My Religion's Less Silly Than Yours

MrFrankZito · 13th October 2006, 10:04 PM

If there’s one thing of which I’m certain, it is this: When one leaves the northern hemisphere and ventures south, one enters a completely new world. Primitive cultures and civilizations abound, many of which hold some very, very strange beliefs. One wonders, how could these people actually believe in that? Surely, we should expect more from the fellow representatives of our species, even if they are behind the scientific curve when compared to the United States. The Fang people of Cameroon are as good an example as any other. The following passage comes from “Religion Explained,” by Pascal Boyer.

The Fang people believe “… that witches have an extra internal animal-like organ that flies away at night and ruins other people’s crops or poisons their blood. It is also said that these witches sometimes assemble for huge banquets, where they devour their victims and plan future attacks. Many will tell you that a friend of a friend actually saw witches flying over the village at night, sitting on a banana leaf and throwing magical darts at various unsuspecting victims.”

Yes, apparently they really believe such crazy fairy tales, which rightfully are laughed off by we in the sophisticated north. In fact, Boyer makes a point of noting that, “… a prominent Cambridge theologian, turned to me and said: ‘That is what makes anthropology so fascinating and so difficult too. You have to explain how people can believe such nonsense’.”

Well, with that, I’ve probably given away my thesis. Here’s a hint: All my northern hemisphere arrogance was a ruse to demonstrate our amazing hypocrisy with respect to the esteem in which we hold our silly superstitions and the mockery we express toward other people’s silly superstitions. In his wonderful book “The God Delusion,” Richard Dawkins lays out some fundamental beliefs associated with contemporary Christianity.

Dawkins writes:

• In the time of the ancestors, a man was born to a virgin mother with no biological father being involved.

• The same fatherless man called out to a friend called Lazarus, who had been dead long enough to stink, and Lazarus promptly came back to life.

• The fatherless man himself came alive after being dead and buried three days.

• Forty days later, the fatherless man went up to the top of a hill and then disappeared bodily into the sky.

• If you murmur thoughts privately in your head, the fatherless man, and his “father” (who is also himself) will hear your thoughts and may act upon them. He is simultaneously able to hear the thoughts of everybody else in the world.

• If you do something bad, or something good, the same fatherless man sees all, even if nobody else does. You may be rewarded or punished accordingly, including after your death.

• The fatherless man’s virgin mother never died but “ascended” bodily into heaven.

• Bread and wine, if blessed by a priest (who must have testicles), “become” the body and blood of the fatherless man.

After laying out this rather insane set of beliefs, Dawkins asks, “What would an objective anthropologist, coming fresh to this set of beliefs while on fieldwork in Cambridge, make of them?”

For those raised in the Christian faith, remember this: You have been conditioned to believe that the Christian belief set is not silly. You have been conditioned to believe that the Christian belief set is not weird. You’ve been conditioned to believe that the Christian belief set is less far-fetched than the beliefs of the Raelians, Scientologists or Fang people. But, alas, that childhood conditioning has made you blind – blind to the fact that the claims of Christianity are deeply, profoundly and shockingly weird. The Christian belief platter, as a matter of fact, is just as fantastically crazy as the Fang people belief platter.

Ever eloquent, Dawkins economically sums it up: “The findings of anthropologists seem weird to us only because they are unfamiliar. All religious beliefs seem weird to those not brought up in them.” Divorce yourself from your deep-seeded childhood conditioning and examine the claims of Christianity as though they are completely new to you. Look at them from the perspective of a sophisticated adult, as opposed to a credulous child.

Is there room in your consciousness for such utter silliness—for such contempt of scientific knowledge and natural principles?

What’s the quickest, most efficient way of flushing your religious beliefs? Overcome your deep-seeded childhood conditioning and think about them as if they’re brand new to you.

____________________________________

My Case Against God

Foster Zygote · 14th October 2006, 02:03 PM

Originally Posted by MrFrankZito

• If you do something bad, or something good, the same fatherless man sees all, even if nobody else does. You may be rewarded or punished accordingly, including after your death.

I'd like to add that the bad may prosper and the good may suffer. The distribution of rewards and punishments is coincidentally indistinguishable from random chance.

Steven

Apathia · 14th October 2006, 02:13 PM

Let's get contemporary:

My roomate believes in something called the "Law of Attraction." She believes (with little confirming evidence ) that if she imagines getting money, money will in some kind of deus ex machina flow her way.

As for Christian superstitions, she's above all that and an Atheist.

chriswl · 14th October 2006, 04:23 PM

Originally Posted by Hyparxis

Let's get contemporary:

My roomate believes in something called the "Law of Attraction." She believes (with little confirming evidence ) that if she imagines getting money, money will in some kind of deus ex machina flow her way.

As for Christian superstitions, she's above all that and an Atheist.

Well of course it's best not to be superstitious at all. But I would rather the world was full of people believing these sort of trivial superstitions than major religious beliefs.

No one ever started a war or persecuted anyone because of horoscopes, lucky numbers or feng shui (as far as I know) and their believers don't have any system of morality they want to force on me. In the words of Douglas Adams they are Mostly Harmless.

MrFrankZito · 14th October 2006, 05:21 PM

Originally Posted by chriswl

Well of course it's best not to be superstitious at all. But I would rather the world was full of people believing these sort of trivial superstitions than major religious beliefs.

No one ever started a war or persecuted anyone because of horoscopes, lucky numbers or feng shui (as far as I know) and their believers don't have any system of morality they want to force on me. In the words of Douglas Adams they are Mostly Harmless.

Fair point, but I really believe ALL superstitions to be pernicious. I think superstitions breed anti-scientific patterns of thought. Once one rejects science in one case, it's that much easier to reject science elsewhere. Whether you're a Christian or a Fang person, you're willfully stepping away from science and into the abyss known as the "paranormal."

Foolmewunz · 15th October 2006, 03:53 AM

Originally Posted by MrFrankZito

Fair point, but I really believe ALL superstitions to be pernicious. I think superstitions breed anti-scientific patterns of thought. Once one rejects science in one case, it's that much easier to reject science elsewhere. Whether you're a Christian or a Fang person, you're willfully stepping away from science and into the abyss known as the "paranormal."

But does that analogy hold. Isn't there a considerable difference between rejecting science as part of a primitive set of beliefs versus tossing out science as stuffy intellectual nonsense or because your authoritarian elders have decided you should do so?

How many generations of the Fang have now been literate and attended university?

I'd worry more about traveling south from my home country (USA) and encountering heavily catholicized populations who are being asked by their ultimate authority to abandon evolution in favor of ID. If they accept this and continue towards this ID goal (i.e. having it taught in science classes as a legitimate scientific theory), then I'd personally start contributing to the Fang Missionary Society to have them go establish missions in Catholic countries. (Or Bible Belt America for that matter.) I think I'd have an easier time later convincing them that cow-like witch kidneys are a fairly ridiculous belief than un-teaching them what they've been fed by their historical father figure.

MrFrankZito · 16th October 2006, 07:36 PM

Originally Posted by Foolmewunz

But does that analogy hold. Isn't there a considerable difference between rejecting science as part of a primitive set of beliefs versus tossing out science as stuffy intellectual nonsense or because your authoritarian elders have decided you should do so?

How many generations of the Fang have now been literate and attended university?

I'd worry more about traveling south from my home country (USA) and encountering heavily catholicized populations who are being asked by their ultimate authority to abandon evolution in favor of ID. If they accept this and continue towards this ID goal (i.e. having it taught in science classes as a legitimate scientific theory), then I'd personally start contributing to the Fang Missionary Society to have them go establish missions in Catholic countries. (Or Bible Belt America for that matter.) I think I'd have an easier time later convincing them that cow-like witch kidneys are a fairly ridiculous belief than un-teaching them what they've been fed by their historical father figure.

I think that's a fair point. I didn't consider the differences in education/sophistication. Ignorance is different than deliberate ignorance, the latter of which is more applicable to American ID.

13th October 2006, 10:04 PM	#1
MrFrankZito Thinker Join Date: May 2005 Posts: 222	My Religion's Less Silly Than Yours If there’s one thing of which I’m certain, it is this: When one leaves the northern hemisphere and ventures south, one enters a completely new world. Primitive cultures and civilizations abound, many of which hold some very, very strange beliefs. One wonders, how could these people actually believe in that? Surely, we should expect more from the fellow representatives of our species, even if they are behind the scientific curve when compared to the United States. The Fang people of Cameroon are as good an example as any other. The following passage comes from “Religion Explained,” by Pascal Boyer. The Fang people believe “… that witches have an extra internal animal-like organ that flies away at night and ruins other people’s crops or poisons their blood. It is also said that these witches sometimes assemble for huge banquets, where they devour their victims and plan future attacks. Many will tell you that a friend of a friend actually saw witches flying over the village at night, sitting on a banana leaf and throwing magical darts at various unsuspecting victims.” Yes, apparently they really believe such crazy fairy tales, which rightfully are laughed off by we in the sophisticated north. In fact, Boyer makes a point of noting that, “… a prominent Cambridge theologian, turned to me and said: ‘That is what makes anthropology so fascinating and so difficult too. You have to explain how people can believe such nonsense’.” Well, with that, I’ve probably given away my thesis. Here’s a hint: All my northern hemisphere arrogance was a ruse to demonstrate our amazing hypocrisy with respect to the esteem in which we hold our silly superstitions and the mockery we express toward other people’s silly superstitions. In his wonderful book “The God Delusion,” Richard Dawkins lays out some fundamental beliefs associated with contemporary Christianity. Dawkins writes: • In the time of the ancestors, a man was born to a virgin mother with no biological father being involved. • The same fatherless man called out to a friend called Lazarus, who had been dead long enough to stink, and Lazarus promptly came back to life. • The fatherless man himself came alive after being dead and buried three days. • Forty days later, the fatherless man went up to the top of a hill and then disappeared bodily into the sky. • If you murmur thoughts privately in your head, the fatherless man, and his “father” (who is also himself) will hear your thoughts and may act upon them. He is simultaneously able to hear the thoughts of everybody else in the world. • If you do something bad, or something good, the same fatherless man sees all, even if nobody else does. You may be rewarded or punished accordingly, including after your death. • The fatherless man’s virgin mother never died but “ascended” bodily into heaven. • Bread and wine, if blessed by a priest (who must have testicles), “become” the body and blood of the fatherless man. After laying out this rather insane set of beliefs, Dawkins asks, “What would an objective anthropologist, coming fresh to this set of beliefs while on fieldwork in Cambridge, make of them?” For those raised in the Christian faith, remember this: You have been conditioned to believe that the Christian belief set is not silly. You have been conditioned to believe that the Christian belief set is not weird. You’ve been conditioned to believe that the Christian belief set is less far-fetched than the beliefs of the Raelians, Scientologists or Fang people. But, alas, that childhood conditioning has made you blind – blind to the fact that the claims of Christianity are deeply, profoundly and shockingly weird. The Christian belief platter, as a matter of fact, is just as fantastically crazy as the Fang people belief platter. Ever eloquent, Dawkins economically sums it up: “The findings of anthropologists seem weird to us only because they are unfamiliar. All religious beliefs seem weird to those not brought up in them.” Divorce yourself from your deep-seeded childhood conditioning and examine the claims of Christianity as though they are completely new to you. Look at them from the perspective of a sophisticated adult, as opposed to a credulous child. Is there room in your consciousness for such utter silliness—for such contempt of scientific knowledge and natural principles? What’s the quickest, most efficient way of flushing your religious beliefs? Overcome your deep-seeded childhood conditioning and think about them as if they’re brand new to you. ____________________________________ My Case Against God
MrFrankZito Thinker Join Date: May 2005 Posts: 222

14th October 2006, 02:03 PM	#2
Foster Zygote Dental Floss Tycoon Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Utility Muffin Research Kitchen Posts: 8,501	Originally Posted by MrFrankZito • If you do something bad, or something good, the same fatherless man sees all, even if nobody else does. You may be rewarded or punished accordingly, including after your death. I'd like to add that the bad may prosper and the good may suffer. The distribution of rewards and punishments is coincidentally indistinguishable from random chance. Steven
	__________________ Minions... ATTACK!!!

14th October 2006, 05:21 PM	#5
MrFrankZito Thinker Join Date: May 2005 Posts: 222	Originally Posted by chriswl Well of course it's best not to be superstitious at all. But I would rather the world was full of people believing these sort of trivial superstitions than major religious beliefs. No one ever started a war or persecuted anyone because of horoscopes, lucky numbers or feng shui (as far as I know) and their believers don't have any system of morality they want to force on me. In the words of Douglas Adams they are Mostly Harmless. Fair point, but I really believe ALL superstitions to be pernicious. I think superstitions breed anti-scientific patterns of thought. Once one rejects science in one case, it's that much easier to reject science elsewhere. Whether you're a Christian or a Fang person, you're willfully stepping away from science and into the abyss known as the "paranormal."
MrFrankZito Thinker Join Date: May 2005 Posts: 222

15th October 2006, 03:53 AM	#6
Foolmewunz Grammar Resistance Leader Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Hong Kong Posts: 12,367	Originally Posted by MrFrankZito Fair point, but I really believe ALL superstitions to be pernicious. I think superstitions breed anti-scientific patterns of thought. Once one rejects science in one case, it's that much easier to reject science elsewhere. Whether you're a Christian or a Fang person, you're willfully stepping away from science and into the abyss known as the "paranormal." But does that analogy hold. Isn't there a considerable difference between rejecting science as part of a primitive set of beliefs versus tossing out science as stuffy intellectual nonsense or because your authoritarian elders have decided you should do so? How many generations of the Fang have now been literate and attended university? I'd worry more about traveling south from my home country (USA) and encountering heavily catholicized populations who are being asked by their ultimate authority to abandon evolution in favor of ID. If they accept this and continue towards this ID goal (i.e. having it taught in science classes as a legitimate scientific theory), then I'd personally start contributing to the Fang Missionary Society to have them go establish missions in Catholic countries. (Or Bible Belt America for that matter.) I think I'd have an easier time later convincing them that cow-like witch kidneys are a fairly ridiculous belief than un-teaching them what they've been fed by their historical father figure.
	__________________ Ha! Foolmewunz has just been added to the list of people who aren't complete idiots. Hokulele Microsoft is NOT the Borg Collective... the Borg have better tech support. Eleri

16th October 2006, 07:36 PM	#7
MrFrankZito Thinker Join Date: May 2005 Posts: 222	Originally Posted by Foolmewunz But does that analogy hold. Isn't there a considerable difference between rejecting science as part of a primitive set of beliefs versus tossing out science as stuffy intellectual nonsense or because your authoritarian elders have decided you should do so? How many generations of the Fang have now been literate and attended university? I'd worry more about traveling south from my home country (USA) and encountering heavily catholicized populations who are being asked by their ultimate authority to abandon evolution in favor of ID. If they accept this and continue towards this ID goal (i.e. having it taught in science classes as a legitimate scientific theory), then I'd personally start contributing to the Fang Missionary Society to have them go establish missions in Catholic countries. (Or Bible Belt America for that matter.) I think I'd have an easier time later convincing them that cow-like witch kidneys are a fairly ridiculous belief than un-teaching them what they've been fed by their historical father figure. I think that's a fair point. I didn't consider the differences in education/sophistication. Ignorance is different than deliberate ignorance, the latter of which is more applicable to American ID.
MrFrankZito Thinker Join Date: May 2005 Posts: 222

14th October 2006, 02:13 PM	#3
Apathia Master Poster Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Tempe, AZ Posts: 2,499	Let's get contemporary: My roomate believes in something called the "Law of Attraction." She believes (with little confirming evidence ) that if she imagines getting money, money will in some kind of deus ex machina flow her way. As for Christian superstitions, she's above all that and an Atheist.

14th October 2006, 04:23 PM	#4
chriswl Muse Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: S.E. England Posts: 944	Originally Posted by Hyparxis Let's get contemporary: My roomate believes in something called the "Law of Attraction." She believes (with little confirming evidence ) that if she imagines getting money, money will in some kind of deus ex machina flow her way. As for Christian superstitions, she's above all that and an Atheist. Well of course it's best not to be superstitious at all. But I would rather the world was full of people believing these sort of trivial superstitions than major religious beliefs. No one ever started a war or persecuted anyone because of horoscopes, lucky numbers or feng shui (as far as I know) and their believers don't have any system of morality they want to force on me. In the words of Douglas Adams they are Mostly Harmless.