This has come up in another thread, but I find it is something that needs more attention:


Why do non-theists engage in dicsussions with theists?
What is hoped for?
What is to be gained?

Do non-theists think that if they outargue the theists, the theists will leave them alone?

Do non-theists think that if they outargue the theists, the theists will admit the error of their ways and change?

Why do non-theists engage in dicsussions with theists?

It gives really good insight into human needs, motivations, and values.



What is hoped for?
What is to be gained?


Better understanding of human behavior.



Do non-theists think that if they outargue the theists, the theists will leave them alone?

Nope.


Do non-theists think that if they outargue the theists, the theists will admit the error of their ways and change?

A few will and most wont.

This has come up in another thread, but I find it is something that needs more attention:

Why do non-theists engage in dicsussions with theists?
What is hoped for?
What is to be gained?

Do non-theists think that if they outargue the theists, the theists will leave them alone?

Do non-theists think that if they outargue the theists, the theists will admit the error of their ways and change?
*************
M*W: IMO, the two groups have little in common, but I don't think there is a problem with who engages whom in the discussion of belief and/or non-belief. I think it is more likely that it is theists who engage (i.e. provoke) atheists into discussions. Atheists already know the dialog. From the dialog on this forum, I think the theists are on a "scorch-the-earth" mission to convert atheists, and the atheists responses mostly point out theists' fallacious beliefs. As for atheists trying to convert theists to non-belief, that is not possible to do. Reaching the state of non-belief cannot be preached, pressured nor provoked. Becoming an atheist is a personal journey which usually requires many years of solid reading, research and revelation. However, to answer your question, "Why do non-theists engage in dicsussions with theists?", I suspect that it might be a desire to question or to learn more about the opposing position. In the case of atheists wanting to learn more about theists' viewpoint, it amounts to re-educating them. When theists engage atheists in dialog, it's because their aim is to convert us to their viewpoint. In short, atheists aim to re-educate and theists aim to convert.

"What is hoped for?", certainly not a mutual ground! I don't think there is one. Although it is possible to reach a mutual agreement on each one's right to his/her own belief, it is never right to force one's own belief on another. Atheists cannot be blamed for doing such a thing. There is nothing atheists can do to "convert" the religious. All we can do is re-educate those who have been lied to. We can't bring them to atheism nor is that our goal.

"What is to be gained?", I think mutual understanding of the opposition's viewpoint. However, most atheists I would think came out of christianity or some other religion, so our knowledge of the opposition's viewpoint is pretty well established. The truth is that atheists know more about christianity that its own adherents do! I am specifically using christianity as an example, because that's what I evolved from. Other than a mutual understanding, and hopefully a re-education, I don't think there is much more to be gained.

As we all can see on the Religion forum, both sides go 'round and 'round. One main difference is the approach to each side's belief. Becoming an atheist can take years and years, almost a life time of learning, but to become a christian (and most are born into it and, therfore, have no choice), all one needs to do is be slam dunked in a pool of water and voila they've gained entrance to a place that was never there! It's that instantaneous! So, which side carries with it the most logical and reasonable philosophy? Freedom from oppression, mis-education, and force fed lies is what is to be gained when the two sides converse.
*************
M*W's Friendly Atheist Quote of the Day:

"All thinking men are atheists." ~ Ernest Hemingway

M*W's Friendly Atheist Quote of the Day:

"All thinking men are atheists." ~ Ernest Hemingway

"Tell a lie often enough, loud enough, and long enough, and people will believe you." ~ Adolf Hitler

It's an internet forum, plain and simple.

The atheist and the theist, whoever they are, can be locked in battle until the second coming of *insert deity*, and still come out not qualified the "Master de Bater"

It is, instead, for the many peeps of the internet to read the thoughts of others and gain some insight into what drives unfounded beliefs and claims, and how difficult it is to substantiate them.

And besides, some here, through these very same discussions, have lost interest in their cults ideals and are preferring a more rationale approach to their worldview.

Very productive, imo.

I enjoy a good debate as long as it is respectful and the other side can hold his/her own. On the other hand, if I'm blindly attacked and criticized, I'll glady debate until I have rolled over who I'm talking too.

Just don't approach me with ignorant claims you can't back up, and then refuse to listen to me, or assume I'm ignorant for not believing what you believe. I'm very accepting of other beliefs and I do learn a lot when I discuss those beliefs and mine with someone else.

Why do non-theists engage in dicsussions with theists?


Forget your God... let me show you how God-like I am in knowledge.

Once in a while I learn something through the debate.
Now and again I learn a little about how to debate.

But most of the time I find it's just an interesting view on the human condition. The interesting debates are those that challenges the theist to their notion of what God means to them. Oh they still believe in something but usually not the same God that they used to believe in. The debates on freewill and all knowing and all powerful are interesting in that aspect.

Greenberg

We can learn a lot about our neighbors of every stripe, even the annoyingly dishonest ones, by engaging them. For instance, today I happened to see something that gave me a shiver. One of the most ridiculous things I've seen is the practice of "Bible paraphrasing", in which a book is written to tell the story of the Bible without using the words of the Bible. In other words, it is a book intended to tell us what the Bible means. I've complained before about Jack Blanco's Clear Word, in fact giving it credit for so twisting one a conundrum about Genesis 3 as to hand the atheists a piece of rhetoric many have wondered about, that this whole redemption thing is, in fact, a racket. But today I saw a copy of The Clear Word for Kids. So the first thing I did was turn to this puzzling passage, and found that on one important point it disagrees with the Bible. In any English translation of the Bible, God expresses a concern in Genesis 3.22-23 that man has become "like one of us", and frets that if they get their hands on the fruit of the Tree of Life, humans would become like God.

I asked the Christian who owned the book about that point. He answered a different question, including the unbiblical assertion that Adam and Eve were scheduled to live forever.

This has come up in another thread, but I find it is something that needs more attention:


Why do non-theists engage in dicsussions with theists?
What is hoped for?
What is to be gained?

Do non-theists think that if they outargue the theists, the theists will leave them alone?

Do non-theists think that if they outargue the theists, the theists will admit the error of their ways and change?

Whether theist or not, it is always good to debate. It helps others understand the world around them, even if they don't agree with it.

We can learn a lot about our neighbors of every stripe, even the annoyingly dishonest ones, by engaging them.

But why do that - why seek to learn about other people?

I mean, I do it too. But recently I've been seriously wondering about the use of such endeavors.

Forget your God... let me show you how God-like I am in knowledge.
lol

But why do that - why seek to learn about other people?

I mean, I do it too. But recently I've been seriously wondering about the use of such endeavors.
in short, internet discussion is too ethereal to manifest anything too substantial - real communication (beyond issues such as "pick me up from the airport next week") requires body language, etc etc - even many relatively straight forward administrative issues need to be discussed in a (real life) conference setting.

What can be gained from such things is basically just a honing of one's presentations of the issues. I have gained something (even from people's trite obnoxiousness in the face of philosophical discussion) that has helped me when I am presenting these sorts of things in the "real world" (what to speak of when persons actually offer legitimate supports/challenges)

To learn, and to gain more insight into their beliefs and those of others.
And since learning is fun for me, then I do it for fun.

Just don't approach me with ignorant claims you can't back up, and then refuse to listen to me, or assume I'm ignorant for not believing what you believe. I'm very accepting of other beliefs and I do learn a lot when I discuss those beliefs and mine with someone else.


I concur. The only thing worse than an idiot is an idiot who can't back themselves up.

greenberg,

The same question could be asked why did we fight a war against Hitler. He had his ideas about what the world should look like and who should rule, why oppose him?

The same is true about theists, if they are allowed to impose their views and ideas on everyone else then mankind will be doomed to revert to the dark ages.

Obvious malignancy must be opposed and since theists have never been able to make a credible case for their views then we are duty bound to re-educate them for the sake of mankind.

This has come up in another thread, but I find it is something that needs more attention:


Why do non-theists engage in dicsussions with theists?
What is hoped for?
What is to be gained?

Do non-theists think that if they outargue the theists, the theists will leave them alone?

Do non-theists think that if they outargue the theists, the theists will admit the error of their ways and change?

I enjoy arguing with people. So I do it. That's why the majority of people are here at SciForums I assume.

Only if the argument is civil and constructive and educated; otherwise, it degenerates, as usual, into a shit flinging contest.

Anyway, I think it has to do with the impact that religion has on our society. Since the tooth fairy has little impact on the lives of people, there is no point in disproving or attacking the idea; however, religion does impact many things, and this is perhaps why atheists argue.

Now, I'm a theist but I do understand the atheist perspective.

Why do non-theists engage in dicsussions with theists?
What is hoped for?
What is to be gained? Seems like around here most of those discussions are started by theists. So the accounting belongs with them, in the first place.

But taking the abstract view, that it doesn't matter who started things: one possibility is that many atheists - especially the argumentative sort - trace their awakening to some such discussion. They do hope to change minds, as they recall their own being changed.

Another motive, among some, would be wariness - some of the more experienced or educated atheist types have an idea of what can happen if certain kinds of nonsense are allowed to dominate the public discourse unchallenged and without having to account for themselves.

A third common factor is that the version of theism invoked interferes with some other topic under discussion - a lot of the anti-Darwinian BS files here. So someone interested in the evolutionary role of homosexuality in human society often finds themselves having to swat theistic assertions willy nilly. Likewise someone analyzing US political issues and demographics.
Now, I'm a theist but I do understand the atheist perspective. First you need to understand is that there is no such thing.

Iceaura

“
Originally Posted by norse
Now, I'm a theist but I do understand the atheist perspective.
”
First you need to understand is that there is no such thing.
..... tell us more
:roflmao:

If a Theist asserts that all Atheists are ignorant and going to burn in hell, I can't help but disagree. Nothing truly is gained from coming onto Sciforums at all, but that obviously hasn't stopped all of us.

Its how they evangelise and try to convert theists. The ones who don't believe have no reason to debate.

Yes I agree, S.A.M. There are many parallels that can be drawn between atheists and closet homosexuals.

lol

"Tell a lie often enough, loud enough, and long enough, and people will believe you." ~ Adolf Hitler

that is a very good point toward atheism

personally i just argue with theist because its fun

I enjoy a little bit on intellectual stimulation every now and again

Atheist discuss and debate because that is what they enjoy. And that is the most obvious thing ever. Not to mention exciting to think about. Because it relaxes one. Puts them to sleep so to speak.............................

Yes I agree, S.A.M. There are many parallels that can be drawn between atheists and closet homosexuals.

I hate to say it but that is correct, I read somewhere that in the united states Homosexuals and other minorities are given more respect than Atheists.

The ones who don't believe have no reason to debate. I listed three, above.

I enjoy arguing with people. So I do it. That's why the majority of people are here at SciForums I assume.
*************
M*W: I like to stir things up, make people mad, and make people think. I'm not here to win friends and influence people. I'm here because I'm not afraid to make atheist mountains out of theist molehills. If people hate me because of what I write, then at least I know my mission was accomplished. They read what I write, and it really pisses them off. It's a dirty job, but somebody's gotta do it, and I hope to be the vehicle that elicits their rage.

Sadly, more often than not, you have illicited a strange kind of horror, like watching a multi-car-pileup. I just keep hoping that the firemen will come along and put you out.

Sadly, more often than not, you have illicited a strange kind of horror, like watching a multi-car-pileup. I just keep hoping that the firemen will come along and put you out.
*************
M*W: Well, dearie, strange kinds of horrors is what sells. I didn't create the horrors, I just write about them.

For my money, the only true theist on this forum is Adstar. He isn't afraid to come right out and say what believing in God is all about. Everyone knows there's more to believing in God than just a Guy in the Sky. It's as if the other theists feel that they can't expand their opinions past God's existence and are too embarassed to tell us atheists what other god associated beliefs they have.

By debating God , theists avoid having to go where the sublime reaches the ridiculous. Much easier to focus on god. Keep the atheist's attention there and away from the nuttiness that goes with religion.

MW-The more of your posts I read the more I think that you are not so truely atheist as you would have everyone believe. Don't worry, I'll still love you when you return to christianity.

PsychoticEpisode-Religion is, well, embarassing. It's often pure silliness, as it is purely a creation of man. That's why I distance myself from religion, while clinging to God and Christ for dear life.

PsychoticEpisode-Religion is, well, embarassing. It's often pure silliness, as it is purely a creation of man. That's why I distance myself from religion, while clinging to God and Christ for dear life.

You're definitely not alone as far as Christians here go. By far, Adstar is the one least embarassed expounding on religion. Those here who are representative of other faiths are less inclined to give us their all. The only reason I can see is that it's easier to prove God than the rest of what's written.

MW-The more of your posts I read the more I think that you are not so truely atheist as you would have everyone believe. Don't worry, I'll still love you when you return to christianity.
*************
M*W: Well, darn, I'm really gonna miss your love!

Yes I agree, S.A.M. There are many parallels that can be drawn between atheists and closet homosexuals.
*************
M*W: Atheists are more akin to homosexuals who have come out of the closet. We (atheists) don't have anything to hide anymore.

I think the man live his life doing one of two things
even ignore God and his existing in his all day long
or insist to prove God existing and try to state some evidences with that
but in the both ways no one of them will change his mind at all and never get back of his mind and will protect it for his entire life
the real question is
who is right and what he will get in the end ? and what is the destiny of the wrong one?