Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Argembarger]

Just popping in briefly to say that this is a really good article.

[Leafsnail]

It doesn't matter, though. If anybody's posting here with hopes of e.g. getting Siquo to admit that he was wrong all this time, and convert him to atheism

Damnit, I'd settle for ""all viewpoints are equally valid" is not a workable worldview" :/.

Just popping in briefly to say that this is a really good article.

"2. Both Sides Really Do Believe What They're Saying"
"7. We Tend to Exaggerate About Ourselves, Too"

Really, just... too full of logical fallacies for my liking.  I can probably agree with the points, but I don't really like the explanations much.

[G-Flex]

"Nobody can change anyone's mind on the Internet" is an extremely naive viewpoint. No, you're not likely to directly change someone's mind during the course of an argument. People's minds change over time via exposure to new ideas (and testing of old ones), and talking/arguing about things is an important part of that. If it weren't for things like that, I would be much less knowledgeable and have much less well-developed ideas about any number of things, not to mention the fact that one of the best ways to learn about something is to discuss it with people who don't think the same way as you about it.

[Andir]

"Nobody can change anyone's mind on the Internet" is an extremely naive viewpoint. No, you're not likely to directly change someone's mind during the course of an argument. People's minds change over time via exposure to new ideas (and testing of old ones), and talking/arguing about things is an important part of that. If it weren't for things like that, I would be much less knowledgeable and have much less well-developed ideas about any number of things, not to mention the fact that one of the best ways to learn about something is to discuss it with people who don't think the same way as you about it.

Short version: "You may not change their mind, but you change part of it." 

[Glowcat]

Short version: "You may not change their mind, but you change part of it." 

Over time those small changes from debate can lead to a complete identity overhaul. I'm only speaking from my own experience but right before periods when I made a major alteration in my view I found myself clinging to micro-victories whereas the wider macro-view made less and less sense to me. Eventually the contradictions and doubts caused me to cease supporting my previous views and I slowly began rebuilding my identity from the wreckage.

[malimbar04]

"Nobody can change anyone's mind on the Internet" is an extremely naive viewpoint. No, you're not likely to directly change someone's mind during the course of an argument. People's minds change over time via exposure to new ideas (and testing of old ones), and talking/arguing about things is an important part of that. If it weren't for things like that, I would be much less knowledgeable and have much less well-developed ideas about any number of things, not to mention the fact that one of the best ways to learn about something is to discuss it with people who don't think the same way as you about it.

Short version: "You may not change their mind, but you change part of it." 

I approve. I'd put it in  my signature, but I'm too lazy.

[Shrugging Khan]

I'd still like to see Sh.Khan be a bit more considerate, and use a different tone in discussion. It's just about good manners, really, and I'd rather see well-mannered people flocking to the atheist cause, rather than crude rednecks.

No chance in snowy hell. The market for polite atheists is oversaturated.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

I'd still like to see Sh.Khan be a bit more considerate, and use a different tone in discussion. It's just about good manners, really, and I'd rather see well-mannered people flocking to the atheist cause, rather than crude rednecks.

No chance in snowy hell. The market for polite atheists is oversaturated.

There are plenty of both flamebugs and calm individuals who are atheists, neither are oversaturated. Just don't do somthing you'll regret later Khan, I know I acted like a bit of an ass during the hight of my post-deconversion frustration.

[Shrugging Khan]

I'd really feel fake if I suddenly started to act like a likeable person. Also, I'm posting on the goddamned internet. I'm here to be angry, not to make a good impression on potential readers.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

I am not asking you to act, although others may be. Just to remain aware of your actions, and use your best judgement instead of letting your emotions control you (which I'm not saying you're doing now either, just to remain aware of the threat of it).

[Shrugging Khan]

I think I like the dark side better.

*gives in to his emotions*

[Siquo]

Don't feed the trolls.

Just popping in briefly to say that this is a really good article.

It is, thank you. He even quotes Neal Stephenson It reminds me of that whole "rally for sanity" thing the US had a while ago. I liked that.

Also, I see now that I was wrong about all my beliefs.
I can see clearly now all viewpoints are equally invalid. Including nihilism, so I can't believe in none of them!

[fqllve]

Also, I see now that I was wrong about all my beliefs.
I can see clearly now all viewpoints are equally invalid. Including nihilism, so I can't believe in none of them!

If by valid you mean "a person has a right to believe it" and not "is an accurate portrayal of the world" then I'd agree with you. People can believe whatever they want.

However, not all beliefs have equal explanatory power. In fact, all beliefs have necessarily unequal explanatory power. If two beliefs explain the same things equally well, then they are in fact the same belief.

[Realmfighter]

But saying they have unequal explanatory power implies that one belief better then another.

[fqllve]

Depending on which questions you want answered and how, yes, one belief will be better than others.