How to avoid losing respect for friends

[mediamogul]

I chose to put this post in the psychology section because it refers to my feelings about friends who believe in religion and (shall we say) unproven phenomena.

Over the last four years I have increasingly found it very hard to stay friends with anyone who doesn't think scientifically, which is a problem.

I respect other view points and opinions, but all to often non scientific minds will assumes to know the answer to something without research, which I find arrogant.

Last night I learned that one of my best friends is a creationist. I was shocked and hurt that he would dismiss all the years of research and combined scrutiny that produced the evolution theory. I see him as someone who is therefore arrogant and foolish.

I preferred to see him as a great friend (which he is), rather than someone who I have lost respect for. How do I balance those two thoughts simultaneously?

How would you feel explaining to him that the reason you don't want to be his friend anymore is because you think less of him due to his religious views?

I have religious friends and family who I would never give up the relationship with simply because of their political or religious views. To me that is not enough. It may strain the relationship somewhat but if there is something there worth salvaging you guys will find a way.

Say what you feel to him and lay it all out on the table. Honesty is better than hiding what you think.

[compass]

Creation science is a science, if hotly contested. It has little to do with religion IMO. Therefore your objection to keeping this person as a friend is based purely upon disagreement over scientific theory. Science thrives on people thinking outside of the box, it's how progress is made. You seem to be as blinkered as your friend.

Scientific theory? Maybe I misunderstand your point? It's fact surely, something you can see with your own eyes.

Over the last 1000 people who live high up (sorry forget the name of these people) have an evolved vein system. They have many more vein capillaries but they are much thinner than ours. It helps them get more oxygen at altitude.

Let's imagine all the decades of evidence studied by intelligent people disappear and use common sense for a moment.

This is simplistic to save time.

Either;

a) Dogs were around with dinosaurs
b) Dogs came after dinosaurs

If 'b' is correct, then god must repeatedly invent new creatures throughout history.

If 'a' is correct then why do we never see dog bones with dinosaurs?

We see individual species who have slight changes to their bone structure over millions of years. We have, for example, 18 versions of the same create at different points in our history. We see the evidence that it changed throughout history. It evolved.

We can see bacteria evolve incredibly quickly, within 12 month. There was a recent case where a radioactive spillage killed almost all microbial life in a river. The bacteria's DNA changed over the course of the year it was studied and they are now essentially a different type of organism. They evolved.

This is a tiny slither of "evidence". Digging into the evolution facts you will find an overwhelming amount of evidence that has been so compelling that the church (non publicly) accepts it to be fact.

---

I chose to put this post in the psychology section because it refers to my feelings about friends who believe in religion and (shall we say) unproven phenomena.

Over the last four years I have increasingly found it very hard to stay friends with anyone who doesn't think scientifically, which is a problem.

I respect other view points and opinions, but all to often non scientific minds will assumes to know the answer to something without research, which I find arrogant.

Last night I learned that one of my best friends is a creationist. I was shocked and hurt that he would dismiss all the years of research and combined scrutiny that produced the evolution theory. I see him as someone who is therefore arrogant and foolish.

I preferred to see him as a great friend (which he is), rather than someone who I have lost respect for. How do I balance those two thoughts simultaneously?

How would you feel explaining to him that the reason you don't want to be his friend anymore is because you think less of him due to his religious views?

I have religious friends and family who I would never give up the relationship with simply because of their political or religious views. To me that is not enough. It may strain the relationship somewhat but if there is something there worth salvaging you guys will find a way.

Say what you feel to him and lay it all out on the table. Honesty is better than hiding what you think.

You are correct. I am not proud of this and sincerely want to rid it from my personality.

But you misunderstand, I don't mind about "religious views", I mind only that he assumes to know the answer without looking at evidence from both sides. That is unfair to all the good people who have collected evidence and dedicated their lives to research.

It is a type if arrogance that I find alien. I often wonder if people like this know within themselves that they are "pretending" to know the answer because they simply don't enjoy research and feel (simultaneously) that they need to have a view one way or the other.

I have never understood the need for "faith" anyway. It seems a pointless pursuit to know what lies beyond this life. I honestly can't see what difference it makes. But maybe I am strange in that respect!

---

I chose to put this post in the psychology section because it refers to my feelings about friends who believe in religion and (shall we say) unproven phenomena.

Over the last four years I have increasingly found it very hard to stay friends with anyone who doesn't think scientifically, which is a problem.

I respect other view points and opinions, but all to often non scientific minds will assumes to know the answer to something without research, which I find arrogant.

Last night I learned that one of my best friends is a creationist. I was shocked and hurt that he would dismiss all the years of research and combined scrutiny that produced the evolution theory. I see him as someone who is therefore arrogant and foolish.

I preferred to see him as a great friend (which he is), rather than someone who I have lost respect for. How do I balance those two thoughts simultaneously?

How would you feel explaining to him that the reason you don't want to be his friend anymore is because you think less of him due to his religious views?

I have religious friends and family who I would never give up the relationship with simply because of their political or religious views. To me that is not enough. It may strain the relationship somewhat but if there is something there worth salvaging you guys will find a way.

Say what you feel to him and lay it all out on the table. Honesty is better than hiding what you think.

Thank you. It has nothing to do with religious view (see a response I made further down).

For example, he might deny that paper is made from wood, I would be frustrated because the evidence is out there if he looked, but he would instead stick to his belief. You see, it's not a religious thing, it's a lack of respect for people who "decide" what is real as opposed to learning what is real through evidence.

[Matt231]

I also have a few friends who are very religious. It does bother me, a lot actually, but I try to ignore it. I know I am right and they are wrong. That's all that matters. The only time I think it could be an issue is if they are constantly talking about the subject or trying to convince you that their beliefs are true. If that's not the case, and their beliefs aren't actually affecting you, then try your best to not think about it. If they want to waste their time with faith and religion, then let them. Don't let it affect your life.

[compass]

You give him a cold, hard stare for about three seconds then you move on swiftly to a subject thats less controversial.
If he has all the facts you have then that makes his ignorance a result of indoctrination and that means he will either break free of it by choice or he will continue to believe it. If he pursues the conversation with you then thats a window hes opening and you can feel free to debate him on it calmly but until then; leave it.

The trouble is he doesn't have the facts that I have. The reason he doesn't have the facts is because (like many people) he resists studying the facts. I assume that to be the case because evolution is one of the most tried and tested theories I can think of, impossible to refute when looked at in detail I would say.

Well in that case you could prepare a couple of small pictures of different transitional forms with a simple, easy to understand explanation.
If he brings it up again just show them to him and if he comes out with something ridiculous like "maybe God placed the fossils there to test us" go back to step 1; cold hard stare, change subject.
If someones willing to picture God getting out a shovel and giggling as he prepares a prank for us as rationalization for his belief then there is absolutely no point in pursuing it.

I have considered this. The only problem is I feel it could open a can of worms in which he starts talking about crystals and all sorts!! I spend so much energy trying to convince people. think there is a bigger "psychological" challenge for me to learn how to resist and respect other peoples opinions.

My struggle is, how do you "respect" and opinion shaped from laziness or stupidity?

PS. Can you suggest a good image to show him (in case I revert to the persuasion method!)?

---

I also have a few friends who are very religious. It does bother me, a lot actually, but I try to ignore it. I know I am right and they are wrong. That's all that matters. The only time I think it could be an issue is if they are constantly talking about the subject or trying to convince you that their beliefs are true. If that's not the case, and their beliefs aren't actually affecting you, then try your best to not think about it. If they want to waste their time with faith and religion, then let them. Don't let it affect your life.

Thank you. Actually they don't throw it in my face at all, I am not sure why it gets to me so much. Perhaps because I simply can not understand how someone can "believe" without evidence. Even more, how someone can "believe" despite evidence to the contrary.

It's makes me feel uneasy in the way that, say, an animal that can not be reasoned with would make you feel uneasy. I know that is a little over the top but it definitely is that type of feeling. Very hard to explain. but I don't like it and it's hard to talk to a friend knowing that their brain works in this way.

The sad thing is, I can feel the same feelings rising for family members. I know I am at fault and that is why I decided to see if anyone here has the same problem.

[Reforged]

You give him a cold, hard stare for about three seconds then you move on swiftly to a subject thats less controversial.
If he has all the facts you have then that makes his ignorance a result of indoctrination and that means he will either break free of it by choice or he will continue to believe it. If he pursues the conversation with you then thats a window hes opening and you can feel free to debate him on it calmly but until then; leave it.

The trouble is he doesn't have the facts that I have. The reason he doesn't have the facts is because (like many people) he resists studying the facts. I assume that to be the case because evolution is one of the most tried and tested theories I can think of, impossible to refute when looked at in detail I would say.

Well in that case you could prepare a couple of small pictures of different transitional forms with a simple, easy to understand explanation.
If he brings it up again just show them to him and if he comes out with something ridiculous like "maybe God placed the fossils there to test us" go back to step 1; cold hard stare, change subject.
If someones willing to picture God getting out a shovel and giggling as he prepares a prank for us as rationalization for his belief then there is absolutely no point in pursuing it.

I have considered this. The only problem is I feel it could open a can of worms in which he starts talking about crystals and all sorts!! I spend so much energy trying to convince people. think there is a bigger "psychological" challenge for me to learn how to resist and respect other peoples opinions.

My struggle is, how do you "respect" and opinion shaped from laziness or stupidity?

PS. Can you suggest a good image to show him (in case I revert to the persuasion method!)?

You don't have to respect any opinion that doesn't draw from logic or evidence, you wouldn't be being honest with yourself if you tried. You just need to humor it politely and if the discussion is going nowhere then you give a closing point and move on swiftly.

Homo erectus. Very good example, especially when compared to homo habilis and homo sapiens.

[compass]

You don't have to respect any opinion that doesn't draw from logic or evidence, you wouldn't be being honest with yourself if you tried. You just need to humor it politely and if the discussion is going nowhere then you give a closing point and move on swiftly.

Homo erectus. Very good example, especially when compared to homo habilis and homo sapiens.


Thank you that's great. I found a great video showing how Jenny Clack found and described a fossil which offered new evidence of how fish made the transition onto land.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b01...nny_Clack/

Alas I am sure my friend will watch 10 minutes and claim it to be rubbish. That is what my dad did when viewing something I had found a while back. You just can't change people's views. I need to change my view on people and not worry about their fear of the truth (I am guessing it's fear of anything that takes away their beliefs).

[fr0d0]

Creation science is not a science, it's a hypothesis with not a hint of evidence to back it up.

A scientific hypothesis. We might agree on the validity of the evidence.

It is also not thinking outside the box. Creation science is done by blinkered Christians who want it to be real, but offer nothing in evidence.

I wasn't talking about CS here.

The United States National Academy of Sciences states that "creation science is in fact not science and should not be presented as such." and that "the claims of creation science lack empirical support and cannot be meaningfully tested."

Like I said, I agree with this. That doesn't alter what CS proponents themselves believe that they are doing, which is using a scientific defence, and never a religious one.

So my point at the OP stands. He rejects a scientific argument, and not a religious one.

[Handprint]

Creation science is a science, if hotly contested. It has little to do with religion IMO. Therefore your objection to keeping this person as a friend is based purely upon disagreement over scientific theory. Science thrives on people thinking outside of the box, it's how progress is made. You seem to be as blinkered as your friend.

Creation science is not science it's trying to take bits of science and squash it into the judeo christian genesis mold. Which is fucking ridiculous.

[5thHorseman]

Ok

[fr0d0]

Creation science is a science, if hotly contested. It has little to do with religion IMO. Therefore your objection to keeping this person as a friend is based purely upon disagreement over scientific theory. Science thrives on people thinking outside of the box, it's how progress is made. You seem to be as blinkered as your friend.

Ha ha ha oh wow. Wow. Well there you have it compass. Creation science is a science and not a ridiculously unbacked crock of elephant shit as previously thought. No doubt he has tons of evidence which hes just too modest to present.
Your problem is solved, convert today before its too late.

You would be a luddite who would oppose any discovery that would contradict current scientific understanding.

---

Creation science is not science it's trying to take bits of science and squash it into the judeo christian genesis mold. Which is fucking ridiculous.

You contradict yourself. CS uses science to justify its claims, yes.