DiscussMormonism.com

In another thread JAK said:

All religions are dangerous. They seek to destroy the intellect replacing it with dogma not derived from reason and evidence.

There is no evidence that all religions are dangerous, and the irony with this comment is that it is itself dogmatic and without reason or evidence.

Religion is just a presupposition like any other. Humans have a tendency to remain fixated in their presuppositions which tends to result in confirmation bias and the placibo effect. In my experience atheists are just as dogmatic and intolerant in their positions as most whacko fundamentalists. Religionists like to feel special and so do atheists. I've heard atheists here suggest that they are more advanced on the scale of human evolution, and that the res of the theistic world has yet to evolve from that primitive mental defect. Religionists simply believe that theirs will be a happier afterlife. Which is more arrogant?

Atheists often rely on ignorance to reinforce their presuppositions the same as any theist. For instance, those who insist on using the crusades and the inquisition to attack Christianity as a religion, when it becomes clear they have absolutely no background knowledge on either. They rely on myth. They rely on ignorance and their minds have already been made up, sans education.

So is this not a perfect example of the "destruction on one's intellect by replacing in order to with dogma not derived from reason or evidence"?

I often hear atheists say atheism isn't a religion, but it does carry all the same characteristics of religion. Most atheists I know do present their own "dogma" whether they like to believe it or not.

dartagnan wrote:In another thread JAK said:

All religions are dangerous. They seek to destroy the intellect replacing it with dogma not derived from reason and evidence.

There is no evidence that all religions are dangerous, and the irony with this comment is that it is itself dogmatic and without reason or evidence.

I agree not all religions are dangerous. Just the ones that teach untrue things are.

If teaching untruth is synonymous with "danger," then all humans are dangerous since all humans are fallible and will eventually say and even teach, something untrue.

You'll have to come up with something better than this.

You are painting with a pretty broad brush. Let's narrow it down. Which religion is not dangerous? Surely you can name one.

Religion is a force that increases the probability of a people to destabilize and collapse ones hierarchy of needs, to borrow from Maslow.

I don't beleive that all religions are dangerous. I believe that fundementalism is dangerous, based on any worldview.
I beleive such a thing as 'atheistic fundementalism' exists, and is a worry.

However, since it has been made clear to me - several times - that I am in fact an idiot, I don't think my opinion can count for too much.

Dart, I think you have some good points.

dartagnan wrote:In another thread JAK said:

All religions are dangerous. They seek to destroy the intellect replacing it with dogma not derived from reason and evidence.

There is no evidence that all religions are dangerous, and the irony with this comment is that it is itself dogmatic and without reason or evidence.

Well, JAK definitely needs to provide his evidence, does he not?

Religion is just a presupposition like any other. Humans have a tendency to remain fixated in their presuppositions which tends to result in confirmation bias and the placibo effect. In my experience atheists are just as dogmatic and intolerant in their positions as most whacko fundamentalists. Religionists like to feel special and so do atheists. I've heard atheists here suggest that they are more advanced on the scale of human evolution, and that the res of the theistic world has yet to evolve from that primitive mental defect. Religionists simply believe that theirs will be a happier afterlife. Which is more arrogant?

I think it depends upon the theist and atheist in question. I have met many atheists that repeat verbatim what they read in Dennett, Dawkins, etal, or repeat the "opiate of the masses" line in lock step with their fellow atheists -- that's rather sheep like. ;) Yet, I think it's probably human nature to want to look about and believe you are RIGHT and the others are foolish for their beliefs. I find that abhorrant that anyone would think that they are more advanced because of their atheism. I hope they recognize that I'm one in their ranks (agnosticism is just atheism without certainty;) and I am certainly not high on the evolutionary ladder. I see the arrogance coming from both camps -- on and off-line. I think again, it's not the beliefs that make one arrogant -- it is the person.

Atheists often rely on ignorance to reinforce their presuppositions the same as any theist. For instance, those who insist on using the crusades and the inquisition to attack Christianity as a religion, when it becomes clear they have absolutely no background knowledge on either. They rely on myth. They rely on ignorance and their minds have already been made up, sans education.

I would say that there are plenty of atheists that have agendas that say ridiculous things. Yet, for the most part I'd imagine that most atheists merely have a lack of belief in God and are happy to go about their day and don't think twice about religion or those that have faith. I've met plenty of them when I was younger. I think what you witness on the internet skews vision since when one is on religious boards it becomes a topic and discussions become debates -- in that atmosphere it is easier to assume that all atheists on the net carry over to those that don't come on bulletin boards.

There are plenty of extremely intelligent, well educated atheists, as well as theists.

I often hear atheists say atheism isn't a religion, but it does carry all the same characteristics of religion. Most atheists I know do present their own "dogma" whether they like to believe it or not.

I disagree with this. There are those that are seen on bulletin boards that do actually seem to have many similarities to their arguments but that's because they're arguing! Of course when you argue against a point you will find the best rebuttal and use it -- and if it's a good one it will be used again, and again, and again. This does not create a dogma for all atheists. You don't need to believe in evolution to be an atheist, you don't need to quote Marx to be an atheist, you don't need to be a scientist to be an atheist -- you merely have no belief in God.

Can you tell me what dogma all atheists prescribe to? There is no doubt there are atheists with an agenda, yet I don't understand why an agenda (or debates) is then correlated to a religion. The Republicans have an agenda - and talking points no less! Are they a religion?

H'lo dart,

Questions for you...

1. Do all religions contain religious dogma?
2. If not, could you identify a religion that does not produce dogma?


I'll have another question after you or someone else chooses to respond.

Jersey Girl

I think that there is a certain percentage of the population that will always gravitate toward a fundamentalist mentality. Whether it is atheism or Christianity, they just can't help but embrace the extreme.

Is it safe to say that any world view can be dangerous if taken to an extreme?

It may not be the actual world view (be it god based or athiest) that is the problem. Rather, the human tendency to become fundamentalist is the problem.

RenegadeOfPhunk wrote:I don't beleive that all religions are dangerous. I believe that fundementalism is dangerous, based on any worldview.
I beleive such a thing as 'atheistic fundementalism' exists, and is a worry.

However, since it has been made clear to me - several times - that I am in fact an idiot, I don't think my opinion can count for too much.

Ok, Ren, who called you an idiot? Point him/her out, and I'll give 'em a cyber punch right in the kisser!