Brought up to believe?

Originally posted by DoctorScribbles
Consider why I make them. The difference between the absurd stuff I post and the absurd stuff you post is that the absurdity of mine is merely an artful veil, seductively disguising the actual points I wish to make, while the meaning of yours is the absurdity itself, naked and ugly for all to smirk at.

=============================

Consider why I make them. The difference between the absurd stuff I post and the absurd stuff you post is that the absurdity of mine is merely an artful veil, seductively disguising the actual points I wish to make, while the meaning of yours is the absurdity itself, naked and ugly for all to smirk at.

=====================================

Artful veil ?

You're trying to make dung out to look like icecream.

You're artful veils are more like a empty boxes wrapped in fancy ribbons and colorful bows.

Originally posted by jaywill
[b]=============================

Consider why I make them. The difference between the absurd stuff I post and the absurd stuff you post is that the absurdity of mine is merely an artful veil, seductively disguising the actual points I wish to make, while the meaning of yours is the absurdity itself, naked and ugly for all to smirk at.

============ ...[text shortened]... You're artful veils are more like a empty boxes wrapped in fancy ribbons and colorful bows.

I retrack to mean statements.

And I apologize.

Originally posted by LemonJello
[b]I didn't say that , I'm just pointing out that many Atheists I come across appear to have been put off by having had religious parents.

Um, okay. I'm not sure why I should find that interesting. Most of the atheists I talk to cite lack of evidence for theism -- not reaction toward their upbringing. Anyway, I could see why an off-putting upbri ...[text shortened]... s to theism. But I think theists often misfire on what they take as evidence for theism.[/b]

Most of the atheists I talk to cite lack of evidence for theism -- not reaction toward their upbringing. -----lemon------------------

Of course they would say that, that's the whole point. They often rationalise away the real reasons for their disbelief. Behind all the evidence and arguments seems to be a fertile bed of anger and discontent.

I'm not saying that the reasons themselves are bunk , but if you look hard enough you can see the bitterness and anger.

If you don't understand that many times human beings don't fully understand the real reasons behind why they believe things then there's little point continuing. Most people who subsribe to rationality are more emotionally driven than they realise.

Originally posted by knightmeister
Most of the atheists I talk to cite lack of evidence for theism -- not reaction toward their upbringing. -----lemon------------------

Of course they would say that, that's the whole point. They often rationalise away the real reasons for their disbelief. Behind all the evidence and arguments seems to be a fertile bed of anger and discontent.

I'm ...[text shortened]... ing. Most people who subsribe to rationality are more emotionally driven than they realise.

…Most of the atheists I talk to cite lack of evidence for theism -- not reaction toward their upbringing. -----lemon------------------

Of course they would say that, that's the whole point. They often rationalise away the real reasons for their disbelief. Behind all the evidence and arguments seems to be a fertile bed of anger and discontent. …

You don’t want to admit even to yourself that atheists are atheists for rational reasons so you rationalise away the real reasons for the disbelief of atheists by deluding yourself that they are not atheists because they rationally see the absence of evidence for theism but rather because they are “angry with their upbringing” -what nonsense.

… If you don't understand that many times human beings don't fully understand the real reasons behind why they believe things then there's little point continuing. Most people who subscribe to rationality are more emotionally driven than they realise.…

That’s my impression of you. You are angry with atheists because they disbelieve what you believe and this is the reason why you delude yourself regarding the reason why atheists are atheists. -you just don’t want to believe that atheists can be rational.

Originally posted by Andrew Hamilton
[b]…Most of the atheists I talk to cite lack of evidence for theism -- not reaction toward their upbringing. -----lemon------------------

Of course they would say that, that's the whole point. They often rationalise away the real reasons for their disbelief. Behind all the evidence and arguments seems to be a fertile bed of anger and discontent. on why atheists are atheists. -you just don’t want to believe that atheists can be rational.

On the contrary , I believe that Atheists can be very rational and there are many arguments against theism. I have always argued that Atheism is a perfectly rational position. I used to be one myself. I can come up with many , many objections to Christianity that some Atheists won't have even thought of. But perfectly rational positions can still be held for emotional reasons.

I think Theists can be Theists for all the wrong reasons as well as Atheists , human nature being what it is it's what you might expect.

I have met creationists who cling to their position against all rationality and argued vehemently against them.

However, I think many Atheists like to portray an Atheism = rational , theism= irrational dogma , a dogma I'm challenging here.

What's interesting is the strength of feeling I sense from you and others on this subject. It just makes me even more convinced that there's something to what I'm saying.

Were your parents religious?

Originally posted by knightmeister
On the contrary , I believe that Atheists can be very rational and there are many arguments against theism. I have always argued that Atheism is a perfectly rational position. I used to be one myself. I can come up with many , many objections to Christianity that some Atheists won't have even thought of. But perfectly rational positions can still be he ...[text shortened]... more convinced that there's something to what I'm saying.

Were your parents religious?

Mostly good arguments. Theism is not inherently rational. However, I think you would agree that Creationism is irrational, because it denies everything that's right in front of you.

Originally posted by knightmeister
Anyway, you should avoid thinking that all atheism stems from a rebellion against upbringing. --lemon----

I didn't say that , I'm just pointing out that many Atheists I come across appear to have been put off by having had religious parents.

It's human nature for children to define themselves in relation to their parents , either through a react ...[text shortened]...
It seems to me that well over 80-90% of atheists around here have some religious upbringing.

It seems that well over 80-90% of PEOPLE have a religious upbringing...

Originally posted by knightmeister
Most of the atheists I talk to cite lack of evidence for theism -- not reaction toward their upbringing. -----lemon------------------

Of course they would say that, that's the whole point. They often rationalise away the real reasons for their disbelief. Behind all the evidence and arguments seems to be a fertile bed of anger and discontent.

I'm ...[text shortened]... ing. Most people who subsribe to rationality are more emotionally driven than they realise.

You don't see bitterness and anger in Christians?! I see it. Oh boy do I see it. They're out to get the feminazis, Commies, Red Chinese, Messican illegal immigrants, assassinate Chavez, nuke Mecca, bla bla bla...

Originally posted by knightmeister
On the contrary , I believe that Atheists can be very rational and there are many arguments against theism. I have always argued that Atheism is a perfectly rational position. I used to be one myself. I can come up with many , many objections to Christianity that some Atheists won't have even thought of. But perfectly rational positions can still be he more convinced that there's something to what I'm saying.

Were your parents religious?

…But perfectly rational positions can still be held for emotional reasons. …

You say you were once an atheist. Where you an atheist for “emotional reasons”?
-if so, can you explain these “emotional reasons”?

…I think Theists can be Theists for all the wrong reasons as well as Atheists , human nature being what it is it's what you might expect. …

I think you may be making an implicit assumption here that atheists generally “choose” to be atheists in just as theists generally “choose” to be theists. If you “choose” your beliefs then, regardless of whether what you believe is actually true, that belief is NEVER rational.

Like, I am sure, the majority of atheists would explain about themselves:

I did not “choose” to be an atheist for the same reason I did not “choose” to believe that two plus two equals four: I do not let my desires of what I would like to be true determine what I come to believe is true because that wouldn’t be thinking rationally -that would just be trying to make myself believe whatever I LIKE to be true as opposed to what, according to my reasoning, IS true.

Originally posted by knightmeister
Most of the atheists I talk to cite lack of evidence for theism -- not reaction toward their upbringing. -----lemon------------------

Of course they would say that, that's the whole point. They often rationalise away the real reasons for their disbelief. Behind all the evidence and arguments seems to be a fertile bed of anger and discontent.

I'm ing. Most people who subsribe to rationality are more emotionally driven than they realise.

Of course they would say that, that's the whole point. They often rationalise away the real reasons for their disbelief.

These "real reasons" being the "emotional reasons" you keep citing but never explaining? I will repeat my question yet again: what do you mean by your "emotional reasons"? And, yet again, I will repeat my charge to you, which you merely deflected (or rather selectively ignored) before: "Anyway, I could see why an off-putting upbringing could help shape a certain attitude toward theists, but could you explain how that is supposed to fully support an absence of theistic belief? Generally speaking, won't there also be evidentiary considerations, and won't these really be what undergirds the atheism?"

Look, knightmeister, I am simply not going to take you seriously here if there are no reasons for me to do so.

Originally posted by knightmeister
Behind all the evidence and arguments seems to be a fertile bed of anger and discontent.

hahahahaha
hahahahahahaha
hahahahahahahahaha

Behind all the evidence and arguments of WHAT?
Show me one shred of evidence that proves God exists, but which disproves me being God.

Go on.
Bring it on, big boy.

Originally posted by knightmeister
Just curious....how many atheists are there out there who have NOT been brought up to believe? It seems to me that many of the Atheists here have been brought up in churches or Christian families.

This is not to say that this discredits their position per se , but it's an interesting fact that many of them seem to be consciously / unconsciously reb ...[text shortened]... eal Christianity.

Is it a pre-requisite of being an Atheist that you went to Sunday school?

I was brought up Roman Catholic in Glasgow.
Probably important to know that Glasgow, especially in the 70's had a strong Protestant / Catholic divide (much along the same lines as Belfast, but having a strong union movement, the division on the workplace seems, to me, to have been less harsh).

The religious divide pushed you from a young age into camps. One of the first songs I can remember singing on the schoolyard was:

"When I was one, I bought a drum,
But the only tune, that I could play,
Was f^ck the queen and the UDA."

My dad was Dutch Hervormd (whacky proddie, anti-alcohol, type) and my mum was Roman Catholic... of the very much pro-alcohol type (go figure... Scottish and booze... what a bizarre combination).

I went to church. I was at a Catholic primary school. Everyone I knew was either Catholic or protestant.

According to everyone I know, from the age of eight onwards I'd lost my faith. It started with Santa Claus and it ended with the big G.

Then, when I was 10 (or so), during confirmation, I started puking in the church. Lots of the people in front and beside me were covered...
All were agreed that it was like something out of the excorist.
Indeed, one kindly mother turned to mine and said: "I don't think he's gonna be a good little Catholic boy."

My parents were very laissez faire about the whole God thing. Nothing was ever forced upon me and the school was far more focussed on creativity and the individual than on churches.

And I never went to Sunday school.

Originally posted by knightmeister
Of course they would say that, that's the whole point. They often rationalise away the real reasons for their disbelief. Behind all the evidence and arguments seems to be a fertile bed of anger and discontent.

I'm not saying that the reasons themselves are bunk , but if you look hard enough you can see the bitterness and anger.

I think you are just going overboard with your mind reading. I think a much more likely mind read would be to think that theists often rationalise away the existence of atheists by trying to find reasons other than rational deduction for their atheism. It is not uncommon to find theists who don't believe that us atheists even exist. They think we are all closet theists.

As for my 'fertile bed of anger and discontent', it is very real, but not the reason for my atheism. I have been atheist since I was about 13, and most of my current anger has built up since then and most of it is due to the fact that I have lived most of my life amongst people who are so obviously deluded, desire to push their delusions on me, and discriminate against me due to the fact that I often openly admit my lack of delusion. That claim is not to be under estimated. To give an example, most of my wifes friends advised her not to marry me because of my atheism, and she was practically ex-communicated because she went ahead with it. To give another example, I once got together with a group of friends from university who were starting a company. They decided I could not be a member of the board but must be hired on a short term basis because they were Christian and I wasn't.
I came to this forum because I heard that some seriously deluded people in the US were trying to get their delusions taught as fact in schools instead of science and I thought that was going too far and that I should speak up about it. I have since met a number of interesting people here both atheist and theist (yes deluded people can be interesting too).

The funniest and saddest part of all of it, is that I was brought up by parents who actually made an effort to live in a 'Christian' manner and as a result I do to. Yet I get discriminated against by people who are far less 'Christian' than me in everything but name.

Now back to the mind reading: maybe theists just rationalise their beliefs because they are ashamed of themselves and are scared of death. I'm not saying that the reasons themselves are bunk, but if you look hard enough you can see the shame and fear.

Originally posted by twhitehead
I think you are just going overboard with your mind reading. I think a much more likely mind read would be to think that theists often rationalise away the existence of atheists by trying to find reasons other than rational deduction for their atheism. It is not uncommon to find theists who don't believe that us atheists even exist. They think we are all ...[text shortened]... easons themselves are bunk, but if you look hard enough you can see the shame and fear.

As I have said elsewhere , there are both rational and irrational aspects to Theists and Atheists alike. I accept that many Atheists hold their position because they are being ruthlessly objective about things. Some however are not so objective it seems to me. The same applies to Theists. Both side are capable of irrational and over emotional reasoning born of prejudice and ignorance.

My feeling is that Atheists seem to treat the whole issue as if they have cornered the market on objectivity and rationality. They have not. I do not consider you deluded or irrational. My view is that there's just things that you are not aware of yet in your life. I object to being labelled "deluded" as a Theist although I can understand how it might look if you don't believe.

The points I am making here concern not all Atheists but just some of them. Your points hopefully do not encompass all Theists either.

BTW- I think the way you were treated was outrageous and has everything to do with "religion" and nothing to do with Christian spirituality.

Originally posted by LemonJello
[b]Of course they would say that, that's the whole point. They often rationalise away the real reasons for their disbelief.

These "real reasons" being the "emotional reasons" you keep citing but never explaining? I will repeat my question yet again: what do you mean by your "emotional reasons"? And, yet again, I will repeat my charge to you, whic ...[text shortened]... simply not going to take you seriously here if there are no reasons for me to do so.[/b]

Anyway, I could see why an off-putting upbringing could help shape a certain attitude toward theists, but could you explain how that is supposed to fully support an absence of theistic belief? ----------------------------Lemon-----------------------------

I'm surprised you ask. Human beings are very good at forming belief systems based on bad/good experiences. It works by association. If you associate something (eg God) with a poor emotional experience at an early age then it has a good chance of putting you off (God) for a long time , maybe life. Some of the experiences people have with Catholicism (in it's worst form) can be seen to have done this. The Catholic church has probably produced more than it's fair share of Atheists.

Getr someone early enough and you can convince them of anything (or turn them off anything)