Tooth Fairy Bullshit

[The Grand Nudger]

As a proposed explanation, the tooth fairy is a childish answer to a trivial parental prank.

How many times are you going to manage to get something completely wrong?  Didn't even google it, did you, you have no idea where the tooth fairy comes from, lol.

In contrast to this, the existence of a divine being is one answer to profound philosophical questions such as why is there something rather than nothing, why does nature operate lawfully, etc. Even if the atheist thinks that is the wrong conclusion, intelligent minds have considered the existence of divine agency a reasonable answer to serious questions.

Intelligents minds don't always reach intelligent conclusions, nor do they begin with intelligent premises.  Yet again you are mistaking the intelligence of a person with the intelligence of a proposition.  

And the questions are not merely philosophical. Throughout human history religious sentiment has been motivating force behind many of Mankind’s greatest achievements and many of its darkest moral failures. No hospital was built in honor of the tooth fairy.

...weren't they, though....lol?

She inspired no wars.

Didn't she, though?

She gave no strength to a missionary nor excuse to a criminal.

Oh, I think she did......

How do you explain the difference between those beliefs that drive history and fanciful notions that do not? There is a reason.

What might that reason be?  Yu;d invariably have to begin by showing us any tangible difference between tooth fairies and yahweh fairies.  The very comparison from which you shrivel.  Good luck. Even if you could manage that (and I have my doubts) all your work is still ahead of you. Can you explain to me what you find so meaningful about one set of idiotic superstitions being the impetus for some decision in a person x , and the other set of idiotic superstitions not being so, in the obvious case of one set being disabused of in children by adults and the other being promoted? If the roles were reversed, and people shunned yahweh fairies and indoctrinated tooth fairies, you'd likely be sitting here babbling about how tooth fairiesm gave us universities and hospitals. You;d still be wrong, and for all of the same reasons. Your belief in fairies -of either stripe- has compelled you to both retcon history and shitcan any rational thought. Preferring instead to pin your every response to vacuous appeals to authority and tradition in between almost unfathomable displays of factual ignorance.

Religious convictions, whether they are right or wrong, address the most profound questions of human existence and, at least for Christianity in particular, provide reasonable answers to those questions. These questions include who am I, why are we here, what am I obliged to do, etc. Trivializing Christian faith by comparing it to a childish superstition is to mock moral heroes, like Dr. King, whose Christian faith was essential to his life and legacy. Shame on you all.

There you go again, rattling MLKs bones.  Perhaps it's you that needs to find some shame?

[FifthElement]

In contrast to this, the existence of a divine being is one answer to profound philosophical questions such as why is there something rather than nothing...

Why is there something rather than nothing is not a profound question to any theist, since they already have an answer ...

The one they have to deal with as "profound" is Why is there god rather than nothing, is it ?


BTW, good guess on gender of a tooth fairy, it is a female for sure 

[downbeatplumb]

As a proposed explanation, the tooth fairy is a childish answer to a trivial parental prank. In contrast to this, the existence of a divine being is one answer to profound philosophical questions such as why is there something rather than nothing, why does nature operate lawfully, etc. Even if the atheist thinks that is the wrong conclusion, intelligent minds have considered the existence of divine agency a reasonable answer to serious questions.

No it is he exact same thing as the tooth fairy. It is an authority figure fobbing people off with an incomplete answer.God did it is such a bad cop out that I am surprised that some one with as much capacity for thought is satisfied with it.

divine agency is the end of the answer where it should be the beginning. Where is the how the divine agency did it, where is the evidence where is anything other than the bland useless statement "god did it".

And the questions are not merely philosophical. Throughout human history religious sentiment has been motivating force behind many of Mankind’s greatest achievements and many of its darkest moral failures.

And it also repressed many endeavours for centuries. The time when everyone was a Christian is called the dark ages and only now are beginning the slow process of advancing without religious shackles despite religions best efforts to retard civilisation.

No hospital was built in honor of the tooth fairy. She inspired no wars. She gave no strength to a missionary nor excuse to a criminal. How do you explain the difference between those beliefs that drive history and fanciful notions that do not? There is a reason.

Popularity. The tooth fairy didn't get into the same position that Yahweh did. but if by happenstance, people believed in the tooth fairy in the same way they believe in EVEY OTHER faith then there is no reason to think that those things couldn't happen.

Religious convictions, whether they are right or wrong, address the most profound questions of human existence and, at least for Christianity in particular, provide reasonable answers to those questions. These questions include who am I, why are we here, what am I obliged to do, etc. Trivializing Christian faith by comparing it to a childish superstition is to mock moral heroes, like Dr. King, whose Christian faith was essential to his life and legacy. Shame on you all.

I don't think they address the profound issues, I think they are a cop meant to distract people from trying to find actual answers.

I think Dr King did great things. But I still think he was wrong and believed in the equivalent of the tooth fairy.

[RoadRunner79]

You may wish to google atheism dark ages. A number of atheist de-ride this myth. It's called the dark ages, because we don't have very records record from that period.

[Cyberman]

The questions may seem different, but those differences are only a matter of perspective. To the target audience, "why is there something rather than nothing?" is equivalent to "why has my tooth been replaced by money?" You may think you have more sophisticated mysteries, but so would a five-year-old. And curiously, the answers to both sets are the same: "magic".

[Minimalist]

You may wish to google atheism dark ages.   A number of atheist de-ride this myth.  It's called the dark ages, because we don't have very records record from that period.

And we don't have many records because practically no one was literate.  There is a definite cause and effect there.

[Catholic_Lady]

As I said on a different thread, one of the double standards I see among some people here (not all) is that they are quick to attribute a person's bad actions to their religious beliefs. But when a person does something good after being inspired/influenced by their religious beliefs to do so, all of the sudden religion has nothing to do with that person's actions.

Right. 

When a religious person does something bad, it's because of religion. When a religious person does something good, inspired by and influenced by his/her religions to do it, all of the sudden religion has nothing to do with it. 

Quoting "Steven Weinberg" (whoever he is) doesn't make this inconsistency/double standard any less bs.

[Faith No More]

Religious convictions, whether they are right or wrong, address the most profound questions of human existence and, at least for Christianity in particular, provide reasonable answers to those questions.

Uh, no, they don't. That's partly what we're trying to explain to you here with this whole tooth fairy thing.

[Cyberman]

Right. 

When a religious person does something bad, it's because of religion. When a religious person does something good, inspired by and influenced by his/her religions to do it, all of the sudden religion has nothing to do with it. 

Quoting "Steven Weinberg" (whoever he is) doesn't make this inconsistency/double standard any less bs.

That's not at all what Weinberg was saying.

[Aroura]

I wanted to chime in here, I actually thought hard about this double standard accusation. Self introspection is the only path to meaningful change, after all.

Anyway, my conclusion is this: religion can contribute to a person's good behavior, but it is not the cause, because religion and faith are side effects of the naturally evolving morality of humans. We are moral as much as we can be with or without religion. This can be demonstrated, because if religion caused more moral behavior, we would see that reflected outwardly in things like commission of crimes, and charitable acts, not just monetary contributions. But that isn't what we see. We see the opposite, actually. Non religious people are less likely to commit criminal offenses. It has been repeatedly demonstrated that religion does not make humans behave better. Religion was an early attempt to codify behavior into societal laws. But now we have secular laws to serve that purpose, and taxes to replace tithing. The purpose and result is the same, only more effective when secular governments with checks and balances perform it, instead of churches.

Any way, you cannot contribute moral behavior to Fath because there is no evidence that it actually causes better moral behavior than secular laws and inherent genetics in the first place. However, if a person believes they are doing the right thing by blind faith and religion, they can commit terrible atrocities. Suicide bombers deeply believe they are committing a moral act. Same with those who bombed abortion clinics, and sometimes those who mistreat minorities like LGBT folks and those of color. They can rationalize how it is GOOD to do a mean, cruel, hateful thing more easily, because they see it as owed by the creator. Any blind faith, including blind faith in a human leader or government can have this result, it isn't really about religion per say but blind faith, but in this country we see it more with the religious people, for now.

So I know CL won't agree, but I wanted to explain more fully why atheists often do this, and that it isn't hatred or a double standard, just evidence based observation.

Morality is in our genetics, and in our societies which sometimes use religion as a tool to enforce it, though it appears to be a less effective tool than modern democracy and exposure to other cultures.

Tldr, religion is not a cause, it is an effect of our inherent desire for a more moral society.