|
|
Post by Wykked Wytch on Dec 10, 2011 22:58:02 GMT -5
For one thing, it serves the purpose of calling out incorrect blanket statements about other people. I have never really put much stock in the existence of free will. Our will is controlled by a mixture of neurological impulses, instincts, and our environment. The specific environment of these people have caused them to think that getting rid of their HIV medication was a good idea. If you took the exact same person and put them in a different situation where they were not encouraged to think that modern medicine was of teh debbil, the outcome would be very different. Need I point out again these people were educated westerners who were only in that environment because they put themselves there in the first place? Yeah, I'm sorry but that's simply stupidity. Need I point out that people don't choose the environment they're born in? And even educated Westerners can sincerely believe in some really stupid shit? Yeah, I'm sorry, but that right there is truly some narrow-minded condescending stupidity. In literature, there are plenty of characters who die due to their own flaws, but we rarely are encouraged to laugh at them because of their stupidity. Take Boxer from Animal Farm. He has good intentions and is a hard worker, but he suffers from extreme gullibility. When he gets duped into accepting Animalism and is later tricked into going to the horse slaughterer (under the pretense of going to a doctor for his injuries), we do not laugh at how stupid he was. I really have no idea why this idea of empathy for people who have been duped is lost on you, especially for someone who is very vocal against political lies. Meanwhile, in real life, people who willingly go to these churches and listen to them instead of a doctor on the subject of their medication are fucking idiots and will get no sympathy from me. Besides, political lies get me because politicians are the people who're supposed to be running the country in a way that most benefits its citizens. Basically, politics should be grounded in reality. This stuff is religious, and well, considering religion is centred around taking some batshit loony mythology seriously and is anything but grounded in reality. As such, being outraged that religion involves lying is like being outraged that water is wet.Yeah, fuck those stupid, stupid sheeple who were dumb enough to be products of their environment! You even just admitted that the motivations for these people were religious, which - surprise! - is a part of the environment of these people. |
|
|
|
Post by Art Vandelay on Dec 10, 2011 23:15:29 GMT -5
Need I point out that people don't choose the environment they're born in? And even educated Westerners can sincerely believe in some really stupid shit? Yeah, I'm sorry, but that right there is truly some narrow-minded condescending stupidity. Why exactly is this, hmmm? My god, could it be... They're simply fucking stupid? Nooo, impossible, the poor little dears are simply victims of teh big ebil environments. Yeah, fuck those stupid, stupid sheeple who were dumb enough to be products of their environment! You even just admitted that the motivations for these people were religious, which - surprise! - is a part of the environment of these people.So you're seriously suggesting that it's only the environment that determines people's behaviour and factors like, oh I don't know, intelligence and critical thinking play no role whatsoever? Especially for someone who despite being educated decided on their own free will to attend one of the more loony churches and take their fucking stupid medical advice (which even a 13 year old could see is a death sentence) over that of a doctor? Are you fucking serious?! As for the second part, my point was that because religion is based entirely on bullshit, religious lies are simply business as usual and anyone moronic enough to take them seriously has only themselves to blame, as opposed to political lies which are of course not only supposed to be reality based, but also influence for the worse who gets to run the country for the next four years. Just to spell it out for you, I only said that to address your attempts to equate the two, I was not saying that somehow personal responsibility disappears when religion is used, mkay? |
|
|
|
Post by RavynousHunter on Dec 10, 2011 23:38:32 GMT -5
Why? Because fuck you, that's why.
|
|
|
|
Post by Thejebusfire on Dec 10, 2011 23:56:46 GMT -5
Somebody needs to be arrested.
|
|
|
|
Post by Wykked Wytch on Dec 11, 2011 0:13:01 GMT -5
Need I point out that people don't choose the environment they're born in? And even educated Westerners can sincerely believe in some really stupid shit? Yeah, I'm sorry, but that right there is truly some narrow-minded condescending stupidity. Why exactly is this, hmmm? My god, could it be... They're simply fucking stupid? Nooo, impossible, the poor little dears are simply victims of teh big ebil environments. Yeah, fuck those stupid, stupid sheeple who were dumb enough to be products of their environment! You even just admitted that the motivations for these people were religious, which - surprise! - is a part of the environment of these people.So you're seriously suggesting that it's only the environment that determines people's behaviour and factors like, oh I don't know, intelligence and critical thinking play no role whatsoever? Especially for someone who despite being educated decided on their own free will to attend one of the more loony churches and take their fucking stupid medical advice (which even a 13 year old could see is a death sentence) over that of a doctor? Are you fucking serious?! As for the second part, my point was that because religion is based entirely on bullshit, religious lies are simply business as usual and anyone moronic enough to take them seriously has only themselves to blame, as opposed to political lies which are of course not only supposed to be reality based, but also influence for the worse who gets to run the country for the next four years. Just to spell it out for you, I only said that to address your attempts to equate the two, I was not saying that somehow personal responsibility disappears when religion is used, mkay? You're really starting to piss me off. In fact, you don't seem to be listening to my point at all. It's not just the environment that influences people's behavior. Instincts and fallacies that our own brains commit against us cause these sorts of things to happen as well. You say that if people choose faith healing over actual medicine and die because of it, they are stupid and do not deserve pity. I say that because free will is an illusion, these people aren't as responsible for their choices as you think they are, and therefore do not deserve to be mocked and derided for their bad choices. I'm not contesting that their decision was mindfuckingly dumb. What I am contesting is the idea that callous disregard of their motivations is a good way of preventing tragedies like this in the future. How do you think a sincere believer in faith healing will be convinced that they are wrong? Through friendly discussion, or through snide comments relegating their intelligence to something less than human? Your attitudes are the reason why so many theists think atheists are arrogant - it's because some of us like to toot our own horns and act like we're some sort of superior stage in human evolution. I don't think that religious fundamentalists are inherently stupid. I just think they're mistaken. We're only human, and mistakes are to be expected. |
|
|
|
Post by Art Vandelay on Dec 11, 2011 0:24:27 GMT -5
You're really starting to piss me off. In fact, you don't seem to be listening to my point at all. It's not just the environment that influences people's behavior. Instincts and fallacies that our own brains commit against us cause these sorts of things to happen as well. You say that if people choose faith healing over actual medicine and die because of it, they are stupid and do not deserve pity. I say that because free will is an illusion, these people aren't as responsible for their choices as you think they are, and therefore do not deserve to be mocked and derided for their bad choices. I'm not contesting that their decision was mindfuckingly dumb. What I am contesting is the idea that callous disregard of their motivations is a good way of preventing tragedies like this in the future. So your argument hinges on the idea that free will is somehow an illusion eh? Well, I don't quite buy into that, namely because neurology is nowhere near the point of understanding how the brain works and how much active control it has over things and as such that assertion has about as much scientific backing as the idea that snorting dog shit is a powerful contraceptive. As such, you're going to have to do far better than any pseudo-scientific ass pulls if you want to change my mind. How do you think a sincere believer in faith healing will be convinced that they are wrong? Through friendly discussion, or through snide comments relegating their intelligence to something less than human? Your attitudes are the reason why so many theists think atheists are arrogant - it's because some of us like to toot our own horns and act like we're some sort of superior stage in human evolution. I don't think that religious fundamentalists are inherently stupid. I just think they're mistaken. We're only human, and mistakes are to be expected. If you're so convinced, then let's try a little experiment. Find yourself an active internet forum based around how much they love faith healing, register and account and give this whole "friendly discussion" schtick a go. If you manage to convert anyone, link me the thread and I'll declare you to be correct. You think you have a shot? |
|
|
|
Post by Wykked Wytch on Dec 11, 2011 0:34:07 GMT -5
You're really starting to piss me off. In fact, you don't seem to be listening to my point at all. It's not just the environment that influences people's behavior. Instincts and fallacies that our own brains commit against us cause these sorts of things to happen as well. You say that if people choose faith healing over actual medicine and die because of it, they are stupid and do not deserve pity. I say that because free will is an illusion, these people aren't as responsible for their choices as you think they are, and therefore do not deserve to be mocked and derided for their bad choices. I'm not contesting that their decision was mindfuckingly dumb. What I am contesting is the idea that callous disregard of their motivations is a good way of preventing tragedies like this in the future. So your argument hinges on the idea that free will is somehow an illusion eh? Well, I don't quite buy into that, namely because neurology is nowhere near the point of understanding how the brain works and how much active control it has over things and as such that assertion has about as much scientific backing as the idea that snorting dog shit is a powerful contraceptive. As such, you're going to have to do far better than any pseudo-scientific ass pulls if you want to change my mind. How do you think a sincere believer in faith healing will be convinced that they are wrong? Through friendly discussion, or through snide comments relegating their intelligence to something less than human? Your attitudes are the reason why so many theists think atheists are arrogant - it's because some of us like to toot our own horns and act like we're some sort of superior stage in human evolution. I don't think that religious fundamentalists are inherently stupid. I just think they're mistaken. We're only human, and mistakes are to be expected. If you're so convinced, then let's try a little experiment. Find yourself an active internet forum based around how much they love faith healing, register and account and give this whole "friendly discussion" schtick a go. If you manage to convert anyone, link me the thread and I'll declare you to be correct. You think you have a shot? "Neurology doesn't know everything!" =/= determinism is wrong. That right there, pal, is called an "argument from ignorance." I expected more from a thinker of your caliber.  I'll agree to your "experiment", only if you go onto a faith healing thread, Art, and try to convince those dumbass sheeple through your incendiary rhetoric that some of their core beliefs are dumb and stupid. But remember that I, and a lot of other ex-pseudoscientists, give up pseudoscience not because some asshole decided to make fun of me or other people who supported it. I gave it up because I found evidence that proved that the ideas I had were wrong. That evidence did not include sweeping statements like, "People who die from choosing [pseudoscientific concept] are dumb and get no sympathy from me." If you don't believe that the environment can convince people to make pseudoscientific choices, consider the case of "reparative therapy", also known as "conversion therapy" or "pray the gay away." Many LGBT people, faced with extreme shame instilled upon them by intolerant environments and experiences, have entered these programs willingly, and are harmed, financially and emotionally, as a result. Some of them become even more depressed during these "therapies", and kill themselves. If your sweeping statement holds true, then these people are not victims of their environment, but dumb idiots who got what they deserved. |
|
|
|
Post by Art Vandelay on Dec 11, 2011 0:52:52 GMT -5
"Neurology doesn't know everything!" =/= determinism is wrong. That right there, pal, is called an "argument from ignorance." I expected more from a thinker of your caliber. Oh no pal. Burden of proof and all that. You claimed that determinism is true, therefore you need to prove it. Without said proof, your entire position is based on an unproven assumption. So make with the proof or shut the hell up. I'll agree to your "experiment", only if you go onto a faith healing thread, Art, and try to convince those dumbass sheeple through your incendiary rhetoric that some of their core beliefs are dumb and stupid. Oh, but did I ever claim that I can convert them? No, no I fucking well did not. My position is not that tearing them a new one will convert them, but that they're simply beyond the help of even ass kissing and as there's no reason not to speak my mind regarding their stupidity. You're the one trying to convince me that this is not the case, it's up to you to prove it. But remember that I, and a lot of other ex-pseudoscientists, give up pseudoscience not because some asshole decided to make fun of me or other people who supported it. I gave it up because I found evidence that proved that the ideas I had were wrong. That evidence did not include sweeping statements like, "People who die from choosing [pseudoscientific concept] are dumb and get no sympathy from me." Well I'm genuinely glad for you, however your anecdote has little relevance regarding people who wilfully ignore said evidence and cling to the bullshit until it kills them. If you don't believe that the environment can convince people to make pseudoscientific choices, consider the case of "reparative therapy", also known as "conversion therapy" or "pray the gay away." Many LGBT people, faced with extreme shame instilled upon them by intolerant environments and experiences, have entered these programs willingly, and are harmed, financially and emotionally, as a result. Some of them become even more depressed during these "therapies", and kill themselves. If your sweeping statement holds true, then these people are not victims of their environment, but dumb idiots who got what they deserved. I didn't say environment doesn't play a role, I'm saying it doesn't trump personal responsibility, especially when the environment in question is a tiny little pro-bullshit echo chamber the idiot in question willingly put him/herself in in the first place despite having all the evidence in the world that this is a really fucking stupid idea. |
|
|
|
Post by Wykked Wytch on Dec 11, 2011 1:38:39 GMT -5
"Neurology doesn't know everything!" =/= determinism is wrong. That right there, pal, is called an "argument from ignorance." I expected more from a thinker of your caliber. Oh no pal. Burden of proof and all that. You claimed that determinism is true, therefore you need to prove it. Without said proof, your entire position is based on an unproven assumption. So make with the proof or shut the hell up. Oh, but did I ever claim that I can convert them? No, no I fucking well did not. My position is not that tearing them a new one will convert them, but that they're simply beyond the help of even ass kissing and as there's no reason not to speak my mind regarding their stupidity. You're the one trying to convince me that this is not the case, it's up to you to prove it. Well I'm genuinely glad for you, however your anecdote has little relevance regarding people who wilfully ignore said evidence and cling to the bullshit until it kills them. If you don't believe that the environment can convince people to make pseudoscientific choices, consider the case of "reparative therapy", also known as "conversion therapy" or "pray the gay away." Many LGBT people, faced with extreme shame instilled upon them by intolerant environments and experiences, have entered these programs willingly, and are harmed, financially and emotionally, as a result. Some of them become even more depressed during these "therapies", and kill themselves. If your sweeping statement holds true, then these people are not victims of their environment, but dumb idiots who got what they deserved. I didn't say environment doesn't play a role, I'm saying it doesn't trump personal responsibility, especially when the environment in question is a tiny little pro-bullshit echo chamber the idiot in question willingly put him/herself in in the first place despite having all the evidence in the world that this is a really fucking stupid idea. My intention is not to try to convince anyone what determinism is true, that the self-deluded are not responsible for their self-delusion, or anything like that. My original comment was meant to point out that, from my standpoint, mocking the dead for their dumb choices is a dick move. It might make us feel better about them, but it's still an incredibly rude and callous thing to say. You don't know what their motivations were. Perhaps they did make a conscious decision and said, "I'm going to agree with something that has no scientific evidence to support it! Woo-hoo!" Or maybe they were emotionally desperate, and something in this vile church offered them a vain hope. In cases like that, emotions can occasionally trump the logic of even the most reasonable people. If it was a case of self-delusion, then yes, their decision was definitely dumb, and tragic (albeit with a twinge of schadenfreude for some). But if they were desperate, I don't see how anyone could blame them for looking for any hope, even a foolish hope, in a time of distress. |
|
|
|
Post by Art Vandelay on Dec 11, 2011 1:56:00 GMT -5
My intention is not to try to convince anyone what determinism is true, that the self-deluded are not responsible for their self-delusion, or anything like that. My original comment was meant to point out that, from my standpoint, mocking the dead for their dumb choices is a dick move. It might make us feel better about them, but it's still an incredibly rude and callous thing to say. You don't know what their motivations were. Perhaps they did make a conscious decision and said, "I'm going to agree with something that has no scientific evidence to support it! Woo-hoo!" Or maybe they were emotionally desperate, and something in this vile church offered them a vain hope. In cases like that, emotions can occasionally trump the logic of even the most reasonable people. If it was a case of self-delusion, then yes, their decision was definitely dumb, and tragic (albeit with a twinge of schadenfreude for some). But if they were desperate, I don't see how anyone could blame them for looking for any hope, even a foolish hope, in a time of distress. Firstly, if you really didn't intend to argue for determinism, you really didn't think your argument through, since you kind of based your entire argument on it. Secondly, this idea that just because someone kicked the bucket they're suddenly untouchable is fucking asinine. Sure, even I wouldn't mock them to the faces of grieving family members (purely for their sake I assure you, not because I actually respect a dead moron any more than a live one), but in other settings there's simply no reason to kiss their decomposing ass. Finally, being overly emotional is still no reason. The information regarding exactly why an HIV+ person needs constant medical treatment to live isn't exactly hard to come by, nor is the info on why this church's claims are fifteen shades of fucking stupid exactly difficult to turn up either. There's simply no excuse for it. |
|
|
|
Post by Wykked Wytch on Dec 11, 2011 2:01:50 GMT -5
My intention is not to try to convince anyone what determinism is true, that the self-deluded are not responsible for their self-delusion, or anything like that. My original comment was meant to point out that, from my standpoint, mocking the dead for their dumb choices is a dick move. It might make us feel better about them, but it's still an incredibly rude and callous thing to say. You don't know what their motivations were. Perhaps they did make a conscious decision and said, "I'm going to agree with something that has no scientific evidence to support it! Woo-hoo!" Or maybe they were emotionally desperate, and something in this vile church offered them a vain hope. In cases like that, emotions can occasionally trump the logic of even the most reasonable people. If it was a case of self-delusion, then yes, their decision was definitely dumb, and tragic (albeit with a twinge of schadenfreude for some). But if they were desperate, I don't see how anyone could blame them for looking for any hope, even a foolish hope, in a time of distress. Firstly, if you really didn't intend to argue for determinism, you really didn't think your argument through, since you kind of based your entire argument on it. Secondly, this idea that just because someone kicked the bucket they're suddenly untouchable is fucking asinine. Sure, even I wouldn't mock them to the faces of grieving family members (purely for their sake I assure you, not because I actually respect a dead moron any more than a live one), but in other settings there's simply no reason to kiss their decomposing ass. Finally, being overly emotional is still no reason. The information regarding exactly why an HIV+ person needs constant medical treatment to live isn't exactly hard to come by, nor is the info on why this church's claims are fifteen shades of fucking stupid exactly difficult to turn up either. There's simply no excuse for it. A while ago, on a thread called "Refuting Climategate", Vene rightfully called me out on using an anecdote of mine to refute cold, hard data. That data was a study that showed that after showing people facts that did not support their ideas, they actually became more certain of their ideas than they were before. ( www.boston.com/bostonglobe/ideas/articles/2010/07/11/how_facts_backfire/) So besides the few strange cases where finding facts actually substantially changes a person's mind, it is perfectly conceivable that a person with access to the facts would continue to believe in a pseudoscientific idea anyway. This is not intentional self-delusion, it's the way people are wired. |
|
|
|
Post by Art Vandelay on Dec 11, 2011 2:15:17 GMT -5
Firstly, if you really didn't intend to argue for determinism, you really didn't think your argument through, since you kind of based your entire argument on it. Secondly, this idea that just because someone kicked the bucket they're suddenly untouchable is fucking asinine. Sure, even I wouldn't mock them to the faces of grieving family members (purely for their sake I assure you, not because I actually respect a dead moron any more than a live one), but in other settings there's simply no reason to kiss their decomposing ass. Finally, being overly emotional is still no reason. The information regarding exactly why an HIV+ person needs constant medical treatment to live isn't exactly hard to come by, nor is the info on why this church's claims are fifteen shades of fucking stupid exactly difficult to turn up either. There's simply no excuse for it. A while ago, on a thread called "Refuting Climategate", Vene rightfully called me out on using an anecdote of mine to refute cold, hard data. That data was a study that showed that after showing people facts that did not support their ideas, they actually became more certain of their ideas than they were before. ( www.boston.com/bostonglobe/ideas/articles/2010/07/11/how_facts_backfire/) So besides the few strange cases where finding facts actually substantially changes a person's mind, it is perfectly conceivable that a person with access to the facts would continue to believe in a pseudoscientific idea anyway. This is not intentional self-delusion, it's the way people are wired. Yes, and these "misinformed" people are textbook "fucking morons". It's not the way people are wired because there exist people who pay attention to facts and base their views off those. They're what we call "not stupid". Besides, whatever happened to the idea that calling them fucking morons is bad because you can actually convert them with, as you put it, friendly discussion? |
|
|
|
Post by Wykked Wytch on Dec 11, 2011 2:21:02 GMT -5
A while ago, on a thread called "Refuting Climategate", Vene rightfully called me out on using an anecdote of mine to refute cold, hard data. That data was a study that showed that after showing people facts that did not support their ideas, they actually became more certain of their ideas than they were before. ( www.boston.com/bostonglobe/ideas/articles/2010/07/11/how_facts_backfire/) So besides the few strange cases where finding facts actually substantially changes a person's mind, it is perfectly conceivable that a person with access to the facts would continue to believe in a pseudoscientific idea anyway. This is not intentional self-delusion, it's the way people are wired. Yes, and these "misinformed" people are textbook "fucking morons". It's not the way people are wired because there exist people who pay attention to facts and base their views off those. They're what we call "not stupid". Besides, whatever happened to the idea that calling them fucking morons is bad because you can actually convert them with, as you put it, friendly discussion? Right, so it's totally not a coincidence that people who grow up in red states are more likely to be Republicans, and that people who grow up in blue states are more likely to be Democrats. Obviously people who are fooled into thinking that FOX News and the Daily Fail are credible sources must be responsible for their own stupidity. The cases where people can be actually converted are a minority, but the possibility is there. It's not completely impossible but the chances are slim. |
|
|
|
Post by RavynousHunter on Dec 11, 2011 2:21:38 GMT -5
Wykked Wytch, take it from someone who's seen Art's posting history for a good while now...quit while you're ahead. He won't back down, he won't give up, even if his argument boils down to "durr, sheeple." Even if his argument is insulting to everyone, not just people of faith. Just take a step back from 'im, and laugh. Laugh hard.
This is FSTDT. Everyone gets mocked. Everyone gets laughed at. Shit, I'm bustin my sides at Art right now.
|
|
|
|
Post by Art Vandelay on Dec 11, 2011 2:28:29 GMT -5
Right, so it's totally not a coincidence that people who grow up in red states are more likely to be Republicans, and that people who grow up in blue states are more likely to be Democrats. Obviously people who are fooled into thinking that FOX News and the Daily Fail are credible sources must be responsible for their own stupidity. The cases where people can be actually converted are a minority, but the possibility is there. It's not completely impossible but the chances are slim. And why is that exactly? Maybe, just maybe, it's because stupid people outnumber the their less moronic brethren everywhere and as such the majority anywhere and everywhere are more likely to follow the status quo rather than think for themselves? |
|
