

[Catholic_Lady]

By definition of the word conning, it isn't something that can be done "accidentally." Like lying. People don't accidentally lie.

A "con" or "confidence trick" is when a person gains another's confidence in order to take advantage of or defraud the other person, so in that respect I agree with Cathy that one cannot "con" oneself.

What Simon is describing sounds more like self-deception.

And respectfully, you don't really know what I'm basing my beliefs on.

Since you brought it up, what are your beliefs based on?

A large part of it is personal experience/evidence.

[Heat]

A "con" or "confidence trick" is when a person gains another's confidence in order to take advantage of or defraud the other person, so in that respect I agree with Cathy that one cannot "con" oneself.

What Simon is describing sounds more like self-deception.



Since you brought it up, what are your beliefs based on?

A large part of it is personal experience/evidence.

I'm not weighing in on your views, frankly this isn't the proper thread to debate something like that, however if you want to debate or at least have a back and forth conversation I think you need to stop being so general and actually explain what that personal experience is/what that supposed evidence is, otherwise anyone could have guessed those two would be your reasoning, it's not really adding to the conversation, and if you are going to be on an atheist forum you should probably be prepared to open up about your views as from what i've seen you've seemed rather reserved on explaining your religious beliefs.

[Jackalope]

I'm a "religion person", does that mean yall think I'm a con man?

Nope. Most of you are the marks.

[ignoramus]

99.9% of religious people are not conmen. More the victims.
(Well they might be for unrelated reasons)

But the grand churches and mosques didn't build themselves.
Some suckers had to pay for them.

[Simon Moon]

A "con" or "confidence trick" is when a person gains another's confidence in order to take advantage of or defraud the other person, so in that respect I agree with Cathy that one cannot "con" oneself.

What Simon is describing sounds more like self-deception.



Since you brought it up, what are your beliefs based on?

A large part of it is personal experience/evidence.

And by basing them on personal experience/evidence, you are ignoring the vast amount of constantly growing evidence on why those kinds of evidence, when it comes to existential claims, are often wrong, at best.

[Clueless Morgan]

A large part of it is personal experience/evidence.

My Mormon penpal (who was raised Catholic) gives this same answer, but worships a very different god.

Why do you think your personal experiences led you to the Catholic god and her personal experiences led her away from the Catholic god to the Mormon one?