This conversation is closed. Start a new conversation
or join one »
Is there any way to prevent religious debates from turning into a big fight?
People discuss lots of things, politics, sports, anything
But when they discuss religious opinions, most of the time, they get all angry and try to win even with fight.
why is that? why that can't be a normal subject?
and more important, How can we prevent this?
Closing Statement from Farokh Shahabi Nezhad
Tnx everyone for their replies. I enjoyed learning from different aspect for this problem.
I can only conclude this : Don't argue with someone unless they are open minded and ready to be changed and challenged.
Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.
Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.
Arkady Grudzinsky 50+
I think, people need to spend more time thinking of "who they are" as humans and be careful associating their identity with things, people, soccer teams, bands, brand names, gods, etc. This is how I interpret the religious commandment forbidding to worship idols instead of "I AM WHO I AM".
I like the quote from the film "Lorax":
The Lorax: Which way does a tree fall?
The Once-ler: Uh, down?
The Lorax: A tree falls the way it leans. Be careful which way you lean.
peter germane
So why should it be an insult to ask anyone making any kind of claim, especially within the supernatural realm to step up and demonstrate, rather than simply assert, that what they claim has merit, something more than just a meme embedded in the minds of a billion people by tradition.
Arkady Grudzinsky 50+
Atheists have their own beliefs which are not to be touched. E.g. there is a widespread belief among atheists that all assertions need to have evidence. This is not true in general. E.g. "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal," does not need evidence and has none. I tried to question this belief in an atheist forum. I got insults and ridicule in reply and was banned as a "troublemaker". Core beliefs of atheists are not open to questioning.
All people get touchy when their core beliefs are questioned. Scientists and atheists are no exception.
peter germane
Wilbert Hunt
We both have this dubious honor in common, having been "banned" from an atheist forum. In my case, twice.
For all their supposed reverence of rationality, they behave irrationally, elevating their atheistic beliefs to the stature of a religion--the very institution they claim to repudiate and scorn.
You could tell, after reading a few of the posts, that most were reticent--and fearful--to deviate from the teachings of their respective guru or mentor, or to question the canons of their faith, lest they invite the ire of the group.
I haven't felt as much pathos for religionist as I felt for these seemingly lost souls, afraid of their own thoughts, and the unreliability of their own minds, as they struggle to place a certain prescribed atheistic overlay the full length of their day-to-day existence.
In short, they were as bound to their beliefs as any religionist.
Colleen Steen 500+
You write about a certin group of people....
"they behave irrationally"... "most were reticent and fearful"...you felt "pathos" for "these seemingly lost souls afraid of their own thoughts, and the unreliability of their own minds, as they struggle."
Do you honestly think/feel this kind of labeling contributes to furthering a conversation? It appears that you effectively demonstrate why religious debates often turn into a fight.
Arkady Grudzinsky 50+
Consider a few analogies. Snakes can bite people for reasons that may not be obvious to us. What do we do about it? Get frustrated that snakes don't behave like people or the way we think they should behave? Declare snakes "evil" and kill them? Or, perhaps, study their behavior, find out under what circumstances snakes bite people and behave in a way that they don't bite us?
All living creatures fear unfamiliar things which they cannot predict and often react with aggression. Same happens when people encounter behavior or beliefs that they cannot understand, explain, or predict. Why would we expect people to behave differently from any other living creature?
Why shouldn't religion follow rules of science? Why shouldn't cats observe table manners? The obvious answer is "cats are not people, human rules do not apply to cats".
Wilbert Hunt
Take the God Particle (the Higgs Boson), for example, claims were made as to the Standard Model, but the "demonstrated" truth of such claims are still being examined, and which required the construction of the Large Hadron Collider for the claims to be examined and substantiated.
"So why should it be an insult to ask anyone making any kind of claim, especially within the supernatural realm to step up and demonstrate, rather than simply assert, that what they claim has merit."
I've seen ghosts. How do I "demonstrate" that without the assistance of the ghost? I travel outside my body. How do I demonstrate that, unless I take you with me? And there are other claims too numerous to recount, and just as hard to replicate in ways that natural science is required to demonstrate its claims.
Should my claims be dismissed simply because "proof" exists differently in the supernatural realm than the natural, and harder to observe.
Granted, you should exhibit skepticism when claims extend beyond your normal range, but we're faced with such claims daily, sometimes from those who subscribe to one conspiracy theory or the other, and we accept them, if we're predisposed, or we reject them, if we're not.
You suggested it yourself when you use the term, "supernatural." These so-called "supernatural" things usually exist outside the "natural world," and can't always be neatly replicated as with natural events.
All I ask is this: When I and others make supernatural claims, that you reserve judgment as to our sanity, and our veracity.
Even some "natural events" puzzle science. Is light a wave or a particle, or both, for example? Does the observer change the behavior of that which is observed? And, then, there's quantum theory: "A theory in physics based on the principle that matter and energy have the properties of both particles and waves."
Paola Cibrario
So is it possible that ghosts exist in your world, but that they don't in mine?
Paola Cibrario
No matter what side of the issue you are on, there is no way to produce absolute proof for either position.
So on one hand the religious zealots bang on the scripture that is on the table and the atheists just bang on the table.
Those of us that have had direct experience just hear the noise of their banging.
Arkady Grudzinsky 50+
To clarify the point, lack of religious prejudice does not guarantee the lack of prejudice. All atheists are different, just as are all religious people (that's, perhaps, the only generalization I can make). It is a mistake to label other people as "fundamentalists" or "creationists" or "lacking a moral compass" or "bigots" just by their faith or lack thereof.
What fascinates me in these debates is how we start with views opposing hypocrisy, bigotry, dogma and end up doing exact same thing that we are opposed to. Didn't this happen to Christianity? When people go too far avoiding these vices, they approach them from the other side.
It's like moderation - "excessive moderation" is self-refuting.
Jim Smithson 10+
You provoke a very interesting question: What is a person if you strip away all of their identities, or as you put it, their "brands?"
Arkady Grudzinsky 50+
http://www.ted.com/talks/julian_baggini_is_there_a_real_you.html
This question intrigued humanity for ages. The concept of "self" is extremely fascinating. It always leads to circular reasoning and defies logic. It cannot be answered by science. I think, this "self-awareness" question is why religions exist with all the references to "I AM WHO I AM" and a host of other circular concepts.
Wilbert Hunt
Unconditional being or unconditional existence.