Just got back from a dumb argument with a so-called christian scientist in a youtube comment sections, and I can't help but wonder: What's it with these guys?
Why do they misrepresent atheism? Why do they find it so hard to accept ignorance on a subject? Why do they assume things they couldn't possibly know? Why do they unwittingly mistake beliefs with knowledge? Why do they establish "facts" based on conjecture? Why do they feel they are winning and proving their favourite theistic deity when using arguments like KCA to name just a few? Are they just trying to surpress cognitive dissonance or do they truly believe what they are saying? Maybe I'm missing something but I just need to know, what's the psychology behind them making these claims and arguments?
By the way, I'm Titilayo. Atheist, and new to the forums. Looking to have a swell time around these parts :)
Subscription Note:
Choosing to subscribe to this topic will automatically register you for email notifications for comments and updates on this thread.
Email notifications will be sent out daily by default unless specified otherwise on your account which you can edit by going to your userpage here and clicking on the subscriptions tab.
Welcome to AR Titilayo.
You will quickly learn that many theists are so heavily invested in their belief, no sane argument or valid proof will budge them from their positions.
We see this all the time in here, many will inform them (for example) that atheism is not a religion or world view, and minutes later they will prove they are not listening.
Also remember, that the only impressions of atheists many of them are exposed to, are the lies spouted by their pastor every Sunday.
And since they are indoctrinated from a very young age to believe their pastor is a special human being, with special 'god detecting' superpowers, they give his words extra credence.
@Titilayo
Welcome to AR boards! We always welcome more atheist to chat with, and hope you will share your thoughts, and if you want, join us in our debates at least for me, sometimes debating a theist apologist can be very relaxing, a safe way to let off steam about religious persecution onto us. You can also visit the other sections if you just want to chat instead of debate.
I have been here for 3 years, and other similar boards/discussion groups before that. So a few things I learned over this time:
Ignorance and also a need to make a "bad guy" an us vs them. Powerful force/tool to garner loyalty. Remember also these people are use to an authoritarian top down structure, that is the supposed absolute truth that cannot be questioned. It is very difficult for theist to understand atheist is not a group like them, where the only difference is that atheist do not believe in gods. The best analogy I have heard for this (and this analogy still rarely works for a hardcore religious apologist) is atheist is not theist. Like "not a stamp collector" is well: not, a stamp collector. The only label/definition you can put on an atheist that is correct is: not theist.
They are taught that way. God knows everything, and the religious leaders at the top are closest to god and that knowledge. In order for this crazy "god" idea to work, they need make it look like god's knowledge is infallible, and the men closest to god (leadership) are mostly infallible in sharing this knowledge of god and what he wants etc.
They feel very threatened, and they should, especially christianity, in the long run, is in steep decline. They desperately need/want to be right, they have invested so much of their lives and thinking and friends/family etc into this particular god idea. It is very hard to accept the possibility that you may be wrong on very big things, and not only that, all your most important peers likely are wrong too, parents, friends, teachers, religious leaders, political leaders, etc. We have a powerful need to belong too.
Both.
Don't overthink it, they (theist apologist) certainly are not.
▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
▮I am an atheist that always likes a good debate
▮Please include @LogicFTW for responses to me
▮Tips on forum use. ▮ A.R. Member since 2016.
▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
Thanks for the response thus far, guys. I guess I may be overthinking this lol. It just boggles my mind sometimes. Just got my degree in Civil Engineering and I've only recently given up on christianity after battling cognitive dissonance for the past 2 to 3 years. I watched a lot of William Lane Craig videos trying to justify belief in god. For every time I attempted to strengthen my christian faith through research and watching debates online, I just kept getting more exposed to the absurdities, contradictions, lies and ridiculousness of the scriptures and apologetics. It's funny really. I guess it is true that very smart people can come up with excellent explanations for any point of view as long as they are biased.
We atheist are in the minority.
Religious beliefs are universal. Without exception, religious/spiritual beliefs reflect the society which invents them . Hence there are literally thousands of different beliefs world wide.
Mt position is that religions exist because they meet important human needs.Eg dealing with the fear of death, giving the illusion of meaning and control over life, and a sense of community.
Imo, to characterise all theists as X Y or Z is facile and bigoted. Of course we run across some beauts here. Those few do not allow a generalised inference of a specific religion or of all believers.
In my experience, a person's religious (or lack of) beliefs do not usually define them as people. I think that may sometimes be reasonably be said of dogmatic extremists of any faith. Or indeed politics and sport
Believing in god(s) does not in itself usually mean a person is stupid ignorant or crazy as a person, . A concrete example: Two weeks ago at my mens group. One of our members had just returned from a great European cruise. Nice bloke, known him for a while---Then he started in on the climate change protests ,and opined that climate change was nonsense. I changed the subject lest I say some very unkind things.
@ Titlayo
Welcome, welcome!
As a student of history I see, throughout the ages , and, like today, with Trump, Boris and our own Aussie Happy Clapper, a whole raft of ideas and philosophies that we can regard as absurd.
Christianity is just one more absurdity that has survived by the gullibility of its adherents and the venality of the political class.
As a general rule I consider those that profess christianity, but generally lead a good life, but do not practice as evangelists mildly deranged so I do not discuss their 'faith' unless they bring it up. It is like having mad Aunt Maud living in the attic, everyone knows she is there, but no one talks about her.
For the professional evangelist, the rich, and the general politician that publicly profess their "love of god or allah or whatever" I call BULLSHIT. I oppose them vociferously at every term.
They are not in least religious, every single one is a hypocrite of the 33rd degree of the grand order of hypocrisy. There is no "cognitive dissonance" with these people, there is greed, lies and venality. They neither deserve the label of delusion or our sympathy.
The ordinary street evangelist is delusional, these powerful bastards are not.
(Edit welcome and typos)
welcome to AR Titilayo!
Welcome!
@Titilayo: (I am finding it really hard to believe a female came up with this name. Titty Lay Oh? Really?) Okay, setting that aside, you have asked some decent questions.,
1. "Why do they misrepresent atheism? " Couple of reasons for this one. First; Christians live in a world of belief and so they assume everyone else is like them. They can not imagine existence without belief and so they call atheism a belief. It is a general lack of ability to actually think on their part. Second; the more cunning of the lot are attempting to shift the burden of proof. "Well, you don't believe in a god so that means you believe god does not exist." (No it does not. However, if you define your god I will then be able to tell you if I think it exists or not.) "You can not prove god does not exist!" Classic shifting of the burden of proof. They do it because they can not provide evidence for the existence of their god and they are attempting to wriggle their way out of having to provide any.
RE: "Why do they assume things they couldn't possibly know? " Childhood indoctrination, support of their peers, fear of questioning less they violate the sanctity of their faith.
RE: "Why do they unwittingly mistake beliefs with knowledge? Why do they establish "facts" based on conjecture?" I think these are about the same. One word answer, FAITH. To the Christian "Faith" is knowledge. First you have faith and believe and then everything you see is touched by god. (It's like having a pair of sunglasses that are faith colored. Once you put them on, everything in the world is tinted faith. )
Beliefs are knowledge. Knowledge is a subset of belief. If you imagine a 10 point scale of belief, 1 being no belief at all and 10 being 100% belief, what we call knowledge falls someplace on that scale. We can eliminate 1 and 10 as nothing can be known or unknown with 100% accuracy. Now the question is, when do we believe we know something?
Well the theists put god claims down around 2. It would be the same as if you walked in and told me you bought a new car today. Why wouldn't I believe that? It's completely normal. People buy cars all the time. In the Christian world, "God spoke to me, " is the exact same thing. Why wouldn't god speak to you. He speaks to people all the time.
Atheists, on the other hand are certainly hovering around 8 to 9.9. (How do you know God spoke to you. How do you know which god it was? How do you know it was not Satan? How do you know you are not insane? How do you know it was not a delusion? Was it a man's voice or a woman's voice? Did he have an accent? ) Atheists got questions, and until the questions are answered there is no reason to believe. It's like coming up to me and asserting a dolphin swam through your kitchen window last night. Okay, we have a problem here. I can not possibly believe what you have said without facts and evidence.
RE: "Why do they feel they are winning and proving their favorite theistic deity when using arguments like KCA to name just a few?" They hear these things from the pulpit and they sound reasonable. Like most people in the world, they do not have critical thinking skills. They have no idea at all about how tired and worn out arguments like KCA are. They just don't know and that is why they keep using them over and over and over even though they have been long debunked. They truly believe what they are saying. (Most of the time.) There are charlatans out there.
RE: The Psychology: Power and control. Being right. Fitting in with family and friends. Imagining being on the moral high ground. Avoiding the pain and suffering of hell while reaping the rewards of heaven. Reaping the benefits of ignorance and making a whole lot of money. Fitting in with the people around them. The psychology of religious belief is as complex and broad as each individual's reason for believing. There would be thousands of reasons.
You are not missing a damn thing. You may never know. Each person you interact with will have their own version of god and their own reasons for believing.
Perhaps the most profound thing you can understand when dealing with these people is the idea that "They are Christians." This is different that being a human being who believes in Christianity. THEY ARE CHRISTIAN. This is a personal identity. They are so attached to the identity that it is who they are. When you question the identity, you are questioning them and to question them is to call them a liar.
I am an atheist because that is what the Church calls me. I do not believe in a god or gods. You can call me a skeptic, a critical thinker, a heathen, a non-believer, a filthy sinner, an infidel, and it all means pretty much the same thing to me. I am just a human being in this world who does not happen to believe in a God or gods. Atheist is not an identity but it is a description of my position on the question of the existence of god or gods.
Welcome to the site
Thanks everyone. @Cognostic, its Tee-tee-lah-yo and not Titty Lay Oh ;D. I'm Nigerian actually.
@ Titilayo
You have to excuse old Cog, he has not quite evolved along with the rest of us. Different common ancestor somewhere.
Give him a banana and he is happy. Tin Man stands by with a net and tranquilisers for when he gets carried away (which is quite often) .
We will try and keep him in check, Titilayo, but no promises, once he sees a word or a sentence he likes he plays with it for days. We don't take him out as he is no good with company as you can see.
A warm welcome to you, Miss Titilayo... *flourishing bow*... Always nice to have another rational mind among us. Afraid I am a bit rushed for time at the moment, but just wanted to say hello real quick before signing off for the evening. I will do my best tomorrow to address a few of your questions, because I understand your puzzlement and frustration when it comes to trying to understand most theists. I have only recently become a "free man" when I finally managed to fully escape my Christian indoctrination within just the last couple of years. And this wonderful AR site has been a major factor in allowing me to get all the remaining mental knots untangled... *chuckle*...
So, come on in and make yourself at home. We have a great group of folks here. And like Old Man said, don't mind dear ol' Cog. He may have a crusty (and stinky) ass sometimes, but for the most part he means well. Besides, he can't help it if he is a couple of evolutionary steps behind the rest of us... *chuckle*... Oh, and, uh, watch out for his poo flinging. You do NOT want to be in his line of fire when he starts that!... *shaking head grimly*... Anyway, more later. Meanwhile, have fun cruising around and getting acquainted with the place.
Thank you for the correction! I honestly would not have gotten that in a hundred years. Most likely for the fact that I am completely unfamiliar with Nigerian names. We have had a real run of weirdos on the site lately. My first assumption was, "Here we go again." But you did ask legitimate questions so I responded. Your unique perception and input will be appreciated. Thanks for joining.
Just ignore Tee in man and Ol dee man they are both useless. We only keep them around here for comedy relief.
@Titilayo
Hi T, and welcome to AR, we share your frustration. The kind of irrational religious polemic, and disingenuous bombastic rhetoric theists use endlessly, and as you describe, litters many of the threads in the debate forum sadly.
You'll love it....have fun.
Kelsey Johnson: Speaking of Dental Implants, I actually have 15 implants and a covering over my top front teeth. In short, I have a perfect smile and a full set of teeth in my mouth. I paid about $900 per implant for most. "One Million Korean Wond." The price in US dollars fluctuated, depending on the exchange rate. The total cost of the implant I had done this month - $ 852.511 USD
I am so happy I am having all my dental work done in Korea.
Welcome my dear Titilayo!
Why? Because a "beautiful" lie is more acceptable than the ugly reality, I guess?
RE: Titty Lay Oh
You know I am finding it more and more difficult to participate in this thread. I thought it was going to be erotic and interesting. But DAMN! My delusions were destroyed and Titilayo turned out to be a perfectly normal and seemingly intelligent Nigerian young woman. IT REALLY PISSES ME OFF! I thought something unique and exciting was about to happen!
Cognostic, put the banana down and step back.
And if you put either hand behind your back, poo throwing will be expected and I will have to banana taser you.
Attachments
Attach Image/Video?:
DAMN!!! I'm taking a cookie from the cookie jar and going to my room. This place is boring!
@Cog Re: "I'm taking a cookie from the cookie jar and going to my room."
Dammit, Cog! Stop stealing my fucking cookies!
@TIN: Damn.... you are such a b....ch. You know I don't eat YOUR cookies.
Attachments
Attach Image/Video?:
No evidence.
Attachments
Attach Image/Video?:
@Titilayo Re: OP
Alrighty. Finally have a bit of extra time this evening. Gonna try to properly address your OP now. Before I get started, though, you may have noticed that Cog is a very bad influence on the rest of us. Personally, I try to stay above his childish and petty behavior... *halo over head*... But when he starts his poo flinging, one cannot help but get hit by some of the splatter sometimes. Such is life... *heavy sigh*... Anyway, on to the OP...
Re: "Why do they misrepresent atheism?"
Speaking from personal experience, I knew practically nothing about atheism until I joined this site. And what I was raised to believe about atheism was nothing short of horrific, to say the least. When I was growing up, claiming not to believe in God was beyond comprehension, and it would likely result in a massive amount of vehement ridicule toward - and potential total outcast of - the claimant. In the eyes of my elders and most others in society at that time, atheism was associated with immoral loser miscreants who worshiped Satan and were extremely dishonest, untrustworthy, and a menace to society. Atheists had zero ethics and lacked any hint of personal integrity. Basically, a person could admit to being a child molester or a serial killer and get treated better and with more respect than an atheist. (And I am not exaggerating when I say that.) Therefore, as you might imagine, it was a very difficult pill for me to swallow when I finally came to terms with the fact I no longer believed in God. And, try as I might, I was not able to find any other term than "atheist" to describe my newfound view of religion. It actually took a couple of weeks and a good amount of coaxing from my wife to finally create an account and sign on the the AR. Putting it mildly, to be associated with a group of atheists AS an atheist was something that was WAAAAAAAY out of my comfort zone. And when I got to the point in the enrollment where I had to choose "I am atheist" or "I am not atheist", I literally sat staring at the screen for several minutes before I could bring myself to finally choose "I am atheist". And that was after checking several times to make sure there were no other options... *chuckle*...
Anyway, about the best answer I can give to your question is that people misrepresent atheism primarily because of what they were taught about it from their parents/friends/church. Yes, granted there are those out there who intentionally misrepresent atheism despite knowing what it truly is. However, from what I have learned on here during my brief time as a member, most of those folks generally have a personal and/or business related agenda they are trying to push. The others are pretty much just annoying trolls who really need to learn to get a life... *shrugging shoulders*...
Re: "Why do they unwittingly mistake beliefs with knowledge?"
Based on the environment in which I was raised and on how I was taught, the beliefs ARE the knowledge. And all knowledge was based on those beliefs. Basically, belief and knowledge were one in the same, so in the minds of those individuals there IS NO MISTAKE. Believing in God was no different than breathing. It was simply an unquestioned part of life. For anybody to suggest otherwise was just too ridiculous to even contemplate. The explanation really is just that simple.
Re: "Are they just trying to surpress cognitive dissonance or do they truly believe what they are saying?"
On this one, I would have to say a little of both. And even that depends on the individual. Believe me, I grew up with MANY family/friends who absolutely without-any-doubt-whatsoever-wholeheartedly-no-ifs-ands-or-buts truly BELIEVED, no questions asked. Again, it was simply a foregone conclusion no different than breathing. And then there are those who believe for no other reason than they are afraid NOT to believe. They just don't want to take the chance of being wrong (Pascal's Wager), regardless of any little nagging doubts they might have. And even that category varies in different degrees depending on the individual. Guess you could say that I fell into that category for a majority of my life, especially once I was old enough to get out on my own and live my own life. And, yes, I was regularly tormented by cognitive dissonance. My logical/rational mind was telling me one thing, while my religious indoctrination was telling something in direct conflict. And because I was still afraid of the possibility of going to hell, I would often make excuses (mostly to myself) for not being able to resolve the issue. That is why when I see theists come on here and use many of the same lame excuses I once used myself, I can fairly well relate to their mindset. If it is somebody who is sincere and genuine in attitude, then they get my sympathy and understanding, and I will do what I can to help them. On the other hand, if it is somebody just trolling or being intentionally hardheaded, then they will incur the wrath of Tin-Man's Butterknife without mercy... *chuckle*...
Well, I suppose that is good for now. Hope my answers help you in some way. Any other questions, feel free to ask. Plenty of smart folks here who are willing to help, and I am always happy to share what little insight I might have... *grin*...
Ah, a newcomer to welcome to the flight deck!
If you want my answer to the question of why superrnaturalists peddle the lies they do about us, try this. Which also covers the tiresomely observable tendency of supernaturalists, to think that regurgitating the assertions of their favourite mythologies constitutes "answers" to awkward questions.
I suspect many here, wonder why supernaturalists even bother with their standard approach, given that they must surely know that we treat their mythologies as nothing more than mythologies, and in many cases, poor examples of the genre to boot. If they don't know this in advance, then they're in for a shock. If they do know this in advance, they must surely know that recourse to the assertions of their mythologies is futile, in the presence of an audience that regards said assertions as discardable on numerous grounds, even before the supernaturalists in question begin peddling their apologetics.
But of course, one fatal mistake that many here make, is to assume that the supernatualists who come here are actually interested in substantive discourse. The majority of those who adopt this seemingly futile approach, are more often interested in posturing before their fellow adherents, and demonstrating their supernaturalist credentials before that unseen audience, than they are in actual engagement with those outside the doctrinal pale. There's a term used to describe the ostentatious public display of overblown and pompous religiosity before fellow adherents, in order to affirm the status of the adherent before his peers as a "true believer", and therefore part of the "in group" to be accorded discoursive and other privileges within that group. The term in question is "witnessing", which was originally concocted by the supernaturalists in question, as an attempt to present the requisite strutting and ideological lekking as some sort of mark of virtue.
Instead, particularly in the hands of the more florid practitioners of American style conservative evangelism, "witnessing" has become a synonym for rampantly hypocritical discoursive double standards, and the willingness to present a disturbing spectacle in public in order to maintain a position in the pecking order. Among the most egregious practitioners thereof, and the most likely to resort to blatant mendacity in order to achieve hegemony for their doctrines, are:
[1] Presuppositionalists - these adopt the approach of trying to dictate the operation of the rules of discourse, to favour their blind assertions and fabrications, and the twisting of said rules to such a blatant extent, as to become practically a study in underhand chutzpah;
[2] Creationists - these prefer a slightly more "under the radar" brand of malfeasance, taking their cue from the arch-charlatan and professional liar for doctrine known as Henry Morris, whose published output consists principally of instruction manuals on the art of lying for Republican Jeebus.
Reprehensible in a different manner, are the "neo-Thomists", frequently fanboys of Edward Feser and his brand of snide condescension, who seek to pretend that their adoration of Aquinas is grounded in substance, whilst taking liberties with metaphysics to an extent that would have made even the likes of Bishop Berkeley blanch, let alone anyone possessing a proper concern for philosophical rigour. Or, you have the William Lane Craig fanboys, who appear to be unaware that the world of logic has moved on in the 23 centuries since Aristotle invented the syllogism, and who take the supernaturalist tendency to treat fabrication as superior to verifiable fact, to an embarrassing extent.
None of these groupings are actually interested in substantive discourse. If they were, they would not be members of these groupings to begin with. Their principal interests lie in entirely different directions. First, their interest rests in lying to themselves, in order to preserve the increasingly onerous emotional investment they have made in their doctrines, an investment which becomes utterly wasted, with tragic personal consequences, for many of the members of these groupings, the moment the cognitive dissonance of their posturing starts to make its presence felt. Second, their interest rests in lying to their fellow adherents, in order to maintain the cohesion of the supernaturalist "in group". Third, their interest rests in maintaining the cohesion of the supernaturalist "in group", through the tried and tested tactic of demonising and dehumanising those outside the doctrinal pale, and frequently, the internecine wars between rival supernaturalists have been pursued with a truly special brand of viciousness and brutality in the past.
In short, most of them aren't here to convert you, they're here to keep themselves converted.
Oh, and one point I forgot to mention in the above ... supernaturalists are so wedded to their mythologies, and the discoursively duplicitous methods used to achieve hegemony for said mythologies, that they are in some cases physically incapable of understanding the notion of being able to conduct one's life without adherence to the assertions of a mythology. That we, when we're conducting atheism properly, toss belief itself into the bin, fucks with their heads so much that it's a wonder they don't all behave like the guy in Scanners ...
Welcome Titilayo
Why do they misrepresent atheism?
Because they're absolutely terrified that we might be right.
Perhaps a bit obtuse;
Over the years my parents were in aged care, I got to know a few of the staff. They told me how badly some ordained clergy meet death. Seems their faith was not always as strong as one might think.
I can't prove this, so it must be taken as hearsay.