worldling

Up on the E/C board, a person called Vanderzyden writes: I find such intellectual obstinacy surprising, but not untypical. On TV the other night there as a guy from a "deliverance ministry" who specialised in exorcisms. He said he was often attacked for his beliefs, but the more he was attacked the stronger his beliefs became.

It seems the stronger the arguments, and the more convincing the evidence you put before these people, the more convinced they become of their own correctness.

What is more, they brag about this trait of theirs, as if it's a virtue!

So, the question I'm asking anyone out there who thinks like this: why do you think obtuseness is a virtue? Do you perhaps see it as strength, or steadfastness?

Veil of Fire

Most Christians seem to be the religious version of Saiyans from Dragonball Z. Kick the crap out of them, leave them lying a hair's bredth from dead on the floor, and they come back the next day stronger than ever.

Of course, in their case, they're praying you forget all the refutations of their positions so they can recycle them all.

K

worldling:

I think the attacks referred to are the personal insults. It seems that the mode of argument for some of the Christians who come to these boards is to be obtuse and evasive until the inevitable personal attack comes. At that point, the Christian can claim that the personal attacks demonstrate (somehow) the validity of the Christian beliefs and that their own resolution to persevere through these attacts is a virtue. I don't think they are actually claiming that being obtuse is a virtue.

It really is a strange (to me) and confrontational style of debate that I find very frustrating. I'm much more comfortable with debate using facts and evidence.

[ October 18, 2002: Message edited by: K ]</p>

Bible Humper

It isn't so surprising when you consider that their belief in the deity is based on emotion rather than reason.

Exactly, we see it here at II all the time. Their religion has been completely discredited in so many ways that it shouldn't be a surprise that it wasn't ever even remotely based on anything other than their emotional invesment in the beliefs.

Martin Luther himself said that to be a Christian, one must pluck the eyes out of his reason. He hit the nail on the head with that one!

lpetrich

I think that it's a sort of natural selection -- those cults that encourage the most closed-mindedness are the ones who most effectively retain followers.

Arrowman

k makes a very good point above. A part of this attitude lies in the fallacy (self-delusion) that once the personal attackes begin, you have won the debate - no matter how much you have failed to answer any points along the way.

I think there is another factor - martyr complex. The Bible is riddled with stories of people who "suffered for their faith", as is Christian history generally. It's a virtue to "suffer the slings and arrows of the heathens".

No, obtuseness is not a virtue in Christian eyes - that's an oversimplification. But what is seen as a virtue (martyrdom), looks pretty much like it.

galiel

My sentiments 101%

Sadly, I have, to my surprise, found this precise set of attitudes and tactics to be used in the political forums as well, by proponents of extreme, conspiracy-laden ideologies on the right and the left.

I am starting to wonder if the problem is religion, per se, or simply people's lack of exposure to, and education in, critical thinking tools and intellectual discourse.

In other words, teaching people to think critically may not only help them resist the siren-song of religion's simplistic answers, perhaps it can also help them resist other, equally destructive dogmas.

And, much as I hate to end a post on a sour note, it also leads me to question my long-held optimism that a post-religious world will be a more rational one. Unless people learn to think free, they may just replace one mad tyranny-of-the-mind with another.

Shadowy Man

In the land of the one-eyed men, the blind man is king?

diana

From Veil of Fire: Kick the crap out of them, leave them lying a hair's bredth from dead on the floor, and they come back the next day stronger than ever.

Not unlike cockroaches.

From K: It seems that the mode of argument for some of the Christians who come to these boards is to be obtuse and evasive until the inevitable personal attack comes. At that point, the Christian can claim that the personal attacks demonstrate (somehow) the validity of the Christian beliefs and that their own resolution to persevere through these attacts is a virtue.

I'd go one further and point out that many of them, while being evasive and obtuse, actively engage in unsolicited psychoanalysis, which has the bennie of appearing thoughtful, caring and altruistic to their fellow believers but pisses you the hell off. Psychoanalysis is the believer's ideal weapon.

lpetrich said: I think that it's a sort of natural selection -- those cults that encourage the most closed-mindedness are the ones who most effectively retain followers.

Amen, Brother Lauren. The more convinced you are that anything anybody says that disagrees with The Truth (TM) is the Devil's work, the less likely you are to hear anything that would cause you to doubt.

galiel said: In other words, teaching people to think critically may not only help them resist the siren-song of religion's simplistic answers, perhaps it can also help them resist other, equally destructive dogmas.

You'd think people would see this, wouldn't you? Problem is, there are a couple of what I think are insurmountable obstacles to convincing people to think for themselves:

1. They must doubt. This means admitting they may be wrong, and accepting that they may never have the right answer. You're up against egos here.

2. They must want to think. The vast majority of people resist thinking any more than absolutely necessary from the time they start school. You're up against learned behaviors (thinking is required and therefore, "work." Work is not something one voluntarily does) and basic human laziness.

I've been thinking about the problem of communication with believers over the last few months and have begun to believe that the greatest communication gap between us lies in our insistence upon thinking with reason and their insistence upon thinking with emotion.

Emotion is something you naturally have (and build on) as you grow; reason is something everybody thinks they have but a strikingly small percentage actually ever demonstrate.

Unless we can find a way to communicate the flaws of belief systems emotionally, we're pretty much beating our heads against proverbial walls.

d

galiel

Or, we can try to reach young people before their minds are closed, and teach them the wonders of critical thinking. I think a proper grounding in empiricism, logic and skepticism is an effective vaccine against purely emotional appeals.

As the saying goes, all the religious/ideological teachin' in the world "can't keep 'em down on the farm after they've seen gay Paree..."