[Cougar]

Tiste Simeon, on 14 January 2010 - 01:25 PM, said:

I'm not sure if this is the right place for this, but it occurred to me that true, real faith actually takes a lot of intelligence. Will have to think more on this and maybe write some thoughts down later.

Ohhhh, I can not wait to see your defence of this Simeon, you intellectual collosus.

[Obdigore]

Cougar, on 14 January 2010 - 01:55 PM, said:

Tiste Simeon, on 14 January 2010 - 01:25 PM, said:

I'm not sure if this is the right place for this, but it occurred to me that true, real faith actually takes a lot of intelligence. Will have to think more on this and maybe write some thoughts down later.

Ohhhh, I can not wait to see your defence of this Simeon, you intellectual collosus.

Now Now Cougar, this is the Religion DB, no personal attacks. Unless of course you seriously just called Tiste an intellectual collosus, which I could never see you doing.

Anyway @ Stone Monkey - I apologize, as I did not get my point across. I was attempting to illuminate the fact that using the scientific theory would be unable to prove the existance of a god.

[Shinrei]

As I indicated before, I can accept an argument that there is a relationship between higher eduaction and lack of formal religious beliefs.

I also know that there are religious fundamentalists who would ban fantasy novels, or at the very least keep their children from reading them. These people view magic, what they would probably call witchcraft, as being against their faith.

However, I reject the idea (without some evidence) that religious people are incapable of telling the difference between a fantasy novel and reality. Which to my interpretation, is what the following comments suggest:

Quote

I think to really enjoy good sci-fi and fantasy you have to be comfortable with immersing yourself in a world that is often viciously at odds with the one that we know. The intellectually/existentially insecure would probably then shy away- which eliminates a substantial portion of the populous.

Quote

IMO the reason they tend not to mix is becuase to enjoy fantasy you must be open to the possibilities of otherness which a lot of the faithful are not for verious reasons.

Some I have found almost find fantasy offensive as if it was a competing theology as if new thoughts or ideas would compromise them.

I can believe that some people interpret fantasy as something that "God doesn't want them to read." But I somehow doubt there are that many religious people who find a work of fiction, usually set in an entirely different world, as somehow threatening to their worldview of the real world and avoid the books because they are instinctively afraid of being challenged or are that insecure.

[Gem Windcaster]

It's not like there aren't a lot of stupid people out there that aren't Christians. Since we're talking statistics: most closed minded and really stupid people aren't Christians.

[Cougar]

To counter: most closed minded and stupid people are religious.

[Gem Windcaster]

No no, Cougar, there are alot of people in the world, you know.

Edit: but hmm, I guess it depends on how you define 'religious'.
Edit2: okay, you have a point, friend. But it still depends on the bloody definitions. People seem to throw around concepts and ignoring the different definitions. It's bloody driving me crazy.
Edit3: still though, it's not like there aren't alot of stupid people that aren't religious at all.

This post has been edited by Gem Windcaster: 14 January 2010 - 04:16 PM

[Cougar]

Gem Windcaster, on 14 January 2010 - 04:11 PM, said:

No no, Cougar, there are alot of people in the world, you know.

Edit: but hmm, I guess it depends on how you define 'religious'.
Edit2: okay, you have a point, friend. But it still depends on the bloody definitions. People seem to throw around concepts and ignoring the different definitions. It's bloody driving me crazy.
Edit3: still though, it's not like there aren't alot of stupid people that aren't religious at all.

Oh right, I thought you were trying to be clever and play with the language to expose the fallacy of statistics, I was wrong.

Since the vast majority of the population are religious, even a normal distribution of the closed minded and stupid people would mean that the majority of stupid people are religious etc.

[Gem Windcaster]

Cougar, on 14 January 2010 - 04:27 PM, said:

Oh right, I thought you were trying to be clever and play with the language to expose the fallacy of statistics, I was wrong.

Actually I was (doesn't mean I succeeded though).

Cougar, on 14 January 2010 - 04:27 PM, said:

Since the vast majority of the population are religious, even a normal distribution of the closed minded and stupid people would mean that the majority of stupid people are religious etc.

Yeah, I misread your post the first time, that's why I edited. My 3rd edit was to point to the fact that the stupid vs. religious parallels doesn't really show anything except the prejudice of the person interpreting statistics in this way. But yeah, I ruined my own little try at being clever by misreading your reply. I was hungry *grumble*.

[caladanbrood]

Cougar, on 14 January 2010 - 04:06 PM, said:

To counter: most closed minded and stupid people are religious.

Most of them on this forum aren't, ironically.

[Tiste Simeon]

Shinrei, on 14 January 2010 - 03:32 PM, said:

I can believe that some people interpret fantasy as something that "God doesn't want them to read." But I somehow doubt there are that many religious people who find a work of fiction, usually set in an entirely different world, as somehow threatening to their worldview of the real world and avoid the books because they are instinctively afraid of being challenged or are that insecure.

The way I see it, Jesus endured being betrayed, beaten, flogged, mocked and spat at, then killed in the most horrifying way. I figure he's OK with me wanting to read a book about a made up universe.

[Obdigore]

Tiste Simeon, on 14 January 2010 - 10:46 PM, said:

Shinrei, on 14 January 2010 - 03:32 PM, said:

I can believe that some people interpret fantasy as something that "God doesn't want them to read." But I somehow doubt there are that many religious people who find a work of fiction, usually set in an entirely different world, as somehow threatening to their worldview of the real world and avoid the books because they are instinctively afraid of being challenged or are that insecure.

The way I see it, Jesus endured being betrayed, beaten, flogged, mocked and spat at, then killed in the most horrifying way. I figure he's OK with me wanting to read a book about a made up universe.

I don't know... that might fill your head with WITCHCRAFT, then we would have to burn you at the stake.

[maro]

Tiste Simeon, on 14 January 2010 - 01:25 PM, said:

maro, on 14 January 2010 - 01:05 AM, said:

Whilst Tolkien was a Christian, he was quite clear that his books were not meant to be used as an allegory.

Yeah, sure but my point was that he wrote dark books full of violence and magic and mythological creatures. Yet was a Christian...

I'm not sure if this is the right place for this, but it occurred to me that true, real faith actually takes a lot of intelligence. Will have to think more on this and maybe write some thoughts down later.

Most faiths demand Blind Faith. That's not too intelligent.

[Gem Windcaster]

Can we please stop the generalizations, it doesn't exactly give credence to your claims that it's the people that are religious that are stupid. Yes, alot of stupid people get enjoy being told what to do by religious type leaders, and people can seem stupid when they're not making decisions for themselves, or just doing what they were taught in school, but are they really stupid, or just not educated enough? Or maybe, if you're elitist enough, you think, hey that's the same thing, and the people not getting an education is not intelligent enough for it anyway so good riddance? Really stop with the generalizations, because it doesn't say shit about the people you come face to face with on the street. Just saying.

As for Christians not liking fantasy, I can't really say, because I am a Christian and I like fantasy. I don't think it's true that Christians don't appreciate Tolkien or Lewis - so I am guessing we're talking modern fantasy/sci-fi? I would venture that most people don't like reading stories that don't fit into their worldview, and I don't think religious people are alone in that, I think most average educated people like reading about a hero that fits their view of a hero, so to speak. Then there's some of us that appreciate that world views are more complicated things than black and white hero descriptions and that heroes are sometimes the bad guys and that the bad guys are sometimes the heroes - simplistically put. The gist of it all is: it gets complicated, and complicated is fun and interesting. Not to mention that things are not always what they seem - and all that crap. Also it's the ability to look past the authors own world view, and appreciate the good parts of a book, because face it, no book is perfect if you really look at it.
Err...I forgot what I was saying.

This post has been edited by Gem Windcaster: 14 January 2010 - 11:25 PM

[Sinisdar Toste]

i understand where you're coming from Gem, and you're right. consider politics. no self-respecting liberal would be caught dead reading a book by sean hannity or glenn beck, and no hardline conservative would go to the book store and pick up a copy of "I am America and you can too!"

for certain things are less clear when the works are fiction, but it doesn't make your point any less valid. people seek out opinions that affirm their beliefs.

[Gem Windcaster]

Sinisdar Toste, on 14 January 2010 - 11:34 PM, said:

i understand where you're coming from Gem, and you're right. consider politics. no self-respecting liberal would be caught dead reading a book by sean hannity or glenn beck, and no hardline conservative would go to the book store and pick up a copy of "I am America and you can too!"

for certain things are less clear when the works are fiction, but it doesn't make your point any less valid. people seek out opinions that affirm their beliefs.

Yes, and for me though, that's not necessarily a good thing, and I always think a versatile education should be encouraged. Personally I am good at compartmentalization, which means I choose to ignore certain parts of a book or a view of an author, because I want to appreciate and enjoy other parts of a book. But I think that goes for every piece of art or fiction. I internally analyze a piece of fiction, amazed and fascinated by the things that are different than my own internal world, and appreciating and celebrating the rest. But of course, there are limits for me aswell, I have a hard time reading fiction that glorifies rape or have an ignorant view on women for instance. I could read it as education, but I couldn't enjoy it as entertainment.

[maro]

Gem Windcaster, on 14 January 2010 - 11:25 PM, said:

Can we please stop the generalizations, it doesn't exactly give credence to your claims that it's the people that are religious that are stupid. Yes, alot of stupid people get enjoy being told what to do by religious type leaders, and people can seem stupid when they're not making decisions for themselves, or just doing what they were taught in school, but are they really stupid, or just not educated enough?

Unbunch those panties mate. I never accused anyone of being stupid. You might have read it that way.

[Gem Windcaster]

maro, on 15 January 2010 - 05:40 AM, said:

Unbunch those panties mate. I never accused anyone of being stupid. You might have read it that way.

How do you propose I interpret this then:

maro, on 14 January 2010 - 11:05 PM, said:

Most faiths demand Blind Faith. That's not too intelligent.

I am intrigued by the hidden meaning in this post, why don't you explain.

[Adjutant Stormy~]

Though tactless, the argument is being made that blind faith is unwise, unintelligent. No need to be touchy here.

[Shinrei]

Adjutant Stormy, on 16 January 2010 - 02:45 AM, said:

Though tactless, the argument is being made that blind faith is unwise, unintelligent. No need to be touchy here.

There are two interpretations to this.

1) People blindly believe what they are taught, and never question it or ponder their beliefs.

Here I would agree - this is unintelligent.

2) People question and ponder their own beliefs, and in the end decide that faith, which some would call "blind" is something they will continue to hold onto. It's the old circular argument found on so many DB threads that goes round and round - faith for some trumps what they feel are the limits of human knowledge.


I would put Gem in the second catagory, and if she's interpreting Maro's statement that way, it is in fact insulting.

[Gem Windcaster]

maro, on 14 January 2010 - 11:05 PM, said:

Most faiths demand Blind Faith. That's not too intelligent.

This is how I interpret the above post. Lets break it down. I take "Most faiths" to point to every faith mentioned unless otherwise stated. He could be meaning my faith, or anyone's, it's not clear. Then he defines those as "demanding blind faith", and right after that he defines that as being "not too intelligent". So he's actually saying most faiths are not too intelligent, i.e. stupid.

I am not being touchy, I was responding to what he actually typed and posted. Hence my post about how you shouldn't generalize.

And I don't buy the "I didn't call anyone stupid" routine - what do you imagine "faith" consist of? Not people? Maybe some weird spirit without a body? If you're not meaning to say that the people having the faith is stupid, then who or what is being stupid? Really, I'm intrigued.

This post has been edited by Gem Windcaster: 16 January 2010 - 04:12 AM