Questions for believers

[Lark]

This is a thread which I've envisaged believers being able to discuss their experiences of their beliefs, I've created it because I'd like to see if there's anyone can relate to some of my experiences living in what I consider is a non-believing culture and world in which belief is consistently run down in a way which is far more insidious than most of the examples of propaganda in history.

I reckon the answer a question leave a question format is a good idea for threads like this.

What does anyone think about movies like The Invention of Lying? I thought that film was alright, I hate Ricky Gervais, I think she's shite and his humour is shite, although I thought this movie took a seriously bad turn with its "mansions for everyone" and "man in the sky" attack on religion, although I dont think this is limited to this movie by any stretch of the imagination, its the dumbfuck "I'm too clever for this" approach to religion and generations upon generations of thinking and I hate it.

Although its not considered to be dumbing down in the normal fashion, most people, I'm even betting most people on this forum, would see it as clever and enlightened commentary. I also know of lots of young people watch this sort of thing and treat it like hard facts, then through peer pressure and group dynamics go out eliminating anything besides the opinions they've seen in what's meant to be a comedy feature.

I never see atheism or non-believers, of any sort, satirised in the same manner.

You couldnt satirise algebra or mathematics in the same way but at the bottom of it all those things are based upon unproveable axioms, that drove Bertrand Russell mad or nearly did but that's how it is. I dont think that the satirising of mathematics or algebra would be as big a deal because those things are not bound up with ethics, morals and societal expectations in the same way but its still knowledge.

This bothers me, not because of a lack of respect, I dont think anyone is entitled to respect and I also think that people who are desperate for it, especially upon criteria to do with their beliefs, particularly religious beliefs, could be the ones with the problem, especially if it preoccupies too much of their time, energy and personal resources. It bothers me because it seems very symptomatic of the world becoming increasingly stupid and satisfied with being that way.

 

[iNtrovert]

I can relate. One of my biggest pet peeves is the tendency of people to simply regurgitate the thoughts of someone else without thinking critically about the information themselves and forming their own opinion. Believers and non-believers are guilty of this. It bothers me and I draw the same conclusion you do. People are just satisfied with their own stupidity so much so that they’re willing to let other people do the thinking for them. The very notion is completely pathetic. I don't consider the ability to watch videos on atheism and quote the arguments word for word as a form of intelligence. I also don't regard the ability to quote scripture as divine enlightenment. It bothers me that on both sides of the issue rote knowledge w.o critical analysis seems to be enough to give your stance merit. Yet believers take the most criticism for it imo. From my observation there is a developing culture that belief by default makes you unintelligent. So it is up to the believer to prove that they are not in fact babbling idiots. More often than not non-believers get the benefit of the doubt in that respect. They are seen as intelligent until proven idiotic for the simple fact that they don’t believe.In the end it all comes down to the acceptance and regurgitation of ideals in the absence of thought and true understanding. I can't alow others to think for me and it's hard for me to tolorate those that do.

 

[GentlemanKnight]

I can relate. One of my biggest pet peeves is the tendency of people to simply regurgitate the thoughts of someone else without thinking critically about the information themselves and forming their own opinion. Believers and non-believers are guilty of this. It bothers me and I draw the same conclusion you do. People are just satisfied with their own stupidity so much so that they’re willing to let other people do the thinking for them. The very notion is completely pathetic. I don't consider the ability to watch videos on atheism and quote the arguments word for word as a form of intelligence. I also don't regard the ability to quote scripture as divine enlightenment. It bothers me that on both sides of the issue rote knowledge w.o critical analysis seems to be enough to give your stance merit. Yet believers take the most criticism for it imo. From my observation there is a developing culture that belief by default makes you unintelligent. So it is up to the believer to prove that they are not in fact babbling idiots. More often than not non-believers get the benefit of the doubt in that respect. They are seen as intelligent until proven idiotic for the simple fact that they don’t believe.In the end it all comes down to the acceptance and regurgitation of ideals in the absence of thought and true understanding. I can't alow others to think for me and it's hard for me to tolorate those that do.

I agree with you. A lot of people spit out denominational rhetoric without even thinking of what it actually means....

 

[21%]

I'm not sure whether to classify myself as a 'believer' or not, because I think I believe in something, and that thing is like a neutral force, perhaps a little benevolent, and a little sad too, but undefined. I guess agnostic is the closest word.

I haven't seen the movie you mentioned, but I think the current trend with non-believers is that they are fighting back against institutionalized religions, which they find oppressive (and in some cases religion can be oppressive). Once it enters the social realm, it is no longer pure faith. Religions usually talk of faith, but faith is a totally different thing. It's individual, and it's sacred. Not all religious people have faith, and not all 'faithful' people are religious. Faith is beyond logic, beyond language. It cannot be debated, so all those faith vs science debates are futile. Faith is a state of mind, like something you feel when you stand alone on a high cliff watching the ocean crash into the rocks beneath you and feel the sublimity of nature. You cannot explain that to anyone, and you cannot expect anyone to understand what you mean. It's an entirely individual experience.

Faith has a lot to do with your worldview and coming to terms with the transiency of life. I've found that a lot of non-believers never think about this thing and have a harder time accepting age and change.

 

[Galena]

You've got to trust yourself to have faith. I think that for a large portion of people who struggle with it (as opposed to those who make the informed decision to live without it and are secure in that), they're plenty clever but just don't trust their own heart and mind. When someone regurgitates the thoughts of someone else uncritically, too, they could be stupid. But they could just think they're stupid, assuming their source with its crowd of interviewees and references and publications knows better than their own individual soul. Which is stupid. But not at all satisfied with it.

Do you think we are encouraged, culturally, to question ourselves a little too much?