Heaven Makes No Sense

[Leumas]

If I'm allowed to chime in late, I don't see how all fantasies are equal. Both being pipe dreams, it seems to me like fantasizing about world peace (how's that for a change in human nature?) is nevertheless not the same as fantasizing about, say, fantasizing about sending the blacks back to Africa. Or it seems to me like, as delusions go, the delusion that all people can be rational is not the same as, say, a delusion that I'm the next emperor of Xanadu and don't have to worry about raking up a debt.

Unfortunately, delusions are not all benign. E.g., in a study that especially the religious love to cite, superstitious people who were told that a ball was lucky tended to play golf more aggressively. So, see, superstition can be good, right?

Well, yes, if it's something as lacking consequences as playing golf alone. Not so much, if it's about betting the house in Vegas, or paying attention on the highway, and so on.

Which should be no surprise. Believing X means believing X is true. Therefore, you can follow an X => Y.

So even if I'm to accept that "Some people fantasize about deities; others fantasize about sudden spontaneous worldwide fundamental changes in human nature", and even skipping over the fact that we have examples of people changing beliefs, but not so much about the former fantasy ever being true... I still don't see how that's all equal. Exactly what kind of similar problems is the latter going to cause?

Wow... finally... some long needed drought relieving logic !!!

 

[Myriad]

So even if I'm to accept that "Some people fantasize about deities; others fantasize about sudden spontaneous worldwide fundamental changes in human nature", and even skipping over the fact that we have examples of people changing beliefs, but not so much about the former fantasy ever being true... I still don't see how that's all equal. Exactly what kind of similar problems is the latter going to cause?

I don't think I really need to point out historical examples of idealistic (yet non-religious) utopian fantasies that contributed to the deaths of tens of millions. Correct me if I'm wrong.

If it's okay to paint all religious practice with the same broad brush, then I'm equally justified in doing the same with all fantasies about changing the world.

 

[Leumas]

I don't think I really need to point out historical examples of idealistic (yet non-religious) utopian fantasies that contributed to the deaths of tens of millions. Correct me if I'm wrong.

If it's okay to paint all religious practice with the same broad brush, then I'm equally justified in doing the same with all fantasies about changing the world.

False Analogy, Reductio ad Hitlerum, Slippery Slope, Poisoning the Well,


So writing a sarcastic parody on a forum on the internet is going to cause the demise of millions....


Irony of ironies...

...
I have written hundreds of posts in various threads on this forum precisely on that topic and have been called by you and others all sorts of names and epithets and been called crazy and demented and a psychologically damaged altar boy and a potential cause for the extinction of mankind and so on and so forth.
....

 

[Myriad]

I'll explain it again.

When discussing the harm of religion, you point out the worst things done in the name of religion. Wars, massacres, rapes, and so on. (And you have every right to do so.)

When discussing the harm of idealistic fantasy, I point out the worst things done in the name of (nonreligious) idealistic fantasy. Wars, massacres, rapes, and so on. (And I have every right to do so.)

Go ahead and continue to spew indignant emoticons across your posts in outrage at this comparison. You underscore my point.

 

[Leumas]

I'll explain it again.

When discussing the harm of religion, you point out the worst things done in the name of religion. Wars, massacres, rapes, and so on. (And you have every right to do so.)

When discussing the harm of idealistic fantasy, I point out the worst things done in the name of (nonreligious) idealistic fantasy. Wars, massacres, rapes, and so on. (And I have every right to do so.)

I will explain it again for the umpteenth time already.... a sarcastic parody is not an idealistic fantasy!!!

How many times do I have to repeat that it was sarcasm and parody which you failed to understand as such despite me saying

It will not happen during this evolutionary stage of Homo Sapiens.

How much more pessimistic realism can one have than to admit in disgust and despair that humanity is not sufficiently evolved to be able to stop believing in sky daddies who fornicate with 13 years old virgins and who prefer the descendants of peripatetic Sumerian pimps over all humanity and ask them to snip their genitals off to ratify fraudulent real estate contracts.

So sarcasm and parody is not something you appreciate... maybe I should have included a laugh track.

Besides my post being a parody on the IRONY of religious beliefs ....

I was SPECULATING with TONGUE IN CHEEK ...

I think the first sentence along with the following two paragraphs in my post which you clipped out (without any indication that you have done so) when you quoted it in your post should have given you a clue to the SARCASTIC stance I was taking.

I think if you have actually read them you might have realized the SARCASM and PARODY I was doing

...
So writing a sarcastic parody on a forum on the internet is going to cause the demise of millions....

Irony of ironies...

But regardless.... your post is a false analogy illogical fallacy.... writing a parody on the internet is not Hitlerian nor Stalinist nor any of the slippery slopes that lead to the poisoned wells you are trying to intimate.

And even if for argument's sake we disregarded the umpteen times I stated that it is sarcasm and parody.... HOW ON EARTH is suggesting that the United Nations organize an ecumenical convention such as I described an IDEALISTIC FANTASY?

Is there a UN?

Don't nations and peoples get together regularly to compete in all sorts of ways e.g. Olympics, World Cup, Winter Olympics, Tennis Opens, Oscars, Nobel Prize, etc. etc. etc.?

Don't we have GLOBAL COMMUNICATIONS?

Don't we have Peace Conferences?

Don't we have G8 and so on and so forth?

What exactly is fantastical about sarcastically speculating an ecumenical meeting of all religious leaders in the UNITED NATIONS?

And what exactly is fantastical about asking religious representatives to participate in a friendly WORLD PRAYER COMPETITION? Maybe even win a world prayer cup!!

And how exactly would such a conference cause genocide and mass murder?

Go ahead and continue to spew indignant emoticons across your posts in outrage at this comparison. You underscore my point.

...Hence the .

Still ; ..

You go ahead and continue to spew fallacies in your posts equating posting on a forum with the potential genocide of millions and equating people who parody religions with mass murderers. You underscore my point.

It is a humongous shame upon humanity that still even in the 21st century people are still willing to fool themselves with sky daddies.

But what is a bigger shame is that people who claim to be not deluded by any sky daddies are willing to defend the sky daddy delusions incessantly and indefatigably and belligerently and acerbically and to label people who demonstrate the preposterousness of it as insane and demented people and to strive for mass genocide and who are psychologically damaged ex-altar boys who have a "thing" that prevents them from thinking rationally about the usefulness of the sky daddies they claim not to believe in.
​

 

[SpuriusMaximus]

I don't think I really need to point out historical examples of idealistic (yet non-religious) utopian fantasies that contributed to the deaths of tens of millions. Correct me if I'm wrong.

If it's okay to paint all religious practice with the same broad brush, then I'm equally justified in doing the same with all fantasies about changing the world.

Well, no. If you're trying to say that X is equivalent (in some way) to Y, you don't get to then argue that X is equivalent to Z instead.

We were talking specifically about the fantasy that people can be rational beings. If you can support the idea that that specific fantasy is as bad, then please don't hold back. Do show the instances when you had enough people being skeptical and rational to kill those tens of millions. That there are some OTHER fantasies that can be bad too, well, that's fully irrelevant.

In other words, sure, I can't stop you from swashing a brush around instead of having any logical point. But colour me unimpressed.

 

[SpuriusMaximus]

I'd also add that filing everything under "fantasy" is the first problem there, and the reason why any discussion based on such trying to dillute and obscure the meaning under a meaningless label is in the end just a red herring.

The fact of the matter is that there is a fundamental difference between fantasizing about what MIGHT BE or what WOULD BE NICE TO HAPPEN and being confused in the head about what IS. The devil is exactly in that kind of details.

Fantasizing that we might some day make contact with aliens is not a problem, but believing that they're here, and look, my neighbour is an alien (they don't make an ass like that around these parts), and she's watching me, now that's a schizophrenic delusion. Fantasizing about a world with dragons and magical swords is not a problem (or the millions that bought Skyrim would be doing a massacre by now), but believing that my grandpa's sabre is possessed by the spirit of a dragon and is telling me who's been bad, that's paranoid schizophrenia. Fantasizing about zombies is not a problem, believing to be one is a standard Cotard delusion. Etc.

If religion -- or, yes, some other woowoo -- stopped at fantasizing about how it would be nice to live for ever, or that it would be cool if one day we had a God watching over us, I don't think it would be problem. Hell, I for one would even agree with it: it would be nice indeed. The problem is that it crosses into the other category instead.

 

[Leumas]

Well, no. If you're trying to say that X is equivalent (in some way) to Y, you don't get to then argue that X is equivalent to Z instead.

We were talking specifically about the fantasy that people can be rational beings. If you can support the idea that that specific fantasy is as bad, then please don't hold back. Do show the instances when you had enough people being skeptical and rational to kill those tens of millions. That there are some OTHER fantasies that can be bad too, well, that's fully irrelevant.

In other words, sure, I can't stop you from swashing a brush around instead of having any logical point. But colour me unimpressed.

Indeed!!!

And that is despite my having said umpteen times that the suggested World Prayer Competition was a sarcastic parody and not the genocidal mass murder causing idealistic fantasy he thinks it is.

It is my fault though. I should have include a laugh track... but come on, how can anyone fail to see the sarcasm when one reads this last paragraph for instance.

....
We also should have this event repeat every 25 years just in case this god dies or is subsequently defeated in a later god competition… if they would care to televise the fighting on a reality show called GODLY SURVIVOR that would be nice.

 

[Craig B]

The major tragedy of course is that this infantile psychological condition was and is viciously and cynically and predatorily exploited by clever brigands and wily poltroons to huckster and bamboozle the quivering shivering sheep. Much like all the other shams, scams and hoaxes discovered or invented by numerous hoodwinkers and mountebanks throughout the ages and are still being utilized even today despite all available knowledge.

But what is a bigger shame is that people who claim to be not deluded by any sky daddies are willing to defend the sky daddy delusions incessantly and indefatigably and belligerently and acerbically and to label people who demonstrate the preposterousness of it as insane and demented and psychologically damaged ex-altar boys who have a "thing" that prevents them from thinking rationally about the usefulness of the sky daddies they claim not to believe in.

No I think the first of these is the bigger shame, as well as the major tragedy.

 

[SpuriusMaximus]

In all fairness, the latter is a real tragedy of a run-on sentence. Makes me want to start a punctuation charity, so people wouldn't choke to death because they couldn't afford something as basic as a period or a comma. You know, a pause to breathe

 

[Leumas]

In all fairness, the latter is a real tragedy of a run-on sentence. Makes me want to start a punctuation charity, so people wouldn't choke to death because they couldn't afford something as basic as a period or a comma. You know, a pause to breathe

Here is my donation ... ,;.,;.,;.,;.

[imgw=150]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/209954d66541cbf7d8.gif[/imgw]