I don't. They won't change my view, I won't change theirs. Neither of us have anything to gain by arguing about religion.
How do you reason with religious people?
- Thread starter YukoValis
- Start date
Recommended Videos
See, the main flaw with talking to really religious people is that they don't believe in fact. Their whole belief system is based on something that they have been told to believe in, and not something that has evidence supporting it. When a logical person tries to bring facts into an argument against a religious person they don't understand its usefulness or purpose because its not relevant.
Usually they tend to get angry because in the argument you are trying to get them to see another side of a story, to get them to look beyond what they know, to push their boundaries of thought. For religious people this is very scary, therefore they react with anger. Religious people have been told what to believe their whole life, you can't just force them to think independantly because its like sheep without their shepard, they get lost and scared.Free or inspirational thought is something the church likes to suppress as much as possible, so trying to get an indocrinated person to think for themselves, to look for facts, or to challenge their beliefs is near impossible.
Disclaimer: This is just my experience in dealing with religious poeple. If you take offence to this post and are not a religious person, then I am sorry just ignore my post. If you take offense and are a religious person, I won't bother debating with you for reasons stated above.
Usually they tend to get angry because in the argument you are trying to get them to see another side of a story, to get them to look beyond what they know, to push their boundaries of thought. For religious people this is very scary, therefore they react with anger. Religious people have been told what to believe their whole life, you can't just force them to think independantly because its like sheep without their shepard, they get lost and scared.Free or inspirational thought is something the church likes to suppress as much as possible, so trying to get an indocrinated person to think for themselves, to look for facts, or to challenge their beliefs is near impossible.
Disclaimer: This is just my experience in dealing with religious poeple. If you take offence to this post and are not a religious person, then I am sorry just ignore my post. If you take offense and are a religious person, I won't bother debating with you for reasons stated above.
You cannot reason with idiots oblivious for the truth.
You NEED to be open-minded to be able to be in a discussion of any kind.
Otherwise it'll just be a fight.
Important! I'm not insinuating that all religious people are idiots.
Your friend just happens to be one when confronted with religion.
You NEED to be open-minded to be able to be in a discussion of any kind.
Otherwise it'll just be a fight.
Important! I'm not insinuating that all religious people are idiots.
Your friend just happens to be one when confronted with religion.
Your friend is not saying what he's saying because he's religious, he's saying it because, frankly, he's being painfully stupid. I'm a Christian, and no one I know supports WBC. Everyone I know, myself included, despises those idiots for their severe misinterpretations of the Bible that makes all the rest of us Christians look bad. "Misinterpretations" is actually not a strong enough word: I don't even know where they pull some of their crap from. Siding with someone just because they claim to believe as you do, even though their actions prove otherwise, is stupid. Regardless of what those beliefs are. Atheists do it too, simply because people are really stupid sometimes.
Religion does not equal anti-intellectualism.
Religion does not equal anti-intellectualism.
Your friend clearly either has the same views as the WBC, or has no idea what they've done.YukoValis said:
Most normal, non-fanatical religious people are normal. Religion has almost nothing to do with it, unless talking about moral issues. Like the WBC. Do we blast them into the sun, or a volcano?
I find that last paragraph interesting. You basically just equated religion with anti-intellectualism, and you don't want anyone to challenge you on it. Your perception of all religious people is conveniently such that you claim it wouldn't be worth discussing it with them. Good job remaining comfortable in your lack of understanding! *sarcastic thumbs up*Polyintrinsic said:
Look, you don't need to debate with someone about it, you just need to understand that you're generalizing here, and the resulting ideas are wrong. Some religious people have issues with that, true. But the amount is becoming less and less. Reason being, we live in a culture that is increasingly hostile toward religion; it's "tolerated" in the actual meaning of the word, but generally made fun of in our culture based on sweeping generalizations like the ones you made here. Anyone growing up with, or accepting later in life, a given religion goes through a period in his/her life where they have to step back and take a serious look at what they believe and decide whether they actually believe it for themselves. Faith does play a role in a religion, but rarely does it take an all-important one. You don't have to agree with any given religion if you don't want to, but to essentially say that anyone who believes in a given religion is against logical thought is more than a little much, and more than a little ignorant.
god your a dick. the title of the post is so frickin ignorant as it is and basically just an attack against religious people (like we arent smart enough to reason with as it is). just because your moron freind isnt educated enough to listen to both sides of the facts doesnt mean all, or even most religious people are as bad as him. i told my dad, an elder at a evangelical christian church, and my mom, also a very religious evangelical christian about this story. they thought it was funny that it happened, they think the WBC should be abolished (they did already) and we got into a discussion about free speech and the implications of it.YukoValis said:
Can't support anyone who supports the WBC. There are people who are in religions for a plethora of reasons; security, conformity, nurture, or just a personal spiritual epiphany. Your friend sounds like he's taking the WBC's side to conform, and find brotherhood amongst those who he thinks share his views and opinions.
This is the type of religious person who sounds devout, but aren't, and on a lower level they just want to fit in, and they've drawn religion out of the deck of cards.
Personally, if someone is "just religious" you should argue with them how you would argue with anyone else. Otherwise you're patronizing or discriminating them based on their beliefs.
It's plain to see most people are firmly against Christian religion's prosthetizing, and I understand, I think that this is invasive and bothersome. I think there's a lot of things this group could do to improve themselves, but keep in mind many religious people are every day people.
I'm a pantheist. I don't use God as an excuse for creation, or divine right, or even for my security. At my root, I just believe there's an essence out there, some sort of embodiment of universal existence in a form, outside of the physical. This means that my views may be more lenient and open to scientific fact and the matter, and there are those religious people that are so rooted in their beliefs they would deny that which is for that which they think is.
But the fact that it exists to them means it exists, in that form.
But, your friend needs to come to understand himself before he can truly understand what he believes.
EDIT: I think it's worth stating that your friend would probably be as thickly routed in his views if they were atheistic views. Religion doesn't so much cause extremism or over zealousness, but because of the variety of interpretations of things like scriptures, it may be more welcome for such people than the straight-forward scientific.
If the person fighting Anonymous was an overtly-ignorant atheist group, not the WBC, and were telling Anon that they were scientifically doomed, and less evolved, etc., and your friend was an extremist atheist, he would still be as he was. His persona comes more from his character than his views.
This is the type of religious person who sounds devout, but aren't, and on a lower level they just want to fit in, and they've drawn religion out of the deck of cards.
Personally, if someone is "just religious" you should argue with them how you would argue with anyone else. Otherwise you're patronizing or discriminating them based on their beliefs.
It's plain to see most people are firmly against Christian religion's prosthetizing, and I understand, I think that this is invasive and bothersome. I think there's a lot of things this group could do to improve themselves, but keep in mind many religious people are every day people.
I'm a pantheist. I don't use God as an excuse for creation, or divine right, or even for my security. At my root, I just believe there's an essence out there, some sort of embodiment of universal existence in a form, outside of the physical. This means that my views may be more lenient and open to scientific fact and the matter, and there are those religious people that are so rooted in their beliefs they would deny that which is for that which they think is.
But the fact that it exists to them means it exists, in that form.
But, your friend needs to come to understand himself before he can truly understand what he believes.
EDIT: I think it's worth stating that your friend would probably be as thickly routed in his views if they were atheistic views. Religion doesn't so much cause extremism or over zealousness, but because of the variety of interpretations of things like scriptures, it may be more welcome for such people than the straight-forward scientific.
If the person fighting Anonymous was an overtly-ignorant atheist group, not the WBC, and were telling Anon that they were scientifically doomed, and less evolved, etc., and your friend was an extremist atheist, he would still be as he was. His persona comes more from his character than his views.
This question just seems like you're making assumptions about a whole group based on a single incident. I know plenty of religious people who are all perfectly reasonable. The question may as well be "How do you reason with (insert ethnicity/race/creed) people?" because it would still have the same answer.
I Fully agree. But i have to ask religious people of the world:BiscuitTrouser said:
How come you join non-religious people in taking a unicorn-worshipping man into psychiatric care, but disagree when we suggest you could benefit from similar treatment?
I highly doubt more than half the human population is psychologically disturbed, instead it seems they simply don't see any reason to question what they have been taught since birth (especially when they are discouraged to question their own religion). But if such teachings are based on abandoning reason and logic when it feels good, then maybe they should be encouraged to question themselves and their own religion from outside sources.
YukoValis said:
Honestly, it depends on the culture or subculture in question. To be blunt in many cases you CAN'T reason with them by definition. Various cults, and even the whole situation in The Middle East demonstrate the problem here. You can't for example reason women's sufferage to someone who genuinely believes that women should be surpressed because god tells them to (no matter how it's justified).
In general Americans have adapted to the point of being pretty reasonable. To be honest your not nessicarly going to be able to tell what religion someone follows by looking at them, assuming of course the group in question has assimilated to American society. There are of course exceptions, from people who don't assimilate into society, want to cause trouble, or are just part of a paticular subculture that we have difficulty dealing with due to other principles.
When it comes to WBC, I think Anonymous has generally the right attitude in that they have their right to their opinion, as distasteful as it might be. I personally think they can be dealt with within the existing laws, and have been in the past. As time goes on and awareness of them continues, I think they are going to find a lot more opposition from the authorities within the existing body of law. They still make a lot of noise, but I think they have actually been corraled somewhat compared to their previous antics, which is why they are doing things like baiting Anonymous for attention.
In a society like the USA, we're lucky in that you typically don't have to reason with religious nutjobs unless you really want to.
I will say though that one of the whole issues is that especially when dealing with the left wing, it comes down to their way or the highway just as much. If the other side does't come around to what the left wants, then it's being inherantly unreasonable or whatever. I think that's a problem with a lot of these debates. While it has little to do with the WBC, I myself tend to take the side of religions in a lot of political squabbles, especially those on a small scale. For example I personally think that it's ridiculous that the people of a town can't decide to use their own money to put up Christmas decorations in public places like a park or town green when that's what the overwhelming majority of people want, because it offends a tiny group of residents who aren't Christian/against it, or might be travelling through. As someone who has seen traditions like town tree lighting ceremonies attacked, I have strong feelings on the subject, especially when it's part of the community, and something that in many cases might have been going on before there was even a United States. "OMG, the mayor can't light a star on top of a tree in the town square even if the mayor has been doing that for 300 years, that's religious symbolism and it offends me!". Then people wonder why the US has so little in the way of traditions or our own culture especially nowadays.
In your example, I'd point out to your friend that while the WBC believes in God, they make no effort to immitate Christ. I don't even consider them to be Christian.
In general, in any large group of people you'll find some that cannot be reasoned with. Don't let this affect your viewpoint of religious people as a whole.
In general, in any large group of people you'll find some that cannot be reasoned with. Don't let this affect your viewpoint of religious people as a whole.
I wasn't sure what the WBC was when I read this thread, so I looked it up... And I'm genuinely scared by what I've read.
As a Christian myself I would say that the WBC is at best misguided, at worst using the Good News of Christ as a smoke screen to attack many different communities and faiths.
If your friend couldn't give you a stright answer it was probably because he thought you were accusing him of being like the WBC, where as I suspect you where hoping he's say he's not.
You can reason with Christians and religious people in general. It's people with blind faith you can't reason with. Blind faith in anything in fact is a path to people being unreasonable as a person of blind faith hasn't personally reasoned out why they believe that thing so when they are confronted with questions they have no answer because they haven't go through the steps of logic that lead reasoned conclusions.
I have thought through things reasonably and thoroughly and then I came to the conclusion that there is a God et al.
Dear goodness... I'm actually scared that the WBC exists... very very scared.
As a Christian myself I would say that the WBC is at best misguided, at worst using the Good News of Christ as a smoke screen to attack many different communities and faiths.
If your friend couldn't give you a stright answer it was probably because he thought you were accusing him of being like the WBC, where as I suspect you where hoping he's say he's not.
You can reason with Christians and religious people in general. It's people with blind faith you can't reason with. Blind faith in anything in fact is a path to people being unreasonable as a person of blind faith hasn't personally reasoned out why they believe that thing so when they are confronted with questions they have no answer because they haven't go through the steps of logic that lead reasoned conclusions.
I have thought through things reasonably and thoroughly and then I came to the conclusion that there is a God et al.
Dear goodness... I'm actually scared that the WBC exists... very very scared.
Casual Shinji said:
This post is essentially the complete and undeniable truth.
There is no doubt.
Some Religious people behave much like "fanboys". They see/hear any statement against their P.O.V. (even if it's just a statement "for" the other P.O.V.) they will take offense or start a fight over it, and ignore every single piece of evidence/reason/crap the other party says, ignore tough questions and normally repeat the same points over and over.
In my opinion, everyone should keep their faith to themselves, and just quit fighting. Their fights obviously have no possible victor, since it's more a matter of opinion or belief, and no one is going to change their beliefs due to one small fight. Just accept that you both believe different things, no matter how strongly you believe the other person is "wrong". It really doesn't matter.
The next time one of these religious/fanboy fights starts, be a man and walk away/don't join in.
In my opinion, everyone should keep their faith to themselves, and just quit fighting. Their fights obviously have no possible victor, since it's more a matter of opinion or belief, and no one is going to change their beliefs due to one small fight. Just accept that you both believe different things, no matter how strongly you believe the other person is "wrong". It really doesn't matter.
The next time one of these religious/fanboy fights starts, be a man and walk away/don't join in.
you can't, theists have a massive blindside when it comes to their faith- no matter how intelligent or educated the person may be, point out any of the logical holes and they will act like a petulant child
In my experience the best bet is to not, bite your tongue and change the subject- its not worth the hassle.
In my experience the best bet is to not, bite your tongue and change the subject- its not worth the hassle.
I'm pretty sure your friend is not a prime example of most religious people... without wishing to be overly insulting at best he is misguided and at worst he's, well, bigoted.
To answer your question, in cases such as these, you just can't. I'm not religious myself but my family have a lot of history with the violence in Northern Ireland, which has helped me understand more than anything that when someone has been taught to hate before they've even learned to walk and talk there's just no way you can bring them back. Their lives are defined by it so they will cling on to it no matter what you say.
To answer your question, in cases such as these, you just can't. I'm not religious myself but my family have a lot of history with the violence in Northern Ireland, which has helped me understand more than anything that when someone has been taught to hate before they've even learned to walk and talk there's just no way you can bring them back. Their lives are defined by it so they will cling on to it no matter what you say.
I agree with you that I was generalizing. And that my tone came off as ignorant. And that not all religious people are the same. Though, it's hard to remind one's self that organized religion has a place in the world when there are nutjobs like WBC taking up the airwaves. That lady's (the one in the anon vs WBC interview) pompous grin alone, makes me scared for humanity.Thaius said: