Religion makes you meaner

[cassity]

Sorry- it's difficult to work out what you're actually saying here. What point are you making?

 

I wasn't, I was replying to the points you made.

 

"If they then chose not to do the charity, is it fair to say they are meaner than before (on the grounds that previously they were more 'giving' than they now are?"

 

No..It would seem they are more meaner not because they are atheists but because they have likely lost the spiritual profit they soaked in as a return...as in the following...[

 

"Suppose a religious person devoted a %-age of their annual income to helping the poor, as they believed in God, and, also believed that God wished believers to do this charitable act".

 

You don't need to be a theist or in anyway religious to make the above charitable sacrifice.

[onewheeldave]

One thing that puzzles me; is, why do we need a competition between theists and atheists, on who is least mean-spirited? Is it that the 'winner' gets to somewhat cement the credibility of their own position? Surely, if you're not mean spirited, you'd want the best for all people?

 

Good point. I guess though that their always has and always will be competition between some theists and atheists (important to note not all, many of both camp simply get on with their own lives and enjoy their beliefs/absence of beliefs).

 

Might it be better to shift it from the negative axis to the positive?

 

i.e. rather than focusing on the mean-spirited side, go to the 'more giving'.

 

So, of the 2 groups, atheist and non-atheist, the group not giving would be seen as the zero point (with no 'blame' or negativity attached with being in that position), while the giving group would be seen as being the positive one in terms of charity.

 

Easy to argue that, purely logically speaking, that could be seen as exactly equivalent to the 'mean-spirited' view.

 

However, in terms of which of the 2 views is most conducive to diplomacy and productive discussion, I think few would argue that the 2nd view is superior?

[cassity]

 

One thing that puzzles me; is, why do we need a competition between theists and atheists, on who is least mean-spirited? Is it that the 'winner' gets to somewhat cement the credibility of their own position? Surely, if you're not mean spirited, you'd want the best for all people?

 

There's no cost to true altruism. Then again if altruism is defined as 'payback' then theism is about 'cost/profit analysis'. Give and ye shall be rewarded...which is mean.

 

I did forget to add a 3rd angle..religious givers could also have a guilt complex by their respective church/parishioners...mean?

Edited November 21, 2015 by cassity

[onewheeldave]

I wasn't, I was replying to the points you made.

 

"If they then chose not to do the charity, is it fair to say they are meaner than before (on the grounds that previously they were more 'giving' than they now are?"

 

No..It would seem they are more meaner not because they are atheists but because they have likely lost the spiritual profit they soaked in as a return...as in the following...[

 

"Suppose a religious person devoted a %-age of their annual income to helping the poor, as they believed in God, and, also believed that God wished believers to do this charitable act".

 

You don't need to be a theist or in anyway religious to make the above charitable sacrifice.

 

Thanks for trying to explain it. But no- I'm really, really not being critical of you, but, due to my autism I need precise language. Your word use is very cloudy to my mind, which is fine, I'm 100% sure that you are way more effective at communication with most people, than I ever will be.

 

I'm finding that my usual approach of trying to clarify 'cloudy' wordage/concepts with tight logic (which is how my mind works when understanding things) almost always results in friction and hostility.

 

So I'll leave it- we just do not have a communication style that connects. I can only do tight precise logic. I'm not expecting or asking you to attempt to put it in tight logic, as I think you'd probably find that as stressful and time consuming as I do trying to unravel the more nebulous and flexible approach, which requires a lot of subtle subtle context that is beyond me.

[cassity]

Thanks for trying to explain it. But no- I'm really, really not being critical of you,

 

Believe me, If I thought you were being an arse I wouldn't have made the attempt to articulate further. As a poster I respect your views even if at logger heads. As for being 'critical'..that's inevitable as long as it's constructive.

[onewheeldave]

Yep, that's just giving to get. It's not really giving at all, it's just the outward appearance of giving. I think proper giving is when you feel a genuine abundance and desire to give and make a positive impact on the world around you.

 

 

Well, first, let's get the 'autistic logic' out of the way.

 

I was talking about a believer giving charity. If I'm going to use words in a discussion, they need to be precise- not hazy and open to different interpretations.

 

'Giving' means 'to give'. If the theist is giving in order to get religious merit, he/she is still giving.

 

There are different types of giving- altruistic, conditional etc. They are all giving.

 

I'm happy to agree with you that a theist giving in order to gain religious merit (or gain anything else) would not be an example of unselfish/altruistic giving.

 

I fully expect that some examples of believers giving, would be that selfish variety.

 

Others wouldn't. For example a believer who gave because they believe that it is Gods wish, and, that, in their view of the world, God the identifier of good/bad. Thus, in their view, they are giving because it is the right/good thing to do, as sanctioned by God Himself.

 

On losing faith/belief in said God, they may cease giving because, they no longer know what is right/good, as they have no God to inform them, and, for whatever reason, can't decide themselves.

[buck]

Fair point. Personally I really do feel that naming specific posters as being 'mean spirited' will be very inflammatory indeed.

 

I definitely feel that naming specifc posters will not be wanted by the mods.

 

However- here's a simple solution, if people really feel it's wise to name specific posters, they contact the mods or the helpdesk, and, if they're fine with it, they can post on here giving the OK, and that'll certainly make me feel more comfortable about it.

I make a point, when I can of not naming people for or against, but I admit I fall for it when angry. I appreciate your words of warning, because I like being on this forum, even when at times there is some bullying going on. I have no problem with atheists, I'm not that far from being one too, but I see no point of being proud of it.

[cassity]

I make a point, when I can of not naming people for or against, but I admit I fall for it when angry. I appreciate your words of warning, because I like being on this forum, even when at times there is some bullying going on. I have no problem with atheists, I'm not that far from being one too, but I see no point of being proud of it.

 

Why would you..I don't know of any atheist proclaiming 'Atheist pride' let alone on here.

[scania]

I make a point, when I can of not naming people for or against, but I admit I fall for it when angry. I appreciate your words of warning, because I like being on this forum, even when at times there is some bullying going on. I have no problem with atheists, I'm not that far from being one too, but I see no point of being proud of it.

 

I'm extremely proud of being an atheist. I can sleep at night knowing I dont have to worry about religious bigotry that so many people suffer from.

 

---------- Post added 21-11-2015 at 20:37 ----------

 

Why would you..I don't know of any atheist proclaiming 'Atheist pride' let alone on here.

 

Just done it for you!! :-) :-)

[cassity]

I'm extremely proud of being an atheist. I can sleep at night knowing I dont have to worry about religious bigotry that so many people suffer from.

 

---------- Post added 21-11-2015 at 20:37 ----------

 

 

Just done it for you!! :-) :-)

 

Well you haven't really, if you remove the "pride" you can still get a nights sleep unless you missed out the 'possibility of paranoia' bit. Religious bigotry doesn't just disappear because you posses pride.