Is the internet destroying religion?

[Napoléon]

No really. The internet is general provides very little really deep knowledge.

This is bullshit. It goes as deep as people want it to. The problem is people don't want to go very deep. That's society's fault not the internet.

[Dystopia]

No really. The internet is general provides very little really deep knowledge.

This is bullshit. It goes as deep as people want it to. The problem is people don't want to go very deep. That's society's fault not the internet.

For the record, I'm not even talking about the deep web, just the 'regular' internet that everyone accesses daily. In the deep web I'm sure we could find lots of extremist groups, religious ones and probably anti-theist ones.

[Polaris]

No really. The internet is general provides very little really deep knowledge.

This is bullshit. It goes as deep as people want it to. The problem is people don't want to go very deep. That's society's fault not the internet.

Or they go to the websites that have incorrect information.

[Napoléon]

For the record, I'm not even talking about the deep web, just the 'regular' internet that everyone accesses daily. In the deep web I'm sure we could find lots of extremist groups, religious ones and probably anti-theist ones.

Because people access the library daily right? Comparing the internet to a library is a shitty thing to do. The internet isn't like a library. The everyday person doesn't browse the internet searching for deep knowledge, but it's there if they want to search for it. A library caters to a more selective need. The internet is so broad and encompasses so much more than a library. To make such a comparison is unfair.

---

Or they go to the websites that have incorrect information.

What? And libraries don't have incorrect information too? The problem isn't the information stored, it's the people employing poor research methods. That's not exactly a new issue.

[Jenny A]

No really. The internet is general provides very little really deep knowledge.

This is bullshit. It goes as deep as people want it to. The problem is people don't want to go very deep. That's society's fault not the internet.

It's real good at three articles on a subject. Want the treatise underlying the articles, find a book. In part this is because not all information is free. And as I said there are exceptions.

[Minimalist]

But it isn't a substitute for a good library yet, though it can do many things the library can't.

Or won't.

[Jenny A]

But it isn't a substitute for a good library yet, though it can do many things the library can't.

Or won't.

Libraries aren't: communication vehicles, news sources, or nearly as broad as the internet. They do provide internet access to the destitute or anyone else.

[John V]

When I started posting at atheist sites 15 or so years ago, the quality of discussion was much higher. Now, people see a couple youtube videos that support what they already believe and they think they know it all.

[Neo-Scholastic]

....it only takes five minutes of googling (for someone curious enough) to realize why you shouldn't believe in god.

...and years of study to realize how shallow and wrong that initial conclusion was. (speaking from experience)

[Ben Davis]

I've heard the internet described as 'The open market-place of ideas'. If true, the corollary would be that the info on the internet is subject to market forces. I think there's more truth than jest in that. To push the analogy further, there's a whole bunch of consumers with low purchasing power; they're buying any old shit and are satisfied.