DP,
My comments are embedded below: It's mostly defensiveness, because these are people who try to claim that atheists are more intelligent/morally upright/ saner than people who believe, and some even argue that all religion should somehow be abolished (hence the fact that even Buddhism doesn't get a free ride). [Bill!] Atheists might be more intelligent, think theyre more morally upright and saner than people who are religious, and as long as you allow them to use these qualities as the basis for the discussion youre likely to be at a disadvantage. But, these are not the most important qualities sought in religion. Im not religious myself, so I can only give you some hints, but I expect the qualities you believe important vis-à-vis religion are peace, happiness and ,depending on the religion, acceptance. Some religions also stress obedience, but Ive left that off my list. If you use these qualities, or whatever qualities you get or at least seek for in religion, I think youll be able to better level the playing field. What really frustrates me is the claims about the "truth," when I find that rather arrogant for humans to assume that we know "the truth," even with our best science. They are intent on *proving* that there is no God. [Bill!] The truth we know is relative, not absolute. Why does this seem to affect me so personally? I don't know. I find someone telling me what to think in the name of "freedom" (and subsequently describing stuff that I love in ways that I simply don't recognize, i.e. "religion is just about controlling people") really hurts my feelings. Is that odd? [Bill!] These things affect you so personally because you evidently care what these other people think about you more than you care about what you think about yourself. You are you. Just be you. Dont worry about what others think or say. You can listen to them, and take some of the things they say into consideration, but in the end it is YOU that needs to be comfortable with what YOU think and do. Whenever someone uses an argument (rhetoric) to assert a premise, and especially if that argument affects you, they are attempting to exercise control over you. You could counter their argument above by saying that asserting that freedom and truth can be found by practicing science is really just about controlling people. But thats just playing their game. Better just tell them what you think and how you feel and leave it at that. Bill! --- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com <mailto:Zen_Forum%40yahoogroups.com> , <billsm...@...> wrote: > > DP, > > > > I think you are drawn into arguments with people like these either out of > compassion or ego. If you engage with them thinking you might help them, > that could be compassion. If you engage with them to defend your beliefs or > yourself (your self), then it is ego-related. > > > > I consider myself at the least an agnostic (a person who holds the view that > any ultimate reality such as God*) is unknown and probably unknowable) and > perhaps even an atheist (one who believes that there is no deity*). I do > believe there is 'an ultimate reality', but that ultimate reality is Just > THIS! It's everyday life - the ultimate WYSIWYG (What You See (and Touch > and Hear and Smell and Taste) Is What You Get). > > > > Although I do not consider myself a Buddhist, I see no conflict between > Buddhism and either agnosticism or atheism. > > > > Back to your question 'why are you drawn into arguments?', I think the > simple answer is that it is fun for you, maybe challenging. You do learn a > lot from arguments. They make you think about whatever the topic is in a > different way than you usually think. They certainly can be uncomfortable, > but I think they are healthy. > > > > Just remember, especially when arguing about religion: almost all arguments > are based on logic, and logic is not the basis for religion. Faith is the > basis for religion. Don't let your opponent drag you into a logical > argument. Then you're on his territory. > > > > And if all else fails you can fall back on the 'fact' that logic and > rationality is actually based on faith itself - faith in cause-and-effect. > I myself actually consider science itself a religion which is based on faith > in logic and cause-and-effect. When I think about this I'm always reminded > of a valuable story which compares logic and belief: > > > > A European hunter was on a trip to Africa and was taking a trip up a river > on a boat which was propelled by a steam engine. He hired a couple natives > to keep the fire in the boiler stoked. When he hired them and told them > their assignment he explained very carefully how a steam engine works and > why it was important to keep the fire going. They understood, but > inevitably they would eventually stop shoving wood into the fire, the fire > would go out and the steam engine and the boat would stop. This happened > over and over again. His African guide watched all this and finally decided > he would have to sort this out. He told the men that there was a very > powerful, angry, vengeful and HUNGRY god living in the boiler. If they > didn't keep his belly full of wood he would become so enraged with hunger > that he would come out of the boiler and eat them! The boat never stopped > for lack of steam again. > > > > Sometimes logic is not the most appropriate tool to use. Another example is > if a 3-year old child has just been run over by a car, talking to the mother > about momentum, kinetic force, inertia and the crushing threshold of a human > skull is not going to soothe her. Telling her that her child is now > 'playing with the angles' or 'in the arms of Jesus' would be a better > approach. > > > > .Bill! > > > > *Merriam-Webster Online > > > > From: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com <mailto:Zen_Forum%40yahoogroups.com> [mailto:Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com <mailto:Zen_Forum%40yahoogroups.com> ] On Behalf > Of DP > Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2010 12:20 AM > To: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com <mailto:Zen_Forum%40yahoogroups.com> > Subject: [Zen] How to walk away from arguments > > > > > > i have this frustrating tendency to get into arguments with random people on > the internet. I personally try to keep in civil, but I get discouraged by > all the insults and obnoxiousness. > > Many of the arguments are about religion. I encounter a lot of so-called > "internet atheists" who seem to design their arguments to provoke people and > make self-congratulatory statements (although I wouldn't call them all > trolls). They spare no religion, citing examples of Buddhist violence or > badly misrepresenting concepts to make them sound like so much babble. (I > have some Christian beliefs, but they are not very orthodox, which they find > hard to understand and therefore I get a lot of "why not just give it all > up?") > > So why do I feel the need to argue with these people? Why does my ego make > it so I feel the need to confront everything they say, not give them the > "victory?" > > > > > > __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature > database 5490 (20100929) __________ > > The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus. > > http://www.eset.com > __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database 5493 (20100930) __________ The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus. http://www.eset.com
