|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
Member (Idle past 3598 days) Posts: 1811 From: East Asia Joined: |
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Dawkins - 'The God Delusion' | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Cold Foreign Object  Suspended Member (Idle past 3048 days) Posts: 3417 Joined: |
In what way, uninformed? I've got his book on my coffee table right now and speaking as a former Christian (who was one for years and is familiar with theology at all levels) I didn't encounter a single thing I thought Dawkins was misinformed or uninformed about. Since you agree with Dawkins, what causes the God delusion? How did you escape the delusion? Ray
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1467 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
Since you agree with Dawkins, what causes the God delusion? People tend to believe what everybody around them believes. That can be seen in things like the Milgram experiment and the Stanford prison experiment. In the latter, subjects became so convinced that they were actually in a prison that:
quote: They could have walked out the doors at any time; they could not have been physically restrained by the guards nor secured on the premises. The prison was in their minds - because they looked around and saw other people acting like they were in a prison. I think that's truly astounding, and it speaks to the capacity of the human mind to be influenced by what others assert to be true. I'd put more stock in the lessons that can be learned from thinking about these two experiments than in the holy texts of any religion.
How did you escape the delusion? I don't know. I think I'm more sensitive than most when it comes to mental prisons. I don't think I would have gotten very far in the Stanford experiment and I doubt I would have gone all the way to the Milgram experiment - of course, no one does. But I flatter myself that my knowledge of how these situations operate immunizes me, somewhat, from being inured by them. Of course, a whole bunch of unanswered prayers did kind of add up to a suspicion that what my church was telling me was wrong.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Cold Foreign Object  Suspended Member (Idle past 3048 days) Posts: 3417 Joined: |
People tend to believe what everybody around them believes. In other words, you explain religious convictions to derive from "following the crowd" or the more scholarly phrase "culturally transmissible"? Hardly a satisfying answer since the word "delusion" (negative force) is at issue. Now, by your own testimony, you have simply come under the influence of a different crowd (delusion). Am I correct in pointing out that Dawkins never defined the title of his book? If so, the title is essentially a red herring. We know for a fact that many African slaves with no cultural exposure to Western religions, after going through slavery and emancipation, then learning how to read and write, when writing their memoirs, said the Gospel message brought them the knowledge of how to respond to the God who had revealed Himself to them, via nature, back in Africa.
Of course, a whole bunch of unanswered prayers did kind of add up to a suspicion that what my church was telling me was wrong. So you never had a life-changing experience with Jesus the Christ? Did you not say (upthread) that you were a Christian well versed in theology? In other words, you knew your Bible verses, but not the God behind the logia? Pity. Now, like Dawkins, you thump the Origin of Species instead of the Bible. Funny how when I really stormed the gates of heaven (fervent prayer) mine got answered. Jesus said in Matthew 13 the "violent take it by force." I think you and Dawkins could care less about finding out if God really exists since we have a world full of people who took the kingdom by force, and found a gracious God. Pity. Since your livelyhoods are wrapped up in evolution, writing books titled "The God Delusion" becomes a necessity to "explain" what you chose to reject by lackadaisical effort. Ray Edited by Cold Foreign Object, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Straggler Member Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined: |
I would bet my life savings on the fact that you live in a predominantly Christian countrty.
I would bet my house on the fact that you live in a predominantly Christian community. I would bet my socks and shoes that you come from a Christian family upbringing. Given that the response to your storming the gates of heaven is completely and indisputably subjective it comes as no suprise to hear that it was exactly as your upbringing and social indoctrination would decree it to be. Why did your prayers get answered by Jesus and not Mohammed? Would a Moslem's prayers have been answered differently?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Modulous Member Posts: 7801 From: Manchester, UK Joined: |
Am I correct in pointing out that Dawkins never defined the title of his book? If so, the title is essentially a red herring. He explains the title by both describing what he means by 'God' and what he means by 'delusion'.
We know for a fact that many African slaves with no cultural exposure to Western religions, after going through slavery and emancipation, then learning how to read and write, when writing their memoirs, said the Gospel message brought them the knowledge of how to respond to the God who had revealed Himself to them, via nature, back in Africa. Converts to any religion from another religion may well tell you the same thing. I know that it happened to me through my religious evolution. This tells us something about how our mind works with regard to our beliefs.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1467 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
Now, by your own testimony, you have simply come under the influence of a different crowd (delusion). Hrm, funny, I don't see where I said that at all. I guess I don't find it surprising that you still insist on replying to legitimate arguments with personal insults.
So you never had a life-changing experience with Jesus the Christ? No, I had the life-changing experience. I still remember it clearly - along with the sense of absolute conviction that I was seeing a battle for my very soul play out.
In other words, you knew your Bible verses, but not the God behind the logia? No, not at all. I knew God as strongly as any other I knew. Then I came to the understanding that what I knew as "God" was actually me talking to myself. But, you know, keep on making hilariously inaccurate characterizations about what you think you know about me. None of it is correct, of course. I guess it's really impossible for you to imagine that someone could believe as strongly as you, and yet still realize the truth of atheism eventually. Your failure, I guess, since that's exactly what happened.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
iceage  Suspended Member (Idle past 5915 days) Posts: 1024 From: Pacific Northwest Joined: |
CrashFrog writes: Then I came to the understanding that what I knew as "God" was actually me talking to myself. That is simultaneously hilarious and insightful. Thanks for sharing that. I have been around and associated with evangelical culture for some time. As an observer, I am often taken by the self-centered perspective that religion often takes in people lives. I know there are true self-denying saints out there like the Schweitzer's, Teresa's and even Paul Farmer's but the vast majority embrace Christianity as a crutch, comforter, vending machine and a get out of hell ticket. Every happening or mundane coincidence is interpreted as have "spiritual" significance and interpreted from a self-centered perspective - the universe evolves around their very salvation and happiness. They often talk about the dramatic changes in lives and i see the same twisted screwed-up selfish people that I see more secular environments, maybe even more so. Back to the topic. I have yet to read the God Delusion, but have read most of Dawkin's other books. Some other poster on here provided a link to a rebuttal by Dr Denis Alexander which I thought was rather weak. I only got thru the first half of Alexander's talk and will pick the rest up later. In the first half, he criticized Dawkin's notion of Memes presented in the book. His complaint was that Memes can include scientific ideas and fads and so therefore the Meme concept is useless and flawed. I thought, sure science is subjected to the foibles of human psychology but the unwaveringly reliance on honesty, logic and supporting data provide an objective correction to the inherent weakness of human nature something missing in the religious world. Popular religion instead feeds and is powered on by human frailty. I hope to read Dawkin's book this summer.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Cold Foreign Object  Suspended Member (Idle past 3048 days) Posts: 3417 Joined: |
He explains the title by both describing what he means by 'God' and what he means by 'delusion'. Do you recall what he said about "delusion" since I do not have the book handy? My point with Crashfrog was that his contention of emulating persons around him (his reason for temporarily accepting God) is not the definition or cause of a delusion. A delusion targets the mind, while we all are impressionable (to varying degrees), delusion is not talking about this. Delusion is something much different. In fact, I would say that a delusion is something more conducive as originating from a Deity. In other words, the delusion is operating on persons who reject the existence of God instead of on persons who accept Deity existence. Dawkins got it backwards, unless, of course, you can tell me the power source of Dawkins delusion contention that believers are under the delusion instead of nonbelievers? I could be wrong but let me speculate: Dawkins did not explain adequately what he meant by delusion; its definition, source and cause: my "delusion term is a red herring" stands. However, in Blind Watchmaker (1986) Dawkins says design is an illusion caused by natural selection. Did Dawkins say that natural selection or powers causes the delusion? Ray
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1467 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
In fact, I would say that a delusion is something more conducive as originating from a Deity. Truly breathtaking idiocy. You're saying that the fact that religion is a delusion is proof that there actually is a God? Can I trust that this is so obviously stupid that no explicit rebuttal is required? Why don't you post the definition of "delusion" - perhaps from a relevant psychological material, like the DSM IV - and see if "divine origin" is the current consensus view on the origin of delusional states of mind.
Dawkins got it backwards, unless, of course, you can tell me the power source of Dawkins delusion contention that believers are under the delusion instead of nonbelievers? The complete lack of any objective, compelling evidence for the existence of any deity. The extensive evidence that no such deity exists or has ever existed.
I could be wrong but let me speculate: Suggestion - read the damn book. This game where you play 20 questions and we tell you if you're right or wrong about what it says is more than just a little ridiculous.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
kongstad Member (Idle past 2870 days) Posts: 175 From: Copenhagen, Denmark Joined: |
Go to google
Enter "define: delusion" Examples:
# (psychology) an erroneous belief that is held in the face of evidence to the contrary # a mistaken or unfounded opinion or idea; "he has delusions of competence"; "his dreams of vast wealth are a hallucination" # the act of deluding; deception by creating illusory ideas wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn A delusion is commonly defined as a false belief, and is used in everyday language to describe a belief that is either false, fanciful or derived from deception. In psychiatry, the definition is necessarily more precise and implies that the belief is pathological (the result of an illness or illness process). en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delusion You will see that some definitions are of pathological conditions, others of common use. Edited by kongstad, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Cold Foreign Object  Suspended Member (Idle past 3048 days) Posts: 3417 Joined: |
Ray writes: In fact, I would say that a delusion is something more conducive as originating from a Deity. Crashfrog responds and writes: Truly breathtaking idiocy. You're saying that the fact that religion is a delusion is proof that there actually is a God? My first statement above does not say that religion is a delusion. It goes on to say that the delusion being suffered is by persons who do not accept Deity existence. What you cannot grasp or seem to understand is that IF we are talking about a real delusion THEN it is more plausible to say that said delusion originates from Deity and targets nonbelievers in making them think or believe that He does not exist. In fact, I have a very respectable source for my view:
2Thessalonians 2:11,12 "And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness" In context, "unrighteousness" is talking about the rejection of the Gospel or way of faith to relate to God. It is not talking about adherence to a code of conduct (Mosaic Law). So we see that this is how God operates: He sends a strong delusion so that those who have scorned Him will remain in that state as a punishment for scorning Him. The "God delusion" is upon you and Dawkins. Ray
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
bluegenes Member (Idle past 2477 days) Posts: 3119 From: U.K. Joined: |
Cold Foreign Object writes: In other words, the delusion is operating on persons who reject the existence of God instead of on persons who accept Deity existence. Which God? Consider all the many Gods that have been invented in many different cultures. You write about "God", singular, so it appears that you only believe in one of them. Is your disbelief in all the others an example of delusion in operation? Can you remember choosing which one to believe in? Can you honestly say that you were not emulating people around you?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1467 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
What you cannot grasp or seem to understand is that IF we are talking about a real delusion THEN it is more plausible to say that said delusion originates from Deity and targets nonbelievers in making them think or believe that He does not exist. I don't see why that would be more plausible. It's less plausible than the existence of a deity altogether - since it's contingent on it - and the existence of deities is astronomically implausible. You don't seem to be able to defend your view, either.
"And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness" Gosh, I guess if I was making up a book full of bullshit that I wanted people to believe, that's exactly one of the things I would say - "well, actually, God wants you to believe this stuff. I know it sounds stupid, but let me tell you - what's stupid is not believing." It's not really a surprise to me that the Bible says those things. You basically have to say those things to get otherwise reasonable people to swallow ridiculous claims.
He sends a strong delusion so that those who have scorned Him will remain in that state as a punishment for scorning Him. But that's exactly the reverse timeline for how it happened to me. I was still a believer when the evidence convinced me that there was no God. If what you say is true, God revoked my "God-sense" when I still believed in him. Why on Earth would he do that? It's pretty stupid, isn't it?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Modulous Member Posts: 7801 From: Manchester, UK Joined: |
Do you recall what he said about "delusion" since I do not have the book handy? A persistent false belief held in the face of strong contradictory evidence.
My point with Crashfrog was that his contention of emulating persons around him (his reason for temporarily accepting God) is not the definition or cause of a delusion If a delusion is as defined, then being taught false beliefs and subsequently holding to them in the face of strong contradictory evidence would render one delusional. So it can be cause of delusion, yes.
I could be wrong but let me speculate: Dawkins did not explain adequately what he meant by delusion; its definition, source and cause: my "delusion term is a red herring" stands. You'd have to read the book yourself to decide if he did it adequately. I can only speculate you would find it inadequate where I find it adequate.
However, in Blind Watchmaker (1986) Dawkins says design is an illusion caused by natural selection. Did Dawkins say that natural selection or powers causes the delusion? However, in Blind Watchmaker (1986) Dawkins says design is an illusion caused by natural selection. Did Dawkins say that natural selection or powers causes the delusion? Essentially yes. Obviously by leading to humans who can be deluded, natural selection is a causative factor. And by creating an illusion of design, as well as tool making entities that look for utility natural selection has certainly created an environment where delusion would operate.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
iceage  Suspended Member (Idle past 5915 days) Posts: 1024 From: Pacific Northwest Joined: |
CFO writes: In other words, the delusion is operating on persons who reject the existence of God instead of on persons who accept Deity existence. Which God? Maybe Allah is sending you a strong delusion because you reject the Islamic view of Allah and blasphemously deify his prophet.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024