Read this.  All of it.  It is the answer to this question, specifically.  When you're finished, read it again.

http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/science-vs-religion/

 

nigelTheBold wrote:

Rising Sun wrote:

But you can't clump all religions together,

Why not?

Quote:

nor can you claim absolutely that there is no intelligence guiding our universe.

Again: why not?

Quote:

risingsun wrote:

You can't clump all religions together because they are all not the same.  Yes, their basic premise in the belief in a god is where the similarities end.  As to your second question, no one can claim that there is no intelligence guiding our universe in a conclusive way.  All anyone can do is form conjectures, logical theories, etc.  We obviously can't see this intelligence, just as we can't see the atom, but that doesn't mean it's not there.  I am not a believer in fairies, ghosts, goblins, heaven or hell, etc.  So please don't place me in this category just because I think there is something more to life than the obvious. 

nigelthebold wrote:

There is no such thing as an atheist "belief." There is only atheist disbelief. The disbelief in a god. That's it.

Otherwise, what you say is true.

Many religious folks believe good and correct things, sometimes even because of their beliefs. Sometimes atheists think incorrect things. All of this falls under the umbrella of "being human."

We're pretty fucking smart, us humans. We're also dismayingly stupid. We can hold contradictory beliefs, and still manage to survive this inemical universe. Our false beliefs do not always lead to certain death.

None of this rationalizes the false beliefs. All it does is explain that we're here in spite of our false beliefs. Not because of them.

risingsun wrote:

I think most people try to reconcile their contradictory beliefs so that they are not in a perpetual state of dissonance.  False beliefs eventually fade, but sometimes we throw out the baby with the bathwater.  Not all false beliefs end in certain death, and not all beliefs are false.

nigelthebold wrote:

I'm not sure where you get the "atheists are angry" meme. Some of us here can be angry. We can say mean things. But that a personal thing. It has nothing to do with atheism. Christians also get angry. Imagine Sally Kern (R, OK) getting so upset she wrote and submitted a resolution declaring Oklahoma, well, Christian. And declaring that the United States is a leader of immorality, starting with its President.

You might be able to imagine why we get a tich upset once in a while.

But really, atheists are a pretty easy-going lot, for the most part. Sure, we can sound heated in debate, but really, all we want is intelligent, engaging conversation; good beer; and regular sex. So we're not that different from most other folks.

I guess it's the nature of the beast to get heated over one's philosophical or religious orientation.  I think both sides are determined to be right, and in this sense, they come off more self-righteous than they ought to be if they want to have an engaging debate.  I am sure when it comes to everyday life, atheists are no different than the religious.  We are all human, and in this sense, we are more alike than different.

Good luck trying to eradicate all irrational fears.  You would be a rich man.  Irrational fear comes from many sources, not just religion.  Religion has its own brand of fear producing BS, to get people to adhere to the teachings and become passive followers.  This is based on pure manipulation.

I am not saying that these behaviors are good.  And I'm also not saying that your cause is unjustified.  But what I am saying is that though there is much dissention and anger, it is so important to be gentle with others not like you, if you truly want to further your cause.

I don't think so, so you can't blame the tree because of a few bad apples. 

  I also want to add that not everything can be empirically tested, but this does not make a hunch or an assertion automatically unfalsifiable. 

This also does not mean that our beliefs are false just because they have not met the criteria of the scientific method. 

Religion doesn't owe anything to anyone.  They don't have to prove their belief through the scientific method because they don't believe the scientific method is the only way to validate what is true.  This is an easy way to get off the hook of having to prove anything. 

 I still don't have the quote function down right.  I'm really trying so please don't ban me.  I am at least trying to show who is speaking.  I will continue to work on this and reread the post that Susan offered.  Thanks so much Susan for your help.

I don't think religionists are selling anything that they don't believe in themselves, therefore you can't compare them to snake oil salesmen who don't care about the product they are selling.  They just want to make a profit. 

Not if the fruit is rotten.

 But we are entering into a gray area when we discuss god.  Some people feel that they have god (or the source of all that exists) within them and therefore are co-creators of the universe.

  To say they are wrong and only evolutionary theory is the way to look at life, is being shortsighted.  These other spiritual paths do not conflict with evolutionary theory, they only add a spiritual dimension to it.  Or do you think that one way of thinking negates the other?  I am interested because I wonder how atheists deal with the ups and downs of life, and do they have any feelings of spirituality?  I happen to believe there is something underlying all creation and this is what I need to feel secure.

 Maybe it's not a 50/50 proposition but sometimes faith in something  turns out to be true.

   Don't you have faith that you will get up in the morning and come home at night safe and sound?  Don't you have faith the minute you get in your car that you will not get in an accident as long as you follow the rules of good driving?  Don't you have faith that you will not get fired from work as long as you do your work well?  Don't you have faith that you will stay healthy as long as you do certain things to take care of yourself?

Religionists have faith that by obeying god's commandments, they will have a happier life on earth and in heaven.

 Maybe they are wrong, but they are giving it their best shot based on the bible. 

 

EXC wrote:

Rising Sun wrote:

I don't think religionists are selling anything that they don't believe in themselves, therefore you can't compare them to snake oil salesmen who don't care about the product they are selling.  They just want to make a profit. 

I don't really think the religionist really believe in what they're sell. When their sick they still go to the doctor, don't they? Except a few delusional ones, but even then if the pain is great enough they'll go to the hospital. And how is heaven less of selfish motive than money?

I think the ones who hand out pamphlets and try to convert everyone do believe in what they are doing.  They don't think they are delusional.  Everything people do has an element of selfishness to it, otherwise they wouldn't do it.  Even altruism is selfish because it is motivated by what feels good even though it also helps other people.  The only difference between a religious person selling his gospel, and a salesman, is that a salesman does not believe in what he is selling, whereas a religionist does even if he is delusional.

Rising Sun wrote:

Rising Sun wrote:

Not if the fruit is rotten.

Don't remember reading that exception.

I was being facetious, but there is some truth in this.  Depending on what seeds a person plants will determine whether that seed grows into something fruitful or not.  Remember the movie The Bad Seed?  It was about a little girl who had evil motives behind everything she did.  In reality, I don't believe there is such a thing as a bad seed if it is given the right amount of sunshine and water.

EXC wrote:

Rising Sun wrote:

 But we are entering into a gray area when we discuss god.  Some people feel that they have god (or the source of all that exists) within them and therefore are co-creators of the universe.

This a product of narcissism.

I don't think this idea is anymore narcissistic than the idea that we are solely responsible for our own creation.

EXC wrote:

Rising Sun wrote:

  To say they are wrong and only evolutionary theory is the way to look at life, is being shortsighted.  These other spiritual paths do not conflict with evolutionary theory, they only add a spiritual dimension to it.  Or do you think that one way of thinking negates the other?  I am interested because I wonder how atheists deal with the ups and downs of life, and do they have any feelings of spirituality?  I happen to believe there is something underlying all creation and this is what I need to feel secure.

What does it mean to be spiritual? To me it just means living in a fantasy world, where one is special. Sure fantasy and fiction are important, but  humans need to seperate fact from fiction. So 'spirtuality' is a product of human insecurity. Isn't this a good reason to debunk? Most things that result from human insecurity in the long run are destructive.

A world without spirituality is a dull world.  I enjoy seeing the world with an element of mystery.  Not everything can be dissected into parts and viewed under a microscope.  I guess it can, but it needs to be balanced or else life becomes very mechanical.  You may call this way of living 'the good life'.  But I would rather look at life from both a scientific and a spiritual perspective.  It gives me comfort to see the world through both lenses, because they both have their places.  If  this is something you feel the need to beat out of me, it ain't going to happen because I believe there are other ways to see life in all of its majesty. 

EXC wrote:

Rising Sun wrote:

 Maybe it's not a 50/50 proposition but sometimes faith in something  turns out to be true.

Can you provide an example that can't be explained as coincidence?

I explained what I meant by faith.  It's the combination of having the belief that something good will turn out if one is willing to do the work.  It is contingent on the actions taken to produce the outcome that one has faith in.  A coincidence is when things fall into place, or something fortuitous happens for no apparent reason.

EXC wrote:

Rising Sun wrote:

   Don't you have faith that you will get up in the morning and come home at night safe and sound?  Don't you have faith the minute you get in your car that you will not get in an accident as long as you follow the rules of good driving?  Don't you have faith that you will not get fired from work as long as you do your work well?  Don't you have faith that you will stay healthy as long as you do certain things to take care of yourself?

This is not faith. This is being conditioned by observation. Religious faith is being conditioned by the superstitious beliefs of others. If no one else in the world was 'spirtual', neither would you be. You've been conditioned to be this way.

I may be conditioned to be this way, but I like being this way.  I am not superstitious, and I'm not religious.  But I am spiritual.  I believe there is something more to life than what meets the eye.  This spiritual way of looking at the world gives me a good feeling regardless of whether it is an accurate view or not.  My spirituality does not rape, kill, or tell others what to do, so why condemn me?

 

EXC wrote:

Rising Sun wrote:

Religionists have faith that by obeying god's commandments, they will have a happier life on earth and in heaven.

They've been conditioned by fear and guilt to act in certain ways. They have no more 'faith' than a trained dog or programmed robot.

I agree that children who grow up in strict religious homes are programmed.  And a lot of this programming is motivated by fear.  This, I believe, is what non- believers are so upset about because this kind of training takes away one's freedom to think for oneself. 

EXC wrote:

Rising Sun wrote:

 Maybe they are wrong, but they are giving it their best shot based on the bible. 

 

Actually very few 'Christians' know that much about the bible. They are rarely versed enought to answer any of our objections. The all believe whatever is convienient. Even pastors can't give a rational reason for believing it.

That's not surprising.  If they actually analyzed their religious beliefs in terms of logic, their life would feel like a sham.

 

I can't help but be perplexed by the anger that exists between believers and non-believers.  And I also can't believe that there is no middle ground.  We all have faith in something, even if it is faith that we can accomplish something without anyone's help.  But what bothers me is the anger that exudes the atheists, almost as if they are superior.  Okay, I said it.  I believe atheists think are better, smarter, and definitely more in charge of their lives than religious folk who depend on a higher authority.  I posed this question in an earlier thread, and got no results.  So I will ask again, why should anyone be so strong in their beliefs that they would blame and crucify those who don't believe as they do?  I am sure you remember a time that you believed something, and it turned out to be wrong, so you changed your ideas.  This is an ongoing evolution, and I believe ideologies have a place in the history of mankind.  I really don't believe this website is healthy because is a defense of one's worldview which can never be used to change everyone's thoughts about life.  It only brings anger and hatred.  Challenge me, I need help to reconcile the two opposing views.

Rising Sun wrote:

Is religion the cause of these conflicts, or is religion being blamed for all of the conflicts without just cause?  Religious conflict, just as any conflict, can lead to fighting and war, but one's religion has also helped relieve the pain of those who have been become the victims of war.  A lot of these conflicts are not religiously motivated, but some are.  I think that Hitler, for example, used the Jews as a scapegoat for all the political and economic problems of that time period so religious hatred then became the focal point which fueled the war.  Another question:  Even if some are motivated by religious hatred, is it the religion causing the problem or is it the people who are using their religion in a way that was not intended.  To draw up an analogy, if whites hate blacks, any intelligent person wouldn't say the solution is for blacks to leave and go back to Africa, unless you are a white supremicist.  The answer is for whites to change their views toward blacks so the prejudice is gone.  This is what is happening today, and even though racial prejudice is not completely gone, it's wonderful to see how we've progressed.  By the same token, does religion need to be wiped out to remove the prejudice, or do we become more tolerant of other people's views so that everyone can have religious freedom?  Of course I am not condoning any religious practices that justify killing, raping, sacrificing, or coercing because this type of behavior is hurtful and gives religion a bad rap. 

Here is the thing, using religion to hide behind so they can be bigots is very common because religion avails itself so easily to it, ancient texts from ancient times, which the world was more tribal, more divided by conquering nations, slavery was allowed throughout the known world, and lets admit many more barbaric traditions than we allowed today to occur. Now religion can be used in anyway or form, it's intention is to control people, that's what it has been doing for well since the beginning. Giving divine right to rules (everything from Egyptian Pharaohs to English Monarchs and dictators around the world), to simply giving a group of people (priests, imams, clerics, etc, etc, etc) power over society and to dictate moral view of society. Since the greatest fear many humans have is death. To threaten them with eternal punishment is a very common tactic among those in power.

As for Hitler, his hatred towards the jews was not a simple scapegoat. This started before hitlers rise to power, going way back the Martin Luther 1543 with the publication of his books, On Jews and their lies, and On his Holy Name and Lineage of Christ. This hatred of jews because they were not christians and did not accept christ, wasn't based on race, but on religious ideological differences, the acceptance of christ as the messiah.  Then for the National Socialist party, the treaty after WWI which basically crippled Germany, they blamed it on communists and Jews. With that said, many books written by the Nazi's always quoted Luther. Now there were other factors as well to include, but much of Germany and parts of Europe were already anti-Semite, and even though Luther was more on a religious view and not racial, his contributions to the hatred of jews is part of the history of Europe. After his death in 1546, there were riots in many Lutheran states, this is in 1580, which cause the expulsion of jews of those states.

Bigotry and racial hatreds will happen, however it is far easier to do so behind divine power and a holy book. Slavery was allowed to flourish in the south because it was allowed in the bible and many slave owners used the bible passages regarding slavery in justification of having slaves. Of course their is the justification for the hatred of gays as well, however you will also notice that those that hide behind the bible, just pick and choose which laws they wish to follow.

Now for example, the Koskovo, christians vs muslims and the Philippines muslims vs christians, they are the same people, born in the country, many of the same race, just different religious views. Somalia is the same, christians vs muslims but they are all the same people, not different racial background. Now Rwanda, they used it to hide behind so that the Hutus could kill of the tutsis, even though many tutsis were christians, however the catholic church, like many times throughout history, sided with those in power, the Hutus and bascially outed the tutsis that were hiding in the churches and helped the genocide continue.

To make everyone more tolerant to different religious views you have to change the teachings withing those holy books. Once you change them, is it the same? No of course not. If you changes the practices are you really following the religious teachings and views?no your not. If killing is justified in their holy books and it is part of their laws, you cannot remove the prejudice without removing the religion really. I mean they are one and the same, they are ancient texts that are outdated for our modern society. The views of it, many of the moral teachings, and even it's "scientific data" are completely outdated.

Mao4EverBadi wrote:

Rising Sun wrote:

I can't help but be perplexed by the anger that exists between believers and non-believers.  And I also can't believe that there is no middle ground.  We all have faith in something, even if it is faith that we can accomplish something without anyone's help.  But what bothers me is the anger that exudes the atheists, almost as if they are superior.  Okay, I said it.  I believe atheists think are better, smarter, and definitely more in charge of their lives than religious folk who depend on a higher authority.  I posed this question in an earlier thread, and got no results.  So I will ask again, why should anyone be so strong in their beliefs that they would blame and crucify those who don't believe as they do?  I am sure you remember a time that you believed something, and it turned out to be wrong, so you changed your ideas.  This is an ongoing evolution, and I believe ideologies have a place in the history of mankind.  I really don't believe this website is healthy because is a defense of one's worldview which can never be used to change everyone's thoughts about life.  It only brings anger and hatred.  Challenge me, I need help to reconcile the two opposing views.

Mao4everbadi wrote:

I speak from a Maoist perspective on this which is out of line with most of the online atheist community I believe. I don’t blame people for being products of their environment (not even good ol‘ Pat Robertson, see my blog post). I understand that what a person believes is largely controlled by the public opinion-molding machine which is overwhelmingly controlled by the capitalist ruling class dictators of this society who use it to get the common people to work for their interests. I don’t “crucify” the theists, I concentrate on what makes them and that is rooted in class relations.

Is the media another term for the public opinion-molding machine?  We are all products of the media to a large degree.  But I'm not sure how capitalist ruling class dictators, or the public opinion-molding machine, targets theists in particular.

Mao4everbadi wrote:

With a Maoist understanding one still looks at the world and sees the horrors brought about by religious beliefs that are held firmly in place by public opinion-molding machines in the hands of those who benefit from the psychological effects of religion on the masses and/or are wrapped up in it themselves. So rather than holding in contempt the people for simply believing things that are coming from the sources that they find most authoritative, Maoists try to gain control of the public opinion-molding machine ourselves. Doing so obviously creates conflict as the ones who control them use them to crush you before you can usually even mount a serious attempt to gain control of it, and even if you get close to having control of a public opinion-molding machine yourself (one that they don’t like) capitalist ruling class dictators will use their command of the armed forces to crush you and use the panic involved around the whole turbulence in society to instill fear into the masses and remind them what a mistake it is to ever challenge their dictatorship again. There are ways around this, if a 100% scientific approach is taken.

Do you really think that by taking over the public opinion-molding machine you can obliterate religion?  Public opinion has always influenced culture.  But you are making it sound as if the public opinion-molding machine is conspiring to control the masses through religion since those who benefit from religion psychologically are more easily controlled.  I'm not sure about that.   It seems like the Maoists don't believe that religionists have any mind of their own, and they need to be rescued from themselves.   What you describe seems more like it applies to a cult situation where public opinion is dominated by one religious figure, and where brainwashing has run rampant. 

Mao4everbadi wrote:

So, love the theist, love all poor people, hate the capitalist dictators…crucify them.  Why I feel strongly? Friends, there are children in Haiti eating cookies made of sugar, oil and dirt in an all-too-often failed effort to survive. I’m not comfortable living one second in this world in this condition, a condition in which we are far more than capable of producing food and shelter for all, yet the overwhelming majority of people are forced to enter into degrading and exploitative relationships in order to survive. My hatred towards the dictators that have led us to this horrendous condition comes from my scientific understanding of the nature of this system and my unshakable belief that there is nothing more important than humanity.

Believe me, I do not like the condition the world is in either, and it hurts me to think of all the suffering, but to put all the blame for all of the problems that exist in the world on religion alone, is pretty extreme.  I realize that there are many problems that stem from religious hatred, but there are religions that are trying to help the poverty stricken; the homeless, the downtrodden.  So how can you say that they are the cause of the world's problems, when they are doing everything to make things better?  I am not referring to the dictators who have control over the masses in order to have complete power.  I hope these regimes get overthrown once and for all.   

 

risingsun wrote:

Mao4EverBadi wrote:

Rising Sun wrote:

I can't help but be perplexed by the anger that exists between believers and non-believers.  And I also can't believe that there is no middle ground.  We all have faith in something, even if it is faith that we can accomplish something without anyone's help.  But what bothers me is the anger that exudes the atheists, almost as if they are superior.  Okay, I said it.  I believe atheists think are better, smarter, and definitely more in charge of their lives than religious folk who depend on a higher authority.  I posed this question in an earlier thread, and got no results.  So I will ask again, why should anyone be so strong in their beliefs that they would blame and crucify those who don't believe as they do?  I am sure you remember a time that you believed something, and it turned out to be wrong, so you changed your ideas.  This is an ongoing evolution, and I believe ideologies have a place in the history of mankind.  I really don't believe this website is healthy because is a defense of one's worldview which can never be used to change everyone's thoughts about life.  It only brings anger and hatred.  Challenge me, I need help to reconcile the two opposing views.

Mao4everbadi wrote:

I speak from a Maoist perspective on this which is out of line with most of the online atheist community I believe. I don’t blame people for being products of their environment (not even good ol‘ Pat Robertson, see my blog post). I understand that what a person believes is largely controlled by the public opinion-molding machine which is overwhelmingly controlled by the capitalist ruling class dictators of this society who use it to get the common people to work for their interests. I don’t “crucify” the theists, I concentrate on what makes them and that is rooted in class relations.

Is the media another term for the public opinion-molding machine?  We are all products of the media to a large degree.  But I'm not sure how capitalist ruling class dictators, or the public opinion-molding machine, targets theists in particular.

Mao4everbadi wrote:

With a Maoist understanding one still looks at the world and sees the horrors brought about by religious beliefs that are held firmly in place by public opinion-molding machines in the hands of those who benefit from the psychological effects of religion on the masses and/or are wrapped up in it themselves. So rather than holding in contempt the people for simply believing things that are coming from the sources that they find most authoritative, Maoists try to gain control of the public opinion-molding machine ourselves. Doing so obviously creates conflict as the ones who control them use them to crush you before you can usually even mount a serious attempt to gain control of it, and even if you get close to having control of a public opinion-molding machine yourself (one that they don’t like) capitalist ruling class dictators will use their command of the armed forces to crush you and use the panic involved around the whole turbulence in society to instill fear into the masses and remind them what a mistake it is to ever challenge their dictatorship again. There are ways around this, if a 100% scientific approach is taken.

Do you really think that by taking over the public opinion-molding machine you can obliterate religion?  Public opinion has always influenced culture.  But you are making it sound as if the public opinion-molding machine is conspiring to control the masses through religion since those who benefit from religion psychologically are more easily controlled.  I'm not sure about that.   It seems like the Maoists don't believe that religionists have any mind of their own, and they need to be rescued from themselves.   What you describe seems more like it applies to a cult situation where public opinion is dominated by one religious figure, and where brainwashing has run rampant. 

Mao4everbadi wrote:

So, love the theist, love all poor people, hate the capitalist dictators…crucify them.  Why I feel strongly? Friends, there are children in Haiti eating cookies made of sugar, oil and dirt in an all-too-often failed effort to survive. I’m not comfortable living one second in this world in this condition, a condition in which we are far more than capable of producing food and shelter for all, yet the overwhelming majority of people are forced to enter into degrading and exploitative relationships in order to survive. My hatred towards the dictators that have led us to this horrendous condition comes from my scientific understanding of the nature of this system and my unshakable belief that there is nothing more important than humanity.

Believe me, I do not like the condition the world is in either, and it hurts me to think of all the suffering, but to put all the blame for all of the problems that exist in the world on religion alone, is pretty extreme.  I realize that there are many problems that stem from religious hatred, but there are religions that are trying to help the poverty stricken; the homeless, the downtrodden.  So how can you say that they are the cause of the world's problems, when they are doing everything to make things better?  I am not referring to the dictators who have control over the masses in order to have complete power.  I hope these regimes get overthrown once and for all.   

 

 

It would have been helpful if you'd read the link, but I'll type here. The public opinion-molding machine is not just the media, it's everything that people look to when gauging what is normal behavior. A large part of this is schools and textbook writing, but the media is a huge part of course.


What it really boils down to is that those who have the most money in this society use money/control of the public opinion-molding machine and their control of the people's very ability to survive by them having ownership of the means to produce the goods we have to have to live -- and by them controlling the flow of those goods -- to mold the public's beliefs, ergo behavior. Poor people can't afford "free speech" to equally compete in the market to mold public-opinion. Most of humanity's daily existence is wrapped up in securing their survival, not in typing comments on Internet forums, voting in polls or spending time researching topics. Unless you've experienced real poverty you might have a hard time grasping this existence. If a common person in this society chooses not to enter into exploitative relationships with someone who has what they don't, ownership of the means to produce needed or desired goods, that person faces death or jail. In chattel slavery the slave owners had to provide the very basics that it took for the slave to be able to live to work another day and reproduce more slaves in their social situation. Today the whips they used on slaves have in large part been replaced by mind control brought about by the capitalist ruling class having overwhelming control of the public opinion-molding machine. They don't need the whips when they can simply form what you think is normal, and today for the large majority of humanity "normal" is entering into degrading and exploitative relationships with a capitalist who give wages that translate to being just enough to make it to work another week and keep your head above the water enough to reproduce more people in your condition for them to keep up the viscous cycle.

Theists aren't targeted with the public opinion-molding machine, theists are a product of this machine coupled with the environment they've experienced. At any time those who produce textbooks could start presenting atheism differently, media could, etc.. and this would drastically change the environment and within generations they'd be tremendous change, but they don't, they continue to prop up religion. The battle the "atheist movement" is facing is directly with the capitalist ruling class, but many choose to blame the people for simply doing what Dawkins said people are naturally inclined to do, and that's go to the sources that they find most authoritative to determine what is true/normal about the world. These sources are more authoritative because they have more funds backing them (humans likes shiny stuff it seems) and the ability to provide people with our survival needs.

And no, I don't think religion can be obliterated immediately by having control of the public opinion-molding machine. It'll be around for a few generations more and if the application of the public opinion-molding machine was a failure then I imagine religion could persist in very very small pockets, but could never ever return to anything like what we have today. Reason being, that scientific ideas have a different nature than religious ideas. Scientific ideas are born out of experiments and demonstration and having been demonstrated the truth of something in a scientific way makes it all but impossible to abandon your knowledge of that demonstration. Two generations of youth properly educated on matters of science and religion would be kind of like a nuclear bomb being dropped on a small island for religion, life could come back, but it'd have to start from scratch or blow over from somewhere else. By then there'd be plenty of means to combat it, such as the school history books that we've written explaining the horrors of what religion did to humanity in the past.


If you'd read my blog you’d know that you're far off target in your telling me that I think the masses, theists or otherwise, don't have a mind of their own. The public opinion-molding machine is not omnipotent by any means, it simply controls what is considered normal behavior in society and that is where mind control aspects that tie directly to our natural instincts are exploited most viscously. It's not that the theists are running around just eating up whatever TV/preacher person tells them, some certainly do out of fear, but more than anything they want to be included in and be at peace with the group they're around.

Okay you really misunderstand me if you think I blame religion. Religion is rooted in class relations as I've been making the case for here and on my blog. Religious beliefs most often aid the ruling class dictators (not a regime, these are the individuals who own the means to produce needed and desire goods and who don't have to sell their ability to labor in order to survive) ergo they use their resources to keep it going. Groups like the RRS are at the forefront of this major problem facing the ruling class. Because people have become educated enough through grassroots efforts, the ruling class is finding it increasingly difficult to prop up religion anymore, but at the same time they benefit from the "atheist movement" because it provides the essential fear it needs to get the masses to believe, ergo behave as they want. Money is flowing into the hands of the most evil people in our society because of the atheist movement. The situation now doesn't call for them to do so, but if you're truly challenging their dictatorship (the loss of religion to them a mere hindrance) they'll use their command of the armed forces to crush you and their public opinion-molding machine to disgrace you to the point that few later on will even bother to engage what you put forth no matter how true it may be..cough Thanks Rising Sun, I hope you're well.

Rising Sun wrote:

risingsun wrote:

Mao4EverBadi wrote:

Rising Sun wrote:

I can't help but be perplexed by the anger that exists between believers and non-believers.  And I also can't believe that there is no middle ground.  We all have faith in something, even if it is faith that we can accomplish something without anyone's help.  But what bothers me is the anger that exudes the atheists, almost as if they are superior.  Okay, I said it.  I believe atheists think are better, smarter, and definitely more in charge of their lives than religious folk who depend on a higher authority.  I posed this question in an earlier thread, and got no results.  So I will ask again, why should anyone be so strong in their beliefs that they would blame and crucify those who don't believe as they do?  I am sure you remember a time that you believed something, and it turned out to be wrong, so you changed your ideas.  This is an ongoing evolution, and I believe ideologies have a place in the history of mankind.  I really don't believe this website is healthy because is a defense of one's worldview which can never be used to change everyone's thoughts about life.  It only brings anger and hatred.  Challenge me, I need help to reconcile the two opposing views.

Mao4everbadi wrote:

I speak from a Maoist perspective on this which is out of line with most of the online atheist community I believe. I don’t blame people for being products of their environment (not even good ol‘ Pat Robertson, see my blog post). I understand that what a person believes is largely controlled by the public opinion-molding machine which is overwhelmingly controlled by the capitalist ruling class dictators of this society who use it to get the common people to work for their interests. I don’t “crucify” the theists, I concentrate on what makes them and that is rooted in class relations.

Is the media another term for the public opinion-molding machine?  We are all products of the media to a large degree.  But I'm not sure how capitalist ruling class dictators, or the public opinion-molding machine, targets theists in particular.

Mao4everbadi wrote:

With a Maoist understanding one still looks at the world and sees the horrors brought about by religious beliefs that are held firmly in place by public opinion-molding machines in the hands of those who benefit from the psychological effects of religion on the masses and/or are wrapped up in it themselves. So rather than holding in contempt the people for simply believing things that are coming from the sources that they find most authoritative, Maoists try to gain control of the public opinion-molding machine ourselves. Doing so obviously creates conflict as the ones who control them use them to crush you before you can usually even mount a serious attempt to gain control of it, and even if you get close to having control of a public opinion-molding machine yourself (one that they don’t like) capitalist ruling class dictators will use their command of the armed forces to crush you and use the panic involved around the whole turbulence in society to instill fear into the masses and remind them what a mistake it is to ever challenge their dictatorship again. There are ways around this, if a 100% scientific approach is taken.

Do you really think that by taking over the public opinion-molding machine you can obliterate religion?  Public opinion has always influenced culture.  But you are making it sound as if the public opinion-molding machine is conspiring to control the masses through religion since those who benefit from religion psychologically are more easily controlled.  I'm not sure about that.   It seems like the Maoists don't believe that religionists have any mind of their own, and they need to be rescued from themselves.   What you describe seems more like it applies to a cult situation where public opinion is dominated by one religious figure, and where brainwashing has run rampant. 

Mao4everbadi wrote:

So, love the theist, love all poor people, hate the capitalist dictators…crucify them.  Why I feel strongly? Friends, there are children in Haiti eating cookies made of sugar, oil and dirt in an all-too-often failed effort to survive. I’m not comfortable living one second in this world in this condition, a condition in which we are far more than capable of producing food and shelter for all, yet the overwhelming majority of people are forced to enter into degrading and exploitative relationships in order to survive. My hatred towards the dictators that have led us to this horrendous condition comes from my scientific understanding of the nature of this system and my unshakable belief that there is nothing more important than humanity.

Believe me, I do not like the condition the world is in either, and it hurts me to think of all the suffering, but to put all the blame for all of the problems that exist in the world on religion alone, is pretty extreme.  I realize that there are many problems that stem from religious hatred, but there are religions that are trying to help the poverty stricken; the homeless, the downtrodden.  So how can you say that they are the cause of the world's problems, when they are doing everything to make things better?  I am not referring to the dictators who have control over the masses in order to have complete power.  I hope these regimes get overthrown once and for all.   

 

 

It would have been helpful if you'd read the link, but I'll type here. The public opinion-molding machine is not just the media, it's everything that people look to when gauging what is normal behavior. A large part of this is schools and textbook writing, but the media is a huge part of course.


What it really boils down to is that those who have the most money in this society use money/control of the public opinion-molding machine and their control of the people's very ability to survive by them having ownership of the means to produce the goods we have to have to live -- and by them controlling the flow of those goods -- to mold the public's beliefs, ergo behavior. Poor people can't afford "free speech" to equally compete in the market to mold public-opinion. Most of humanity's daily existence is wrapped up in securing their survival, not in typing comments on Internet forums, voting in polls or spending time researching topics. Unless you've experienced real poverty you might have a hard time grasping this existence. If a common person in this society chooses not to enter into exploitative relationships with someone who has what they don't, ownership of the means to produce needed or desired goods, that person faces death or jail. In chattel slavery the slave owners had to provide the very basics that it took for the slave to be able to live to work another day and reproduce more slaves in their social situation. Today the whips they used on slaves have in large part been replaced by mind control brought about by the capitalist ruling class having overwhelming control of the public opinion-molding machine. They don't need the whips when they can simply form what you think is normal, and today for the large majority of humanity "normal" is entering into degrading and exploitative relationships with a capitalist who give wages that translate to being just enough to make it to work another week and keep your head above the water enough to reproduce more people in your condition for them to keep up the viscous cycle.

Theists aren't targeted with the public opinion-molding machine, theists are a product of this machine coupled with the environment they've experienced. At any time those who produce textbooks could start presenting atheism differently, media could, etc.. and this would drastically change the environment and within generations they'd be tremendous change, but they don't, they continue to prop up religion. The battle the "atheist movement" is facing is directly with the capitalist ruling class, but many choose to blame the people for simply doing what Dawkins said people are naturally inclined to do, and that's go to the sources that they find most authoritative to determine what is true/normal about the world. These sources are more authoritative because they have more funds backing them (humans likes shiny stuff it seems) and the ability to provide people with our survival needs.

And no, I don't think religion can be obliterated immediately by having control of the public opinion-molding machine. It'll be around for a few generations more and if the application of the public opinion-molding machine was a failure then I imagine religion could persist in very very small pockets, but could never ever return to anything like what we have today. Reason being, that scientific ideas have a different nature than religious ideas. Scientific ideas are born out of experiments and demonstration and having been demonstrated the truth of something in a scientific way makes it all but impossible to abandon your knowledge of that demonstration. Two generations of youth properly educated on matters of science and religion would be kind of like a nuclear bomb being dropped on a small island for religion, life could come back, but it'd have to start from scratch or blow over from somewhere else. By then there'd be plenty of means to combat it, such as the school history books that we've written explaining the horrors of what religion did to humanity in the past.


If you'd read my blog you’d know that you're far off target in your telling me that I think the masses, theists or otherwise, don't have a mind of their own. The public opinion-molding machine is not omnipotent by any means, it simply controls what is considered normal behavior in society and that is where mind control aspects that tie directly to our natural instincts are exploited most viscously. It's not that the theists are running around just eating up whatever TV/preacher person tells them, some certainly do out of fear, but more than anything they want to be included in and be at peace with the group they're around.

Okay you really misunderstand me if you think I blame religion. Religion is rooted in class relations as I've been making the case for here and on my blog. Religious beliefs most often aid the ruling class dictators (not a regime, these are the individuals who own the means to produce needed and desire goods and who don't have to sell their ability to labor in order to survive) ergo they use their resources to keep it going. Groups like the RRS are at the forefront of this major problem facing the ruling class. Because people have become educated enough through grassroots efforts, the ruling class is finding it increasingly difficult to prop up religion anymore, but at the same time they benefit from the "atheist movement" because it provides the essential fear it needs to get the masses to believe, ergo behave as they want. Money is flowing into the hands of the most evil people in our society because of the atheist movement. The situation now doesn't call for them to do so, but if you're truly challenging their dictatorship (the loss of religion to them a mere hindrance) they'll use their command of the armed forces to crush you and their public opinion-molding machine to disgrace you to the point that few later on will even bother to engage what you put forth no matter how true it may be..cough Thanks Rising Sun, I hope you're well.

I still don't understand the connection between mind control and slavery.  Mind control might be a consequence of our culture where those on the top echelon influence the masses.  But I don't think that this is similar to slavery which justified harsh treatment of people who were not considered human beings.  And I also have a problem with blaming religion for everything.  Yes, there are despots in every part of the world who use religion to manipulate the masses.  But this is not what all religion is about.  Yes, it is true that some of the teachings of religion are not based on science, but the messages that are shared are based on love and forgiveness.  If this is a means to an end, even if the story behind the message is not completely accurate, so be it.  If people are helped by these teachings even if Jesus is not a true figure by scientific standards, so be it.  If Jesus never rose from the dead, but the belief that he did helps to give people a second chance at life, so be it.  Where does science come off to take away the one thing that has helped to heal the broken, the needy, the poor, and the dying?

Mao4EverBadi wrote:

Rising Sun wrote:

risingsun wrote:

Mao4EverBadi wrote:

Rising Sun wrote:

I can't help but be perplexed by the anger that exists between believers and non-believers.  And I also can't believe that there is no middle ground.  We all have faith in something, even if it is faith that we can accomplish something without anyone's help.  But what bothers me is the anger that exudes the atheists, almost as if they are superior.  Okay, I said it.  I believe atheists think are better, smarter, and definitely more in charge of their lives than religious folk who depend on a higher authority.  I posed this question in an earlier thread, and got no results.  So I will ask again, why should anyone be so strong in their beliefs that they would blame and crucify those who don't believe as they do?  I am sure you remember a time that you believed something, and it turned out to be wrong, so you changed your ideas.  This is an ongoing evolution, and I believe ideologies have a place in the history of mankind.  I really don't believe this website is healthy because is a defense of one's worldview which can never be used to change everyone's thoughts about life.  It only brings anger and hatred.  Challenge me, I need help to reconcile the two opposing views.

Mao4everbadi wrote:

I speak from a Maoist perspective on this which is out of line with most of the online atheist community I believe. I don’t blame people for being products of their environment (not even good ol‘ Pat Robertson, see my blog post). I understand that what a person believes is largely controlled by the public opinion-molding machine which is overwhelmingly controlled by the capitalist ruling class dictators of this society who use it to get the common people to work for their interests. I don’t “crucify” the theists, I concentrate on what makes them and that is rooted in class relations.

Is the media another term for the public opinion-molding machine?  We are all products of the media to a large degree.  But I'm not sure how capitalist ruling class dictators, or the public opinion-molding machine, targets theists in particular.

Mao4everbadi wrote:

With a Maoist understanding one still looks at the world and sees the horrors brought about by religious beliefs that are held firmly in place by public opinion-molding machines in the hands of those who benefit from the psychological effects of religion on the masses and/or are wrapped up in it themselves. So rather than holding in contempt the people for simply believing things that are coming from the sources that they find most authoritative, Maoists try to gain control of the public opinion-molding machine ourselves. Doing so obviously creates conflict as the ones who control them use them to crush you before you can usually even mount a serious attempt to gain control of it, and even if you get close to having control of a public opinion-molding machine yourself (one that they don’t like) capitalist ruling class dictators will use their command of the armed forces to crush you and use the panic involved around the whole turbulence in society to instill fear into the masses and remind them what a mistake it is to ever challenge their dictatorship again. There are ways around this, if a 100% scientific approach is taken.

Do you really think that by taking over the public opinion-molding machine you can obliterate religion?  Public opinion has always influenced culture.  But you are making it sound as if the public opinion-molding machine is conspiring to control the masses through religion since those who benefit from religion psychologically are more easily controlled.  I'm not sure about that.   It seems like the Maoists don't believe that religionists have any mind of their own, and they need to be rescued from themselves.   What you describe seems more like it applies to a cult situation where public opinion is dominated by one religious figure, and where brainwashing has run rampant. 

Mao4everbadi wrote:

So, love the theist, love all poor people, hate the capitalist dictators…crucify them.  Why I feel strongly? Friends, there are children in Haiti eating cookies made of sugar, oil and dirt in an all-too-often failed effort to survive. I’m not comfortable living one second in this world in this condition, a condition in which we are far more than capable of producing food and shelter for all, yet the overwhelming majority of people are forced to enter into degrading and exploitative relationships in order to survive. My hatred towards the dictators that have led us to this horrendous condition comes from my scientific understanding of the nature of this system and my unshakable belief that there is nothing more important than humanity.

Believe me, I do not like the condition the world is in either, and it hurts me to think of all the suffering, but to put all the blame for all of the problems that exist in the world on religion alone, is pretty extreme.  I realize that there are many problems that stem from religious hatred, but there are religions that are trying to help the poverty stricken; the homeless, the downtrodden.  So how can you say that they are the cause of the world's problems, when they are doing everything to make things better?  I am not referring to the dictators who have control over the masses in order to have complete power.  I hope these regimes get overthrown once and for all.   

 

 

It would have been helpful if you'd read the link, but I'll type here. The public opinion-molding machine is not just the media, it's everything that people look to when gauging what is normal behavior. A large part of this is schools and textbook writing, but the media is a huge part of course.


What it really boils down to is that those who have the most money in this society use money/control of the public opinion-molding machine and their control of the people's very ability to survive by them having ownership of the means to produce the goods we have to have to live -- and by them controlling the flow of those goods -- to mold the public's beliefs, ergo behavior. Poor people can't afford "free speech" to equally compete in the market to mold public-opinion. Most of humanity's daily existence is wrapped up in securing their survival, not in typing comments on Internet forums, voting in polls or spending time researching topics. Unless you've experienced real poverty you might have a hard time grasping this existence. If a common person in this society chooses not to enter into exploitative relationships with someone who has what they don't, ownership of the means to produce needed or desired goods, that person faces death or jail. In chattel slavery the slave owners had to provide the very basics that it took for the slave to be able to live to work another day and reproduce more slaves in their social situation. Today the whips they used on slaves have in large part been replaced by mind control brought about by the capitalist ruling class having overwhelming control of the public opinion-molding machine. They don't need the whips when they can simply form what you think is normal, and today for the large majority of humanity "normal" is entering into degrading and exploitative relationships with a capitalist who give wages that translate to being just enough to make it to work another week and keep your head above the water enough to reproduce more people in your condition for them to keep up the viscous cycle.

Theists aren't targeted with the public opinion-molding machine, theists are a product of this machine coupled with the environment they've experienced. At any time those who produce textbooks could start presenting atheism differently, media could, etc.. and this would drastically change the environment and within generations they'd be tremendous change, but they don't, they continue to prop up religion. The battle the "atheist movement" is facing is directly with the capitalist ruling class, but many choose to blame the people for simply doing what Dawkins said people are naturally inclined to do, and that's go to the sources that they find most authoritative to determine what is true/normal about the world. These sources are more authoritative because they have more funds backing them (humans likes shiny stuff it seems) and the ability to provide people with our survival needs.

And no, I don't think religion can be obliterated immediately by having control of the public opinion-molding machine. It'll be around for a few generations more and if the application of the public opinion-molding machine was a failure then I imagine religion could persist in very very small pockets, but could never ever return to anything like what we have today. Reason being, that scientific ideas have a different nature than religious ideas. Scientific ideas are born out of experiments and demonstration and having been demonstrated the truth of something in a scientific way makes it all but impossible to abandon your knowledge of that demonstration. Two generations of youth properly educated on matters of science and religion would be kind of like a nuclear bomb being dropped on a small island for religion, life could come back, but it'd have to start from scratch or blow over from somewhere else. By then there'd be plenty of means to combat it, such as the school history books that we've written explaining the horrors of what religion did to humanity in the past.


If you'd read my blog you’d know that you're far off target in your telling me that I think the masses, theists or otherwise, don't have a mind of their own. The public opinion-molding machine is not omnipotent by any means, it simply controls what is considered normal behavior in society and that is where mind control aspects that tie directly to our natural instincts are exploited most viscously. It's not that the theists are running around just eating up whatever TV/preacher person tells them, some certainly do out of fear, but more than anything they want to be included in and be at peace with the group they're around.

Okay you really misunderstand me if you think I blame religion. Religion is rooted in class relations as I've been making the case for here and on my blog. Religious beliefs most often aid the ruling class dictators (not a regime, these are the individuals who own the means to produce needed and desire goods and who don't have to sell their ability to labor in order to survive) ergo they use their resources to keep it going. Groups like the RRS are at the forefront of this major problem facing the ruling class. Because people have become educated enough through grassroots efforts, the ruling class is finding it increasingly difficult to prop up religion anymore, but at the same time they benefit from the "atheist movement" because it provides the essential fear it needs to get the masses to believe, ergo behave as they want. Money is flowing into the hands of the most evil people in our society because of the atheist movement. The situation now doesn't call for them to do so, but if you're truly challenging their dictatorship (the loss of religion to them a mere hindrance) they'll use their command of the armed forces to crush you and their public opinion-molding machine to disgrace you to the point that few later on will even bother to engage what you put forth no matter how true it may be..cough Thanks Rising Sun, I hope you're well.

I still don't understand the connection between mind control and slavery.  Mind control might be a consequence of our culture where those on the top echelon influence the masses.  But I don't think that this is similar to slavery which justified harsh treatment of people who were not considered human beings.  And I also have a problem with blaming religion for everything.  Yes, there are despots in every part of the world who use religion to manipulate the masses.  But this is not what all religion is about.  Yes, it is true that some of the teachings of religion are not based on science, but the messages that are shared are based on love and forgiveness.  If this is a means to an end, even if the story behind the message is not completely accurate, so be it.  If people are helped by these teachings even if Jesus is not a true figure by scientific standards, so be it.  If Jesus never rose from the dead, but the belief that he did helps to give people a second chance at life, so be it.  Where does science come off to take away the one thing that has helped to heal the broken, the needy, the poor, and the dying?

You've said that you at least have some understanding of the effects of the public opinion-molding machine on people's beliefs. With that understanding please watch this video that I compiled addressing the issue of slavery.

If you're looking at problems with the approach of what's best for the individuals, then you're doing it wrong, start asking and answering questions in terms of what's best for humanity and it's clearly and horrendously bad for us to have a psychological belief on hold with a large portion of the masses that there is indeed something more important than humanity (gods/religious beliefs) and this life (next one). These beliefs make many people very mentally lazy and provides the psychology that it's okay to be exploited because that's god's plan and all will be okay when I die anyway, it encourages anti-scientific thought (and scientific thought is essential to break this dictatorship)..on and on. I'm sure you can find many extensive writings on the unhealthiness of Christianity to humanity on this site.

[

I am in total agreement.    If you would like to read a book that has had a major impact on my life, I will link you to it.  It is not a religious book, so don't worry.