The top 25 christian reactions to #GODISNOTGREAT
Comment 0
Cool
vote cool
vote uncool
Terms of Service Violation
strike inappropriate
not inappropriate
Other
sunlight
get permlink
Cool
|
Tagged with : beware the jabberwock , insatiable cock lust , phil quixote , remind them that rabb , santic bitches , threadnaught What are tags? |
paranoyd:
So do your children think Santa is a real person like you and I, or are they of the impression that he's an ideal representative of multiple concepts and ideas?
So do your children think Santa is a real person like you and I, or are they of the impression that he's an ideal representative of multiple concepts and ideas?
pajamas: I didn't say that. I did say that it was a lie to say that Santa Claus Exists, as a person. Is this really up for debate here? Unicorns, Leprechauns, The Easter Bunny? Is it all now up for debate?
Yes. And why not? It's fun.
Yes. And why not? It's fun.
paranoyd: I'm glad you feel this way. I wish you respected how I raise my kids to believe in Santa for a little while until the world crushes their childlike wonder.
Notice that I am trying to understand it, and am not disrespecting it. I am not telling you to stop, calling you names, threatening to send CPS, telling you that you're a bad parent, etc. You are getting really upset here. And I don't understand why.
Notice that I am trying to understand it, and am not disrespecting it. I am not telling you to stop, calling you names, threatening to send CPS, telling you that you're a bad parent, etc. You are getting really upset here. And I don't understand why.
I suppose I should have asked if you present Santa to your children as...
surfnazi: So do your children think Santa is a real person like you and I, or are they of the impression that he's an ideal representative of multiple concepts and ideas?
For now, my child believes he's a real person. I'm teaching her about the spirit of giving. As she gets older, she'll come to realization that they are the same thing.
For now, my child believes he's a real person. I'm teaching her about the spirit of giving. As she gets older, she'll come to realization that they are the same thing.
paranoyd: Yes. And why not? It's fun.
ok, if you would like to have a debate on the existence of Santa Claus, we can all do that. But is this actually something you believe to be true?
ok, if you would like to have a debate on the existence of Santa Claus, we can all do that. But is this actually something you believe to be true?
paranoyd: For now, my child believes he's a real person. I'm teaching her about the spirit of giving. As she gets older, she'll come to realization that they are the same thing.
So despite your gnashing of teeth, it is inescapable that you are presenting false information to your daughter. That's called lying. It's OK to lie to people, and you aren't a bad person for doing it.
So despite your gnashing of teeth, it is inescapable that you are presenting false information to your daughter. That's called lying. It's OK to lie to people, and you aren't a bad person for doing it.
pajamas: Notice that I am trying to understand it, and am not disrespecting it. I am not telling you to stop, calling you names, threatening to send CPS, telling you that you're a bad parent, etc. You are getting really upset here. And I don't understand why.
I'm debating you. I'm not upset. I have an exuberant speech pattern. Although, If you don't understand why calling someone a liar because they enjoy presenting the myth of Santa to their kids for a little while would make them upset, you might want to think about it.
I'm debating you. I'm not upset. I have an exuberant speech pattern. Although, If you don't understand why calling someone a liar because they enjoy presenting the myth of Santa to their kids for a little while would make them upset, you might want to think about it.
pajamas: I guess I don't understand why people would think that it's wrong to lie to adults but perfectly acceptable to tell lies to children.
Really? You don't understand the difference between harmless myth and malicious lies? You don't get that one fosters a sense of wonderment in a child and the other is, well, deliberately malicious?
Are you also of the opinion we should get rid of Aesops fables as well, since no tortoise and hare ever really ran a race. No more Beatrix Potter or Enid Blyton? Demolish Toad Hall, chop down the Faraway tree and clear-cut the Hundred Acre Wood? Thanks, but no thanks. I really do not want to live in your world.
Keats says it better than I ever could:
In the dull catalogue of common things.
Philosophy will clip an Angel's wings,
Conquer all mysteries by rule and line,
Empty the haunted air, and gnomed mine -
Unweave a rainbow, as it erewhile made
The tender-person'd Lamia melt into a shade.
Really? You don't understand the difference between harmless myth and malicious lies? You don't get that one fosters a sense of wonderment in a child and the other is, well, deliberately malicious?
Are you also of the opinion we should get rid of Aesops fables as well, since no tortoise and hare ever really ran a race. No more Beatrix Potter or Enid Blyton? Demolish Toad Hall, chop down the Faraway tree and clear-cut the Hundred Acre Wood? Thanks, but no thanks. I really do not want to live in your world.
Keats says it better than I ever could:
In the dull catalogue of common things.
Philosophy will clip an Angel's wings,
Conquer all mysteries by rule and line,
Empty the haunted air, and gnomed mine -
Unweave a rainbow, as it erewhile made
The tender-person'd Lamia melt into a shade.
so vote republican: I will add yours to my repertoire, which includes the following.
I especially like the ground bugs.
Clouds look like cotton because they are actually cotton blown free from careless cotton mills. Aerosol cans are filled by having their contents blown into them by tuba players. Naugahyde is the skin of naugas and woodpeckers can peck morse code if you listen right. I think the hardest I ever saw him laugh was when I told him that my German teacher said that 'guttenteit' was not actually the german word for virgin. He was driving at the time and damn near took the car off the road.
Lord do I miss the old reprobate.
I especially like the ground bugs.
Clouds look like cotton because they are actually cotton blown free from careless cotton mills. Aerosol cans are filled by having their contents blown into them by tuba players. Naugahyde is the skin of naugas and woodpeckers can peck morse code if you listen right. I think the hardest I ever saw him laugh was when I told him that my German teacher said that 'guttenteit' was not actually the german word for virgin. He was driving at the time and damn near took the car off the road.
Lord do I miss the old reprobate.
paranoyd: I'm debating you. I'm not upset. I have an exuberant speech pattern. Although, If you don't understand why calling someone a liar because they enjoy presenting the myth of Santa to their kids for a little while would make them upset, you might want to think about it.
If you are going to take the truth as a provocation and take offense, I don't think this is a wise conversation to have. I don't know how to say that I think that giving untrue information is not lying, except by lying myself.
People lie for many reasons. Some people say, "hey, that dress looks nice on your size 24 ass." and they may be telling the truth. Or not. There is a reason there.
I am trying to figure out the reason here.
If you are going to take the truth as a provocation and take offense, I don't think this is a wise conversation to have. I don't know how to say that I think that giving untrue information is not lying, except by lying myself.
People lie for many reasons. Some people say, "hey, that dress looks nice on your size 24 ass." and they may be telling the truth. Or not. There is a reason there.
I am trying to figure out the reason here.
burntman: Really? You don't understand the difference between harmless myth and malicious lies? You don't get that one fosters a sense of wonderment in a child and the other is, well, deliberately malicious?
Are you also of the opinion we should get rid of Aesops fables as well, since no tortoise and hare ever really ran a race. No more Beatrix Potter or Enid Blyton? Demolish Toad Hall, chop down the Faraway tree and clear-cut the Hundred Acre Wood? Thanks, but no thanks. I really do not want to live in your world.
Keats says it better than I ever could:
In the dull catalogue of common things.
Philosophy will clip an Angel's wings,
Conquer all mysteries by rule and line,
Empty the haunted air, and gnomed mine -
Unweave a rainbow, as it erewhile made
The tender-person'd Lamia melt into a shade.
My parents told me every one of those stories. Never once did they ask me to believe that they really happened, that talking rabbits and turtles ran races, etc.
There is a power to stories, fictions, moral tales. That power is not lessened through our understanding that they are not true. I don't understand why it's essential to lie to children to create a sense of wonder that is already there or tell a story they will already listen to.
Are you also of the opinion we should get rid of Aesops fables as well, since no tortoise and hare ever really ran a race. No more Beatrix Potter or Enid Blyton? Demolish Toad Hall, chop down the Faraway tree and clear-cut the Hundred Acre Wood? Thanks, but no thanks. I really do not want to live in your world.
Keats says it better than I ever could:
In the dull catalogue of common things.
Philosophy will clip an Angel's wings,
Conquer all mysteries by rule and line,
Empty the haunted air, and gnomed mine -
Unweave a rainbow, as it erewhile made
The tender-person'd Lamia melt into a shade.
My parents told me every one of those stories. Never once did they ask me to believe that they really happened, that talking rabbits and turtles ran races, etc.
There is a power to stories, fictions, moral tales. That power is not lessened through our understanding that they are not true. I don't understand why it's essential to lie to children to create a sense of wonder that is already there or tell a story they will already listen to.
surfnazi: I don't understand why it's essential to lie to children to create a sense of wonder that is already there or tell a story they will already listen to.
Because a child is not an adult, and it is grossly unfair on a child to treat them as adults. They have the rest of their adult lives to worry about what's real and not, for gods sake, let them have a bit of magic.
Because a child is not an adult, and it is grossly unfair on a child to treat them as adults. They have the rest of their adult lives to worry about what's real and not, for gods sake, let them have a bit of magic.
pajamas: ok, if you would like to have a debate on the existence of Santa Claus, we can all do that. But is this actually something you believe to be true?
As I've said above, there is a spirit in this holiday of giving and togetherness that I call Santa. He represents something special that doesn't exist at any other time of the year. I don't consider this a religious holiday - I'm a step away from Atheist myself. I have no problem presenting this to my child as a real person for now - as a four-year old she probably wouldn't understand the more spiritual aspects of what I'm trying to teach her. Embody it in a person and she can grasp it. And then, over time, she transposes the person to the idea. You understand the reasons for myth - one of them is to explain the unexplainable. No one would call the stories the Native Americans told to their children "lies". Sure, they aren't true as we understand them, but they are true to them. Just like Santa is true to me. That's what you aren't seeing. And I don't need you to accept my beliefs as your own. But I do need you to accept that I have that belief.
As I've said above, there is a spirit in this holiday of giving and togetherness that I call Santa. He represents something special that doesn't exist at any other time of the year. I don't consider this a religious holiday - I'm a step away from Atheist myself. I have no problem presenting this to my child as a real person for now - as a four-year old she probably wouldn't understand the more spiritual aspects of what I'm trying to teach her. Embody it in a person and she can grasp it. And then, over time, she transposes the person to the idea. You understand the reasons for myth - one of them is to explain the unexplainable. No one would call the stories the Native Americans told to their children "lies". Sure, they aren't true as we understand them, but they are true to them. Just like Santa is true to me. That's what you aren't seeing. And I don't need you to accept my beliefs as your own. But I do need you to accept that I have that belief.
surfnazi:
shit sorry, that was pajamas quote, I was writing to you then addressed her post and somehow borked it.
shit sorry, that was pajamas quote, I was writing to you then addressed her post and somehow borked it.
burntman: Because a child is not an adult, and it is grossly unfair on a child to treat them as adults. They have the rest of their adult lives to worry about what's real and not, for gods sake, let them have a bit of magic.
But magic is everywhere. The argument "Because a child is not an adult" could be used to excuse all sorts of things that are reasonable, some that aren't and many in between. It's not much of an argument.
I recently read Carl Sagan's "Demon Haunted World". (There are about 5 copies in my house) and he makes a fantastic point at the beginning about a man who was so caught up in the imaginary stories-made-real that he was brought up on, things like Astrology and homeopathy and crystal mysticism, atlantis, etc. that he was blinded to the REAL magic in the world. Carl Sagan didn't think those stories shouls not exist, just that there was a price to be paid for encouraging people to BELIEVE them.
But magic is everywhere. The argument "Because a child is not an adult" could be used to excuse all sorts of things that are reasonable, some that aren't and many in between. It's not much of an argument.
I recently read Carl Sagan's "Demon Haunted World". (There are about 5 copies in my house) and he makes a fantastic point at the beginning about a man who was so caught up in the imaginary stories-made-real that he was brought up on, things like Astrology and homeopathy and crystal mysticism, atlantis, etc. that he was blinded to the REAL magic in the world. Carl Sagan didn't think those stories shouls not exist, just that there was a price to be paid for encouraging people to BELIEVE them.
pajamas: But magic is everywhere. The argument "Because a child is not an adult" could be used to excuse all sorts of things that are reasonable, some that aren't and many in between. It's not much of an argument.
I recently read Carl Sagan's "Demon Haunted World". (There are about 5 copies in my house) and he makes a fantastic point at the beginning about a man who was so caught up in the imaginary stories-made-real that he was brought up on, things like Astrology and homeopathy and crystal mysticism, atlantis, etc. that he was blinded to the REAL magic in the world. Carl Sagan didn't think those stories shouls not exist, just that there was a price to be paid for encouraging people to BELIEVE them.
Are you really comparing Santa to Astrology, crystals, and Atlantis?
I recently read Carl Sagan's "Demon Haunted World". (There are about 5 copies in my house) and he makes a fantastic point at the beginning about a man who was so caught up in the imaginary stories-made-real that he was brought up on, things like Astrology and homeopathy and crystal mysticism, atlantis, etc. that he was blinded to the REAL magic in the world. Carl Sagan didn't think those stories shouls not exist, just that there was a price to be paid for encouraging people to BELIEVE them.
Are you really comparing Santa to Astrology, crystals, and Atlantis?
paranoyd: I have no problem presenting this to my child as a real person for now - as a four-year old she probably wouldn't understand the more spiritual aspects of what I'm trying to teach her.
It is possible that you underestimate her. Again, I was raised by a professor who never encouraged me to believe any of that and my boyfriend is currently raising his kids the same way. We all understood easily the spirit of giving and the concepts surrounding the season.
It is possible that you underestimate her. Again, I was raised by a professor who never encouraged me to believe any of that and my boyfriend is currently raising his kids the same way. We all understood easily the spirit of giving and the concepts surrounding the season.
paranoyd: Are you really comparing Santa to Astrology, crystals, and Atlantis?
The pretty lies we believe to make things easier for us? Yes.
The pretty lies we believe to make things easier for us? Yes.
pajamas: It is possible that you underestimate her. Again, I was raised by a professor who never encouraged me to believe any of that and my boyfriend is currently raising his kids the same way. We all understood easily the spirit of giving and the concepts surrounding the season.
I'm not underestimating her. She's an incredibly intelligent, sweet, caring, and unselfish child. But she is a child. She is not privy to the greater truths yet. She understands giving and compassion, but as a child does. She'll understand it more as she gets older. But there's no harm in presenting her with a myth that's both fun and instructive.
I'm not underestimating her. She's an incredibly intelligent, sweet, caring, and unselfish child. But she is a child. She is not privy to the greater truths yet. She understands giving and compassion, but as a child does. She'll understand it more as she gets older. But there's no harm in presenting her with a myth that's both fun and instructive.
pajamas: But magic is everywhere. The argument "Because a child is not an adult" could be used to excuse all sorts of things that are reasonable, some that aren't and many in between. It's not much of an argument.
I recently read Carl Sagan's "Demon Haunted World". (There are about 5 copies in my house) and he makes a fantastic point at the beginning about a man who was so caught up in the imaginary stories-made-real that he was brought up on, things like Astrology and homeopathy and crystal mysticism, atlantis, etc. that he was blinded to the REAL magic in the world. Carl Sagan didn't think those stories shouls not exist, just that there was a price to be paid for encouraging people to BELIEVE them.
No, there is a big difference between a child believing in santa claus and an adult believing in santa claus. And indeed that inevitable step where the child figures out that there is no santa is important in it's own right since it's the development of independent critical thought.
I recently read Carl Sagan's "Demon Haunted World". (There are about 5 copies in my house) and he makes a fantastic point at the beginning about a man who was so caught up in the imaginary stories-made-real that he was brought up on, things like Astrology and homeopathy and crystal mysticism, atlantis, etc. that he was blinded to the REAL magic in the world. Carl Sagan didn't think those stories shouls not exist, just that there was a price to be paid for encouraging people to BELIEVE them.
No, there is a big difference between a child believing in santa claus and an adult believing in santa claus. And indeed that inevitable step where the child figures out that there is no santa is important in it's own right since it's the development of independent critical thought.
pajamas: Well. Thank you for pointing out my problem, then?
No, I mean, conflating things like Astrology and crystals - which can do actual harm by blinding people to actual science - with Santa, who does no one harm and is a fun fiction once a year.
No, I mean, conflating things like Astrology and crystals - which can do actual harm by blinding people to actual science - with Santa, who does no one harm and is a fun fiction once a year.
paranoyd: I'm not underestimating her. She's an incredibly intelligent, sweet, caring, and unselfish child. But she is a child. She is not privy to the greater truths yet. She understands giving and compassion, but as a child does. She'll understand it more as she gets older. But there's no harm in presenting her with a myth that's both fun and instructive.
I think there is no harm presenting a myth as a parable and using that to teach. That seems universally what fiction does. I just don't understand why actually believing that this myth is real is necessary.
I think there is no harm presenting a myth as a parable and using that to teach. That seems universally what fiction does. I just don't understand why actually believing that this myth is real is necessary.
pajamas: I think there is no harm presenting a myth as a parable and using that to teach. That seems universally what fiction does. I just don't understand why actually believing that this myth is real is necessary.
Otherwise it doesn't work.
Otherwise it doesn't work.
burntman: No, there is a big difference between a child believing in santa claus and an adult believing in santa claus. And indeed that inevitable step where the child figures out that there is no santa is important in it's own right since it's the development of independent critical thought.
I really don't see this at all. Lying to a child as a means of encouraging critical thinking? This seems as backwards as is possible to me.
I really don't see this at all. Lying to a child as a means of encouraging critical thinking? This seems as backwards as is possible to me.
paranoyd: Otherwise it doesn't work.
It seems to work very well. In fact, that is the entire idea behind a parable. And I can tell you it worked perfectly fine for me and the two children I see every day.
It seems to work very well. In fact, that is the entire idea behind a parable. And I can tell you it worked perfectly fine for me and the two children I see every day.
pajamas: I really don't see this at all. Lying to a child as a means of encouraging critical thinking? This seems as backwards as is possible to me.
That's because you're equating telling a child about santa claus with malicious deceit. They are not the same thing.
That's because you're equating telling a child about santa claus with malicious deceit. They are not the same thing.
burntman: That's because you're equating telling a child about santa claus with malicious deceit. They are not the same thing.
I'm not. I'm equating it with deceit. The intent was never really a part of this. I am under no illusion that this is malicious. It doesn't need to be. I don't understand how lying to a child and perpetuating that lie, creating actual apologetics for it, encourages critical thinking.
I'm not. I'm equating it with deceit. The intent was never really a part of this. I am under no illusion that this is malicious. It doesn't need to be. I don't understand how lying to a child and perpetuating that lie, creating actual apologetics for it, encourages critical thinking.
burntman: he's got a kids book out now as well.
He is wonderful.
http://richarddawkins.net/videos/643003-dawkins-s-new-children-s-book
He is wonderful.
http://richarddawkins.net/videos/643003-dawkins-s-new-children-s-book
pajamas: I'm not. I'm equating it with deceit. The intent was never really a part of this. I am under no illusion that this is malicious. It doesn't need to be. I don't understand how lying to a child and perpetuating that lie, creating actual apologetics for it, encourages critical thinking.
A child's world should not be the world of adults. When the child grows up they learn to differentiate between the myths of their childhood and reality. But there is no reason, indeed it makes no sense, to disparage a parents efforts to make their child's life a little bit more wondrous based on your adult precepts of the importance of objective truth.
A child's world should not be the world of adults. When the child grows up they learn to differentiate between the myths of their childhood and reality. But there is no reason, indeed it makes no sense, to disparage a parents efforts to make their child's life a little bit more wondrous based on your adult precepts of the importance of objective truth.
burntman: A child's world should not be the world of adults. When the child grows up they learn to differentiate between the myths of their childhood and reality. But there is no reason, indeed it makes no sense, to disparage a parents efforts to make their child's life a little bit more wondrous based on your adult precepts of the importance of objective truth.
No one is disparaging anything. But I see no evidence that it benefits anyone to lie to children. Children that are raised without these untruths don't seem to have any disadvantages. At the same time, there is a very real reason to support, in general principle, the idea of being truthful to children, not just out of respect but also so as to instill in them the ability to discern, critically, what is real and what is not.
This seems to be the point of Dawkin's book, actually.
No one is disparaging anything. But I see no evidence that it benefits anyone to lie to children. Children that are raised without these untruths don't seem to have any disadvantages. At the same time, there is a very real reason to support, in general principle, the idea of being truthful to children, not just out of respect but also so as to instill in them the ability to discern, critically, what is real and what is not.
This seems to be the point of Dawkin's book, actually.
jeff73: Clouds look like cotton because they are actually cotton blown free from careless cotton mills. Aerosol cans are filled by having their contents blown into them by tuba players. Naugahyde is the skin of naugas and woodpeckers can peck morse code if you listen right. I think the hardest I ever saw him laugh was when I told him that my German teacher said that 'guttenteit' was not actually the german word for virgin. He was driving at the time and damn near took the car off the road.
Lord do I miss the old reprobate.
I think there is no greater lesson we can teach as parents than "Authority figures lie."
Now, pull my finger.
Lord do I miss the old reprobate.
I think there is no greater lesson we can teach as parents than "Authority figures lie."
Now, pull my finger.
jeff73:
Why not just tell him if you don't know? That's what my boyfriend does with his kids. They look it up. Together. Learning how to find information is an insanely useful skill.
Why not just tell him if you don't know? That's what my boyfriend does with his kids. They look it up. Together. Learning how to find information is an insanely useful skill.
pajamas: Why not just tell him if you don't know? That's what my boyfriend does with his kids. They look it up. Together. Learning how to find information is an insanely useful skill.
When you're 4??
When you're 4??
paranoyd: When you're 4??
Especially when you are 4.
I have to come down pretty hard on Dawkin's and Sagan's side on this.
Especially when you are 4.
I have to come down pretty hard on Dawkin's and Sagan's side on this.
pajamas: No one is disparaging anything.
This is disparagement:
pajamas: I suppose it seems to me that this is selling kids short and teaching them to appreciate being lied to.
pajamas: But I see no evidence that it benefits anyone to lie to children.
It adds to the wonder of Christmas and is a way to impart the maxim that goodness is rewarded.
pajamas: Children that are raised without these untruths don't seem to have any disadvantages..
Nor do they have any advantages, so there is no reason to insist that santa claus be decried as a lie to a 4 year old child.
pajamas: This seems to be the point of Dawkin's book, actually.
Dawkins book is aimed at children over 7 years old. There is a big difference.
This is disparagement:
pajamas: I suppose it seems to me that this is selling kids short and teaching them to appreciate being lied to.
pajamas: But I see no evidence that it benefits anyone to lie to children.
It adds to the wonder of Christmas and is a way to impart the maxim that goodness is rewarded.
pajamas: Children that are raised without these untruths don't seem to have any disadvantages..
Nor do they have any advantages, so there is no reason to insist that santa claus be decried as a lie to a 4 year old child.
pajamas: This seems to be the point of Dawkin's book, actually.
Dawkins book is aimed at children over 7 years old. There is a big difference.
burntman: This is disparagement:
It adds to the wonder of Christmas and is a way to impart the maxim that goodness is rewarded.
Nor do they have any advantages, so there is no reason to insist that santa claus be decried as a lie to a 4 year old child.
Dawkins book is aimed at children over 7 years old. There is a big difference.
So. I disagree with you that this is disparaging. It is not attempting to belittle or bring reproach upon. It is presenting a different position.
I also see no evidence that presenting fictions as truths add anything to the wonder of anything. This seems to be what Dawkins is arguing against as well. The world is full of real wonder and magic. presenting these, I would think, would be the best way to instill this wonder and also critical thinking.
I'm not telling Paranoyd he can't say whatever he wants to his daughter. I suppose I'm saying that I don't get it. And nothing here makes the case well. The world is full of wonder. Real wonder.
What I hear here is that it's essential for showing that wonder to kids but it isn't. Or that it steals your childhood to NOT lie about Santa. But it doesn't. Or that there is no other way to communicate with a 4 year old. But there is.
It adds to the wonder of Christmas and is a way to impart the maxim that goodness is rewarded.
Nor do they have any advantages, so there is no reason to insist that santa claus be decried as a lie to a 4 year old child.
Dawkins book is aimed at children over 7 years old. There is a big difference.
So. I disagree with you that this is disparaging. It is not attempting to belittle or bring reproach upon. It is presenting a different position.
I also see no evidence that presenting fictions as truths add anything to the wonder of anything. This seems to be what Dawkins is arguing against as well. The world is full of real wonder and magic. presenting these, I would think, would be the best way to instill this wonder and also critical thinking.
I'm not telling Paranoyd he can't say whatever he wants to his daughter. I suppose I'm saying that I don't get it. And nothing here makes the case well. The world is full of wonder. Real wonder.
What I hear here is that it's essential for showing that wonder to kids but it isn't. Or that it steals your childhood to NOT lie about Santa. But it doesn't. Or that there is no other way to communicate with a 4 year old. But there is.
pajamas: Especially when you are 4.
I have to come down pretty hard on Dawkin's and Sagan's side on this.
What do you honestly think a 4-year old is going to get out of a discussion of weight ratios and the tensile strength of concrete?
I have to come down pretty hard on Dawkin's and Sagan's side on this.
What do you honestly think a 4-year old is going to get out of a discussion of weight ratios and the tensile strength of concrete?
paranoyd: What do you honestly think a 4-year old is going to get out of a discussion of weight ratios and the tensile strength of concrete?
Is that honestly what you think I am saying? One of the things that makes an effective communicator is the ability to translate complex ideas into true and responsible age-appropriate ideas. Ideas that can kick-start a lifetime of knowing the difference between what is real and what is "magic".
Is that honestly what you think I am saying? One of the things that makes an effective communicator is the ability to translate complex ideas into true and responsible age-appropriate ideas. Ideas that can kick-start a lifetime of knowing the difference between what is real and what is "magic".
pajamas: Or that there is no other way to communicate with a 4 year old. But there is.
Neither Dawkins or Sagan were talking about 4 year old children. A 4 year old child and an 8 year old child are completely different things. Paranoyds daughter is four. That is not an age to be pushing ideas about critical thinking and reality. It's the age for cookies and santa claus. To decry it on the basis that it's not true is not doing any favours to the child. Those concepts come later.
Neither Dawkins or Sagan were talking about 4 year old children. A 4 year old child and an 8 year old child are completely different things. Paranoyds daughter is four. That is not an age to be pushing ideas about critical thinking and reality. It's the age for cookies and santa claus. To decry it on the basis that it's not true is not doing any favours to the child. Those concepts come later.
pajamas: So. I disagree with you that this is disparaging. It is not attempting to belittle or bring reproach upon. It is presenting a different position.
Sure feels reproachful to be called a liar.
pajamas: I also see no evidence that presenting fictions as truths add anything to the wonder of anything. This seems to be what Dawkins is arguing against as well. The world is full of real wonder and magic. presenting these, I would think, would be the best way to instill this wonder and also critical thinking.
It's one way. And she'll have plenty of time for that, if I do my job right. We enjoy all sorts of "real" things. Some things are just fun, and also serve a greater purpose.
pajamas: I'm not telling Paranoyd he can't say whatever he wants to his daughter. I suppose I'm saying that I don't get it. And nothing here makes the case well. The world is full of wonder. Real wonder.
A 4-year old doesn't see things the way adults do. My kid knows about evolution, dinosaurs, bacteria, internal organs, has seen the body exhibit, understands precipitation and rain, knows about elements and the sun and the planets. And she sees them at a very simplistic level. And she believes in Santa. I don't see any contradictions here.
pajamas: What I hear here is that it's essential for showing that wonder to kids but it isn't. Or that it steals your childhood to NOT lie about Santa. But it doesn't. Or that there is no other way to communicate with a 4 year old. But there is.
No one said essential, it's just one way of many. And it does rob you of something singular to childhood, not OF your childhood, to not have had that in your life. And there are plenty of ways of communicating with a 4-year old, this being one of them. It feels like you are being disingenuous.
Sure feels reproachful to be called a liar.
pajamas: I also see no evidence that presenting fictions as truths add anything to the wonder of anything. This seems to be what Dawkins is arguing against as well. The world is full of real wonder and magic. presenting these, I would think, would be the best way to instill this wonder and also critical thinking.
It's one way. And she'll have plenty of time for that, if I do my job right. We enjoy all sorts of "real" things. Some things are just fun, and also serve a greater purpose.
pajamas: I'm not telling Paranoyd he can't say whatever he wants to his daughter. I suppose I'm saying that I don't get it. And nothing here makes the case well. The world is full of wonder. Real wonder.
A 4-year old doesn't see things the way adults do. My kid knows about evolution, dinosaurs, bacteria, internal organs, has seen the body exhibit, understands precipitation and rain, knows about elements and the sun and the planets. And she sees them at a very simplistic level. And she believes in Santa. I don't see any contradictions here.
pajamas: What I hear here is that it's essential for showing that wonder to kids but it isn't. Or that it steals your childhood to NOT lie about Santa. But it doesn't. Or that there is no other way to communicate with a 4 year old. But there is.
No one said essential, it's just one way of many. And it does rob you of something singular to childhood, not OF your childhood, to not have had that in your life. And there are plenty of ways of communicating with a 4-year old, this being one of them. It feels like you are being disingenuous.
pajamas: age-appropriate ideas.
Yes, and santa claus is indeed an age appropriate way to teach a 4 year old that there are benefits to being good.
Yes, and santa claus is indeed an age appropriate way to teach a 4 year old that there are benefits to being good.
pajamas: Is that honestly what you think I am saying? One of the things that makes an effective communicator is the ability to translate complex ideas into true and responsible age-appropriate ideas. Ideas that can kick-start a lifetime of knowing the difference between what is real and what is "magic".
Speaking of magic, my kid (and I) love magicians. We see a magic trick and, many times I know how it is done, but she doesn't. And I ask her how it's done and she goes "It was in his pocket!" or somesuch. And she's usually right, even though she doesn't know it. She wants to know the reasons behind things like this. She'll figure it out. And when she does, I'm sure the answers will mean much more to her than if I just told her.
Speaking of magic, my kid (and I) love magicians. We see a magic trick and, many times I know how it is done, but she doesn't. And I ask her how it's done and she goes "It was in his pocket!" or somesuch. And she's usually right, even though she doesn't know it. She wants to know the reasons behind things like this. She'll figure it out. And when she does, I'm sure the answers will mean much more to her than if I just told her.
burntman: Yes, and santa claus is indeed an age appropriate way to teach a 4 year old that there are benefits to being good.
Another thing we do is, we go to the store and I have her pick out a game or toy and I tell her it's for poor kids who don't have anything. And then, after we buy it, I make her put it in the box for Toys for Tots. She's very happy to do so.
Another thing we do is, we go to the store and I have her pick out a game or toy and I tell her it's for poor kids who don't have anything. And then, after we buy it, I make her put it in the box for Toys for Tots. She's very happy to do so.
burntman: Yes, and santa claus is indeed an age appropriate way to teach a 4 year old that there are benefits to being good.
If you want another way, tell your kid about homeland security and how they're always watching.
If you want another way, tell your kid about homeland security and how they're always watching.
pajamas: Learning how to find information is an insanely useful skill.
Oh absutively and posilutely. I was a sharp-eyed and skeptical tyke because I had to be to stay ahead of Dad's endless silliness, which never touched topics of importance or possible danger, but otherwise might pop up anywhere.
There are many ways to teach a child critical discernment and to not blindly accept the word of authority, and deliberate unreliability regarding harmless matters is one that's fun for the student once and the teacher twice. I don't think that parents who don't engage in it are depriving their kids at all - different strokes for different folks - but I will always be grateful for having a dad like Calvin's.
Neither teachers, books, politicians nor clergy could put one over on li'l me for I was raised by a master of the Big Shovel.
Oh absutively and posilutely. I was a sharp-eyed and skeptical tyke because I had to be to stay ahead of Dad's endless silliness, which never touched topics of importance or possible danger, but otherwise might pop up anywhere.
There are many ways to teach a child critical discernment and to not blindly accept the word of authority, and deliberate unreliability regarding harmless matters is one that's fun for the student once and the teacher twice. I don't think that parents who don't engage in it are depriving their kids at all - different strokes for different folks - but I will always be grateful for having a dad like Calvin's.
Neither teachers, books, politicians nor clergy could put one over on li'l me for I was raised by a master of the Big Shovel.
blandly pompous: If you want another way, tell your kid about homeland security and how they're always watching.
Except they don't bring anything on Christmas Eve.
Except they don't bring anything on Christmas Eve.
burntman: It adds to the wonder of Christmas and is a way to impart the maxim that goodness is rewarded.
It's just another way of saying "There's an invisible dude in the sky that is always spying on you and keeping score so that he can reward or punish you as appropriate."
It's just another way of saying "There's an invisible dude in the sky that is always spying on you and keeping score so that he can reward or punish you as appropriate."
paranoyd: Another thing we do is, we go to the store and I have her pick out a game or toy and I tell her it's for poor kids who don't have anything. And then, after we buy it, I make her put it in the box for Toys for Tots. She's very happy to do so.
Actually that's another good point, and probably the most tangible. The Santa Claus myth is a part of the culture the child is growing up in. It's not a fiction she holds in isolation. I think it's very wrong to try ask a 4 year old to reject an idea because it is not real, when all her peers and the world around her is celebrating it. There's a time and a place for things, and 4 years old is most certainly santa claus time.
Actually that's another good point, and probably the most tangible. The Santa Claus myth is a part of the culture the child is growing up in. It's not a fiction she holds in isolation. I think it's very wrong to try ask a 4 year old to reject an idea because it is not real, when all her peers and the world around her is celebrating it. There's a time and a place for things, and 4 years old is most certainly santa claus time.
sloth: It's just another way of saying "There's an invisible dude in the sky that is always spying on you and keeping score so that he can reward or punish you as appropriate."
And for a 4 year old that's ok too.
And for a 4 year old that's ok too.
blandly pompous: If you want another way, tell your kid about homeland security and how they're always watching.
:/
It's a real toy
:/
It's a real toy
burntman: And for a 4 year old that's ok too.
To each their own. I was never one for passing on the Sky Father myth, myself. The truth is magical enough.
To each their own. I was never one for passing on the Sky Father myth, myself. The truth is magical enough.
jeff73: Oh absutively and posilutely. I was a sharp-eyed and skeptical tyke because I had to be to stay ahead of Dad's endless silliness, which never touched topics of importance or possible danger, but otherwise might pop up anywhere.
There are many ways to teach a child critical discernment and to not blindly accept the word of authority, and deliberate unreliability regarding harmless matters is one that's fun for the student once and the teacher twice. I don't think that parents who don't engage in it are depriving their kids at all - different strokes for different folks - but I will always be grateful for having a dad like Calvin's.
[image removed]
Neither teachers, books, politicians nor clergy could put one over on li'l me for I was raised by a master of the Big Shovel.
Whenever a toy commercial came on for something my kids already had, I always pointed out how cool the commercial made the toy look in sharp contrast to how the toy really was.
There are many ways to teach a child critical discernment and to not blindly accept the word of authority, and deliberate unreliability regarding harmless matters is one that's fun for the student once and the teacher twice. I don't think that parents who don't engage in it are depriving their kids at all - different strokes for different folks - but I will always be grateful for having a dad like Calvin's.
[image removed]
Neither teachers, books, politicians nor clergy could put one over on li'l me for I was raised by a master of the Big Shovel.
Whenever a toy commercial came on for something my kids already had, I always pointed out how cool the commercial made the toy look in sharp contrast to how the toy really was.
pajamas: I really don't see this at all. Lying to a child as a means of encouraging critical thinking? This seems as backwards as is possible to me.
There is plenty of use in teach a child to tell what lies are as a means to encourage critical thinking. That isn't in play here though.
There is plenty of use in teach a child to tell what lies are as a means to encourage critical thinking. That isn't in play here though.
quinblake: Whenever a toy commercial came on for something my kids already had, I always pointed out how cool the commercial made the toy look in sharp contrast to how the toy really was.
I honestly can't think of a toy we've gotten because of an ad. Every once in a while my kid will watch an ad and go, "I want that!" and I'll say, "Well, yeah, because you want everything." And then we never hear about it again.
I honestly can't think of a toy we've gotten because of an ad. Every once in a while my kid will watch an ad and go, "I want that!" and I'll say, "Well, yeah, because you want everything." And then we never hear about it again.
paranoyd: Sure feels reproachful to be called a liar.
I didn't call you a liar. I said that presenting Santa Claus as existing for real was a lie.
I am bailing from this conversation. There is no way to not offend you here.
I didn't call you a liar. I said that presenting Santa Claus as existing for real was a lie.
I am bailing from this conversation. There is no way to not offend you here.
paranoyd: I honestly can't think of a toy we've gotten because of an ad. Every once in a while my kid will watch an ad and go, "I want that!" and I'll say, "Well, yeah, because you want everything." And then we never hear about it again.
Well, instead of saying "I want that" they started saying "yeah right".
Well, instead of saying "I want that" they started saying "yeah right".
quinblake: Well, instead of saying "I want that" they started saying "yeah right".
Every once in a while I'll say to my kid, "So, that thing you wanted - was it everything you hoped for?" And most of the time she'll go, "Yes!"
But I think we both know she's kidding.
Every once in a while I'll say to my kid, "So, that thing you wanted - was it everything you hoped for?" And most of the time she'll go, "Yes!"
But I think we both know she's kidding.
pajamas: I didn't call you a liar. I said that presenting Santa Claus as existing for real was a lie.
I am bailing from this conversation. There is no way to not offend you here.
Perhaps if you approached this from the stand point that telling kids about Santa isn't a lie, but rather a group cultural myth that lends an aire of magic to a child's life for a few short years, maybe it would be easier both for you to understand it and for me to not be offended.
I am bailing from this conversation. There is no way to not offend you here.
Perhaps if you approached this from the stand point that telling kids about Santa isn't a lie, but rather a group cultural myth that lends an aire of magic to a child's life for a few short years, maybe it would be easier both for you to understand it and for me to not be offended.
paranoyd: Perhaps if you approached this from the stand point that telling kids about Santa isn't a lie, but rather a group cultural myth that lends an aire of magic to a child's life for a few short years, maybe it would be easier both for you to understand it and for me to not be offended.
But that's just it. I don't agree. And you are basically telling me that you will be offended if I don't agree.
But that's just it. I don't agree. And you are basically telling me that you will be offended if I don't agree.
pajamas: But that's just it. I don't agree. And you are basically telling me that you will be offended if I don't agree.
You don't agree that it's a myth, shared by millions? Would you tell the Native Americans that their collective mythology was a lie? The Aboriginals? Seems like a rather un-flexible viewpoint to me.
You don't agree that it's a myth, shared by millions? Would you tell the Native Americans that their collective mythology was a lie? The Aboriginals? Seems like a rather un-flexible viewpoint to me.
paranoyd: You don't agree that it's a myth, shared by millions? Would you tell the Native Americans that their collective mythology was a lie? The Aboriginals? Seems like a rather un-flexible viewpoint to me.
Sure, it's a myth. And one of the problems with being an atheist is that when you tell people that you don't believe their myth, that you think it is untrue, you get the same response. They are offended. This is the number one issue I have with beliefs like this. That they are dogmatic, religious in nature and people form identity around them, creating offense when someone commits the cardinal sin of saying they aren't true.
It's not unyielding to say that the aboriginal gods don't exist. It's actually factual.
And I predominantly disagree that it lends an air of magic to a child's life for a few short years. My experience is that it interferes with the joy and respect for the REAL magic of the world and forces children to spend a couple of years being told untruths, given apologetics to support them and not learning about the difference between knowledge and belief.
Sure, it's a myth. And one of the problems with being an atheist is that when you tell people that you don't believe their myth, that you think it is untrue, you get the same response. They are offended. This is the number one issue I have with beliefs like this. That they are dogmatic, religious in nature and people form identity around them, creating offense when someone commits the cardinal sin of saying they aren't true.
It's not unyielding to say that the aboriginal gods don't exist. It's actually factual.
And I predominantly disagree that it lends an air of magic to a child's life for a few short years. My experience is that it interferes with the joy and respect for the REAL magic of the world and forces children to spend a couple of years being told untruths, given apologetics to support them and not learning about the difference between knowledge and belief.
pajamas: My experience is that it interferes with the joy and respect for the REAL magic of the world and forces children to spend a couple of years being told untruths, given apologetics to support them and not learning about the difference between knowledge and belief.
You're talking about a 4 year old child. There's a reason kids only start school at the age of 6. A 4 year old child is not ready to know about the difference between knowledge and disbelief. 4 years old is squarely in the middle of what is termed 'the play years.' It's what Piaget termed the preoperational stage.
You are trying to submit that the child will benefit from being taught concepts that he/she is simply incapable of understanding at that stage in development. Most important at that stage is encouraging word use and story telling. Morality at that stage of development is heteronomous. Which is why santa claus works as well as anything else. And why Dawkins book is not suitable for four year old children.
You're talking about a 4 year old child. There's a reason kids only start school at the age of 6. A 4 year old child is not ready to know about the difference between knowledge and disbelief. 4 years old is squarely in the middle of what is termed 'the play years.' It's what Piaget termed the preoperational stage.
You are trying to submit that the child will benefit from being taught concepts that he/she is simply incapable of understanding at that stage in development. Most important at that stage is encouraging word use and story telling. Morality at that stage of development is heteronomous. Which is why santa claus works as well as anything else. And why Dawkins book is not suitable for four year old children.
burntman:
You are trying to submit that the child will benefit from being taught concepts that he/she is simply incapable of understanding at that stage in development.
No, I am submitting that a child will benefit from being told age-appropriate truths. I find it hard to believe you can't imagine any.
You are trying to submit that the child will benefit from being taught concepts that he/she is simply incapable of understanding at that stage in development.
No, I am submitting that a child will benefit from being told age-appropriate truths. I find it hard to believe you can't imagine any.
pajamas: No, I am submitting that a child will benefit from being told age-appropriate truths. I find it hard to believe you can't imagine any.
no, I just don't see why you are placing such the emphasis on truth. Or indeed decrying Santa Claus on the basis it's a fiction, when it's being told to a four year old.
That stringent emphasis on truth is not appropriate for a four year old child.
no, I just don't see why you are placing such the emphasis on truth. Or indeed decrying Santa Claus on the basis it's a fiction, when it's being told to a four year old.
That stringent emphasis on truth is not appropriate for a four year old child.
burntman: no, I just don't see why you are placing such the emphasis on truth. Or indeed decrying Santa Claus on the basis it's a fiction, when it's being told to a four year old.
That stringent emphasis on truth is not appropriate for a four year old child.
Truth not important? That's just it. I think it is. All the way around. Not only is it important for adults but it is especially important for children.
We live in a world where people routinely believe pretty lies just because they want to. Isn't critical thinking and truth important to you?
That stringent emphasis on truth is not appropriate for a four year old child.
Truth not important? That's just it. I think it is. All the way around. Not only is it important for adults but it is especially important for children.
We live in a world where people routinely believe pretty lies just because they want to. Isn't critical thinking and truth important to you?
pajamas: Sure, it's a myth. And one of the problems with being an atheist is that when you tell people that you don't believe their myth, that you think it is untrue, you get the same response. They are offended. This is the number one issue I have with beliefs like this. That they are dogmatic, religious in nature and people form identity around them, creating offense when someone commits the cardinal sin of saying they aren't true.
It's not unyielding to say that the aboriginal gods don't exist. It's actually factual.
And I predominantly disagree that it lends an air. By magic to a child's life for a few short years. My experience is that it interferes with the joy and respect for the REAL magic of the world and forces children to spend a couple of years being told untruths, given apologetics to support them and not learning about the difference between knowledge and belief.
If you've ever wondered why people get offended when you tell them that their beliefs are not true, I'm not sure I can tell you why without it sounding disrespectful. A belief is as personal as one's body, their weight, their looks, their identity. Telling someone their beliefs are not true is no different and maybe worse than walking up to someone and telling them they're fat, or ugly, or gross. Its offensive because its disrespectful. And there is a huge difference between "I don't believe in Santa" and "there is no Santa".
It's not unyielding to say that the aboriginal gods don't exist. It's actually factual.
And I predominantly disagree that it lends an air. By magic to a child's life for a few short years. My experience is that it interferes with the joy and respect for the REAL magic of the world and forces children to spend a couple of years being told untruths, given apologetics to support them and not learning about the difference between knowledge and belief.
If you've ever wondered why people get offended when you tell them that their beliefs are not true, I'm not sure I can tell you why without it sounding disrespectful. A belief is as personal as one's body, their weight, their looks, their identity. Telling someone their beliefs are not true is no different and maybe worse than walking up to someone and telling them they're fat, or ugly, or gross. Its offensive because its disrespectful. And there is a huge difference between "I don't believe in Santa" and "there is no Santa".
The top 300 bN reactions to the top 25 Christian reactions to #GODISNOTGREAT.
pajamas: Truth not important? That's just it. I think it is. All the way around. Not only is it important for adults but it is especially important for children.
We live in a world where people routinely believe pretty lies just because they want to. Isn't critical thinking and truth important to you?
I am an adult. I am not a four year old child. Do you not see the distinction? A child is not a mini adult. A child has limited cognitive abilites. That's why we make the distinction between adult and child. Further, we're talking about a preschooler. You want to argue as to the importance of truth for a 4 year old? A four year old mixes up fantasy and fact. It's only at about 6 that a child can properly distinguish between fantasy and reality.
We live in a world where people routinely believe pretty lies just because they want to. Isn't critical thinking and truth important to you?
I am an adult. I am not a four year old child. Do you not see the distinction? A child is not a mini adult. A child has limited cognitive abilites. That's why we make the distinction between adult and child. Further, we're talking about a preschooler. You want to argue as to the importance of truth for a 4 year old? A four year old mixes up fantasy and fact. It's only at about 6 that a child can properly distinguish between fantasy and reality.
burntman: I am an adult. I am not a four year old child. Do you not see the distinction? A child is not a mini adult. A child has limited cognitive abilites. That's why we make the distinction between adult and child. Further, we're talking about a preschooler. You want to argue as to the importance of truth for a 4 year old? A four year old mixes up fantasy and fact. It's only at about 6 that a child can properly distinguish between fantasy and reality.
Chuckle. My four year old asked if the Chipmunks on "Alvin and the Chipmunks" (live action + animation) were "real".
I started to answer in a complicated way, and it started to get more and more complicated and then she finally interrupted and said "Daddy, you can stop talking now."
On the other hand, my 6.5 year old is now making stop-action animation shorts. :)
Chuckle. My four year old asked if the Chipmunks on "Alvin and the Chipmunks" (live action + animation) were "real".
I started to answer in a complicated way, and it started to get more and more complicated and then she finally interrupted and said "Daddy, you can stop talking now."
On the other hand, my 6.5 year old is now making stop-action animation shorts. :)
pajamas: Truth not important? That's just it. I think it is. All the way around. Not only is it important for adults but it is especially important for children.
We live in a world where people routinely believe pretty lies just because they want to. Isn't critical thinking and truth important to you?
There is no such thing as truth. There is only perspective. Your truth is based on your experiences and references. It may appear to be an indisputable fact, but only from your point of view. Truth is a lie.
Plus, anyone who makes a definitve statement that leaves no room for doubt or exploration is not thinking critically.
We live in a world where people routinely believe pretty lies just because they want to. Isn't critical thinking and truth important to you?
There is no such thing as truth. There is only perspective. Your truth is based on your experiences and references. It may appear to be an indisputable fact, but only from your point of view. Truth is a lie.
Plus, anyone who makes a definitve statement that leaves no room for doubt or exploration is not thinking critically.
vic rattlehead: There is no such thing as truth. There is only perspective. Your truth is based on your experiences and references. It may appear to be an indisputable fact, but only from your point of view. Truth is a lie.
Plus, anyone who makes a definitve statement that leaves no room for doubt or exploration is not thinking critically.
Plus, anyone who makes a definitve statement that leaves no room for doubt or exploration is not thinking critically.
vic rattlehead: There is no such thing as truth. There is only perspective.
I find relativism frightening. For one thing, it hinders progress through shared knowledge. Additionally, it can too easily be used to justify atrocity.
I find relativism frightening. For one thing, it hinders progress through shared knowledge. Additionally, it can too easily be used to justify atrocity.
sabine: I find relativism frightening. For one thing, it hinders progress through shared knowledge. Additionally, it can too easily be used to justify atrocity.
The counter to that is that it can also add new insight. And similarly can also be used to promote inter-cultural understanding.
I think it's one of those double edged things. Depends how you use it.
The counter to that is that it can also add new insight. And similarly can also be used to promote inter-cultural understanding.
I think it's one of those double edged things. Depends how you use it.
burntman: I think it's one of those double edged things.
Yeah, vic rattlehead's version was just too strongly stated for my taste.
Yeah, vic rattlehead's version was just too strongly stated for my taste.
sabine: I find relativism frightening. For one thing, it hinders progress through shared knowledge. Additionally, it can too easily be used to justify atrocity.
As frightening as relativism is, I find belief that there is such a thing as Truth even more frightening. I'm not saying that there is no reality, but I am saying that we only believe something is true because it appears to be true to us. However, since we are limited to our individual frame of reference, how do we really know.
As frightening as relativism is, I find belief that there is such a thing as Truth even more frightening. I'm not saying that there is no reality, but I am saying that we only believe something is true because it appears to be true to us. However, since we are limited to our individual frame of reference, how do we really know.
sabine: By having others replicate our experiments and observations.
We are still limited by what we can sense. Science is still only giving us the best answer available. The point of my statement is that there is always the possibility that we are wrong, and if you discount this in the name of truth you stop thinking critically and start being dogmatic.
We are still limited by what we can sense. Science is still only giving us the best answer available. The point of my statement is that there is always the possibility that we are wrong, and if you discount this in the name of truth you stop thinking critically and start being dogmatic.
vic rattlehead: As frightening as relativism is, I find belief that there is such a thing as Truth even more frightening. I'm not saying that there is no reality, but I am saying that we only believe something is true because it appears to be true to us. However, since we are limited to our individual frame of reference, how do we really know.
Because we all share the same reference tools to an extreme degree.
Because we all share the same reference tools to an extreme degree.
vic rattlehead: there is always the possibility that we are wrong
Sure, but I'm not willing to completely toss the notion of objective truth. The law of gravity has more credibility than does astrology, even if some people firmly believe in the latter.
Sure, but I'm not willing to completely toss the notion of objective truth. The law of gravity has more credibility than does astrology, even if some people firmly believe in the latter.
surfnazi: Because we all share the same reference tools to an extreme degree.
Sure we all share the same tools (as humans), but my point is that if you don't reserve some doubt about what is called the truth, then you stop thinking critically and are being dogmatic.
Sure we all share the same tools (as humans), but my point is that if you don't reserve some doubt about what is called the truth, then you stop thinking critically and are being dogmatic.
sabine: Sure, but I'm not willing to completely toss the notion of objective truth. The law of gravity has more credibility than does astrology, even if some people firmly believe in the latter.
So are you saying you leave no room in your mind for new information about Gravity?
So are you saying you leave no room in your mind for new information about Gravity?
vic rattlehead: Sure we all share the same tools (as humans), but my point is that if you don't reserve some doubt about what is called the truth, then you stop thinking critically and are being dogmatic.
Sure but at the same time there's no reason one must consider any random "what if" that comes along without being considered dogmatic.
Sure but at the same time there's no reason one must consider any random "what if" that comes along without being considered dogmatic.
vic rattlehead: So are you saying you leave no room in your mind for new information about Gravity?
No, I'm saying that everybody doesn't get to have their own measuring stick for truth (or they can, but they aren't all equally valid). Naturally, there are some personal beliefs that are exempt, but I'm talking largely about knowledge of the physical world and ethical structure here. "It's not wrong to me" isn't a valid defense to stealing somebody's car.
No, I'm saying that everybody doesn't get to have their own measuring stick for truth (or they can, but they aren't all equally valid). Naturally, there are some personal beliefs that are exempt, but I'm talking largely about knowledge of the physical world and ethical structure here. "It's not wrong to me" isn't a valid defense to stealing somebody's car.
this thread is starting to get bi-czar
surfnazi: Sure but at the same time there's no reason one must consider any random "what if" that comes along without being considered dogmatic.
You're right and wrong. True enough is almost always good enough. But it is dogmatic if you reject a random what if because you "know the truth" instead of critically evaluating each and every what if. Most of us are smart enough to actually evaluate the what ifs without even consciously working on it. We do it every day.
You're right and wrong. True enough is almost always good enough. But it is dogmatic if you reject a random what if because you "know the truth" instead of critically evaluating each and every what if. Most of us are smart enough to actually evaluate the what ifs without even consciously working on it. We do it every day.
sabine: "It's not wrong to me" isn't a valid defense to stealing somebody's car.
Just repeating because I can't +2 it.
Just repeating because I can't +2 it.
vic rattlehead: You're right and wrong. True enough is almost always good enough. But it is dogmatic if you reject a random what if because you "know the truth" instead of critically evaluating each and every what if. Most of us are smart enough to actually evaluate the what ifs without even consciously working on it. We do it every day.
I was about to make the same point in your last two sentences before I read them. That unconscious reasoning is happening here I believe, in the form of "Does czar believe it?" Shorthand you can assume it false, but further information can always sway.
I was about to make the same point in your last two sentences before I read them. That unconscious reasoning is happening here I believe, in the form of "Does czar believe it?" Shorthand you can assume it false, but further information can always sway.
sabine: No, I'm saying that everybody doesn't get to have their own measuring stick for truth (or they can, but they aren't all equally valid). Naturally, there are some personal beliefs that are exempt, but I'm talking largely about knowledge of the physical world and ethical structure here. "It's not wrong to me" isn't a valid defense to stealing somebody's car.
I think I'm being unclear, and I apologize. I'm saying that if you accept "truth" without question or doubt, you are no longer being rational. You should question even facts that you have personally sensed. (Now obviously I'm speaking in a philsophical sense.) Maybe saying this would make it clearer as an example: science should not be about finding the answers, it should be about challenging the answers.
Sorry if I'm not being clear, still.
I think I'm being unclear, and I apologize. I'm saying that if you accept "truth" without question or doubt, you are no longer being rational. You should question even facts that you have personally sensed. (Now obviously I'm speaking in a philsophical sense.) Maybe saying this would make it clearer as an example: science should not be about finding the answers, it should be about challenging the answers.
Sorry if I'm not being clear, still.
I'm not telling anyone that they are wrong. People are free, obviously, to believe what they want. Always. Without apology. But I do have a certain freedom, as well, to express what is the logical and reasoned position borne out through evidence.
I think it gives me the freedom to say things like "Santa Claus is not real" and not just that "I don't believe in Santa Claus". If you have sufficient evidence at your disposal (and even if you don't), you have the freedom, as well, to say that He does exist. We get to talk about things that are OUTSIDE of our specific belief sets and are not driven by a belief system.
I think it gives me the freedom to say things like "Santa Claus is not real" and not just that "I don't believe in Santa Claus". If you have sufficient evidence at your disposal (and even if you don't), you have the freedom, as well, to say that He does exist. We get to talk about things that are OUTSIDE of our specific belief sets and are not driven by a belief system.
vic rattlehead: I think I'm being unclear, and I apologize. I'm saying that if you accept "truth" without question or doubt...
Who advocated that?
Who advocated that?
If you logged in, you could post here.