Poor trump - Page 15

All atheists are not smarter than all believers. Believers are at a cognitive disadvantage because they see patterns and associations, which may not be there, and intentionality. These were things that we needed for evolutionary purposes as they increased the chances of survival but as we have become more reliant on rational thought we don't have as much use for irrational thought so the more intelligent among us are able to not fall victim to primitive ways of thinking.

Spinoza believed that people believe everything at first and it's only after we "disbelieve" something that we consider it as false. There's an additional cognitive step involved in rejecting something as false. Brain scans, unavailable in Spinoza's time, have backed up this idea. For ancient humans, taking this additional cognitive step could have meant death.

Think about how religion is taught to children. It is not taught as a belief but as fact. If children, as they grow, never subject those "facts" to the cognitive step of disbelief then they will always believe, regardless of reality. How many people believe the story of Noah because they never really thought about it? And people who don't take the additional step of disbelief when it comes to religion are less likely to take that step in other areas of life. Especially when what they are to judge is something that fits into the patterns they believe exist.

Glad there is an acknowledgement that all atheists are not smarter than all believers. Spinoza"s life story is interesting. Short and controversial, but definitely interesting. Hegel, I just learned, even considered him a requisite study for philosophy.

I can't be bothered with getting into the virgin birth debate or trying to get GSD Admin to actually state what is, or is not his relationship with the spiritual. Been there, done that. It ain't happening.

WTF difference would it make knowing another's beliefs? Why would anyone care , as long as they're not forcing it on someone else???

I don't care if one remains of a tolerant mind, and more so, and in particular, if one respects one another's choice in a like manner. That manner is so often, not the case when differences are stated. My statement would apply to both sides of these continuing atheist/God stance, debates.

If one is going to be critical of certain posters for their beliefs it seems to me, only fair to want to know what are those secret beliefs that are used for a bludgeon against the openly stated position of the opposition.

Fair play, really. If they don't want to say, please exit from the fray.

It depends on the question. If someone believes in Noah's Ark and I say I don't and that I think it's rather silly to believe it what's the question I need to answer? Is it, if I don't believe in Noah's Ark what do I believe? Believe as far as what? The Noah's Ark story, a great flood, etc? Am I expected to provide an alternative explanation for something that I don't believe happened?

"Belief" has nothing to do with any argument or discussion, sound and valid points are what matter.

I think if you left the statement at: I don't believe in Noah's Ark because the whole idea is silly to me, that is better than saying-- I don't believe in the silly story called Noah's Ark and that makes you and all the rest of your views silly, (or worse).

That is a specific example but the most insulting damage is done with the whole subject of faith beliefs being disrespected in a personal way.

If your truth that you want to impart is that all faith beliefs are based on irrationality, and that makes the believer, who you know by studying their faith does not separate personally their ego from that self identity, and that then swiftly moves to a contest of IQ's, it is deliberately hurtful. If that is no concern of yours, that you have that affect, then I personally will sooner than later, just stop engaging with that conversation, and maybe you, entirely.

I know GSDAdmin will deride certain Christian "myths" because nothing has changed over the years where philosophies of personal and more learned natures than mine, have been exchanged and done, again and again. I know he claims an out of body type of experience from being in a near death accident and always declines to elaborate how this gives him an insight to the spiritual that is not shared by anyone else, (here). That I know of.

Then really, too, it might be wise to consider who is the one being silliest to continue to argue with someone you have labeled as an irrational person, because their personal religious journey and views don't match your own.

I don't think I said you are silly for believing what you believe. Maybe I did someplace but I don't remember it. I have made so many posts here in the last 8 years. I lose track. I am just not big on organized religion. Bee I have never shoved my personal beliefs in your face and it does us no good to talk about my personal beliefs because I don't need to convert anyone or prove my beliefs to anyone. I will say that 85 to 90% of what I have said about religion here has not been started by me. But if you/anyone starts a religious thread then I have every right to respond with what I see as inconsistencies or question it with mostly proven scientific facts. Christians believe God created humans in his likeness so before us there were dinosaurs who's likeness are they created in? No matter how much you try and get me to tell you my personal beliefs, it isn't going to happen and if you can't take my comments about religion you can always try not to read them or respond to them, I am good with that. If you write something and I don't want to respond, I don't. You wrote about Ninja the other day and I felt no need to respond so I didn't. I do wish his wife and him the best and hope her health improves. I am out as I have had a very busy week and there are still 3 days left. Lots of running tomorrow and then a full days work. Ugh.

http://time.com/4447985/inside-donald-trump-meltdown/

@GSD Admin I don't think you used "silly", either. That word was used more in response to Noitsyou's post, where he used it when asking all the questions.

Yes, I know where you draw your line, and with my last post it should be clear where I draw my line. We actually agree on a few points.

I want to be clear for the benefit of other readers that I too, never attempt to convert anyone, or shove my beliefs in their faces. I might have started one thread with a religious theme in 8 or 9 years, and don't see that mistake happening again. The real funny thing is, this is a political thread, lol, and somehow our "religious banter" developed to the point it is, and drew the thread off topic!

While not reading your posts is good advice, the truth is doing so is often like trying to unring a bell.

Now, at least my prior statement is explained more clearly as why, I won't be bothered getting into Virgin birth debates or any specific defenses of a literal scripture interpretation to explain my faith views and, that I know you will insist on keeping your spiritual views private, as well. Looks like neither one of us will concede-- yes, it ain't happening. Of course, you will post as you always do, and I will try not to post to these topics, but to spite myself, I nevertheless, sometimes do.

It was nice of you to wish Ninja and his wife, get-well wishes. Yes, you didn't need to bring his name up, again. Maybe after elections are over you will relent. Who knows, it might happen, 🤔

Don't work too hard, it is going to be a hot one today! My A/C is already cranked ... Low! Not so, for my lifeguarding son. He'll be sweating for his paycheck today!