4 ms·

As an atheist myself, I don't know what to make of people who say they're religious or believe in god. Are they for real, or are they just saying that for cultu

As an atheist myself, I don't know what to make of people who say they're religious or believe in god. Are they for real, or are they just saying that for cultural reasons. I don't remember ever believing in anything supernatural (not even santa claus or the tooth fairy), so I can't know whether it's really possible. I find the vast majority of "religious" people aren't really religious, but rather quite agnostic if you question them.

mst 13y ago
The lesswrong Belief In Belief stuff is, I think relevant here. http://wiki.lesswrong.com/wiki/Belief_in_belief http://wiki.lesswrong.com/wiki/Belief_in_belief
baddox 13y ago
I would think that the willingness to suffer or die because of your beliefs is a reasonable piece of evidence that the beliefs are genuine. Obviously that doesn't happen much in the Western world these days, but it certainly has happened a lot throughout history and continues to happen today.
- argumentum 13y ago
  I agree that they exist, but I don't personally know anyone like that. I'm talking about the average person who says "I'm catholic", "I'm jewish" or "I'm hindu" etc (and are the types of people who usually pitch to VCs). They haven't really questioned their beliefs.
  - baddox 13y ago
    I have no idea about the average person, or how you would even measure or quantify what it means to "actually" believe something you claim to believe. I suppose you could say the same thing about any belief system, even empiricism or scientific rationalism. How do you prove that you "actually" believe in anything?
    - argumentum 13y ago
      I suppose you would "measure" how they act rather than what they say. If someone says I'm willing to "die for Allah" and then actually becomes a suicide bomber, that's pretty solid evidence.
- lutusp 13y ago
  > I would think that the willingness to suffer or die because of your beliefs is a reasonable piece of evidence that the beliefs are genuine. Surely you didn't mean to say "genuine", assuming you understand the meaning of the word. You may have meant "sincere". But "genuine" implies that the belief is true, which is a property not necessary for a belief to be sincerely held, and that contradicts the meaning of "belief" as a view held without regard for the evidence.
  - baddox 13y ago
    In my sentence, "genuine" modifies "belief," not the thing that is believed. I believe this is common English usage. "Genuine belief" is a common phrase with the meaning I intended, as in "I hope you don't genuinely believe that."
    - lutusp 13y ago
      This doesn't change how the original reads -- as granting credence to the belief, rather than the holding of the belief.
      - baddox 13y ago
        I don't think that's a reasonable reading of my comment. My phrasing matches standard English usage.
        lutusp 13y ago
        All I am saying is that, in English, to avoid confusing people about your meaning, you're much better off saying "sincere belief". > My phrasing matches standard English usage. So does saying "literally" when you mean figuratively -- all the dictionaries now list this perversion, but it's still inadvisable and still sows confusion among educated readers. It's one thing to argue that a usage is accepted by lexicographers, but quite another to try to engage in effective communications.
        13y ago
dasil003 13y ago
Although I'm not religious, I am agnostic. Why? Because no one can credibly say they know a damn thing about the metaphysical. To me, hardcore atheists are almost as bad as religious fundamentalists in their own way. Basically, both groups of people believe something which they feel everyone else needs to accept or else they're wrong and are evil. And in both cases the thing they are so self-assured about is essentially unknowable. To me, religion is a branch of philosophy. There are a lot of useful ideas developed there over the centuries. Atheists often talk about the evil created religion, but evil will use whatever tool is available—we sit in this forum worshiping startups, yet capitalism has done just as much evil as religion (or at least, it's on its way to). The other thing atheist fundamentalists do (as peterforde does above) is set up a strawman to be argued from a scientific perspective. If you say that god is a bearded man sitting in the sky then of course it sounds ridiculous, but that's ignoring the fact that it's a millenia-old imagery created for pre-scientific people. As much as we get angry over evolution-deniers and creationists, it's equally ridiculous to cherry-pick some age old metaphor, state as a falsifiable hypothesis and then demonstrate its ridiculousness on scientific grounds. Atheists often claim rationality on their side, but how rational is it to invoke religious beliefs in a thread about sexist asshole talk? It's an utter non-sequitur and what it demonstrates is an irrational axe to grind.
- argumentum 13y ago
  Atheism is not the belief that there is nothing supernatural, it's simply the absence of any belief that there is. > "To me, hardcore atheists are almost as bad as religious fundamentalists in their own way" This is ridiculous, religious fundamentalists kill people in the name of their religion. What atheist has ever done that? > "capitalism has done just as much evil as religion" You're comparing apples with oranges. This is just as much of a non-sequitor as bringing up atheism in a discussion about sexism (like you mentioned below). > "Atheists often claim rationality on their side, but how rational is it to invoke religious beliefs in a thread about sexist asshole talk? It's an utter non-sequitur and what it demonstrates is an irrational axe to grind." Agreed, not sure what peterforde was trying to accomplish here.
  - dasil003 13y ago

mst 13y ago

The lesswrong Belief In Belief stuff is, I think relevant here. http://wiki.lesswrong.com/wiki/Belief_in_belief http://wiki.lesswrong.com/wiki/Belief_in_belief

baddox 13y ago

I would think that the willingness to suffer or die because of your beliefs is a reasonable piece of evidence that the beliefs are genuine. Obviously that doesn't happen much in the Western world these days, but it certainly has happened a lot throughout history and continues to happen today.

argumentum 13y ago
I agree that they exist, but I don't personally know anyone like that. I'm talking about the average person who says "I'm catholic", "I'm jewish" or "I'm hindu" etc (and are the types of people who usually pitch to VCs). They haven't really questioned their beliefs.
- baddox 13y ago
  I have no idea about the average person, or how you would even measure or quantify what it means to "actually" believe something you claim to believe. I suppose you could say the same thing about any belief system, even empiricism or scientific rationalism. How do you prove that you "actually" believe in anything?
  - argumentum 13y ago
    I suppose you would "measure" how they act rather than what they say. If someone says I'm willing to "die for Allah" and then actually becomes a suicide bomber, that's pretty solid evidence.
lutusp 13y ago
> I would think that the willingness to suffer or die because of your beliefs is a reasonable piece of evidence that the beliefs are genuine. Surely you didn't mean to say "genuine", assuming you understand the meaning of the word. You may have meant "sincere". But "genuine" implies that the belief is true, which is a property not necessary for a belief to be sincerely held, and that contradicts the meaning of "belief" as a view held without regard for the evidence.
- baddox 13y ago
  In my sentence, "genuine" modifies "belief," not the thing that is believed. I believe this is common English usage. "Genuine belief" is a common phrase with the meaning I intended, as in "I hope you don't genuinely believe that."
  - lutusp 13y ago
    This doesn't change how the original reads -- as granting credence to the belief, rather than the holding of the belief.
    - baddox 13y ago
      I don't think that's a reasonable reading of my comment. My phrasing matches standard English usage.
      - lutusp 13y ago
        All I am saying is that, in English, to avoid confusing people about your meaning, you're much better off saying "sincere belief". > My phrasing matches standard English usage. So does saying "literally" when you mean figuratively -- all the dictionaries now list this perversion, but it's still inadvisable and still sows confusion among educated readers. It's one thing to argue that a usage is accepted by lexicographers, but quite another to try to engage in effective communications.
        13y ago

dasil003 13y ago

Although I'm not religious, I am agnostic. Why? Because no one can credibly say they know a damn thing about the metaphysical. To me, hardcore atheists are almost as bad as religious fundamentalists in their own way. Basically, both groups of people believe something which they feel everyone else needs to accept or else they're wrong and are evil. And in both cases the thing they are so self-assured about is essentially unknowable. To me, religion is a branch of philosophy. There are a lot of useful ideas developed there over the centuries. Atheists often talk about the evil created religion, but evil will use whatever tool is available—we sit in this forum worshiping startups, yet capitalism has done just as much evil as religion (or at least, it's on its way to). The other thing atheist fundamentalists do (as peterforde does above) is set up a strawman to be argued from a scientific perspective. If you say that god is a bearded man sitting in the sky then of course it sounds ridiculous, but that's ignoring the fact that it's a millenia-old imagery created for pre-scientific people. As much as we get angry over evolution-deniers and creationists, it's equally ridiculous to cherry-pick some age old metaphor, state as a falsifiable hypothesis and then demonstrate its ridiculousness on scientific grounds. Atheists often claim rationality on their side, but how rational is it to invoke religious beliefs in a thread about sexist asshole talk? It's an utter non-sequitur and what it demonstrates is an irrational axe to grind.

argumentum 13y ago
Atheism is not the belief that there is nothing supernatural, it's simply the absence of any belief that there is. > "To me, hardcore atheists are almost as bad as religious fundamentalists in their own way" This is ridiculous, religious fundamentalists kill people in the name of their religion. What atheist has ever done that? > "capitalism has done just as much evil as religion" You're comparing apples with oranges. This is just as much of a non-sequitor as bringing up atheism in a discussion about sexism (like you mentioned below). > "Atheists often claim rationality on their side, but how rational is it to invoke religious beliefs in a thread about sexist asshole talk? It's an utter non-sequitur and what it demonstrates is an irrational axe to grind." Agreed, not sure what peterforde was trying to accomplish here.
- dasil003 13y ago