Geography and Family Determines Religious Belief

I know the real reason why you believe what you believe.

Category:

People & Blogs

Tags:

• Religion
• Geography
• Family
• Indoctrination
• God
• Religious
• Belief
• Bible
• Richard
• Dawkins

[noahm77]

This was good, What lecture is that that you have clips from?

[CompleteRationality]

@noahm77 Thanks.  Here is a link. /watch?v=YcYDkZcLAug

[meshuggah2727]

I agree man, I finally questioned my own religion 2 or 4 years ago, in Christianity you're not supposed to do that, which may be why so many just don't it is all just blind faith. I'm glad I looked at my own religion objectively and came to my own conclusion. My mom is still christian and I respect that and she respects that I am an atheist, so it is all good.

[fourbabies1]

@Skindoggiedog if i have a penny in my right hand and 2 pennies in my left, but am not willing to just open my hands and show you the penny, are you going to base your life on me having pennies in my hand or are you going to say "show me the pennies"? if another person shows you a dollar in their hand, are you going to turn a blind eye and say "i believe the other person has pennies cause he says he has and i have faith"? there is nothing wrong in not believing without evidence.

[tmesist]

@Skindoggiedog

They freely identify themselves collectively, if something is done in the name of The Atheist Experience this can only imply collective responsibility, if one disagrees it's their responsibility to make it known they disassociate themselves from that particulr view.

Since they posted the lecture series on Atheist Prosletyzing on their website in the group's name I take as their groups collective views.

None of th Atheist

[tmesist]

@Skindoggiedog You seem to be stealing the word rationality to describe a system of thought you subscribe to. Fundementalist Islam is perfectly rational, a different rationality but one none the less.

Many people who deconvert from religion or convert to religion do it from a paradigm shift converting from one system of rationality to another, which as no paradign exists in isolation can be triggered by a change in outside cultural influences. Our thoughts adapt to the culture around them

[Skindoggiedog]

@CompleteRationality So, if you can see this from my perspective, it's like someone with their hands behind their back stating that they have item X in their hand, you saying 'There is definitely no item X in his hand' and me saying 'I'm not sure. Maybe there is.'

That's why I see your atheism as somewhat dogmatic, holding to the principle that 'gods do not exist', but I can see how you would view my position, too. There IS no evidence of any god. I just don't rule it out.

[Skindoggiedog]

@CompleteRationality Not really.

As stated, the idea of a prime causal agent is something virtually all children experience naturally, and is something I'd consider a reasonable idea based on human experience. The FSM is just something people made up to demonstrate the idea of not being able to prove a negative.

I think it's just a case of me finding a deistic god a credible idea, you not being able to give me a reason not to find it so, and same the other way around.

[CompleteRationality]

@Skindoggiedog Father: "Son, there is no such thing as the flying spaghetti monster."

Mother: "Why would you tell him that? Don't you think that telling him that is unjustified? You can't disprove its existence!"

Father: "???"

Your statement represents the the Mothers position and the Father's represents telling his son that no Gods exist.

[Skindoggiedog]

@CompleteRationality "It was not a direct claim."

We're at an impasse here. We disagree. Let's move on.