Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
6 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,807 Year: 3,064/9,624 Month: 909/1,588 Week: 92/223 Day: 3/17 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Best approaches to deal w/ fundamentalism
alaninnont
Member (Idle past 5436 days)
Posts: 107
Joined: 02-27-2009


Message 16 of 142 (500702)
03-01-2009 10:22 PM


I find a lot of similarities between your "fundies" and the atheistic evolutionists. For the most part they both come at you trying to convince you that their view is right rather than considering new ideas. They both get defensive if you counter their arguments. They both have a limited openness to new ideas. It is my opinion that there is little use in trying to convince either side. No matter what evidence you bring forward, the fundamental Christian or the fundamental atheist with view it through their own set of glasses and block out things that are contrary to their own opinion. You can't change anyone's mind. They must change it themselves.

Replies to this message:
 Message 17 by subbie, posted 03-01-2009 11:05 PM alaninnont has not replied
 Message 22 by Percy, posted 03-02-2009 8:55 AM alaninnont has not replied

  
alaninnont
Member (Idle past 5436 days)
Posts: 107
Joined: 02-27-2009


Message 130 of 142 (503132)
03-16-2009 9:48 AM


There is a very interesting study by psychologists Kari Edwards and Edward Smith A Disconfirmation Bias in the Evaluation of Arguments, (Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1996, Vol. 71, No. 1, 5-24)that presented the same evidence to two groups of people who had opposing views. The result was that the groups became even more polarized.
It doesn't matter which side you're dealing with, it is highly unlikely that argument will persuade individuals to change their ideas because both sides filter information through their belief system.
In my opinion, if you're on these forums to try and persuade others that you are right and they are wrong, you're wasting your time.

Replies to this message:
 Message 131 by Percy, posted 03-16-2009 9:55 AM alaninnont has replied

  
alaninnont
Member (Idle past 5436 days)
Posts: 107
Joined: 02-27-2009


Message 132 of 142 (503138)
03-16-2009 10:45 AM
Reply to: Message 131 by Percy
03-16-2009 9:55 AM


I'm not an expert in pyschology but I have noticed some things in dealing with people.
1. You can't change people's mind by force. They have to want to change.
2. People retreat to defensive, well fortified positions when threatened. It then becomes even harder to move them.
3. War is destructive. Sitting in your bunker shooting artillary may possibly win a battle but the resistance will continue until you completely wipe out the enemy in which case you have an unhealthy dictatorship which will eventually fall.
4. The moral high ground often has the best success in opening up people's minds. If someone treats you like a jerk and you go all Ghandi on them, they tend to look at their actions with shame and begin to question themselves.
If they can't be persuaded to change their views, and if they can't even be persuaded to leave science alone and keep religion in church, what are we to do?
I think that science should not be left alone. It should be constantly challenged and questioned. That is part of what science is. I say bring 'em on. In the past, any theory that is valid has eventually won the day.
"Greater than the tread of mighty armies is an idea whose time has come."
Victor Hugo

This message is a reply to:
 Message 131 by Percy, posted 03-16-2009 9:55 AM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 133 by Coyote, posted 03-16-2009 11:13 AM alaninnont has not replied
 Message 135 by Percy, posted 03-16-2009 1:31 PM alaninnont has not replied
 Message 136 by onifre, posted 03-16-2009 3:59 PM alaninnont has replied

  
alaninnont
Member (Idle past 5436 days)
Posts: 107
Joined: 02-27-2009


Message 137 of 142 (503177)
03-16-2009 4:47 PM
Reply to: Message 136 by onifre
03-16-2009 3:59 PM


Only an ignorant person would not change their mind when presented with a logical and reasonable positions, littered with objective evidence, against their arguments. Once one encounters such a person, it's best to leave them to their ignorance, I've found.
As wonderful as that world would be, I don't think it is realistic. This study dealt with reasonable individuals and strong evidence and still the opinions became polarized.
p.s. I think the word "ignorant" is a poor word choice. An ignorant person is one lacking training or knowledge. But I understood what you meant.
Only if one holds to the position that they have infallible information to counter you with. There is no defensive measure they should retreat to when one is simply trying to educate that person.
Their defensive measures are indicative of a weak position, it shows lack of confidence in their argument and usually takes any discussion into a childish debate.
Defensive measures and childish name calling is not limited to the creationist side on these forums.
Faith cannot be contested against. Your point is moot if one is simply going to "challenge" science with their subjective beliefs.
What would be the point of allowing such an argument to be presented?
Not to mention the lowering of scientific standards that would have to take place for such metaphysical hypothesis to be given an open forum for scientific discussion.
So why bother? If I remember from a previous exchange, we differ on important points and I have no wish to convince you over to "my side." I'm just looking to bounce ideas around and enjoy the discussion. I reiterate my opinion. If you're here to convince others that you are right and they are wrong, you're wasting your time. It's highly unlikely that it will happen.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 136 by onifre, posted 03-16-2009 3:59 PM onifre has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 138 by onifre, posted 03-16-2009 5:06 PM alaninnont has replied
 Message 139 by Taq, posted 03-16-2009 5:22 PM alaninnont has not replied

  
alaninnont
Member (Idle past 5436 days)
Posts: 107
Joined: 02-27-2009


Message 140 of 142 (503283)
03-17-2009 8:56 AM
Reply to: Message 138 by onifre
03-16-2009 5:06 PM


I think you are wrong about that...
lol
Their defensive measures are indicative of a weak position, it shows lack of confidence in their argument and usually takes any discussion into a childish debate.
I propose that on these forums, atheists descend into childish debate more often and more quickly than creationists on average. I took a look through some of the topics you have participated in (I hope you don't mind but these are open forums. Big brother is watching.) I'm assuming you are an athesist. Correct me if I'm wrong. I saw very little of what I'd call childish debate from the responses of the creationists. For a wide variety of reasons, I currently think that the existence of creator is more probable than not. If you take a look at my correspondences (mind you, I'm new and so the number of responses may be considered statistically insignificant) and count the childish responses from atheists (assuming again) I hypothesize that creationists demonstrate less childish debate than atheists on this site. I know this isn't scientific, no establishing of definitions, no double blind, etc. but there is a trend.
Edited by alaninnont, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 138 by onifre, posted 03-16-2009 5:06 PM onifre has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 141 by Percy, posted 03-17-2009 9:39 AM alaninnont 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