Difference between revisions of "List of bad arguments against religions"

From TheAlmightyGuru
Jump to: navigation, search
 
(3 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 3: Line 3:
 
==Religious people believe in an invisible magic man in the sky==
 
==Religious people believe in an invisible magic man in the sky==
 
As long as people describe their beliefs accurately, I think they should be allowed to use their own words to describe what they believe. The above statement doesn't use the words that religious people use to describe themselves, and it's purposely worded to be insulting. Most of the religious people I know believe their god lives in an ethereal paradise, not "the sky," even if the language of their scripture suggests that he does. Most religious people I know don't use the word "magic" to describe their god, but use "miraculous" to distinguish it from what they view as evil magic. Most religious people don't view their god as "invisible," but rather he is unseen, but sometimes appears to those who believe. Many religious people don't assign a sex to their god either, so he's not necessarily a "man."
 
As long as people describe their beliefs accurately, I think they should be allowed to use their own words to describe what they believe. The above statement doesn't use the words that religious people use to describe themselves, and it's purposely worded to be insulting. Most of the religious people I know believe their god lives in an ethereal paradise, not "the sky," even if the language of their scripture suggests that he does. Most religious people I know don't use the word "magic" to describe their god, but use "miraculous" to distinguish it from what they view as evil magic. Most religious people don't view their god as "invisible," but rather he is unseen, but sometimes appears to those who believe. Many religious people don't assign a sex to their god either, so he's not necessarily a "man."
 +
 +
==Religious people are suffering from a mental disorder==
 +
As far as I understand it, psychologists define a mental disorder as behavioral or mental pattern that makes it difficult for a person to function in society. Aside from fanatics, such a definition does not apply to most religious people. Obviously, the level at which a mental condition affects a person's ability to function in society differs from person to person, and even from day to day, and there isn't a non-arbitrary line which determines when a person has a disorder or is just "idiosyncratic." Yes, religious people have irrational beliefs based on specious reasoning and poor evidence, but that is not enough to call their belief a mental disorder. However, I do think that some religious people are suffering from a mental disorder, like those who picket innocent people's funerals to convince people that we should execute homosexuals, or those who strap bombs to their chest to punish the non-believers. I also think that religions, especially those with persecution complexes like Christianity and Islam, are partially responsible for causing mental illness.
  
 
==Religious people should be happy at funerals==
 
==Religious people should be happy at funerals==
Line 10: Line 13:
  
 
==There is no evidence for a religion==
 
==There is no evidence for a religion==
Obviously, people can argue over what constitutes "evidence," but unless you're using an extremely conservative definition, I would say that every religion has evidence in favor of at least some of their beliefs. Consider the life of [[Jesus]], there are several ancient documents that mention a person named Jesus. Of course, there are problems with every document describing the life of Jesus so severe they causes me to doubt their veracity, but the point is, evidence exists. The point of the argument can be salvaged by rewording it to, "I do not find any of evidence for miraculous religious claims to be believable ."
+
Obviously, people can argue over what constitutes "evidence," but unless you're using an extremely conservative definition, I would say that every religion has evidence in favor of at least some of their beliefs. Consider the life of [[Jesus]], there are several ancient documents that mention a person named Jesus. Of course, there are problems with every document describing the life of Jesus so severe they cause me to doubt their veracity, but the point is, evidence exists. The crux of the argument can be salvaged by rewording it to, "I do not find any of evidence for miraculous religious claims to be believable ."
  
 
==Media==
 
==Media==
* [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bleXUvc4Gdo youtube.com/watch?v=bleXUvc4Gdo] - Genetically Modified Skeptic - What Atheists ACTUALLY Get Wrong About Christianity.
+
* [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bleXUvc4Gdo youtube.com/watch?v=bleXUvc4Gdo] - Genetically Modified Skeptic - What Atheists Actually Get Wrong About Christianity.
 +
* [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3rR7jTgfpSk youtube.com/watch?v=3rR7jTgfpSk] - Genetically Modified Skeptic - Four Things Atheists Should Never Say.
  
  
 
[[Category: Atheism]]
 
[[Category: Atheism]]
 
[[Category: Religion]]
 
[[Category: Religion]]

Latest revision as of 12:16, 1 July 2019

This is a list of bad arguments against religions, either because I don't think they're effective or because they employ fallacious logic. It is common for non-religious people to make a list of bad arguments in favor of religions, but I rarely see them make lists of bad arguments often employed by fellow non-religious people. So, I'm keeping track of them as I encounter them.

Religious people believe in an invisible magic man in the sky

As long as people describe their beliefs accurately, I think they should be allowed to use their own words to describe what they believe. The above statement doesn't use the words that religious people use to describe themselves, and it's purposely worded to be insulting. Most of the religious people I know believe their god lives in an ethereal paradise, not "the sky," even if the language of their scripture suggests that he does. Most religious people I know don't use the word "magic" to describe their god, but use "miraculous" to distinguish it from what they view as evil magic. Most religious people don't view their god as "invisible," but rather he is unseen, but sometimes appears to those who believe. Many religious people don't assign a sex to their god either, so he's not necessarily a "man."

Religious people are suffering from a mental disorder

As far as I understand it, psychologists define a mental disorder as behavioral or mental pattern that makes it difficult for a person to function in society. Aside from fanatics, such a definition does not apply to most religious people. Obviously, the level at which a mental condition affects a person's ability to function in society differs from person to person, and even from day to day, and there isn't a non-arbitrary line which determines when a person has a disorder or is just "idiosyncratic." Yes, religious people have irrational beliefs based on specious reasoning and poor evidence, but that is not enough to call their belief a mental disorder. However, I do think that some religious people are suffering from a mental disorder, like those who picket innocent people's funerals to convince people that we should execute homosexuals, or those who strap bombs to their chest to punish the non-believers. I also think that religions, especially those with persecution complexes like Christianity and Islam, are partially responsible for causing mental illness.

Religious people should be happy at funerals

This argument is used on religions that teach the soul of faithful followers enter an afterlife of paradise (Christianity, Islam, etc.). The argument here is, if a religious person truly believes that their loved one is now in paradise, they should be extremely happy for them, and, therefore, funerals should be all smiles and rejoicing. People in some of the more violent religious sects do claim to be happy when their children kill themselves as martyrs, but most religious funerals are somber affairs. The argument suggests that these believers can't be as confident as they claim because this sadness comes from a fear of the unknown.

I have several problems with this argument. First, it's crude. Mocking religious people at their most vulnerable time is a horrible thing to do, so only those who are equally as crude will be impressed with such a tactic. Second, it's ineffective. Telling a religious person their actions prove they don't believe strong enough will not endear them to you. Most religious people have doubts, whether they acknowledge them or not, but, if you're interested in helping someone discover the truth, those doubts need to be explored, not wielded as a weapon against them. Third, it's not true. Even if someone truly believed their loved one has gone to paradise and they will meet again soon, they can still be sad that they won't be able to see them for awhile. Most parents are sad to see their children go off to college, even though they know they will see them again soon, and they know their children are going to a great place. It's perfectly normal to miss people.

There is no evidence for a religion

Obviously, people can argue over what constitutes "evidence," but unless you're using an extremely conservative definition, I would say that every religion has evidence in favor of at least some of their beliefs. Consider the life of Jesus, there are several ancient documents that mention a person named Jesus. Of course, there are problems with every document describing the life of Jesus so severe they cause me to doubt their veracity, but the point is, evidence exists. The crux of the argument can be salvaged by rewording it to, "I do not find any of evidence for miraculous religious claims to be believable ."

Media