llamatron Posted September 14, 2011 Share Posted September 14, 2011 Where has that been postulated? Or are you making things up? I object to religion being taught as a scientific basis for creation in schools though. I care not what "white lies" parents tell their children, however, those "white lies" should not be taught in schools. I think we have very much established that this philosophy graduate is making things up to fit in to his own idea of what an atheist is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
onewheeldave Posted September 14, 2011 Share Posted September 14, 2011 I don't think that atheists have any sort of group goal to convince people of how their religious believes are incorrect. But lets assume that they do for a minute. What makes you think that they're failing. The number of active religious people in this country has been falling for decades now, and most of the remaining ones who give a religion aren't really religious, although if questioned they may well still say that they believe in god. That sounds like a slow, but steady, movement in the direction which you are suggesting atheists want to move society. Diplomacy doesn't just mean speaking without causing offence, that's just tact, diplomacy is more than that. Maybe it's just a definition thing, but I see diplomacy as a larger set of skills that includes tact within them. A process of negotiation between two parties in order to achieve a mutually beneficial outcome. The video posted by six45ive- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ixVNtzc5RqI covers the points you mention- it's also by a vocal atheist, so I feel that it's probably better to watch that than for me to continue trying to explain why diplomacy is the best thing for you guys to investigate if you want the sceptical movement to progress in it's aims. He's also pretty focused in stating what he considers the aim of the sceptical movement to be and on why, in his opinion (and mine), it's failing to acheive them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted September 14, 2011 Share Posted September 14, 2011 Shall I repeat that I don't think that there is some sort of atheist agenda to progress? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
llamatron Posted September 14, 2011 Share Posted September 14, 2011 The video posted by six45ive- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ixVNtzc5RqI covers the points you mention- it's also by a vocal atheist, so I feel that it's probably better to watch that than for me to continue trying to explain why diplomacy is the best thing for you guys to investigate if you want the sceptical movement to progress in it's aims. He's also pretty focused in stating what he considers the aim of the sceptical movement to be and on why, in his opinion (and mine), it's failing to acheive them. It isn't a movement! ....maybe if we keep explaining this you will understand. The only agenda I have as an atheist is to stop the evils that come from religion. I have no problem with people believing in sky fairies until they start trying to force others to their religion, telling people not to use contraception etc And just to be clear because you seem to have problems with this, that is my opinion as an atheist. It applies to no-one (neccessarily) other than me. Although I think it is a common atheist view, it is not something you have to agree with to become an atheist. There is nothing you have to do to become an atheist because it is not a group. Just as I do not have to join a group of non hat wearers to become a non hat wearer! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
onewheeldave Posted September 14, 2011 Share Posted September 14, 2011 I think we have very much established that this philosophy graduate is making things up to fit in to his own idea of what an atheist is. You've established nothing. You also may benefit from watching the video linked to- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ixVNtzc5RqI The points he makes regarding why the sceptical movement is failing in it's aims, the value of diplomacy, the recognition that calling people stupid is counter-productve are exactly what I've been saying myself in these threads over many years. In which time I don't recall a single atheist responding to them with anything over than ridicule. Years ago, threads like this attracted religious believers, you guys failed to show to them the value of scepticism, you failed to communicate with them (talking at them is not communication) and you belittled and insulted them. (I accept fully that that was not one-sided, but, you guys have got brains, you're intelligent, you should have known better: you had an opportunity to bring about change, but you blew it, cos it 'feels' better to ridicule believers and boost your egos, than to do what is necessary to actually communicate with them). And, from what I've seen in reality, on other disscusion boards, on online vide and TV- the sceptical movement in general, has been doing pretty much the same. Most of you can't even agree on what the aims of the movement are. A movement consisting of thousands of intelligent people, some of them scientists at the top of their profession, who could have made real progress in combating ignorance and delusion, have squandered the opportunity and, quite possibly, been actively counter-productive. I've heard of religious leaders emailing Dawkins and thanking him for his work, because they've had so many people driven to their congregations after having heard Dawkins speak and being appalled by his utter contempt for believers. Look at this thread, 17 pages, and I'm not aware of a single believer here to engage in debate- not one. And, why should they come here- to be insulted and belittled, with no hope of an actual discussion? So what's the point? It seems like you get together at your little conferences, a room full of atheists, and basically sit and revel in how intelligent, how clever you are, and make up new ways to make believers feel stupid. And the more you do it, the more the only people listening to you, are other vocal atheists. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
onewheeldave Posted September 14, 2011 Share Posted September 14, 2011 Shall I repeat that I don't think that there is some sort of atheist agenda to progress? The video linked to is a meeting of the sceptical movement- they seem to have an agenda. If you're going to say 'ah, they're sceptics, not atheists' then take it up with six45ive- he recommended I watch it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
llamatron Posted September 14, 2011 Share Posted September 14, 2011 The video linked to is a meeting of the sceptical movement- they seem to have an agenda. If you're going to say 'ah, they're sceptics, not atheists' then take it up with six45ive- he recommended I watch it. Just because a group of atheists have an agenda does not mean that that is an atheist agenda. This is really not difficult to grasp! It is very like saying because a group of muslims want to kill people in the west all muslims want to do that. It is a stupid conclusion which is clearly not true. Clearly you have a problem with Dawkins-that is fine but assuming that all atheists are the same is not fine! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
onewheeldave Posted September 14, 2011 Share Posted September 14, 2011 It isn't a movement! ....maybe if we keep explaining this you will understand. See my post above. The only agenda I have as an atheist is to stop the evils that come from religion. I have no problem with people believing in sky fairies until they start trying to force others to their religion, telling people not to use contraception etc And just to be clear because you seem to have problems with this, that is my opinion as an atheist. It applies to no-one (neccessarily) other than me. Although I think it is a common atheist view, it is not something you have to agree with to become an atheist. There is nothing you have to do to become an atheist because it is not a group. Just as I do not have to join a group of non hat wearers to become a non hat wearer! If your agenda is to change anything, then your current approach goes against it. I guarantee, if we put the vocal atheists and me, in a room with some believers, and you continue with your current approach, I bet that I would have far more success in conveying to some of them, what scepticism is about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
onewheeldave Posted September 14, 2011 Share Posted September 14, 2011 Just because a group of atheists have an agenda does not mean that that is an atheist agenda. This is really not difficult to grasp! It is very like saying because a group of muslims want to kill people in the west all muslims want to do that. It is a stupid conclusion which is clearly not true. Clearly you have a problem with Dawkins-that is fine but assuming that all atheists are the same is not fine! Again, see my post above. As it seems to be such a problem, from now on I'll direct my posts to sceptics, who are also atheists, but, who seem to be able to accept that their movement does actually have an aim. To the aimless atheists, just out of interest, why are you posting on this thread if you have no aim? If you do have an aim, why not tell me what it is, so confusion can be avoided? (those atheists who have stated their aim, seem to say that it's about educating people to what scepticism is about and combating the bad effects of religious belief, which is basically the aim I'm talking about, so I'm unclear as to what the problem is). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lockjaw Posted September 14, 2011 Share Posted September 14, 2011 To the aimless atheists, just out of interest, why are you posting on this thread if you have no aim? In my case it was the desire to engage in a bit of intellectual discourse, coupled with the fact I find religious people mildly amusing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.