Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Atheism and freedom of speech
nator
Member (Idle past 2169 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 16 of 108 (341555)
08-19-2006 10:15 PM
Reply to: Message 15 by Hyroglyphx
08-19-2006 8:54 PM


Re: Why not?
quote:
Yes, but why share every aspect of one's life except this one thing?
That's just it, juggs.
The British tend to be far more private (and much less arrogant) as a culture than us in the US.
One thing I noticed when I lived there is that people were far, far less liable to give their opinion about something to another unless they were specifically asked.
Also, in general it was, unlike here in the US, considered perfectly OK to admit to not knowing anything about a subject. It was socially acceptable and even encouraged to be tentative and self-depricating about the level of one's knowledge on a subkect even if it was extensive.
Which is interesting, considering British folks seem to me to be much better read on a wide variety of subjects than Americans.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by Hyroglyphx, posted 08-19-2006 8:54 PM Hyroglyphx has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 17 by MangyTiger, posted 08-19-2006 10:30 PM nator has not replied
 Message 19 by Hyroglyphx, posted 08-19-2006 10:34 PM nator has replied

  
MangyTiger
Member (Idle past 6353 days)
Posts: 989
From: Leicester, UK
Joined: 07-30-2004


Message 17 of 108 (341567)
08-19-2006 10:30 PM
Reply to: Message 16 by nator
08-19-2006 10:15 PM


Re: Why not?
The British tend to be far more private (and much less arrogant) as a culture than us in the US.
We tend to use the description 'reserved' (at least my age/social group do).
Your observations about the differences between us pretty much mirror mine from living in central Iowa in the '80s and central Texas in the early '90s.
It used to amaze me when I was first in the States that I could meet a total stranger in a bar and within 10 minutes they were telling me things about themselves and their lives that I wouldn't share with anyone who wasn't a pretty close friend.
Correspondingly I got accused of being unfriendly, cold or aloof because I didn't treat people I'd just met as though they were lifelong friends.
In the '70s and early '80s the Brits tended to find the Americans loud, lacking in manners, uncultured and incredibly ignorant of the rest of the world. The advent of mass trans-Atlantic air travel combined with the Americanisation of our culture through TV and films has changed all that though. Whereas it used to be a real culture shock to meet Americans nowadays we just gawp at how how fat they are

Oops! Wrong Planet

This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by nator, posted 08-19-2006 10:15 PM nator has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 26 by CK, posted 08-20-2006 6:43 AM MangyTiger has replied

  
subbie
Member (Idle past 1254 days)
Posts: 3509
Joined: 02-26-2006


Message 18 of 108 (341569)
08-19-2006 10:33 PM
Reply to: Message 15 by Hyroglyphx
08-19-2006 8:54 PM


Re: Why not?
On the one hand you argue:
[Atheists argue about religion] because there is something in them that is mindful of their Creator and the mere fact that they give Him such 'undue' attention should speak very loudly to you that they do in fact care and that they are in fact effected by the notion of God.
In this thread, on the other hand, you say:
I think its odd to not, at some point, have the discussion come up amongst a good circle of friends or within a family.
It sounds to me like you obsess about the whole deal a lot more than I do, than most atheists that I know do.

Those who would sacrifice an essential liberty for a temporary security will lose both, and deserve neither. -- Benjamin Franklin

This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by Hyroglyphx, posted 08-19-2006 8:54 PM Hyroglyphx has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 21 by Hyroglyphx, posted 08-19-2006 10:46 PM subbie has not replied

  
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 19 of 108 (341570)
08-19-2006 10:34 PM
Reply to: Message 16 by nator
08-19-2006 10:15 PM


Re: Why not?
The British tend to be far more private (and much less arrogant) as a culture than us in the US.
I agree with them being more private, but I don't know about less arrogant. They're constantly engaged in verbal jousting. Especially when they talk amongst themselves, they're always trying to subtly outwit their friend (i.e. opponent) in even normal conversations.
Any Brits feels free to answer how that developed within the culture. I've asked quite a few of them and they state that they do do that, but they aren't sure why. Its just part of the culture.
One thing I noticed when I lived there is that people were far, far less liable to give their opinion about something to another unless they were specifically asked.
I would agree with that. Certainly there are extenuating circumstances, but all in all, i would say that's accurate.
Also, in general it was, unlike here in the US, considered perfectly OK to admit to not knowing anything about a subject. It was socially acceptable and even encouraged to be tentative and self-depricating about the level of one's knowledge on a subkect even if it was extensive.
I haven't noticed that. I've noticed the opposite in most cases. Then again I've only met maybe 30 to 40 Brits in a lifetime (not including those online. That doesn't count in my opinion). The one's I've encountered were doing that verbal jousting, trying to outwit the other person as if it were some kind of game.
Which is interesting, considering British folks seem to me to be much better read on a wide variety of subjects than Americans.
That's because they probably are per capita.
Edited by nemesis_juggernaut, : No reason given.

“It is in vain, O' man, that you seek within yourselves the cure for all your miseries. All your insight has led you to the knowledge that it is not in yourselves that you will discover the true and the good.” -Blaise Pascal

This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by nator, posted 08-19-2006 10:15 PM nator has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 20 by nator, posted 08-19-2006 10:46 PM Hyroglyphx has replied
 Message 56 by Larni, posted 08-21-2006 7:56 AM Hyroglyphx has not replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2169 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 20 of 108 (341576)
08-19-2006 10:46 PM
Reply to: Message 19 by Hyroglyphx
08-19-2006 10:34 PM


Re: Why not?
quote:
I agree with them being more private, but I don't know about less arrogant. They're constantly engaged in verbal jousting. Especially when they talk amongst themselves, they're always trying to subtly outwit their friend (i.e. opponent) in even normal conversations.
I don't get how that is arrogant, though.
quote:
The one's I've encountered were doing that verbal jousting, trying to outwit the other person as if it were some kind of game.
I think you have it; it's a game.

"Science is like a blabbermouth who ruins a movie by telling you how it ends! Well I say there are some things we don't want to know! Important things!"
- Ned Flanders
"Question with boldness even the existence of God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason than that of blindfolded fear." - Thomas Jefferson

This message is a reply to:
 Message 19 by Hyroglyphx, posted 08-19-2006 10:34 PM Hyroglyphx has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 23 by Hyroglyphx, posted 08-20-2006 12:06 AM nator has not replied

  
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 21 of 108 (341577)
08-19-2006 10:46 PM
Reply to: Message 18 by subbie
08-19-2006 10:33 PM


Re: Why not?
On the one hand you argue:
[Atheists argue about religion] because there is something in them that is mindful of their Creator and the mere fact that they give Him such 'undue' attention should speak very loudly to you that they do in fact care and that they are in fact effected by the notion of God.
In this thread, on the other hand, you say:
I think its odd to not, at some point, have the discussion come up amongst a good circle of friends or within a family.
It sounds to me like you obsess about the whole deal a lot more than I do, than most atheists that I know do.
Sounds like I rattled something loose in your psyche. Sounds like maybe you're obsessed with me. Sorry, but that does seem weird to me. Talking to perfect strangers or even an acquantence about religion seems taboo...? Sure. That's understandable to me. But never speaking about religiosity with close friends or family, at some point, is bizarre to me. Perhaps some of them are craving that dialogue, as there are many Brits who are active participants on this forum. They don't seem to be too shy in telling me how wrong I am on here. They obviously have strong feelings on the subject. So why hide your feelings, eh?

“It is in vain, O' man, that you seek within yourselves the cure for all your miseries. All your insight has led you to the knowledge that it is not in yourselves that you will discover the true and the good.” -Blaise Pascal

This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by subbie, posted 08-19-2006 10:33 PM subbie has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 27 by CK, posted 08-20-2006 6:51 AM Hyroglyphx has replied

  
kuresu
Member (Idle past 2513 days)
Posts: 2544
From: boulder, colorado
Joined: 03-24-2006


Message 22 of 108 (341599)
08-19-2006 11:11 PM
Reply to: Message 15 by Hyroglyphx
08-19-2006 8:54 PM


Re: Why not?
social confirmation--the group concluding that God does (not) exist. in your case, leave the not out. and further, it means that the only way to conclude God's existence is by relying on the support of the group and it's decision. in that, you'll only accept his existence when the group concludes he exists because you are afraid to do the same without their backup. hope that makes more sense.
what I meant with the whole--no one telling us . . . is that no one should tell us. that doesn't mean that someone won't try to tell us what to think (except, apparently, in britain, where everyone does stay out of your religious life).
p.s. I always found that faith in the US tends to be weak in most people. evidenced by needing science to confirm their views. evidenced by needing others to confirm their views. very few people, in my experience, have directly claimed that God exists becuase he just does. most want proof. ah, the empiricist in the american life.

All a man's knowledge comes from his experiences

This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by Hyroglyphx, posted 08-19-2006 8:54 PM Hyroglyphx has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 24 by Hyroglyphx, posted 08-20-2006 1:11 AM kuresu has not replied

  
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 23 of 108 (341620)
08-20-2006 12:06 AM
Reply to: Message 20 by nator
08-19-2006 10:46 PM


Re: Why not?
I don't get how that is arrogant, though. I think you have it; it's a game.
Maybe it is friendly. But moreover, I don't think its a matter of nationality that makes someone arrogant. Rather, certain people portray a more brahs tone and others are more subdued. I mean, on some level, we all think our assumptions are the correct ones. I guess its how we get that point across that makes us either arrogant, humble, or somewhere in between.
quote:
"Science is like a blabbermouth who ruins a movie by telling you how it ends! Well I say there are some things we don't want to know! Important things!" - Ned Flanders
This is a great quote, btw. I remember that episode.

“It is in vain, O' man, that you seek within yourselves the cure for all your miseries. All your insight has led you to the knowledge that it is not in yourselves that you will discover the true and the good.” -Blaise Pascal

This message is a reply to:
 Message 20 by nator, posted 08-19-2006 10:46 PM nator has not replied

  
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 24 of 108 (341640)
08-20-2006 1:11 AM
Reply to: Message 22 by kuresu
08-19-2006 11:11 PM


Re: Why not?
social confirmation--the group concluding that God does (not) exist. in your case, leave the not out. and further, it means that the only way to conclude God's existence is by relying on the support of the group and it's decision. in that, you'll only accept his existence when the group concludes he exists because you are afraid to do the same without their backup. hope that makes more sense.
That logic doesn't encompass me, though there are lemmings the world over. Some people are born into a church setting and others born into an atheistic setting. I was born in a fairly agnostic setting, not leaning one way or another. My parents say that they are Christians, but they don't really care or seem to understand. Its purely a traditional thing that has no real value in their lives. They live as though they are pagans and always have, so long as I've known them. They never talked about God with me, just about practical, everyday matters. Incidentally, they only speak to me now about God because I've professed a belief in God. But even the dialogue seems canned. I wrote a book about my experience and about my beliefs and they haven't even read it. It was pretty rude if you ask me because they knew how much time I had invested in it.
what I meant with the whole--no one telling us . . . is that no one should tell us. that doesn't mean that someone won't try to tell us what to think (except, apparently, in britain, where everyone does stay out of your religious life).
A true believer in Yeshua wouldn't sit idly by, afraid to stir the pot. Belief in Yeshua is an automatic invitation to opposition. I guess Jesus said it best when He said, "If the world hates you, know that it hated Me first." Its just the way the cookie crumbles.
p.s. I always found that faith in the US tends to be weak in most people. evidenced by needing science to confirm their views. evidenced by needing others to confirm their views. very few people, in my experience, have directly claimed that God exists becuase he just does. most want proof. ah, the empiricist in the american life.
I believed in God's existence prior to anything else that was taught to me. Perhaps I'm a rare breed. It seems that its the opposition that wants proof, and though no creationist, christian, or ID'ist could provide outright empirical proof of that existence, we can direct them through the one avenue they feel would best support the notion -- be that science, philosophy, theology, etc.

“It is in vain, O' man, that you seek within yourselves the cure for all your miseries. All your insight has led you to the knowledge that it is not in yourselves that you will discover the true and the good.” -Blaise Pascal

This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by kuresu, posted 08-19-2006 11:11 PM kuresu has not replied

  
CK
Member (Idle past 4127 days)
Posts: 3221
Joined: 07-04-2004


Message 25 of 108 (341697)
08-20-2006 6:40 AM
Reply to: Message 12 by Hyroglyphx
08-19-2006 3:45 PM


Re: Why not?
quote:
How does anyone ever conclude within themselves whether or not God exists if it never comes up in discussion? Why is it such a private matter? Why is it the dirty little secret that we are theists are atheists? I've never understood this. Now, I can understand the good advice of, when in a setting where you are entertaining many guests, the cardinal rule is, don't bring up politics and don't bring up religion. But within your own family or your circle of friends, this seems odd to me.
Well I guess you conclude god exists because you go to a church or you grow up in a relgious environment. I can see it come up in certain family environments but I don't see why it would come up in conversation with friends - what's it to do with them?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by Hyroglyphx, posted 08-19-2006 3:45 PM Hyroglyphx has not replied

  
CK
Member (Idle past 4127 days)
Posts: 3221
Joined: 07-04-2004


Message 26 of 108 (341698)
08-20-2006 6:43 AM
Reply to: Message 17 by MangyTiger
08-19-2006 10:30 PM


Re: Why not?
quote:
We tend to use the description 'reserved' (at least my age/social group do).
Are you like me Mangy? Do you cringe when you see people on TV telling all and sundry their private business?
quote:
It used to amaze me when I was first in the States that I could meet a total stranger in a bar and within 10 minutes they were telling me things about themselves and their lives that I wouldn't share with anyone who wasn't a pretty close friend.
Correspondingly I got accused of being unfriendly, cold or aloof because I didn't treat people I'd just met as though they were lifelong friends.
I've had the same experience - total strangers telling me all sorts of things, and then they'd say "and what about you?"
"well what about me? I bid you good day."
Edited by CK, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 17 by MangyTiger, posted 08-19-2006 10:30 PM MangyTiger has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 44 by MangyTiger, posted 08-20-2006 9:13 PM CK has not replied

  
CK
Member (Idle past 4127 days)
Posts: 3221
Joined: 07-04-2004


Message 27 of 108 (341701)
08-20-2006 6:51 AM
Reply to: Message 21 by Hyroglyphx
08-19-2006 10:46 PM


Re: Why not?
quote:
Perhaps some of them are craving that dialogue, as there are many Brits who are active participants on this forum. They don't seem to be too shy in telling me how wrong I am on here. They obviously have strong feelings on the subject. So why hide your feelings, eh?
I wouldn't count on that - we (as a race) like to argue that's not quite the same thing. I come here because it's a useful way to kill time and the debates get quite fierce. I can honestly say I don't give religion much thought away from here.
It's a mistake to assume that all online traits represent real-life traits.
If I really had strong feelings about it - I guess I'd seek out a group of similar people, why am I going to embarrass my friends by subjecting them to rants about religion and quizzing them about what their beliefs are?
Edited by CK, : No reason given.
Edited by CK, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 21 by Hyroglyphx, posted 08-19-2006 10:46 PM Hyroglyphx has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 28 by Hyroglyphx, posted 08-20-2006 10:52 AM CK has replied

  
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 28 of 108 (341720)
08-20-2006 10:52 AM
Reply to: Message 27 by CK
08-20-2006 6:51 AM


Re: Why not?
I wouldn't count on that - we (as a race) like to argue that's not quite the same thing. I come here because it's a useful way to kill time and the debates get quite fierce. I can honestly say I don't give religion much thought away from here.
Yes, I noticed the whole argue thing and it seems to be over anything.
If I really had strong feelings about it - I guess I'd seek out a group of similar people, why am I going to embarrass my friends by subjecting them to rants about religion and quizzing them about what their beliefs are?
Because its not a source of embarrassment. What's a worse thing to ask when the subject comes up? Are they even remotely similar in distaste?
1. Hey, is that a fashion statement or an actual belief in God? I only ask because I noticed that crucifix around your neck.
2. Hey, do you have genital herpes? I only ask because I see some cold sores around your mouth?
Its like Jesus said, "If you're ashamed of Me before men, I'll be ashamed of you before My Father."

“It is in vain, O' man, that you seek within yourselves the cure for all your miseries. All your insight has led you to the knowledge that it is not in yourselves that you will discover the true and the good.” -Blaise Pascal

This message is a reply to:
 Message 27 by CK, posted 08-20-2006 6:51 AM CK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 29 by CK, posted 08-20-2006 11:04 AM Hyroglyphx has replied
 Message 30 by Michael, posted 08-20-2006 11:24 AM Hyroglyphx has not replied

  
CK
Member (Idle past 4127 days)
Posts: 3221
Joined: 07-04-2004


Message 29 of 108 (341723)
08-20-2006 11:04 AM
Reply to: Message 28 by Hyroglyphx
08-20-2006 10:52 AM


Re: Why not?
quote:
Because its not a source of embarrassment.
The embarrassment comes because culturally it's one of the subjects that we don't bring up in polite conversation - that, sex and what people earn. It's none of our business. You just have to accept that socially things are different here.
quote:
1. Hey, is that a fashion statement or an actual belief in God? I only ask because I noticed that crucifix around your neck.
But again what's it got to do with me?, it's none of my business. We consider religion to be a private thing and something you should do at home or in your religion house of choice, not to bother other people with.
However in some respects, if you ask someone that's consider better than telling people about your beliefs unsolicited, that's likely to get you labeled as a kook. If I was at a party and someone started talking about how they were a christian/Mulsim/Jew and expounding on their belief in a creator - I'd smile politely and then slowly slide away...
(edit: I should point out that the relationship with religion we have in the uk is more complex than this post makes it appear - I'm purely talking about the interactions that we have as individuals and small groups).
Edited by CK, : No reason given.
Edited by CK, : No reason given.
Edited by CK, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 28 by Hyroglyphx, posted 08-20-2006 10:52 AM Hyroglyphx has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 31 by Hyroglyphx, posted 08-20-2006 11:33 AM CK has replied

  
Michael
Member (Idle past 4637 days)
Posts: 199
From: USA
Joined: 05-14-2005


Message 30 of 108 (341726)
08-20-2006 11:24 AM
Reply to: Message 28 by Hyroglyphx
08-20-2006 10:52 AM


Re: Why not?
Because its not a source of embarrassment. What's a worse thing to ask when the subject comes up? Are they even remotely similar in distaste?
1. Hey, is that a fashion statement or an actual belief in God? I only ask because I noticed that crucifix around your neck.
2. Hey, do you have genital herpes? I only ask because I see some cold sores around your mouth?
I would never ask anyone either of those questions. They are quite similar in distaste, in my opinion.
Also, it is very difficult for me to have a conversation with someone adamant in discussing their silly (in my view) beliefs (as many biblical literalists are)--we have no common ground. This would hold equally true for both Scientologists and biblical literalists (just so you know I'm not singling out a particular silly belief).
Cheers
Edited by Michael, : edited for clarity

This message is a reply to:
 Message 28 by Hyroglyphx, posted 08-20-2006 10:52 AM Hyroglyphx has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024