Telling fact from fiction

[Excited Penguin]

Let me rephrase what I said earlier.

This thread is for stating and discussing the obvious(like how to tell fact from fiction). Is that it?


Why, then?

[robvalue]

The point is we're teaching it to children who are approaching that phase in their cognitive development.

It's to get people to think. That's the point of it.

[Excited Penguin]

I'm not being patronising EP. You're being thoroughly rude as per usual so I'll just ignore you.

I updated the OP with a clearer idea of what I mean by "fiction".

Rob, now you're being passive-aggressive and you're totally misreading the situation. I didn't mean to upset you or offend you, I'm simply offering my opinion of the OP, asking you for clarification and criticizing the way you formulated it. If you're going to take that personally, that's on you, but please notice that I never called you names or anything even close to that. So, again, how am I being rude exactly?

[Excited Penguin]

A good novelist could cheat this challenge with no problem so long as he didn't appeal to magic.

That's exactly what I said...

[ignoramus]

That's Rob's point I think.

eg: kids read: the man, a good golfer, was found to have had sex with 23 different beautiful women and his wife was none the wiser! Unbelievable that he would do that!

vs:

The man, a good golfer, mistook his drive and landed the ball on a little island in the lake. No problem he muttered to himself as he walked on the water to the island and this time he managed to drive it within 10 feet of the hole! Unblievable shot!

Yes, subtle difference, I know! I wonder if theists even know which one is more probable than the other? hehehe

[robvalue]

EP: OK, well I apologize then. You seemed very aggressive and dismissive to me. If that wasn't your intention, then I drop the accusation.

I've explained the point of it in quite a few ways now, so if that's still not satisfactory I think we're at an impasse.

The other point is that I don't think some theists have a good answer to this, either. I would expect atheists to find the answers obvious.

[robvalue]

Consider this:

A theist, presumably, has some sort of conversation with their child about telling reality from fantasy. I suspect this talk comes after they have indoctrinated them with stories about their religion; if at all.

I'm asking them to reverse the process and to imagine the results.

So this is mainly aimed at theists. I thought that was obvious, apologies if it wasn't.

[Excited Penguin]

The point is we're teaching it to children who are approaching that phase in their cognitive development.

It's to get people to think. That's the point of it.

I read the updated OP. I've still got the impression that is a pointless thread. It's not constructed to achieve anything in particular but make theists see the irony disguised in the last paragraph, and have atheists notice that irony and virtualy bump fists and fret over it.


Again, all really basic stuff, extremely obvious, and no religious person ever would fall for it(at least I can't imagine it). You're probably going to assume after this post that I'm after you or something, and ignore me. I guess that's a risk I'll have to take. I'm just being honest and I hope, if my criticism is unfounded, that you set me straight.

Respectfully, EP.

[Excited Penguin]

That's Rob's point I think.

eg: kids read: the man, a good golfer, was found to have had sex with 23 different beautiful women and his wife was none the wiser! Unbelievable that he would do that!

vs:

The man, a good golfer, mistook his drive and landed the ball on a little island in the lake. No problem he muttered to himself as he walked on the water to the island and this time he managed to drive it within 10 feet of the hole! Unblievable!

Yes, subtle difference, I know! I wonder if theists even know which one is more probable than the other?  hehehe

Well, again, they either already know that you can't walk on water or you'll have to educate them about it. So what else is there to teach them?

[robvalue]

Fine, you think it's pointless. Fair enough. I don't think it is.

I appreciate the feedback. I have now updated the OP to hopefully make the purpose more clear. You're right, I could have been more explicit. I thought the aims were obvious, but clearly this isn't always the case.

Even if theists don't reply, they might at least think about it.