6 ms·

"So the opposite of "Brainy and Sexy" is a Conservative Christian?" Belief in a perfectly good being that tortures people forever if they don't believe in it:

by gort 17y ago

"So the opposite of "Brainy and Sexy" is a Conservative Christian?" Belief in a perfectly good being that tortures people forever if they don't believe in it: not brainy. As for sexy, well, I dunno. [ETA: Hmm, started a horribly off-topic side-thread. Sorry.]

DanielBMarkham 17y ago
"Belief in a perfectly good being that tortures people forever if they don't believe in it: not brainy." Playing devil's advocate here (or perhaps the better term is God's advocate), if I understand you correctly you are saying that all beings of higher intelligence and wisdom should conform to your definition of goodness. Does that seem very brainy? Would you like your dog creating a sense of what is right or wrong and then holding you to account for it? How about an ant? When I take my 3-year old for shots, he definitely views the entire process as decidedly immoral. But he's not seeing it from my viewpoint now, is he? I believe the notion is that goodness as God understands it is beyond my ability to understand it. The greater good when dealing with a universe is so far beyond a petty 100-year lifespan (or a 10K year civilization) that comparisons are kind of silly. We wouldn't even understand the moral questions, much less the answers I'm not saying I buy into it, I'm simply pointing out that you're taking a cheap shot at religion. I believe the best response to this is: all I've got is this brain and I have to use it to make judgments. That's cool, but all it really means is the point is undecidable.
- gort 17y ago
  So, if only I had vastly more insight and wisdom, I might approve of torturing ordinary people forever? I find this extremely unlikely. If you're so agnostic about morality that you won't condemn the torture of ordinary people for eternity, I don't see how you can condemn or condone anything, ever. I don't consider this a cheap shot. This is the profoundly rotten core at the heart of traditional Christianity (and, indeed, Islam).
  - DanielBMarkham 17y ago
    Look -- I'm not a religious person. But I'm willing to play along, because I understand the arguments. So let's continue for purposes of instruction. Religion is based around the limitations of human knowledge. The idea is that the Great Spirit, Great Father, or whatever is older and wiser than us (but yet strangely human!) so he understands things we do not. Just as when we were a child we did not understand things, now the Big Dude With The Beard knows things far beyond our kin. Like a child, you can stamp your feet and complain about his/her/it lack of suitable morality for you all you want, but it really just plays into the entire metaphor, doesn't it? I can tell you that more liberal Christans view sin as being apart from God, and hell as being simply apart from God forever. Taken this way, it simply means that if you're doing okay with the plan (whatever the plan is) you get to hang out with the big guy. If not, you don't. And that's awful! You really want to hang out with the big guy. It's the fundamentalists who get into this "lake of fire" bit and such. I imagine "not hanging with the Big Kahuna" doesn't bring in the converts as much as "tearing your eyes out with pain" but I was never much into marketing and sales. As for me, and you seem to be interested in my morals, I'm perfectly happy not being able to make moral decisions for God. As long as he returns the favor. (grin) I don't think that torturing folks for eternity is moral for me to do, but I try to confine my judgments of morality to myself. I also think that you're arguing with what some bunch of folks "think" some other (probably imaginary) being will do, and that seems really, really silly to me. Better to determine what you think about the idea of God in general -- any kind of God -- before you go lumping the whole kit and kaboodle together and passing your own judgment on it.
    - gort 17y ago
      I won't repeat what I said above, but I stand by it. We're not children; we're not so incompetent about ethics. "It's the fundamentalists who get into this "lake of fire" bit and such." Indeed. Nevertheless, it is in the Bible you know: Matthew 25:41, Mark 9:43, Luke 16:22-24, Revelation 14:9-11, probably others: http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew%2025:41,%20Mark%209:43,%20Luke%2016:22-24,%20Revelation%2014:9-11;&version=47 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew%2025:41,...; "I also think that you're arguing with what some bunch of folks "think" some other (probably imaginary) being will do, and that seems really, really silly to me." My great hope is that they will come to see that their concept of God is contradictory. "Better to determine what you think about the idea of God in general" What I think is that P(God), while low, is much, much higher than P(God and Hell).
- sho 17y ago
  "all it really means is the point is undecidable" Undecidable? You're kidding right? It's "decidable" all right, by any rational person, just like whether or not the tooth fairy exists is "decidable". Look, here's religion in a nutshell. Religion: 1. Makes a great many claims about events known to be physically impossible 2. Offers no evidence whatsoever for those claims 3. Is therefore total nonsense until (2) is convincingly rectified 4. Therefore anyone believing it is either brainwashed or stupid or both It's as simple as that, really.
  - DanielBMarkham 17y ago
    So if I told you I was the tooth fairy, would that mean that you were wrong all this time? What if I confided in you that I was God? I get it. You would subject me to scientific tests and logic to "prove" whether or not I fit into some label that has about as many meanings as there are people who believe in the tooth fairy. Yes, that makes a lot of sense. Since we know exactly what God is we can use the scientific method to disprove a negative. Of course. You're purposely cherry-picking your definition of God. That's at the heart of your fallacy -- some belief that there is this one definition of God that somehow you can come to terms with. There isn't. You've got a great argument about the self-inconsistencies of Christianity inside it's own system. That's the best one. Stick to that. Trying to come up with one straw man (or straw God) to discredit or disprove just makes you look intellectually dishonest. In my opinion, of course.
    - sho 17y ago
      If you could convincingly demonstrate that you were the tooth fairy, for example by flying into the locked rooms of every little boy and girl in the world overnight looking for teeth, or just by displaying any supernatural ability whatsoever, then of course I'd admit I was wrong all this time. And I wouldn't mind being wrong, either, since I'd be getting the fricking Nobel Prize for turning all scientific knowledge to date upside down in an instant by discovering you. I have no idea what you mean by "cherry-picking" - I am going straight for the heart of the matter. Religion - all religion really, but Abrahamic in particular - is practically made of supernatural phenomenon. It's all impossible according to everything we know about the universe. No further discussion is required. I hate to repeat memes but when it comes to religion it's basically "pics or it didn't happen". Until you have some evidence - any evidence - you may as well be arguing that Harry Potter is real.

by gort 17y ago

DanielBMarkham 17y ago

"Belief in a perfectly good being that tortures people forever if they don't believe in it: not brainy." Playing devil's advocate here (or perhaps the better term is God's advocate), if I understand you correctly you are saying that all beings of higher intelligence and wisdom should conform to your definition of goodness. Does that seem very brainy? Would you like your dog creating a sense of what is right or wrong and then holding you to account for it? How about an ant? When I take my 3-year old for shots, he definitely views the entire process as decidedly immoral. But he's not seeing it from my viewpoint now, is he? I believe the notion is that goodness as God understands it is beyond my ability to understand it. The greater good when dealing with a universe is so far beyond a petty 100-year lifespan (or a 10K year civilization) that comparisons are kind of silly. We wouldn't even understand the moral questions, much less the answers I'm not saying I buy into it, I'm simply pointing out that you're taking a cheap shot at religion. I believe the best response to this is: all I've got is this brain and I have to use it to make judgments. That's cool, but all it really means is the point is undecidable.

gort 17y ago
So, if only I had vastly more insight and wisdom, I might approve of torturing ordinary people forever? I find this extremely unlikely. If you're so agnostic about morality that you won't condemn the torture of ordinary people for eternity, I don't see how you can condemn or condone anything, ever. I don't consider this a cheap shot. This is the profoundly rotten core at the heart of traditional Christianity (and, indeed, Islam).
- DanielBMarkham 17y ago
  Look -- I'm not a religious person. But I'm willing to play along, because I understand the arguments. So let's continue for purposes of instruction. Religion is based around the limitations of human knowledge. The idea is that the Great Spirit, Great Father, or whatever is older and wiser than us (but yet strangely human!) so he understands things we do not. Just as when we were a child we did not understand things, now the Big Dude With The Beard knows things far beyond our kin. Like a child, you can stamp your feet and complain about his/her/it lack of suitable morality for you all you want, but it really just plays into the entire metaphor, doesn't it? I can tell you that more liberal Christans view sin as being apart from God, and hell as being simply apart from God forever. Taken this way, it simply means that if you're doing okay with the plan (whatever the plan is) you get to hang out with the big guy. If not, you don't. And that's awful! You really want to hang out with the big guy. It's the fundamentalists who get into this "lake of fire" bit and such. I imagine "not hanging with the Big Kahuna" doesn't bring in the converts as much as "tearing your eyes out with pain" but I was never much into marketing and sales. As for me, and you seem to be interested in my morals, I'm perfectly happy not being able to make moral decisions for God. As long as he returns the favor. (grin) I don't think that torturing folks for eternity is moral for me to do, but I try to confine my judgments of morality to myself. I also think that you're arguing with what some bunch of folks "think" some other (probably imaginary) being will do, and that seems really, really silly to me. Better to determine what you think about the idea of God in general -- any kind of God -- before you go lumping the whole kit and kaboodle together and passing your own judgment on it.
  - gort 17y ago
    I won't repeat what I said above, but I stand by it. We're not children; we're not so incompetent about ethics. "It's the fundamentalists who get into this "lake of fire" bit and such." Indeed. Nevertheless, it is in the Bible you know: Matthew 25:41, Mark 9:43, Luke 16:22-24, Revelation 14:9-11, probably others: http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew%2025:41,%20Mark%209:43,%20Luke%2016:22-24,%20Revelation%2014:9-11;&version=47 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew%2025:41,...; "I also think that you're arguing with what some bunch of folks "think" some other (probably imaginary) being will do, and that seems really, really silly to me." My great hope is that they will come to see that their concept of God is contradictory. "Better to determine what you think about the idea of God in general" What I think is that P(God), while low, is much, much higher than P(God and Hell).
sho 17y ago
"all it really means is the point is undecidable" Undecidable? You're kidding right? It's "decidable" all right, by any rational person, just like whether or not the tooth fairy exists is "decidable". Look, here's religion in a nutshell. Religion: 1. Makes a great many claims about events known to be physically impossible 2. Offers no evidence whatsoever for those claims 3. Is therefore total nonsense until (2) is convincingly rectified 4. Therefore anyone believing it is either brainwashed or stupid or both It's as simple as that, really.
- DanielBMarkham 17y ago
  So if I told you I was the tooth fairy, would that mean that you were wrong all this time? What if I confided in you that I was God? I get it. You would subject me to scientific tests and logic to "prove" whether or not I fit into some label that has about as many meanings as there are people who believe in the tooth fairy. Yes, that makes a lot of sense. Since we know exactly what God is we can use the scientific method to disprove a negative. Of course. You're purposely cherry-picking your definition of God. That's at the heart of your fallacy -- some belief that there is this one definition of God that somehow you can come to terms with. There isn't. You've got a great argument about the self-inconsistencies of Christianity inside it's own system. That's the best one. Stick to that. Trying to come up with one straw man (or straw God) to discredit or disprove just makes you look intellectually dishonest. In my opinion, of course.
  - sho 17y ago
    If you could convincingly demonstrate that you were the tooth fairy, for example by flying into the locked rooms of every little boy and girl in the world overnight looking for teeth, or just by displaying any supernatural ability whatsoever, then of course I'd admit I was wrong all this time. And I wouldn't mind being wrong, either, since I'd be getting the fricking Nobel Prize for turning all scientific knowledge to date upside down in an instant by discovering you. I have no idea what you mean by "cherry-picking" - I am going straight for the heart of the matter. Religion - all religion really, but Abrahamic in particular - is practically made of supernatural phenomenon. It's all impossible according to everything we know about the universe. No further discussion is required. I hate to repeat memes but when it comes to religion it's basically "pics or it didn't happen". Until you have some evidence - any evidence - you may as well be arguing that Harry Potter is real.