gary_s wrote:I don't get why some people on this forum don't want to discuss a topic without resorting to incessant insults and personal attacks. What is their problem?
Are you putting this question to me? If so, I don't know what to say - that's what I always try to do. Now in the last year, after I pleaded with Emery for some moderation on behavior and got shot down (rather rudely by the atheist side), I decided to be less reticent, while still keeping it WAY below what is typically dished out. I consistently see some atheists starting things and being quite rude, and I respond at a much lesser level, and they lose it. I guess they just can't see things from another POV.Why not discuss something intellectually instead of just putting down the other's ideas and person? would that be a bad thing?
Absolutely not! I've been very frustrated at how this board has degenerated, and pleaded with Emery for some moderation, but got turned down. I finally decided to put the worst offenders on ignore, and choose only the nicest atheists to respond to.Am I the only one here who feels this way?
Your latter option is what I have always wanted here, and what I always try to do.If so, then I'm clearly on the wrong forum. I'm really curious, what is the opinion of others on this forum? If you disagree with another person's point of view, should you resort to insults or just disagree, particularly when there are options to compare your ideas and perhaps find common ground?
But KTR, this isn't true! at least for any theist that I respect. But I guess that's another thread. But that's definitely a cause of conflict - people assuming things about other people. But I think some of that is good for discussion, too, so where's the balance? We ALL do it, but tend to get insulted when someone does it about US, and don't see it as insulting when we do it about someone else.Keep The Reason wrote:Well, I am accused of insulting people as well, but my insults are "the bible is a fairytale". Is this really an insult? Actually, what I say about the bible is that's it's really an amazing book of myth and literature, but as "reality" -- that it is clearly not. When people insist that the stories in the bible are true, if they don't get the point that they are not actually true, I will eventually use the term "fairytale". This is viewed as insulting because theists see their books as "holy" (whatever that means), and therefore above criticism.
Again, what?! Ditto what I said above.Atheists tend to see their atheism as a simple conclusion, on the order of "Cars have engines". Our lack of belief in theistic proposals don't have anything to do with our personalities; we don't get our honesty, integrity, authenticity from their myths. But theists actively rely on their religions as the source for their personalities. They are good, decent, honest, have integrity because their god is in his heaven and has created them. So when we tell them, "God is imaginary" -- they filter this into meaning that their decency is founded on something we dismiss as unreal-- hence, they are not really good, or decent, or have integrity, etc.
I think that atheists tend to hurl the insults first, except for Mitch. I think Mitch has some great things to say, but it's just a shame that he loses his temper so often. I think it's because he sees insults where they aren't, and doesn't think he's insulting when most people would say he is. We ALL do that, IMO, but he does it a LOT more, and that has caused a lot of threads to degenerate.So I get it why they tend to be the first to hurl insults.
Isn't that a good thing? I think it is. I hope atheists are the same way about their belief system.I think no theist is 100% certain that their belief system is correct.
In fact, I would argue that our arguments create a deep fear in them. We articulate things that activate their deepest held fears that they are really just fooling themselves, that they know there is no god, and that their own worldview betrays them.
What you said above about "fear" is a typical statement from many atheists. I'm guessing you don't think it's an insult. However, not only is it an insult, it's so far beyond insult that it's just comical. And I"m guessing that you don't even see that, because why else would you put it on a thread about insults? Anyway, my first response is to think "yet again, another mind-reading guess and another insult", and then to laugh at how ridiculous that statement is, and how I could easily turn the tables and point out what I think atheists' fears are. But the problem is that my response, then, to a complete guess on your part about the minds of Christians, is usually taken as an insult, and then we start the downward spiral. YOU start with the insult, but don't see it's an insult, as well as a guess about people's thoughts, and if I respond in kind, you say it's an insult, but don't see YOUR insult.
But you are also criticizing the people that have that belief system. That's what this thread is about.Keep The Reason wrote: For me, I am merely criticizing a belief system.
We can disagree about where it starts, but even if I grant, for the sake of argument, that Christianity started it (which I don't agree with), is that helping us in any way?If you want to know where the spiral really begins, start at the beginning. Not the part that starts at us saying, "No more!"
Well, I'd say that's the whole point. I've said things that are similar about atheists and some of them blow sky-high with indignation over something that I don't think is an insult. And you can see that theists take the fairy-tale thing as an insult, but you question if it's an insult.KTR wrote: Well, I am accused of insulting people as well, but my insults are "the bible is a fairytale". Is this really an insult?
Rian wrote:There's a lot that I disagree with, and you continue to make wholesale statements about what you think theists believe, but I'll keep it to the main points
But you are also criticizing the people that have that belief system. That's what this thread is about.
The verse you listed is cherry-picked and devoid of context, so I won't discuss that further, although I see what you're saying about how it made you feel.
We can disagree about where it starts, but even if I grant, for the sake of argument, that Christianity started it (which I don't agree with), is that helping us in any way?
Well, I'd say that's the whole point. I've said things that are similar about atheists and some of them blow sky-high with indignation over something that I don't think is an insult. And you can see that theists take the fairy-tale thing as an insult, but you question if it's an insult.
Keep The Reason wrote:Your poll is a bit misleading, because at some point, being insulted by people like mitch is going to result in replying in kind-- that's human nature. Mitch insults, insults, insults -- and eventually you gotta just say to him, "Hey, you're being a douchebag" because-- he's being a douchebag!. So, is that insulting in kind? Strictly speaking, yes. But there's unnecessary insult-- the kind that mitch starts off with, and then there's retaliatory insult-- the type mitch engenders by his methods.
mitchellmckain wrote:No it is not acceptable to make posts for no other purpose than to insult other people.
Name calling is unbelievably childish.
The ad hominem tactic of turning the discussion to your opinions of the other persons character is completely dishonest.
I do not however complain when people do these things. I personally don't care. The perception of insult is a highly subjective thing and so I do not waste my time with things which nobody can prove. If I determine that a person is no longer posting anything but empty insults and name calling then I will simply ignore their posts.
But frankly, it is my experience that people typically complain about these things as a pretext to do these very things themselves. They fabricate charges of insults and name calling and then proceed to carry on an unambiguous campaign of blatant insult and unreserved name calling and all of that in order to shift the focus of the discussion from the topic to something completely irrelevant.
Mitch wrote:Don't be silly with your "thesis project" bullshit. It has nothing to do with the scientific method PERIOD.
gary_s] The fact is, we practice very informal and subtle examples of the scientific method all the time when making decisions[/quote]
This is where things went really off kilter.
[quote="Mitch wrote:LOL Oh this is rich. This must be how nonscientist-atheists pretend they they are actually scientists themselves. LOL
It explains how they turn their ideology into kind of religion to the point where they cannot understand how their "high priests" the scientists can believe in the things of religion. I imagine that their shock is rather similar to the reaction of the christians in the film "Man from Earth", finding that their holy one(s) are not quite what they have thought to be. LOL
Some people seem to think that just by complaining more loudly than anyone else that this makes their charges true. Nothing could be further from the truth.
Look the primary charge here is that these two christians are being "rude" to these totally honest, respectful and polite atheists.
LOL The hypocrisy is so thick you can cut it with a knife. There is NOTHING more subjective and unprovable than their opinions of what constitute rudeness, which I could swear they invent on the spot for the most ridiculous self-serving reasons. I show them the hypocrisy of their rhetoric and they just don't like hearing that and so they are EXACTLY like the religious people who declare that people are being rude and insulting when they dare to criticize their religion.
Rian wrote:You say I keep missing your points, yet you keep missing mine.
You keep trying to police my behavior by telling me to stop being OT (according to YOUR definition) and even that I didn't need to give "further analysis" on something (who do you think you are to tell me what I can and can't say, especially when even by the furthest stretch of imagination, it's no insult?)
And this - you can't even keep straight what I said was "strange" - you keep substituting things like I said "defending a position" was strange and then saying how ridiculous that is. Of course it's ridiculous, and I never said it.
Rian wrote:And another thing - have you noticed this? - the more outspoken of these personify science quite often, and sometimes to a rather strange degree, such as "We need to look to science for our answers ..." or "Science tells us ...", like "science" is some type of authority figure.
Rian wrote:I think Mitch's behavior is a case by itself, but I was hoping to make some progress in general between the two groups (and no, you don't have to be a member of anything official - I'm just talking of the two groups in the title, for the sake of convenience, because typically the problems are between members of the two groups). I put up several points on the subject of insults that I think could be talked over (how perception matters, and moderation) and I haven't seen your response yet, Gary. Could you please respond when you get a chance?
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests