ChatterBank0 min ago
How do cherry-picking believers decide what to believe?
168 Answers
One would think that a person who could think rationally would be consistent about it. But this seems not to be so. Below is a thread about a chap who rejects God but believes in an afterlife, even though both beliefs have a similar irrational status.
How many other cases are there? People who, for example, reject astrology but believe in Tarot cards; who reject dowsing but accept ouija boards; who reject crystal balls but accept ESP; who reject weeping statues but accept alien abductions; who reject fairies but accept angels…..and so on. How do they discriminate between one lot of nonsense and another? What criteria do they use?
I anticipate one possible answer: a believer (naomi perhaps?) might say that she believes in ghosts because she has seen one. But this cannot always be the answer, surely. What is?
How many other cases are there? People who, for example, reject astrology but believe in Tarot cards; who reject dowsing but accept ouija boards; who reject crystal balls but accept ESP; who reject weeping statues but accept alien abductions; who reject fairies but accept angels…..and so on. How do they discriminate between one lot of nonsense and another? What criteria do they use?
I anticipate one possible answer: a believer (naomi perhaps?) might say that she believes in ghosts because she has seen one. But this cannot always be the answer, surely. What is?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by chakka35. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
My apologies for that Andy, et al. No excuses for my pathetic sense of humour.
I think you misread something in my initial response though. I am extremely gullible, hence my scepticism in all regards is as much an essential survival strategy as it is academic. I honestly believe developing these survival strategies has led me to explore avenues and gain an understanding of the processes of consciousness and reason many people would not even image exist. Almost ironic . . . don't you think? I'm one of those people who are inherently so open minded that it has nearly fallen out, on more than one occasion. I'll leave to you to decide for yourself whether or not I've lost it completely.
I think you misread something in my initial response though. I am extremely gullible, hence my scepticism in all regards is as much an essential survival strategy as it is academic. I honestly believe developing these survival strategies has led me to explore avenues and gain an understanding of the processes of consciousness and reason many people would not even image exist. Almost ironic . . . don't you think? I'm one of those people who are inherently so open minded that it has nearly fallen out, on more than one occasion. I'll leave to you to decide for yourself whether or not I've lost it completely.
You haven't lost it at all mibn. I see where you are coming from in not just accepting whatever is presented to you without question.
I have questions which I've now realised I won't explain. I spent long enough forming and dismissing theories to logically explain my experiences. In the end I realised that we don't know every answer to every question and there are some things that will remain unknown - at least to us today. Other more tangible examples are dark energy, dark matter, the Big Bang etc.
The chicken was quite interesting - it was! It's probably the same catatonic state young animals enter when picked up by their parents. Sharks also enter it when turned on their backs. I can understand young animals going still as a survival mechanisim - but the sharks? Who on Earth turned sharks on their back in the first place to discover it!
I have questions which I've now realised I won't explain. I spent long enough forming and dismissing theories to logically explain my experiences. In the end I realised that we don't know every answer to every question and there are some things that will remain unknown - at least to us today. Other more tangible examples are dark energy, dark matter, the Big Bang etc.
The chicken was quite interesting - it was! It's probably the same catatonic state young animals enter when picked up by their parents. Sharks also enter it when turned on their backs. I can understand young animals going still as a survival mechanisim - but the sharks? Who on Earth turned sharks on their back in the first place to discover it!
"Who on Earth turned sharks on their back in the first place to discover it!" Most likely a mad man . . . or a scientist in an aquatic research laboratory.
When I was about 16 my old brother who had done some extensive spiritual research of his own suggested summoning the devil to appear in the corner of a darkened room. I had little doubt that had my sister and I agreed to it that he could make it happen, and I still believe 'Satan' was completely capable of putting on a convincing show. But I just didn't see the point in doing it and I still don't.
Belief has unquestionably incredible and truly remarkable powers to influence and shape how we interpret our perceptions and experiences. And reality provides us with much of the raw materials required to send us reeling into a state of wonderment and disbelief. Perhaps the most incredible and unbelievable fact of all is that we ever managed to make any sense at all out of what are minds are capable of imagining and the worlds our thoughts are prone to conceiving. So what do we really know for a fact and how do we know anything with a reasonable degree of certainty? These are the first questions we must ask and the first answers we must find if we are ever to arrive at a comprehensive understanding of what's actually going on around us.
When I was about 16 my old brother who had done some extensive spiritual research of his own suggested summoning the devil to appear in the corner of a darkened room. I had little doubt that had my sister and I agreed to it that he could make it happen, and I still believe 'Satan' was completely capable of putting on a convincing show. But I just didn't see the point in doing it and I still don't.
Belief has unquestionably incredible and truly remarkable powers to influence and shape how we interpret our perceptions and experiences. And reality provides us with much of the raw materials required to send us reeling into a state of wonderment and disbelief. Perhaps the most incredible and unbelievable fact of all is that we ever managed to make any sense at all out of what are minds are capable of imagining and the worlds our thoughts are prone to conceiving. So what do we really know for a fact and how do we know anything with a reasonable degree of certainty? These are the first questions we must ask and the first answers we must find if we are ever to arrive at a comprehensive understanding of what's actually going on around us.
Mibs, //In determining what something might be, knowing what it can't be can go a long way in the quest to make such a determination by eliminating ineligible suspects and narrowing our focus on possible causes.//
But that's just the point isn't it. You don't really know what it can't be any more than you know what it can be.
I don't have a dilemma - but you and Chakka do simply because you continue to refuse to consider the possibility that something may exist in this world that doesn't fit comfortably into your ideal where everything works as you think science says it should. Rather than investigate and try to find a reason for it, which is something I would expect from a truly enquiring mind, you conclude that I'm deluded, mistaken, or for all I know, just plain nuts. So what would you like me to say? "Chakka and Mibs say it can't be so, so I must be wrong"? Why would I do that when my intellect is certainly no less than either of yours and I've no doubt whatsoever that what I experienced was real? Actually, I might put a question up inviting people to challenge you to rationally explain their experiences. Chakka has already failed to explain one that I've offered him a couple of times, and if memory serves you haven't fared any better, so that could be interesting.
Incidentally, I didn't realise you'd undergone a sense of humour by-pass. Sorry I spoke. Always was a monkey. Oops! Dunnit again! Slapped legs! ;o)
But that's just the point isn't it. You don't really know what it can't be any more than you know what it can be.
I don't have a dilemma - but you and Chakka do simply because you continue to refuse to consider the possibility that something may exist in this world that doesn't fit comfortably into your ideal where everything works as you think science says it should. Rather than investigate and try to find a reason for it, which is something I would expect from a truly enquiring mind, you conclude that I'm deluded, mistaken, or for all I know, just plain nuts. So what would you like me to say? "Chakka and Mibs say it can't be so, so I must be wrong"? Why would I do that when my intellect is certainly no less than either of yours and I've no doubt whatsoever that what I experienced was real? Actually, I might put a question up inviting people to challenge you to rationally explain their experiences. Chakka has already failed to explain one that I've offered him a couple of times, and if memory serves you haven't fared any better, so that could be interesting.
Incidentally, I didn't realise you'd undergone a sense of humour by-pass. Sorry I spoke. Always was a monkey. Oops! Dunnit again! Slapped legs! ;o)
Mibs and Chakka, I BELIEVE although I have no real evidence for it, that had the pair of you lived a few hundred years ago, you would both be founder members of the Flat Earth Society, because having examined all of the AVAILABLE evidence, you would have concluded that those holding views other than yours were not reasonably and rationally entitled to do so, and should therefore be burned at the stake as heretics.
Science itself is too spooky to be explained away with either of your considerable intellects, but you have both grown up too far too fast and seem to have lost the childish gifts of wonderment and awe of what might be possible.
Science itself is too spooky to be explained away with either of your considerable intellects, but you have both grown up too far too fast and seem to have lost the childish gifts of wonderment and awe of what might be possible.
We've all just finished with the biggest cherry-picked celebration of all.
Christmas. Why do you put a big tree in your house once a year with lights on or how do you discriminate between one lot of nonsense and another?
Many different cultures religious festivals and beliefs thrown into one pot and wrapped up with the story of a bloke nailed to a cross.All the different cultures have their own interpretation of god.
How many atheists told their places of work, "No sorry I'm continuing to work over the holidays because of my non-belief in god but religion as a tradition once a year is okay?
So what's the difference between choosing what religious festival you wish to celebrate and accepting that their are phenomena you can't explain or understand?
You may not have any tangible evidence for the basis of either belief.
I bet there's millions of people with scientific backgrounds that have had experiences with ghosts or other strange incidents they can't explain or are afraid to convey because of what their friends may think.
Even Wyz doubted his atheist ways when he experienced ghostly occurences in his house.
The answer is, why not?
So next time you're in your house alone, in a room alone and objects you know have their place have moved from one side of the room to the other with no contact from you or anyone in a matter of seconds without you noticing then whatever you haven't seen or heard that moved it, isn't really there?
It moved by itself?
Christmas. Why do you put a big tree in your house once a year with lights on or how do you discriminate between one lot of nonsense and another?
Many different cultures religious festivals and beliefs thrown into one pot and wrapped up with the story of a bloke nailed to a cross.All the different cultures have their own interpretation of god.
How many atheists told their places of work, "No sorry I'm continuing to work over the holidays because of my non-belief in god but religion as a tradition once a year is okay?
So what's the difference between choosing what religious festival you wish to celebrate and accepting that their are phenomena you can't explain or understand?
You may not have any tangible evidence for the basis of either belief.
I bet there's millions of people with scientific backgrounds that have had experiences with ghosts or other strange incidents they can't explain or are afraid to convey because of what their friends may think.
Even Wyz doubted his atheist ways when he experienced ghostly occurences in his house.
The answer is, why not?
So next time you're in your house alone, in a room alone and objects you know have their place have moved from one side of the room to the other with no contact from you or anyone in a matter of seconds without you noticing then whatever you haven't seen or heard that moved it, isn't really there?
It moved by itself?
@Nadis - The roots of the christmas celebration may be founded in religion - but the whole xmas holiday thing that is celebrated now has become a cultural event. To imply that atheists are cherry-picking because they dont work through christmas and instead celebrate with mince pies etc is a nonsense argument.
So is this talk about unexplainable events that you mention. Of course there are events that happen that may be difficult to explain by our current standards of knowledge - but that does not mean that there is not a rational explanation. The mind can play tricks, and belief is not evidence - so next time, if I thought the furniture had been moved around, I would be more likely to try to remember if I had done the hoovering the day before and inadvertently moved the furniture, rather than assume a ghost or poltergeist had become involved. Anytime I see a slow moving ball of light in the sky I will think first that it is likely to be a chinese lantern rather than a UFO.
And thats the point - Many who ascribe to a belief ghosts, or life after death, or Aliens as an explanation for an unusual sighting or event reach for that explanation first and foremost rather than considering the boringly, mundanely rational.
So is this talk about unexplainable events that you mention. Of course there are events that happen that may be difficult to explain by our current standards of knowledge - but that does not mean that there is not a rational explanation. The mind can play tricks, and belief is not evidence - so next time, if I thought the furniture had been moved around, I would be more likely to try to remember if I had done the hoovering the day before and inadvertently moved the furniture, rather than assume a ghost or poltergeist had become involved. Anytime I see a slow moving ball of light in the sky I will think first that it is likely to be a chinese lantern rather than a UFO.
And thats the point - Many who ascribe to a belief ghosts, or life after death, or Aliens as an explanation for an unusual sighting or event reach for that explanation first and foremost rather than considering the boringly, mundanely rational.
Never seen a ghost, never experienced anything remotely like anything described. As far as I can see, looking around here, Christmas as celebrated by the locals consists of an opportunity to buy and receive presents, eat lots of good food and drink lots of booze. A couple might go to church but I don't know any - oh and for some an extra couple of days holiday. Bet some of them don't even know (or care) that it is a religious festival. They are just intent on enjoying themselves while they have a chance.
I think people believe what they want to believe. Imagine a Trappist Monk living a life of silence, prayer, and meditation. Such a life might bring some people to a nervous breakdown. Yet if that man had been born in another religious culture he would probably have followed a similar austere road.
Belief in the Tarot, alien abductions, fairies, or angels give weight to the remark ascribed to Chesterton: 'When a man stops believing in God he doesn't believe in nothing, he believes in anything.'
Belief in the Tarot, alien abductions, fairies, or angels give weight to the remark ascribed to Chesterton: 'When a man stops believing in God he doesn't believe in nothing, he believes in anything.'
Theland, It's because of people like you, inflicting your preposterous unfounded monstrous assertions on innocent minds that I've had my childhood robbed from me having to learn how to distinguish fantasy from reality and to understand why neither god nor ghost can possibly exist, thank you. It's that very same ability to reason that informed me in the nick of time why it would be wrong to take someone’s life, simply because their rationality has failed them. The only reason I don't tell you precisely what I think of you is that I realise your inability to grasp the reality would not justify being banned from this forum.
-- answer removed --
LazyGun, //Many who ascribe to a belief ghosts, or life after death, or Aliens as an explanation for an unusual sighting or event reach for that explanation first and foremost ...... //
That's true, but as you say that doesn't apply to all. In fact not so long ago I solved a 'ghostly' problem that someone posted on these very pages.
Sandy, I don't believe what I want to believe. I have no alternative. And incidentally, perhaps there were times when the undoubtedly prolific Mr Chesterton should have taken the time to think a little more carefully before putting pen to paper. What utter contradictory tripe!!
Eddie, that possibility has occurred to me too - but I don't know how possible it might be.
That's true, but as you say that doesn't apply to all. In fact not so long ago I solved a 'ghostly' problem that someone posted on these very pages.
Sandy, I don't believe what I want to believe. I have no alternative. And incidentally, perhaps there were times when the undoubtedly prolific Mr Chesterton should have taken the time to think a little more carefully before putting pen to paper. What utter contradictory tripe!!
Eddie, that possibility has occurred to me too - but I don't know how possible it might be.
-- answer removed --
-- answer removed --
Latest Posts
Quizzes & Puzzles1 min ago
Could The Nefarious Hand Of Antifa Be...
News2 mins ago
Crosswords16 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.