Working on a short "plea" to the religious,what do you think?

[EGarrett]

I was typing it to someone else elsewhere, and I decided to put this up on a few religious-type boards in an effort to provide a short summary of why atheism and evolution aren't so scary and bad. I hope the language isn't too flame-causing, but maybe if it's a tiny bit confrontational they're more likely to respond.

What do you think?
_________________

Religious people have a conflict of interest. On the one hand they want to know the truth about who they are, but on the other they want to feel warm and fuzzy inside. So what they do is choose the thing that claims to be true, but makes them feel really warm and fuzzy on the most shallow, simple level...then defend it to the death even when it obviously makes zero sense.

To religious people, evolution is depressing because it's not as warm and reassuring as a fairy tale. But if they opened up their minds, they'd see that it's not at all. For example...religious people think...

1) Evolution makes them not special.

HOW are we not special? We're the only self-aware, rational organisms in the known universe! That's amazing. We might be the most significant thing IN the universe.

2) That it means we're alone.

We're not alone. We have each other. And that's much more then an imaginary friend, because we KNOW that the people around us are real.

3) That if there's no God, there's no basis for morality.

On the contrary, without a God, there's a better basis for morality. Logic. Not "because a divine being said so." The things we consider good help us organize a society in a way that makes the most people the most happy. For example, stealing contributes to anarchy, and violence...which hurts both participants.

And if you somehow still think criminal atheists will kill and steal because they don't fear God, we seem to do quite well keeping people in line with the fear of prison. So I don't see how that's a problem?

3) That it means the universe is a cold, empty abyss.

Considering that the universe can occassionally give rise to life, I don't see how it can be this cold, empty thing.

4) That there's nothing after death and we have to accept that.

This is a part where I disagree with a lot of other atheists. They say "you die, there's nothing else. Live with it." Yes. There IS nothing after death, but we DON'T have to accept that...any more then the inventors of the airplane had to accept that gravity makes it impossible for man to fly.

The sooner you acknowledge that there's something undesirable about your situation, the sooner you can start to fix it. The first step to solving a problem is ADMITTING there is a problem to solve. As soon as we admit that our bodies break down over time and eventually stop being able to support the existence of our minds, the sooner we can learn WHAT causes it (cell damage, shortening of telomeres) and learn ways to bypass it or control it.

And since there IS no 'divine plan' for our lives, just a process that has developed and can be understood and changed, there are no limits to what we can achieve.

Religious people, THAT'S the reason atheists and evolutionists and scientists are always shoving water down your throats when you'd rather have wine. Reality isn't as dark and depressing as you think...and the sooner you admit the world isn't everything you'd WANT it to be...the sooner you can help us MAKE it what we want it to be.

Is that so bad?

[Meffy]

After a quick scan, it makes perfect sense to me. Not how I'd have worded everything but you ain't me. :-}

How much good it can do against minds entrenched and taught that "we" are the enemy... well, all you can do is give them the truth and hope someone eventually notices it doesn't have the same stench as the lies and half-truths they've been taught. :-( It's a good fight, and good on ya for fighting it.

[Smart_Cookie]

What you've written seems clear and concise.

I thought most of it held together well, but I personally don't believe the following:

4) That there's nothing after death and we have to accept that.

This is a part where I disagree with a lot of other atheists. They say "you die, there's nothing else. Live with it." Yes. There IS nothing after death, but we DON'T have to accept that...any more then the inventors of the airplane had to accept that gravity makes it impossible for man to fly.

The sooner you acknowledge that there's something undesirable about your situation, the sooner you can start to fix it. The first step to solving a problem is ADMITTING there is a problem to solve. As soon as we admit that our bodies break down over time and eventually stop being able to support the existence of our minds, the sooner we can learn WHAT causes it (cell damage, shortening of telomeres) and learn ways to bypass it or control it.

And since there IS no 'divine plan' for our lives, just a process that has developed and can be understood and changed, there are no limits to what we can achieve.



I don't think there's anything "undesirable" about dying. I think I've actually said that somewhere else on this board. That's just the reality of life on this planet. Everything has a life cycle. We're born, we grow, we age and we die. Including trees, mountains, etc.

To me, there's something wrong with wanting to bypass that natural way of things. I just hope like heck that my time to go is a LONG time in coming. :)

And, I think that's partly why the whole dying thing helped foster religious development. Not for us, but for those we care about. It is VERY painful to lose a loved one, especially in a tragic fashion. People don't like to think about their family and friends rotting in the ground. They want to believe that they'll see them again some day.

That said...those were just my two cents! Good Luck!

[Meffy]

*nod* Well said, Smart Cookie. I plan to die and make way for someone else. It's unpleasant but That's How It Is.

But that's just me. Others are welcome to pursue longevity or whatever.

[Wally]

*nod* Well said, Smart Cookie. I plan to die and make way for someone else. It's unpleasant but That's How It Is.

But that's just me. Others are welcome to pursue longevity or whatever.

Well, I plan on living forever.
So far, I’m on track.;)

[ceo_esq]

I was typing it to someone else elsewhere, and I decided to put this up on a few religious-type boards in an effort to provide a short summary of why atheism and evolution aren't so scary and bad. I hope the language isn't too flame-causing, but maybe if it's a tiny bit confrontational they're more likely to respond.

What do you think?

I think this is very well written. I also think, however, that it is vulnerable to a few criticisms, which I offer here in what I hope is a constructive way.


Religious people have a conflict of interest. On the one hand they want to know the truth about who they are, but on the other they want to feel warm and fuzzy inside. So what they do is choose the thing that claims to be true, but makes them feel really warm and fuzzy on the most shallow, simple level...then defend it to the death even when it obviously makes zero sense.

When you think about it, fairy tales (authentic ones, not the Disney variety) tend not to be especially warm and fuzzy. In the same way, "God exists" is not necessarily a more pyschologically comfortable notion than "God doesn't exist." Arguably (see, e.g., Graham Greene's works), theism is the less comfortable option; certainly many people (believers and non-believers alike) have felt this way.


To religious people, evolution is depressing because it's not as warm and reassuring as a fairy tale. But if they opened up their minds, they'd see that it's not at all. For example...religious people think...

1) Evolution makes them not special.

HOW are we not special? We're the only self-aware, rational organisms in the known universe! That's amazing. We might be the most significant thing IN the universe.

2) That it means we're alone.

We're not alone. We have each other. And that's much more then an imaginary friend, because we KNOW that the people around us are real.

Here I think you might devote some more thought to your purpose. Your target audience is obviously religious people who do not believe in evolution, but are you trying to coax them towards evolution or away from religion? (Bear in mind that most evolutionists are probably religious, and most religious people do not find evolution depressing.) If your goal here is to get religious people comfortable with the idea of evolution - which is certainly worthwhile - perhaps it would be best not to drop hints that evolution and theism are opposed. Not only because it's not true, but because it doesn't seem like the best way to make the medicine go down, as it were.


3) That if there's no God, there's no basis for morality.

On the contrary, without a God, there's a better basis for morality. Logic. Not "because a divine being said so." The things we consider good help us organize a society in a way that makes the most people the most happy. For example, stealing contributes to anarchy, and violence...which hurts both participants.

A number of valid critiques can be made about theistic moral philosophy, but I'm not sure they include (1) that its basis can be reduced to "because a divine being said so" or (2) that is necessarily logically deficient vis-à-vis the utilitarian view to which you allude (albeit that the premises are different).

[EGarrett]

How much good it can do against minds entrenched and taught that "we" are the enemy... well, all you can do is give them the truth and hope someone eventually notices it doesn't have the same stench as the lies and half-truths they've been taught. :-( It's a good fight, and good on ya for fighting it.That is all you can do. I find that a lot of religious 'arguments' against science/evolution boil down to a (probably purposeful) misunderstanding of it...so maybe making things as clear as possible can help fight that ignorance.

I don't think there's anything "undesirable" about dying. I think I've actually said that somewhere else on this board. That's just the reality of life on this planet. Everything has a life cycle. We're born, we grow, we age and we die. Including trees, mountains, etc.

To me, there's something wrong with wanting to bypass that natural way of things. Well, in fairness, indoor plumbing isn't the natural way of things either...but I'm sure fond of it.

I think that just because things have evolved a certain way, it doesn't mean we're doing bad by changing that. Evolution hasn't really developed to serve happiness, but just to serve rapid reproduction. With that in mind, I don't see why we should be chained to the processes it's stuck us with. Thanks for reading the thread.

When you think about it, fairy tales (authentic ones, not the Disney variety) tend not to be especially warm and fuzzy. In the same way, "God exists" is not necessarily a more pyschologically comfortable notion than "God doesn't exist." Arguably (see, e.g., Graham Greene's works), theism is the less comfortable option; certainly many people (believers and non-believers alike) have felt this way.I'm sure there are a lot of religious people who hate the idea of God, and I don't mean to paint them all with the same brush...but I do believe that the concept of God sticks with most people because it makes them feel happy and secure in their purpose in the world.

Here I think you might devote some more thought to your purpose. Your target audience is obviously religious people who do not believe in evolution, but are you trying to coax them towards evolution or away from religion? (Bear in mind that most evolutionists are probably religious, and most religious people do not find evolution depressing.) If your goal here is to get religious people comfortable with the idea of evolution - which is certainly worthwhile - perhaps it would be best not to drop hints that evolution and theism are opposed. Not only because it's not true, but because it doesn't seem like the best way to make the medicine go down, as it were.It does jump back and forth between evolution and science. Probably because I was typing to someone who argued against both originally. I probably should take a second look at that. Thanks.

A number of valid critiques can be made about theistic moral philosophy, but I'm not sure they include (1) that its basis can be reduced to "because a divine being said so" or (2) that is necessarily logically deficient vis-à-vis the utilitarian view to which you allude (albeit that the premises are different).Well, I do think the religious morals boil down to "because my divine being said so"...isn't that exactly where the Ten Commandments come from (or the equivalent in other religions, it's too late for my brain to work properly).

The problem with it is that someone can say "well, I don't believe in your God, so I am not bound by his rules."

If on the other hand, you can demonstrate that "this is logical, and these are the rules that work for helping us be happy"...then that same easy escape from morals doesn't work.

[ned flandas]

I am a Christian. My great friend and business partner is an athiest and skeptic. I dont get scared by it or have a doom and gloom opinion on his way of thinking.

We get on great. We laugh about our differences and have fantastic conversations where we both respect each others opinions.

He thinks i'm a sad nutcase, I think he is too. But we share loads of love (in a non sexualo way).

That, I feel is how it should be...

[Molinaro]

Religious people have a conflict of interest. On the one hand they want to know the truth about who they are, but on the other they want to feel warm and fuzzy inside. So what they do is choose the thing that claims to be true, but makes them feel really warm and fuzzy on the most shallow, simple level...then defend it to the death even when it obviously makes zero sense.



If you want to avoid it being considered flaming, perhaps you could find a way to tone down the ending of this bit. The general tone of the piece is not overly confrontational, but this bit would have to be the most harsh. With it coming so near the beginning you could end up turning off some people before they read the meat of your essay.

Overall, well said.

[ned flandas]

Reality isn't as dark and depressing as you think...and the sooner you admit the world isn't everything you'd WANT it to be...the sooner you can help us MAKE it what we want it to be.

Is that so bad?

Hiya

You lost me here, please explain.

How could I help you make the world the way you want it to be?

[UndercoverElephant]

Religious people have a conflict of interest. On the one hand they want to know the truth about who they are, but on the other they want to feel warm and fuzzy inside.


That is both deeply insulting and factually innaccurate. Some religious people are like this. A great many are nothing of the sort. Feeling fuzzy inside has got nothing to do with it. Instead, it is all about duty and responsibility to others with no regard for oneself.


So what they do is choose the thing that claims to be true, but makes them feel really warm and fuzzy on the most shallow, simple level...then defend it to the death even when it obviously makes zero sense.


This is also a very primitive opinion. No truly religious person does this. You are talking about fundamentalists and claiming to be talking about "religious people" in general.


To religious people, evolution is depressing because it's not as warm and reassuring as a fairy tale.


What about all the religious people who are quite happy with evolution? Like all the Hindus and Buddhists and much of mainstream Christianity?

You mean "Christian fundamentalists" not "religious people".