Why Do "Some Of Us" Do This?

10 posts / 0 new
Last post
The Pragmatic's picture
It depends a little on what

It depends a little on what you mean by "stupid". It originally means "mentally slow" or "unintelligent". But sometimes it's used when people mean "naive" or "ignorant".

There are a lot of statistics that indicate that religion thrives where people have a low level of education (stupid or ignorant) and vice versa. Education could be viewed as inoculation against both naivety and ignorance ("Science is basically an inoculation against charlatans" - Neil deGrasse Tyson).

But there are of course exceptions both ways, unintelligent people that are not at all religious and intelligent people that are highly religious.

It's also close at hand to equate being gullible (stupid or naive) to getting fooled by religion. As an example, take TV-ministers that make money of stuff like this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rm-Rf-f5zw4

So, it's not hard to see how people can associate religious belief with stupidity. But there is a difference between actually being stupid and acting stupid.
It easy to make the mistake of criticizing the person instead of their beliefs or actions. An intelligent person can be indoctrinated into beliefs just like an unintelligent person, they just have more tools in the tool kit to disassemble the doctrine and therefore have a better resistance against it. But it is probably more complex then that, due to other factors like social situations, available information or having a need to believe (for example: a need to believe that deceased loved ones continue to exist in an afterlife).

If a person actually is stupid, it wouldn't do any good to criticize them for it. So I think it's often a case where "we" make the mistake of criticizing the person instead of their beliefs or it's an intentional offensive remark, in an attempt to shame them into critical thought (an ineffective tactic, at best).

Kataclismic's picture
I'm beginning to think it's a

I'm beginning to think it's a different level of consciousness. I think we modify or support our level with each passing day. I think we can re-enforce current levels or we can be open to new levels depending on all sorts of variables.

Take an alcoholic for instance. Sometimes the hardest part is breaking it to the person that they have a problem and need to change their behaviour. It requires them to accept a new level of consciousness that most of the time they intentionally avoid. It's hard to convince them that their behaviour is self-destructive because they've spent so much energy re-enforcing their current levels, for whatever reason. Religion is no different. It's only when you can look at it from the outside that you realize what a f*cktard you were. Some never come to that realization because the consciousness required is rejected by their current state. That's my theory anyway.

I spent some time arguing with a believer who is quite convinced that the complexity of consciousness proves there is a god. Now I don't understand how you can be interested in consciousness as a science and not see that drawing a conclusion first is a conscious flaw, but who am I to judge? He actually suggested a book on the logistics of debating before I start accusing him of logical fallacies because apparently I have no idea. If his version of logic comes from a book though, it's one I'll put on my "do not read" list.

Some people can accept consciousness levels just like accepting the world around them, others spend so much time trying to confirm their own view of reality that they deny themselves a consciousness level from the outset. If you are encouraged by your loved ones to deny yourself a consciousness, and you of course want to believe what they want to believe, it's just like a feedback loop that supports itself.

The Pragmatic's picture
Personally, I'm struggling to

Personally, I'm struggling to understand your use of "consciousness" and "level of consciousness" here.

Apart from that, I agree. Especially "it's just like a feedback loop that supports itself" and "It's only when you can look at it from the outside that you realize what a f*cktard you were.". Spot on.

CyberLN's picture
I concur. I also wonder how

I concur. I also wonder how much of the name calling ('stupid' in this case) is self stroking behavior...I'm okay, you're not okay.

Stu. K.'s picture
Thanks Prag and Kat for those

Thanks Prag and Kat for those overwhelmingly long, thoughtful answers. Y'all gave me the answers to what I've asked perfectly ;} Cyber, can you please explain what you just said, I'm not sure I quite understand lol.

CyberLN's picture
I'll explain...Years ago,

I'll explain...Years ago, there was a mental health therapy 'movement' called Transactional Analysis. One practitioner of it wrote a book called, " I'm OK - You're OK". He described four personality types, those who think:
I'm OK, you're OK (the mentally healthy stance)
I'm OK, you're not OK
I'm not OK, you're OK
I'm not OK, you're not OK

So, someone who is #2 on the above list, will diss others in order to feel better about themselves. They are self stroking.

Stu. K.'s picture
Ahhh got it :D. I'm surprised

Ahhh got it :D. I'm surprised its not #3 more than #2.

CyberLN's picture
That would only be if s/he

That would only be if s/he was saying, "you're really stupid and I'm an asshole," or the like....but I frequently hear, "you're stupid or (fill in the word here) and I'm always right (or the only one using logic, or am obviously smarter than qualified scientists who are frequently idiots).

devout christian's picture
I would never call a person

I would never call a person stupid, nut rather take them out for coffee or dinner and try to have a rational conversation with them.you have to remember that Christians are usually indoctrinated at an early age.So by the time we can have an honest and open conversation with them they have beliefs that are so ingrained in there mind.As for my own life I was a catholic and then left and went over to Protestantism but one day I heard a debate between a Christian apologist and an atheist, I took especially the part about evil and suffering in the world. also Iheard a question that an apologist couldn`t answer, Which was did he believe that when J esus Christ rose then also the other graves were opened and the saints came out of their graves and went into town.Also saul the jewish Pharisee who studied under Gameil who went on to change his name to what we now know was the apostle Paul he was knocked off his horse, He never met Christ or will meet Christ but he claims to have had a visit from the lord jesus Christ. It was diligently studying that my eyes were opened, This is just a few reasons I site for leaving the faith and the one most of all it is a big money grabber not only in the local church but on television and radio to.Also Christians is what the famous literature par excellence said that religion is suppose to make you behave differently to your fellow man but he never noticed it and he lived to he was 98 years old and won a noble prize.there is no virtue in Christians as Bertrand Russell stated, they act no different, they are judgmental they sleep around are into pornography, they are no different then anybody else.

Donating = Loving

Heart Icon

Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.

Or make a one-time donation in any amount.