New Atheists . . .‘shallow’, ‘naive’, ‘dangerous’

Zubeneschamali

Penny 4 Thoughts wrote: »

They have this abstract notion that it is the "right-thing-to-do" even if they couldn't explain to you why.

Yes, and having actual visible spokespeople say that it's all balls can only help. Thanks, Atheist Ireland.

SebBerkovich

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Yes, and having actual visible spokespeople say that it's all balls can only help. Thanks, Atheist Ireland.

Yup, as long as they don't actually find out what the Bible says about slavery (among many, many, many other things)- there shouldn't be a problem.

Beano

nagirrac wrote: »

Religious teaching by and large encourages people to avoid bad traits and focus on good traits.

Unfortunately it encourages people to focus on what is good for the religion. not necessarily what is good for mankind in general. Or even what is fair and just.

Vivisectus

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

like no gay sex

Not entirely correct. A bible scholar acquaintance of mine assures me that if you look at the way it is put in the original language, they are merely condemning certain (male) gay sex acts.

Let me put it this way: they are remarkably consistent when they say that it is better to give than to receive :P

Zubeneschamali

Vivisectus wrote: »

it is better to give than to receive

The ancient Romans were also big on the idea that it's always better to be a pitcher than a catcher.

Dades

Penny 4 Thoughts wrote: »

Dades wrote: »

The concept of promoting "atheism" to adults is at best unrealistic, at worst threatening to people who might otherwise entertain secular ideas.

I personally think that is over stating how important Catholicism is for most Irish adults.

I'm not suggesting catholicism is important to a large chunk of Irish people (it ain't) - just that promoting atheism (how do we do that again?) isn't going to work as a replacement for a cultural blanket. How many people already know it's all nonsense but don't care enough to give the charade entirely?

But if you take the blanket away from the child they won't need it as an adult.

rozeboosje

Dades wrote: »

But if you take the blanket away from the child they won't need it as an adult.

Not so sure about that. I'm originally from Holland and the various churches, including the Catholic one, have been in a long, hard, irreversible decline there since at least the '60s. I can't remember any of the people I knew there being very religious at all.

But look a bit more closely and you see how Holland is overrun by "psychics", "alternative healers", quacks, charlatans and snake oil merchants, and how the supposedly secular Dutch are flocking to those people in their millions.

Like it or not, the lack of religion seems to leave some kind of religion shaped hole in many people's lives, and if they can't fill it with organised religion they will find some other nonsense to fill it with.

*sigh*

Vivisectus

rozeboosje wrote: »

Not so sure about that. I'm originally from Holland and the various churches, including the Catholic one, have been in a long, hard, irreversible decline there since at least the '60s. I can't remember any of the people I knew there being very religious at all.

But look a bit more closely and you see how Holland is overrun by "psychics", "alternative healers", quacks, charlatans and snake oil merchants, and how the supposedly secular Dutch are flocking to those people in their millions.

Like it or not, the lack of religion seems to leave some kind of religion shaped hole in many people's lives, and if they can't fill it with organised religion they will find some other nonsense to fill it with.

*sigh*

Hallo Landgeno(o)t(e)!

I know just what you mean. The attraction of the illusion of control that magical thinking brings with it seems quite powerful.

wp_rathead

Vivisectus wrote: »

Hallo Landgenote!

I know just what you mean. The attraction of the illusion of control that magical thinking brings with it seems quite powerful.

I was just a a psyhic that reads birdsdroppings and she said you'd say that!!

Beano

Vivisectus wrote: »

Hallo Landgenote!
.

rozeboosje is alle man

Vivisectus

I wonder if it is rational to believe in the healing power of flower scents, even though we do not have any rational reason to assume it is more powerful than the placebo effect, because it makes people feel a little better about having diabetes.

rozeboosje

Thanks Vivisectus ... but I'm a landgenoot, not a landgenote [grin]


ROFL @ Beano

Beano

Vivisectus wrote: »

I wonder if it is rational to believe in the healing power of flower scents, even though we do not have any rational reason to assume it is more powerful than the placebo effect, because it makes people feel a little better about having diabetes.

you'll have to explain that one to me. what is the connection between flower scents and diabetes?

Vivisectus

Beano wrote: »

you'll have to explain that one to me. what is the connection between flower scents and diabetes?

There isn't. I was referring to the earlier discussion in a semi facetious way

Penny 4 Thoughts

Dades wrote: »

I'm not suggesting catholicism is important to a large chunk of Irish people (it ain't) - just that promoting atheism (how do we do that again?) isn't going to work as a replacement for a cultural blanket. How many people already know it's all nonsense but don't care enough to give the charade entirely?

But if you take the blanket away from the child they won't need it as an adult.

But that assumes the blanket is personal and formed in children while at school. I would disagree with both of those assumptions. The blanket isn't really a blanket at all, it is a social pressure to conform to social norms, and it exists in adulthood because of social pressure.

This is why people who do not go to Catholic schools still feel social pressure to conform to Catholic moral standards, such as marrying in a church or having children baptized. That pressure exists due to external influences, at a sub-cultural level, that exists simply because the majority of people go along with it and thus forms what is "normal behaviour".

The only way to change that that I can see is to change what is considered the social norm

Dades

rozeboosje wrote: »

Like it or not, the lack of religion seems to leave some kind of religion shaped hole in many people's lives, and if they can't fill it with organised religion they will find some other nonsense to fill it with.

I'd take my chances with leaving a hole for quacks to lift the catholic shroud we've been under for so long.

Penny 4 Thoughts wrote: »

But that assumes the blanket is personal and formed in children while at school. I would disagree with both of those assumptions. The blanket isn't really a blanket at all, it is a social pressure to conform to social norms, and it exists in adulthood because of social pressure.

This is why people who do not go to Catholic schools still feel social pressure to conform to Catholic moral standards, such as marrying in a church or having children baptized. That pressure exists due to external influences, at a sub-cultural level, that exists simply because the majority of people go along with it and thus forms what is "normal behaviour".

The only way to change that that I can see is to change what is considered the social norm

But the social norm will change if the next generation of children aren't all brought up being fed that catholicism is the one and only way because the blanket is/was formed in school. What percentage of people "discover" catholicism as an adult? The vast, vast majority of us were told as children (often by someone with a stick) it was true.

Many of those parents that are so apathetic about religion now aren't going to start bringing their kids to mass and extra-curricular religion class if school hours were reserved for education. Why - because religion now becomes a hassle, or at least something that requires effort on behalf of the parent.

Yes, the current culture will prevail for (probably) decades, but in a generation the kids who weren't force fed catholicism won't be under anything like the same social pressure people feel now, and the dilution will mean the end the current societal norm.

Piliger

Penny 4 Thoughts wrote: »

But that assumes the blanket is personal and formed in children while at school. I would disagree with both of those assumptions. The blanket isn't really a blanket at all, it is a social pressure to conform to social norms, and it exists in adulthood because of social pressure.

This is why people who do not go to Catholic schools still feel social pressure to conform to Catholic moral standards, such as marrying in a church or having children baptized. That pressure exists due to external influences, at a sub-cultural level, that exists simply because the majority of people go along with it and thus forms what is "normal behaviour".

The only way to change that that I can see is to change what is considered the social norm

And not just change what is considered the norm, but empower people who do not form part of the theist community to feel strong enough to say "NO ... I won't conform and I know it's ok because it makes no rational sense and there is a huge community that agrees with me !"

nagirrac

Penny 4 Thoughts wrote: »

The problem with most religions though is that "good" and "bad" was defined thousands of years ago in societies that we would consider antipathetic to modern notions of morality.

It's certainly true that's how they started out. I think many religions have adjusted moral teachings to changes in society, although there are obvious exceptions. The RCC and fundamentalist Christian churches are still stuck in an ancient setting, and obviously many Muslims, but on the other hand many Christian churches are very liberal and have adapted their positions to modern times. Much of Buddhist and Taoist teachings are as valid today as when they were first written.

I would say the majority of people who are religious, including in Ireland, are reasonable about religion, and don't believe a strict moral code should be forced on anyone legally. It is up to the legislators really, and they have been hopelessly slow and spineless in this regard.

nozzferrahhtoo

nagirrac wrote: »

It's certainly true that's how they started out. I think many religions have adjusted moral teachings to changes in society

Only where they absolutely have to and usually only in the face of mounting and irresistible pressure to do so. And they do it against their own principles as if morality is fixed and objective and eternal how therefore can one modify it?

For the most part the religions.... around these parts at least.... are based on using a book written by bronze aged peasants to construct a modern morality. And it is seriously out of date.

The whole concept in religion of an "Objective morality" is against the principle of a modern morality because it can not be fixed. Morality only makes sense when we realize it is subjective and needs to constantly change and evolve hand in hand with a constantly changing and evolving society and its requirements and realities.

Hotblack Desiato

nagirrac wrote: »

I would say the majority of people who are religious, including in Ireland, are reasonable about religion, and don't believe a strict moral code should be forced on anyone legally.

Except for pregnant women. Yes, religion isn't the only reason to oppose abortion but it sure does appear to be the main one.

PopePalpatine

I'm surprised. 320 posts in, and this thread hasn't yet been posted in by one of the most prolific hit-and-run posters from the Christianity subforum.

lazygal

PopePalpatine wrote: »

I'm surprised. 320 posts in, and this thread hasn't yet been posted in by one of the most prolific hit-and-run posters from the Christianity subforum.

It's a miracle! Praise Jebus.

Vivisectus

ninja900 wrote: »

Except for pregnant women. Yes, religion isn't the only reason to oppose abortion but it sure does appear to be the main one.

Or gay teachers. Or the terminally ill.

But I keep forgetting. laws based on Victorian standards = societies fault and a cultural thing. A lovely fuzzy feeling inside, a few bits of charity and a community sing-song = the good that religion is doing to us all on a personal level.

Penny 4 Thoughts

Dades wrote: »

But the social norm will change if the next generation of children aren't all brought up being fed that catholicism is the one and only way because the blanket is/was formed in school.

That would remove only the influence from the schools, not the general prevailing notion in society that equates Catholicism and religious practice with "being good". That will persist until alternatives are presented. If it was as simple as it being making it a hassle no one would go to church on Sunday, or have their kids baptized. Parents do these things despite them being a hassle because they are feed from society the notion that it is the correct and good thing to do.

Dades

I had a big response typed out but instead let's just agree to disagree.

Hotblack Desiato

Penny 4 Thoughts wrote: »

That would remove only the influence from the schools, not the general prevailing notion in society that equates Catholicism and religious practice with "being good".

There's a generation who are adults now who, as far back as they can remember, associate the catholic church with serious scandals, and this association is continually reinforced to this day.

Not many of them are going to associate catholic influence on society with 'goodness'.

Piliger

Penny 4 Thoughts wrote: »

That would remove only the influence from the schools, not the general prevailing notion in society that equates Catholicism and religious practice with "being good". That will persist until alternatives are presented. If it was as simple as it being making it a hassle no one would go to church on Sunday, or have their kids baptized. Parents do these things despite them being a hassle because they are feed from society the notion that it is the correct and good thing to do.

No. That 'equating of Catholicism and religious practice with "being good"' doesn't really exist any more. It was trashed by the religious raping and abusing of children and a string of other expositions over the last 25 years.

School and parents are the biggest hurdle to children having an opportunity to grow up and develop as individuals. Removing the insidious influence of religious schools will play a huge role and make a huge dent in the hold that religion has over the people.

Hotblack Desiato

Piliger wrote: »

Removing the insidious influence of religious schools will play a huge role and make a huge dent in the hold that religion has over the people.

Religious indoctrination in school is insidious and it should go. But that hold over the Irish people is gone forever. It's just a matter of time, the current grandparent generation will die off, the generation who are parents now by and large have little enthusiasm for religion, the young adults want nothing to do with it. Although even at this stage it's really only the great-grandparent generation who can be said to be solidly behind the church...

There will be a large change in Irish society as a result of this, within ten years.

In twenty years time, the RCC will be on its last legs in this country as regards a mass movement, and there will be large scale closures of churches. It will survive but at a fraction of its present size.

Just look at the demographics of the priesthood. There will be about half the active priests of today in ten years time. In twenty years time there will be hardly any Irish-born priests left.

Piliger

ninja900 wrote: »

Religious indoctrination in school is insidious and it should go. But that hold over the Irish people is gone forever. It's just a matter of time, the current grandparent generation will die off, the generation who are parents now by and large have little enthusiasm for religion, the young adults want nothing to do with it. Although even at this stage it's really only the great-grandparent generation who can be said to be solidly behind the church...

There will be a large change in Irish society as a result of this, within ten years.

In twenty years time, the RCC will be on its last legs in this country as regards a mass movement, and there will be large scale closures of churches. It will survive but at a fraction of its present size.

Just look at the demographics of the priesthood. There will be about half the active priests of today in ten years time. In twenty years time there will be hardly any Irish-born priests left.

Indeed... it will be limited to a new breed of African missionaries coming to Ireland ... how ironic

I agree with you above. My son's school classmates (he is 22) in 2ndary school were about 80% atheist he told me a couple of years ago. This was despite every effort by their teachers to ram Catholicism down their throat even in geography class.However I think we will always have a significant group of people who will cling to the crutch of religion. In every population there are and always will be people with weakness, character flaws, inadequacies and they will always look for some kind of crutch to can lean on to avoid responsibility and the realities of life.

Penny 4 Thoughts

ninja900 wrote: »

There's a generation who are adults now who, as far back as they can remember, associate the catholic church with serious scandals, and this association is continually reinforced to this day.

Not many of them are going to associate catholic influence on society with 'goodness'.

I would draw the opposite conclusion from the Irish scandals. If you look how much pressure is placed on the church to reform, to change, to prove they will never do this again, you will see a people who for them the idea that the system itself can be abandoned hasn't occurred. People are very angry at the Catholic church but that anger is directed towards changing and improving the church, rather than simply walking away.

If you ask a typical cultural Catholic in Ireland, even one horrified by the scandals, why don't they simply leave the church they will look at you with a mixture of confusion and annoyance, like you just asked them if their children are being too loud in a cinema why don't you just murder them. It is both seen as wrong and not an option.

What people need to see if that the two things do not equate. It is not that we need the Catholic church to be better. It is that we don't need the Catholic church. At all. That is the option that isn't visible enough in society at the moment, and which AI helps I feel.

robindch

Robert Grant and Michael Nugent went head to head this morning on BBC Ulster, with Grant eventually admitting that he didn't have a complete picture about "new atheism":

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b048j5xr

BBC Ulster wrote:

Grant: [...] I'm just referring to these guys that I've read.

Nugent: Well, then maybe you need to read a bit more or discuss things with a few more people.

Grant: Maybe so. This is not my area, this is not what I study in Trinity. This is just something I was interested in. And absolutely, I need to do more reading I'm sure.

<end of interview>

At least he was good enough to admit it - I think quite a few people wouldn't have.

recedite

robindch wrote: »

Robert Grant and Michael Nugent went head to head this morning on BBC Ulster..

Listening to that was like watching a worm squirm on a fish hook. Why does he keep doing these interviews?
He must be some media whore to be willing to endure the humiliation of it.

SebBerkovich

robindch wrote: »

Robert Grant and Michael Nugent went head to head this morning on BBC Ulster.

What I learned from that is - Robert Grant wrote an article about something he didn't completely understand and that Michael Nugent has no time for people with poor debating skills.

recedite

Its not so much that Grant lacked debating skill, its more that he had a baseless and defamatory article published in the Irish Times, and then of course Nugent was called out by various radio presenters to "discuss" it. Under those circumstances, Nugent is obliged to call it for the bull$hit it is.

Dades

Penny 4 Thoughts wrote: »

If you ask a typical cultural Catholic in Ireland, even one horrified by the scandals, why don't they simply leave the church they will look at you with a mixture of confusion and annoyance, like you just asked them if their children are being too loud in a cinema why don't you just murder them.

This made me LOL.