As a "Dull" I have some questions for our "Bright" friends. I need to have these explained to me, to us (believers), because we're unintelligent, weak, and believe in fairy tales.
First question is how does insulting people that believe something different add to the discussion of the existence of God? Does being insulting help prove God doesn't exist?
Second question is how to justify the claim that atheists in charge would have better results than "Dulls" have had? (During this questioning I'm focusing on Judaism and Christianity because that's my religious tradition.) The atheist regimes in history brought Fascist Italy, Nazi Germany, Communist Soviet Union, and Communist China, to name the big ones. I saw one defense of this observation stating Hitler was a Catholic, so he was (secretly) religious; as if that explained it all. I don't think being a member of a church makes anyone a Christian any more that sitting in the garage makes one a car. David Berlinski: "What Hitler did not believe and what Stalin did not believe and what Mao did not believe and what the SS did not believe and what the Gestapo did not believe and what the NKVD did not believe and what the commissars, functionaries, swaggering executioners, Nazi doctors, Communist Party theoreticians, intellectuals, Brown Shirts, Black Shirts, gauleiteres, and a thousand party hacks did not believe was that God was watching what they were doing." Anything bad we "Dulls" have done doesn't even come close to the results of these "Bright" regimes.
On the flip side of that is good works. Why do "Dulls" give more than "Brights"? I'm thinking of all that charitable work, and charitable organizations that the "Dulls" have founded and support. Hospitals, shelters, feeding the poor, paying attention to prisoners, universities, ending slavery, civil rights ("Dull" Christian Minister Martin Luther King), actually a whole range of things that improve the plight of humanity. I remember a "Bright" say after the worst of cleaning up after Katrina was done, that mostly what he saw were Christians and their organizations helping. (Note that the government wasn't of much help.) He said he had to hand it to them, they were there when needed, and the "Brights" really didn't help out that much, if at all. Christians have given $billions to the suffering and poor all over the world. "Dulls" give far more than "Brights" in charitable donations. Lots of stats from many sources bear this out. "Dulls" volunteer far more than "Brights". The question is, what's to recommend, what evidence is there, that "Brights" care for others? Or don't "Brights" care about others? I know some individuals do, but as a group or movement? Not so much. Side note here. "Brights" are all for governments taking care of people in trouble, just not them personally, and taking money from others to do it, which in turn empowers the Nazi, Fascist, Socialist, Communist expression of "Brights".
God made it quite clear to us "Dulls" that service to others is job one. Question to "Brights", what is your job one?
Next question is about the arts. "Dulls" have some incredible architecture, music so lovely I tear up, literature that takes the breath away with its expressions, paintings and sculptures that's so gorgeous it make one's eyes glow with appreciation, philosophy that really forces us to think about how we relate to life, nature, each other. The question is, what have "Brights" provided us in architecture, painting, literature, music, philosophy, sculpture? What aesthetics have "Brights" provided us that compares?
Back to insults. I've noticed when engaged in dialectic, when an opponent begins loosing ground, insults happen, from them. Another tactic is to point out something singular, and event or person, as if that's of consequence.
Answers to the questions here I'm sure will clear things up, and help us "Dulls" understand better why "Brights" have so much more to offer, and why we should denounce God.
11 comments:
"Another tactic is to point out something singular, and event or person, as if that's of consequence. "
Hitler?
Do you honestly think you've said something here that hasn't been said a thousand times before?
Dawkins et al. have been as insulting to religion as capitalists are to socialists or anybody who believes anything is to anyone else. That any particular religious people think that the big scary new Atheists are out to get them just shows the persecution complex at work. You're so vain; you probably think this song is about you.
You've seen this right - http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_URZM4fTat9c/SePUuE24hfI/AAAAAAAABAc/HgziuiDkMqg/s400/atheist-cartoon.png
Fair turnabout, I think.
Just one thing really. Brights do NOT refer to those who have religious beliefs as 'dulls'.
We refer to you as 'supers': those who believe in the 'supernatural'.
I can only speak for myself. I thought Brights called believers Supers? This means supernaturalists.
***
You can call yourselves Dull if you want but I will call you Super.
***
We don't stop at simply saying we don't believe because we think there is harm in belief, or at any rate, I do. I look at all the trouble within and between religions over the centuries and wonder wouldn't it be better if all those believers could at least admit that they might be wrong then we'd all be on the same page.
***
As long as billions of people all think they are right then they will attack each other. Christianity is split into many factions. And it all started as animism anyway. Read The Evolution of the Idea of God by Grant Alan for the details.
***
If you read your bible you will find a story about the Christian God, who was made of stone, fighting with the Philistine God, made of wood. The Christian God won. I should say the God who later became the God of the Chistians.
***
As this God was handed down from parents to children (since children are born without beliefs) He changed from a little stone God to a great big God who became the God of everyone and everything, except nobody told all the heathens. You must admit it sounds rather far fetched.
***
Your description of yourselves as, and I quote: “ unintelligent, weak, and believe in fairy tales.” might or might not be true, but you seem mostly to have taken in what your parents and others told you, hook, line and sinker. You might rationalise it any way you like, but you have done what all religionists have always done, you have believed in your parents truths. If one religion were true then God would present it to all races, not let them go believing lies for thousands of years.
***
Maybe you think I am insulting you or your intelligence. It is hard not to believe what our elders teach us, for they should know, shouldn't they? But how should they know, they only got it from their parents, and they from their parents.
***
In the case of the Judaism based religions, the book religions, you have it in writing from God himself, so it must be true. In which case, why more than one book, more than one religion?
***
as for Brights being in charge. I don't think we have suggested such a thing, we simply don't want squabbling religionists in charge, telling us what to believe and what not to believe. For all we know, really know, there might be a God, a great creator who created everything. He (?) might have even created himself. How do you think He might have done that? That would be a neat trick.
***
Supers indulge in good works because they think it is their duty. Brights also think it is their duty as humans. Both do a good job. At the same time, many Supers and many Brights do less than they could. They wish the bickering would stop and we could all have peace. That's what I want. I admit I could be wrong. If you all admit the same then we are all singing from the same hymnsheet.
Amen.
Cheers,
Bob
Robert Howes (robertcircle1@yahoo.co.uk)
I'll be honest, "Dull" is a new term for me, so I guess I'm as guilty as a Dull" for not paying attention. I'd also ask if you could elaborate on what "lies" have been thrown about.
Bit of a strawman question to start of with but the simple answer to your question is no it does not. If you feel insulted by the proposition a deity probably did not create you & I, then perhaps you should consider how insulting the proposition is that a non-believer cannot know right from wrong.
What helped these regimes rise was the religious mindset.
They grew quickest in Catholic countries and were endorsed in the pulpets.
You rightly observe we can never be 100% sure what these believed, though Hitler did write in mein Kempfe "by defending myself against the Jew, I am fighting for the work of the Lord."
You make the mistake that many believers make in asserting that because they did bad things, they did not believe a deity was watching over them.
I'm not a real history in expert. All I can say really is if you believe these regimes occured because some or all who were in charge were perhaps Atheists, then you are deluding yourself.
Charity, Katrina etc
Your statement about Christians giving more than non-Christians is what makes piffle of your claim to be insulted.
Firstly, most of the work carried out by charities in disaster zones like Haiti is done by secular agencies. Believers went into this recent disaster zone not to help, but to carry out sinister activities like child trafficking and preaching whichever faith it is they believed in.
You mention Christians carried out ost of the cleaning up operations in the Katrina disaster zone because the Government was no help. It seems you drew this conclusion after speaking to a handful of individuals. Unless you established the belief system of each volunteer, this "observatiion" can be safely disgarded. Shall I remind you the US Government at the time had some of the most fundamental christians?
To throw my own strawman questiont o you and ask does an act of charity prove the existence of supernatural forces?
"God made it quite clear to us "Dulls" that service to others is job one. Question to "Brights", what is your job one? "
Firstly I need you to clarify what you mean by "God made it quite clear to us".
I assume you mean by "job one" is what is the purpose of life. As I only think for myself, I can only answer for myself and say no one has given me a defining role. I have chosen my role in life and tried to make the best of it.
I enjoy helping others whenever possible & do not feel it necessary to believe I have to do good for the sake of eternal reward or anything of that effect.
I'd also ask you to use the Internet in a more shrewder manner before asking silly questions on if non-believers have brought art into the world. Wikipedia maybe a good place to start.
"Back to insults. I've noticed when engaged in dialectic, when an opponent begins loosing ground, insults happen, from them. Another tactic is to point out something singular, and event or person, as if that's of consequence."
I'd choose better arguments before throwing on the towel like that, especially after you brought up the subject of "bright" regimes.
"Answers to the questions here I'm sure will clear things up, and help us "Dulls" understand better why "Brights" have so much more to offer, and why we should denounce God."
I don't see how answering those questions would give you any reason to give up belief in anything. You seem to be setting another strawman boobie trap by saying if anyone does not give adequate answers for you to denounce your deity, then the argument (if there ever was one) is lost.
I feel that people of religion help the needy, go on missions to poor countries etc... for an alternative agenda, namely to spread the word of God. They prey on the poor and vulnerable, giving them much needed food and supplies - almost as a bribe to join their way of thinking. As for the Brights as a movement - this organisation has not been around long enough. We are cats that cannot be herded - we are individuals doing good in our own way. Perhaps in time once we have grown we will organised enough to start charitable work under the name of the Brights. For the moment I know that I as an individual do help on a charitable basis and I am sure other Brights do to. We just dont have the Umbrella name of a united 'religion'.
You are not "Dulls" to us Brights, you are "Supers", short for those who believe in the supernatural. If one of your fellow Supers told you otherwise, they were either mistaken or lying. Some of you ARE dull, as are some Brights. It's not for me to say whether you are or not, I have no idea. But yuo clearly DO believe in the supernatural, and that makes you a Super.
Speaking as a "Bright" I have found personally that believers tend to do good works because they are too scared not to! They are told, from a very young age, that to enter the kingdom of heaven or wherever, they should prove themselves by doing good whilst on Earth. That's not what I'd call a selfless motive. The Brights tend to cherish the Earth whilst we're here, we feel that we should take care of our planet for future generations, what happens to us when we're dead causes us little concern. We don't call believers "Dulls", nor do we assume that we are more intelligent than anyone else. We just feel that we are enlightened by science, philosophy, nature and the natural world, we have no need of idols, gods, places of worship or leaders who tell us how to live our lives. We don't attack believers individually, we just feel that religion should be a personal experience, it has no place in government, courts of law or schools. I don't know why people of faith feel so threatened by non-believers, you have nothing to fear from us. All we ask is that you question everything, take nothing at face value, develop a sense of curiosity and open your eyes to the world. It's so much better than burying your head in a 2,000 year old story!
i wonder, with comments moderation tiurned on, are you letting through all of the comments?
after all, you invited responses
Responses Part I: I usually don't respond to comments, but this is an interesting dialectic, so here are some thoughts.
From the first post by Anonymous, regarding 'fair turnabout'. We don't think the new Atheists are out to get us. We don't like being lied about and insulted; no one does. 'Fair turnabout'...justifying a wrong by pointing out another wrong is not a valid justification.
robercirlce1's observation about trouble between religions. We recognize the bad things done in the name of religion, and don't support them. Within the religious community these are discussed and noted, not justified or ignored. Christianity has been factious since day one; it's not a monolithic belief. There may just be the possibility that some if not most believers became so intellectually, emotionally, or had a personal experience that change how they thought, believed, behaved. Simply not true we are a bunch of mindless biological formations only responding to whatever stimulus. Question: Do all Christians only come from Christian parents? If the answer to that is no, then...? The origin of God is a mystery, volumes written, and any answer I suggest here can't do much justice. We'd have to start with agreeing on a definition of God, and from your perspective, 'if God existed' then... As for bickering, we all are just people. Within the religious community, we 'discuss' stuff all the time. Even some heated arguments. In the end, we all come together, to serve others the best we can, and act in as good a manner as best we can. Best friends, husbands and wives, we all have different points of view. We may even disagree with our own ideas on occasion. That's when we make changes.
Responses Part II: To awalsh's points, there are a lot of writing from Hitler's inner circle stuff he said that were not supportive of Christianity. He had, toward the end, started arresting Christian leaders, notably Dietrich Bonhoffer. About charity, can you know other's motivations, and what's in their hearts? The Haiti missionary situation, which I followed closely in this blog, was a proven lie, there was no kidnapping, and it was a shakedown to the US government for money. I'm not trying to trap anybody, but these were honest questions regarding a different belief system.
For Melanie, the question goes back to thinking we know what motivates other, and why, or knowing what's in their hearts. When I volunteer, or help someone, it's because their pain and suffering grieves me. All the people in my faith community that I know do things for the same reason. I haven't talked to any Believer that had even given a thought to eternal reward. I have several atheist friends that do volunteer and charitable work; all for the same reason my religious friends do...they grieve for those that suffer.
Responses Part III: Much of the same response to Jane. We help others out of genuine love, and not fear. Again, we should all be careful to claim we know what motivates people to love, and help, contribute and care for people that suffer and are in trouble. Religion is by definition a social experience. It's a lot about serving others. We are after all social creatures, and religion, properly applied, is an expression of that. People of Faith are not threatened by atheists, we only object to the insults, lies, and disrespect. We practitioners of religion are in fact curious, creative and innovative. Every church that can afford it has a library. There are lots of small groups that get together on Sundays and at each other's homes to discuss issues, and figure out how to care better for each other, secular or religion in belief.
To Martin, I post all comments, regardless of subject or what is said. I don't shy away from disagreement, and in my church I'm known for dusting things up a bit about our history, ideas, etc. I have to filter comments because the spamming got to be a daily issue, and became a time consumer.
I'm sixty years now, and practiced Buddhism for about twenty years. I've been studying Comparative Religion since I was twelve or thirteen, so I've always been a spiritualist (at least) all my life. I do know from personal experience that there is more to life that the material, than just 'things'. I've seen and experienced things that just defy rational explanation. Defying that rational explanation, I can only come to the conclusion that the events/experiences were supernatural.
I thank all for your civility and taking your precious time to explain your ideas.
Post a Comment