Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
If you talk to fundamentalist Christians or New Atheists, you are not going to find open mindedness.
Yes, but the fundamentalist is emotionally invested in whatever unhealthy remix of the religion they have concocted for themselves. If an atheist is similarly emotionally invested in some caricature of the religion, any claim to being more tolerant goes out the window.
Do you need to be a Muslim to think that anything of real value could come out of the Islamic world? What was the topic of this thread again?
If you talk to fundamentalist Christians or New Atheists, you are not going to find open mindedness.
I'm not sure why you equivocate open mindedness with toleration. But we can settle this right now.
Let's pretend that Christians and atheists are both wrong. Let's pretend Islam is the correct religion.
Will you forsake Jesus and revere Muhammad instead? Will you continue to believe in your Jesus even though you know he's not real? Or will you give up on religion altogether?
Nearly every Christian (and I'd bet this includes you) *will refuse* to consider this hypothetical. Nearly every atheist *will* consider it and give an answer.
So please, tell us more about how Christians are more open minded.
My understanding of open mindedness is empathy for the other's position, the ability to put yourself, at least for a time, in their shoes and see things through their eyes, even if their reasoning is poor. After all, a person can have poor reasoning and still be right -- they may simply be bad at putting things into words.Are you equivocating open mindedness with tolerance again? Or do you really mean to imply that atheists are unwilling to consider a line of reasoning?
I'm open minded in that I am willing to consider any evidence or line of reasoning. Christians and Muslims simply are not. If you think you are, I'll be happy to convert you to atheism free of charge or else expose your closed mindedness.
My understanding of open mindedness is empathy for the other's position, the ability to put yourself, at least for a time, in their shoes and see things through their eyes, even if their reasoning is poor. After all, a person can have poor reasoning and still be right -- they may simply be bad at putting things into words.
I'm saying that SOME atheists, particularly the New Atheist sort, do not have that sort of empathy.
Being an evil atheist I did the unthinkable. I spent 2 whole minutes and used Google. Lo and behold I found the intolerance atheists and agnostics have is a good thing. It is intolerance of contradiction. Probably why I do nasty things like digging when something smells rotten, like this time.
Are atheists undogmatic?
I doubt that. But at any rate, I suspect you are not willing to accept existential evidence. Your post seems to say that you rely entirely on reasoning, and folks that do that are weak in empathy.I'm open minded in that I am willing to consider any evidence or line of reasoning.
the Christian existentialists were very rational people. They pushed reasoning all the way to the wall. It was only when reasoning could take them no further that they stepped through in faith.I'm into Christian existentialism
The thread is titled to convey what the article is saying. I thought the article was interesting, and am open to its possibility, though I stick to my theory of temperament being the deciding factor of openness.Well then this thread is poorly titled and confusing.
My understanding of open mindedness is empathy for the other's position, the ability to put yourself, at least for a time, in their shoes and see things through their eyes, even if their reasoning is poor. After all, a person can have poor reasoning and still be right -- they may simply be bad at putting things into words.
I'm saying that SOME atheists, particularly the New Atheist sort, do not have that sort of empathy.
the Christian existentialists were very rational people. They pushed reasoning all the way to the wall. It was only when reasoning could take them no further that they stepped through in faith.
Oh, of course! We are on the same page here. One can be open minded, and yet be comfortable where they are in their opinion.An interesting view. I see a problem applying it to this kind of research however. One can have empathy in the sense you are using and still at the end of the day reject the position of the opposing view because it simply does not stand up. Not that I reject your idea, I find it a good one in large part for the very reasons that make it hard to measure in a survey situation.
I don't think faith contradicts reason. I just think it goes beyond reason. Soren Kierkegaard is my personal favorite. He was one brilliant reasoner -- who stepped past into the unknown. It reminds me of The Wall by Kansas. Do you remember that? Oldie but goodie.Mmm, I think the difference is that everyone else had been trying to prove everything rationally and the existentialists turned around and said that faith is by its very nature unreasonable. And then they celebrated that.
"Intolerance of contradiction and myside bias."
That second bit isn't so good. I am surprised it's worse for atheists than theists, though. Could be that European theists are more comfortable with secular ideas.
I don't think faith contradicts reason. I just think it goes beyond reason. Soren Kierkegaard is my personal favorite. He was one brilliant reasoner -- who stepped past into the unknown. It reminds me of The Wall by Kansas. Do you remember that? Oldie but goodie.
I'm wondering how they measured either of those. While I personally find intolerance of contradiction to be a good thing as it indicates rational thought and implies finding a rational solution when there is a contradiction I also know it is something that is very easy to rig a survey for. All one needs to do is put forth a case where the emotional response and the rational response lead to different conclusions. These will occur most in different places for different groups. A radical feminist will be totally consistent regarding abortion. A Christian is apt to have problems when the fetus is the result of rape or incest. And some get positively absurd when contrasting incest to genetic defects! But a radical feminist can raise illogic to new heights if a woman chooses to become a housewife. Pick the potential conflicts where for one group logic and emotion get the same result and for the other they differ and your result is all but guaranteed.
On the myside bias we have no idea just how it was determined. Perhaps the atheists supposed bias is in fact no such thing, it is just contrary to the researches own biases. Another possibility is the supposed bias is regarding positions supported by reason for the atheists and agnostics and not supported by reason for those of faith.
Mmm, I think the difference is that everyone else had been trying to prove everything rationally and the existentialists turned around and said that faith is by its very nature unreasonable. And then they celebrated that.
Granted, I kind of ended up with a really lopsided view of faith after reading Kierkegaard and thought that Christianity was all about blindly believing things based on intuition alone. Whoops.
Well, Christianity makes exceptional claims for things outside the norm. There are those Christians who claim God breaks the laws of nature, but then again there are those Christians who say he does not, but simply does things that are highly improbable -- even the virgin birth COULD have happened, God just tinkered with the dice. I once talked to a man from Romania who was tortured under the communists; he said his heart stopped while being brutalized, but he "came to" the next day in the morgue.No, definitely agreed! I mean "unreasonable" as "not provable through reason." Though Christianity in particular does fly in the face of reality as we know it. Which has always been the point.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?