Is debate pointless?
Offline I've posted this question in other place online but never really got a response.
Over the past few years I've noticed that facts and reality are increasingly meaning less to people. (Well, some people). I felt like no matter how many times I show them the facts it doesn't matter. They hold onto their beliefs political/religious/ whatever, no matter what the evidence may say. Well the other day I had my suspicions confirmed when I heard NPR's Talk of the Nation. They did a story on research being done at the University of Michigan on something called the "Backfire effect". Brendan Nyhan and Jason Reifler have found that when someone holds a belief and is then presented with facts that contradict that belief, they are likely to hold onto that belief all the more strongly. In effect, presenting a misinformed person with the correct information only strengthens their belief in the misinformation. The Washington Post did a story on this a while back too.
So my question is this: Is there just no point in having a discussion with these people? If reality only makes them hold onto their false beliefs all the more strongly, what's the point? It's a conversation ender. "Hi, do you know that evolution is a lie?" "It's not." "Yes it is!" "Wait a second, before I take the time to talk to you about this, would you, if presented with facts that contradict your views, change your mind?" "Nope, not in the slightest. It would just confirm my faith." "Uh...have a nice day." (And keep in mind, this is not just fundies, the research was done on average people on political issues) If we can't even have a discussion about things where the facts and reality matter, how can we build a stable society? Doesn't everything just come down to either who can get the most people to the polls or who has the most guns?
- Login to post comments
I believe that owning a lot of guns is extremely important for any man, even if he is from some Godless country like Europe or Cambodia. Without guns how will you protect your home from thieving minorities and dispose of old beer bottles?
However, I think the reason you find debate pointless is not because of some lie the liberals on NPR told you once. I believe you find debating Christians fruitless due to the obvious fact that atheism and evolutionism are factually unsupported lies meant to populate Hell and mock God. Not only that, but once you have heard the Truth, nothing else will suffice. The KJV1611 has a level of credence that no other book can convey, because it is written by the most credible source there is: God.
The Truest Christian these atheists will ever meet. I worship the only Lord at the Church with the Truest Christians: Landover Baptist.
must. not. feed. troll. gaah! <facepalm>
oh, please. the liberal lies? you, my friend, are case A in that you will not see reason in actual scientific studies. You see that and you say, they're liars, I'm right. do you not see that you are doing the thing you deny being true?
The Truest Christian these atheists will ever meet. I worship the only Lord at the Church with the Truest Christians: Landover Baptist.
My first impression of this is that there would still be a tendency towards truth. Even if the backfire effect occurs for the majority of people, as long as some people are open to change then the overall number of people with an opinion supported by facts will increase.
i.e. lets say you know 50 people with an inconsistent unsupported position exist and 50 people (including yourself) have a "correct" aka supported and consistent viewpoint. Present facts to those who are wrong and maybe you will convince only five percent of them and reaffrim the belief of the other 95 percent. well if people really do have a correct viewpoint then there are no facts to contradict them, no one will deconvert and their number will increase by five percent. Then maybe if you keep hammering away youll convince another five percent next year. youll also have more people that agree with you who may try to convince at least five percent of the people they know who are wrong. the aggregate effect will definitely make the world a better place hopefully faster rather than slower
I Am My God
The absence of evidence IS evidence of absence
I've found muslims to be more open and frank about this than the christians I know. Truth ? Honesty ? Facts ? "No thanks", they say, "We'll stick with faith". They really just come out and admit it. It's shocking and depressing at first, untill you examine their behaviour a little more closely, and find out that they're lying. They do change their minds. Waiting for a muslim/christian to digest and acknowledge a fact is kinda like watching gras grow (or continents drift), but it does happen, so yes, there is a point.
Now there is the best reason ever for avoiding heaven and going to hell. If you are going to be in heaven, jacko, I will definitely never accept Jesus into my heart.
-- I feel so much better since I stopped trying to believe.
"We are entitled to our own opinions. We're not entitled to our own facts"- Al Franken
"If death isn't sweet oblivion, I will be severely disappointed" - Ruth M.
The Truest Christian these atheists will ever meet. I worship the only Lord at the Church with the Truest Christians: Landover Baptist.
<sigh> hopefully a mod will see this guy and kick him out of the freethinkers anonymous forum so we can get back to actually having a discussion about this... I would respond to him but like others have said before, here's a classic case.
Okay, you want to win souls for Jesus. Let's review your technique.
1. You tell us that you slap around your wife when she "acts like a woman".
2. You tell us that we women will get to spend eternity in heaven with you if we accept Jesus as our savior.
3. I tell you that I am an old lady and I didn't say it, but you assumed and you are correct, that I am am atheist.
4. I'm supposed to want to go to heaven and get slapped around by guys like you whenever I "act like a woman". For eternity no less.
Can you see that this is less than enticing for me? I don't want to get slapped around by you or anyone else for any reason. I don't think that is loving or kind or wonderful and I am not a masochist. In fact, if my husband was dumb enough to try to slap me around I'd take the cast iron skillet to his dumb head. But he is loving and kind and when I "act like I think you mean a woman acts" he puts his arms around me and gives me a hug.
Maybe you want to think about your technique for getting people to "come to Jesus" because you sure aren't winning anyone over the way you are going now.
-- I feel so much better since I stopped trying to believe.
"We are entitled to our own opinions. We're not entitled to our own facts"- Al Franken
"If death isn't sweet oblivion, I will be severely disappointed" - Ruth M.
Actually, we have a test case going here. Let's see how ol' Billy Bobber responds to my gentle reasoning.
I've seen the studies as well. And it does seem to be true.
One of my beefs is cholesterol lowering drugs. If you look at the actual studies - we knew someone who was a pharmaceutical rep and she gave us copies - the actual change is from 3% deaths from heart attacks without drugs to 2% deaths from heart attacks with drugs. Is that a 1% change or a 50% change? I say 1% and the numbers weren't very high to begin with. I had a different friend who insisted it was a 50% change. Both of us are right. She wasn't convinced the drugs are a waste of money, I don't think I will ever take the drugs given the side effects.
Any time you argue in front of other people, it only solidifies everyone's opinions. That's why debates are a waste of time. No one's mind is changed in that kind of forum. We can sometimes influence fence sitters. And you have to be able to argue on the other person's terms. Which I can only do on occasion. I am not so good at putting myself in the other person's shoes when the debate is about belief in invisible friends. I grew up a long time ago and I don't see the appeal and I am not patient. So generally, I suck at debating christians. But let's see if this tactic works. It's a new one for me.
-- I feel so much better since I stopped trying to believe.
"We are entitled to our own opinions. We're not entitled to our own facts"- Al Franken
"If death isn't sweet oblivion, I will be severely disappointed" - Ruth M.
That's actually a brilliant idea! Don't kick him out, lets see if the backfire effect works on him too.
1 Corinthians 11:3 (King James Version)
3But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God.
The Truest Christian these atheists will ever meet. I worship the only Lord at the Church with the Truest Christians: Landover Baptist.
I DO NOT wear the pants in my family. We are a partnership. Equal. With both of us having a say in how the house is run and who does what. I wouldn't hit my husband for any reason except self defense. He wouldn't hit me except for the same reason. Since neither of us ever hit the other, it isn't an issue. I would be seriously concerned for his mental health if he ever tried to hit me. As he would be concerned for mine if I tried to hit him. A partnership - wrap your head around it.
I would be exceedingly UNhappy in a relationship where the man tried to rule the roost. In fact, I would never marry anyone like that. Learned to avoid dating them when I was single. Instead of craving "a true christian man" I think guys who think they get to beat on women because the bible says so are sick.
As to size, my husband is larger than I am, but I am not petite by any stretch of anyone's imagination. He isn't some pansy, either. Back to my original question: Just why would I want to be beaten for all eternity by a bunch of christian men? That doesn't sound heavenly to me, but more like hell.
-- I feel so much better since I stopped trying to believe.
"We are entitled to our own opinions. We're not entitled to our own facts"- Al Franken
"If death isn't sweet oblivion, I will be severely disappointed" - Ruth M.
The Truest Christian these atheists will ever meet. I worship the only Lord at the Church with the Truest Christians: Landover Baptist.
Sorry, I might as well go hell. Why bother trying to be perfect if I'm just going to get hit for my troubles? Because I ain't never going to be perfect, not ever. And besides, you will be there, and I can already tell if I ever met you, I'd hate your guts. I never want to meet you, especially not for an eternity in heaven. Now, if I could just get satan to get me that winning lottery ticket, I'll be set.
-- I feel so much better since I stopped trying to believe.
"We are entitled to our own opinions. We're not entitled to our own facts"- Al Franken
"If death isn't sweet oblivion, I will be severely disappointed" - Ruth M.
Debate is most certainly pointless in the sense that when I'm right, I'm always right, and don't you forget it!
More sincerely, debate CAN be pointless if both sides of a given (usually controversial) issue approach each other with a (usually pointless) axe to grind.
Debate is never pointless if ideas are ultimately exchanged in a somewhat respectful manner. I, personally, think that my exchanges with Bobspence have been SUPER productive, but then... that's just me.
“A meritocratic society is one in which inequalities of wealth and social position solely reflect the unequal distribution of merit or skills amongst human beings, or are based upon factors beyond human control, for example luck or chance. Such a society is socially just because individuals are judged not by their gender, the colour of their skin or their religion, but according to their talents and willingness to work, or on what Martin Luther King called 'the content of their character'. By extension, social equality is unjust because it treats unequal individuals equally.” "Political Ideologies" by Andrew Heywood (2003)
You should, perhaps, save your prayers for yourself...
“A meritocratic society is one in which inequalities of wealth and social position solely reflect the unequal distribution of merit or skills amongst human beings, or are based upon factors beyond human control, for example luck or chance. Such a society is socially just because individuals are judged not by their gender, the colour of their skin or their religion, but according to their talents and willingness to work, or on what Martin Luther King called 'the content of their character'. By extension, social equality is unjust because it treats unequal individuals equally.” "Political Ideologies" by Andrew Heywood (2003)
“A meritocratic society is one in which inequalities of wealth and social position solely reflect the unequal distribution of merit or skills amongst human beings, or are based upon factors beyond human control, for example luck or chance. Such a society is socially just because individuals are judged not by their gender, the colour of their skin or their religion, but according to their talents and willingness to work, or on what Martin Luther King called 'the content of their character'. By extension, social equality is unjust because it treats unequal individuals equally.” "Political Ideologies" by Andrew Heywood (2003)
Too kind.
We need to write a satire about his mother having sex with him in an outhouse...
“A meritocratic society is one in which inequalities of wealth and social position solely reflect the unequal distribution of merit or skills amongst human beings, or are based upon factors beyond human control, for example luck or chance. Such a society is socially just because individuals are judged not by their gender, the colour of their skin or their religion, but according to their talents and willingness to work, or on what Martin Luther King called 'the content of their character'. By extension, social equality is unjust because it treats unequal individuals equally.” "Political Ideologies" by Andrew Heywood (2003)
I'm actually having fun watching the misogynistic train wreck. I'm so appalled by his view on women that I can't take my eyes away from it!
please. pleeeeaaaase tell me everybody sees the POE.
This one's soooooooooooooooooooooo crazy it must be real.
Debate is a formalized engagement where both sides present their best arguments within the rules and the quality of the presentation is judged.
Even when there is no formalization and it is just a couple guys around at a bar it is still a contest of presentation. The only known way to change minds is by political argument. Even then an old observation in the US is that a man will more easily change religions than political parties. Even then it is a joke because there is a hierarchy of protestant churches which a graded by pay level.
A while back I recommended 50 Voices of Disbelief. I have not finished it but the majority of unbelievers appear to have been born that way with very few suffering the proverbial crisis of faith. And most reports of a crisis of faith end with faith becoming more profound.
In considering an economic model of religion it appears the majority get something from religion. I have no idea what it is but it appears to be desirable. So is steak or a good book or sex. It is a waste of time trying to argue a person out of enjoying what he enjoys. The audience is not receptive to begin with.
One of the routes to atheism is via a crisis of faith is to be unable to reconcile reality with the conception of god. Darwin looked at the blind ruthlessness of nature and could not reconcile that with a loving god. Had his world still honored the Greco-Roman pantheon there would have been no loving gods and no problems.
Argumentation is not reality. Argumentation only invites counter argument. And no one really believes the lose an argument. They simply conclude the other guy is a dunderhead. (I haven't used that word in years. Is dunderhead a real word?)
The primary means of spreading atheism is merely to let everyone know there are atheists and that atheists do not eat babies. This tells almost atheists they are not alone.
But what do we want to accomplish? We want the end of mindless religious influence on our lives. We do not have to tune into the god channel. What we care about is prohibited stem cell research and so many areas where preachers claim oracular powers to find meanings in the bible where the bible is silent.
Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. That is all anyone needs to know about Israel. That is all there is to know about Israel.
www.ussliberty.org
www.giwersworld.org/made-in-alexandria/index.html
www.giwersworld.org/00_files/zion-hit-points.phtml
I own plenty of guns. I have two gun safes filled with handguns, rifles, and shotguns and I have a concealed handgun license so I also carry one with me in public.
( and before I became a godless atheist I frequently associated with a lot of Christian muh-lish-uh members in the early '90's )
Yes, of course, and consequently, no more time to waste here, either.
Genesis 3:16 (King James Version)
16Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.
The Truest Christian these atheists will ever meet. I worship the only Lord at the Church with the Truest Christians: Landover Baptist.
Matthew 5:48 (King James Version)
48Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect.
God wouldn't tell you to be perfect if it was impossible. God is benevolent, not like you hateful atheists.
I didn't mean to derail whatever Godmockery this thread was intended for. By all means ignore me and continue your hateful blaspheming.
The Truest Christian these atheists will ever meet. I worship the only Lord at the Church with the Truest Christians: Landover Baptist.
Really? Says who?
The Truest Christian these atheists will ever meet. I worship the only Lord at the Church with the Truest Christians: Landover Baptist.
“A meritocratic society is one in which inequalities of wealth and social position solely reflect the unequal distribution of merit or skills amongst human beings, or are based upon factors beyond human control, for example luck or chance. Such a society is socially just because individuals are judged not by their gender, the colour of their skin or their religion, but according to their talents and willingness to work, or on what Martin Luther King called 'the content of their character'. By extension, social equality is unjust because it treats unequal individuals equally.” "Political Ideologies" by Andrew Heywood (2003)
So let me get this straight, you're saying the bible is the word of god because god wrote it. When I asked how you know it's the word of god, you point to the bible.....
2 Timothy 3:16 (King James Version)
16All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
The Truest Christian these atheists will ever meet. I worship the only Lord at the Church with the Truest Christians: Landover Baptist.
But that doesn't escape the fact that you're using scripture to try and prove scripture! It's circular! >.<
God didn't write that a man did. A man who wanted to control women. The Bible is not inspired by a god. It is way too human.
Are you the guy on the right side of your picture?
Religion Kills !!!
Numbers 31:17-18 - Now kill all the boys. And kill every woman who has slept with a man, but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man.
http://jesus-needs-money.blogspot.com/
Dude, you are the one spewing hate.
Religion Kills !!!
Numbers 31:17-18 - Now kill all the boys. And kill every woman who has slept with a man, but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man.
http://jesus-needs-money.blogspot.com/
A man wrote that. His name was Paul. He knew nothing more than anyone else.
Religion Kills !!!
Numbers 31:17-18 - Now kill all the boys. And kill every woman who has slept with a man, but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man.
http://jesus-needs-money.blogspot.com/
People's religious and political beliefs are based on how it makes them feel rather than evidence that they would want to test and verify. That is why these are such divisive topics.
Feelings trump reason and logic. Unfortunately that is still the present state of humanity.
Life developed and humanity evolved from chaos, so perhaps this is the more natural state than 'stability'. And when we have the sanitized stable life in suburbia, people still are not happy. I think we need a revolution in the science of pleasure and motivation.
I'd say who has the best guns and technology. Who can may people feel the best. Also who can do the best job of convincing people that they can get something for nothing. Preachers and politicians are experts at this.
Taxation is the price we pay for failing to build a civilized society. The higher the tax level, the greater the failure. A centrally planned totalitarian state represents a complete defeat for the civilized world, while a totally voluntary society represents its ultimate success. --Mark Skousen
Now that I have finished responding to billy bob blockhead I will discuss my views on debating Christians.
I think it is worth it. I was a minister and non-believers debated me. I vigilantly debated them back. They had no clue that their arguments were carrying some weight with me. One couple I tried to convert asked me patiently to explain why there was so much pain and suffering in the world and yet we have this loving perfect God witnessing the whole thing. He creates people He knows will burn in hell forever. He cripples them because they are born in sin. They are essentially stupid and ignorant and blind. Yet they are supposed to believe in spite of all they see to the contrary. Sounds insane as I write it. I put up all the arguments and inside they felt hollow, but I pretended otherwise. In time I couldn't hold up the fascade. I expect billy bob is feels the same. The more strongly they argue the less they believe what they are saying. They need to get angry to convince themselves.
A calm spirit is what I want for myself. Christianity never gave me that because is is a hollow horn.
Anybody remember Margerite the God Warrior.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DrBymvOvO28
hey CJ, are you saying you wouldn't want that good Christian Mel Gibson to be your beau? He will slap you into heaven.
Religion Kills !!!
Numbers 31:17-18 - Now kill all the boys. And kill every woman who has slept with a man, but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man.
http://jesus-needs-money.blogspot.com/
The Truest Christian these atheists will ever meet. I worship the only Lord at the Church with the Truest Christians: Landover Baptist.
You know, when he was 18, he was kind of cute. But he sure didn't grow old gracefully. No, no slapping not by anyone even if they were Sean Connery. (Who is a much nicer looking old guy than Mel.)
-- I feel so much better since I stopped trying to believe.
"We are entitled to our own opinions. We're not entitled to our own facts"- Al Franken
"If death isn't sweet oblivion, I will be severely disappointed" - Ruth M.
Mel Gibson is a ring kissing, incense burning, kiddie fiddling, Mary worshipping cathylicker. Never has there been a gang of transvestites more corrupt than the cathylicker church.
The Truest Christian these atheists will ever meet. I worship the only Lord at the Church with the Truest Christians: Landover Baptist.
cathylicker? hardly. charlielicker would more correct. Little girls have much less to worry about than little boys.
How small is your saved world? You condemn catholics, atheist, pentecostals.
What about Methodist, Episcopalians, Mormons, Seventh-Day Adventist, Jehovah Witnesses, Amish, Mennonites, Quakers, Church of the Brethren, Unitarians, Lutherians, Messianic Jews?
Are they all equally evil or is there a hierarchy of ones that are worse than others? Do only Baptist have the truth? only they can be saved?
I assume you probably put Jews on the bottom or would that be atheist?
Do you respect Billy Graham's work?
Any public preachers you respect?
Religion Kills !!!
Numbers 31:17-18 - Now kill all the boys. And kill every woman who has slept with a man, but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man.
http://jesus-needs-money.blogspot.com/
i hate to break in on all this constructive argument, but this just made me remember the time i saw sean connery on leno a few years ago (i think it was leno) and i was really surprised by how dumb he is--like, hard-to-have-a-conversation-with dumb. i was a bit let down since he always plays these suave, erudite, clever characters.
"I have never felt comfortable around people who talk about their feelings for Jesus, or any other deity for that matter, because they are usually none too bright. . . . Or maybe 'stupid' is a better way of saying it; but I have never seen much point in getting heavy with either stupid people or Jesus freaks, just as long as they don't bother me. In a world as weird and cruel as this one we have made for ourselves, I figure anybody who can find peace and personal happiness without ripping off somebody else deserves to be left alone. They will not inherit the earth, but then neither will I. . . . And I have learned to live, as it were, with the idea that I will never find peace and happiness, either. But as long as I know there's a pretty good chance I can get my hands on either one of them every once in a while, I do the best I can between high spots."
--Hunter S. Thompson
Can you honestly say you'll be any brighter at that age? He's soon to turn 80. What type of intellect does a perosn honestly expect in someone that old?
Will Dawkins or Hitchens be able have a meaningful conversation at that point in their lives?
“A meritocratic society is one in which inequalities of wealth and social position solely reflect the unequal distribution of merit or skills amongst human beings, or are based upon factors beyond human control, for example luck or chance. Such a society is socially just because individuals are judged not by their gender, the colour of their skin or their religion, but according to their talents and willingness to work, or on what Martin Luther King called 'the content of their character'. By extension, social equality is unjust because it treats unequal individuals equally.” "Political Ideologies" by Andrew Heywood (2003)
Reffering back to the original question... Debate between two people is often fruitless... however when it is a public forum those pre-disposed to embrace logic (f not truth) will often have their perspectives changed... at least to the point that they will "Take their first step"
I know that through my work, I have caused many people to question the validity of what they were raised with...and helped others to articulate what they may have felt, but were unable to convey...
www.RichWoodsBlog.com
You are soooo young.
-- I feel so much better since I stopped trying to believe.
"We are entitled to our own opinions. We're not entitled to our own facts"- Al Franken
"If death isn't sweet oblivion, I will be severely disappointed" - Ruth M.
I'm 27, so... yeah?
Iwbiek seems unfamiliar with the concept of "Dementia", and how it applies to the 65+ crowd...
“A meritocratic society is one in which inequalities of wealth and social position solely reflect the unequal distribution of merit or skills amongst human beings, or are based upon factors beyond human control, for example luck or chance. Such a society is socially just because individuals are judged not by their gender, the colour of their skin or their religion, but according to their talents and willingness to work, or on what Martin Luther King called 'the content of their character'. By extension, social equality is unjust because it treats unequal individuals equally.” "Political Ideologies" by Andrew Heywood (2003)
1. Not everyone who is over 65 has dementia.
2. Not everyone who has dementia is over 65.
3. In 33 years, 65 will not seem so old.
-- I feel so much better since I stopped trying to believe.
"We are entitled to our own opinions. We're not entitled to our own facts"- Al Franken
"If death isn't sweet oblivion, I will be severely disappointed" - Ruth M.
Genesis 9:20-27 (King James Version)
20And Noah began to be an husbandman, and he planted a vineyard:
21And he drank of the wine, and was drunken; and he was uncovered within his tent.
22And Ham, the father of Canaan, saw the nakedness of his father, and told his two brethren without.
23And Shem and Japheth took a garment, and laid it upon both their shoulders, and went backward, and covered the nakedness of their father; and their faces were backward, and they saw not their father's nakedness.
24And Noah awoke from his wine, and knew what his younger son had done unto him.
25And he said, Cursed be Canaan; a servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren.
26And he said, Blessed be the LORD God of Shem; and Canaan shall be his servant.
27God shall enlarge Japheth, and he shall dwell in the tents of Shem; and Canaan shall be his servant.
Edit: I really respect the witnessing done by Jack Chick.
The Truest Christian these atheists will ever meet. I worship the only Lord at the Church with the Truest Christians: Landover Baptist.