Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
Respectfully, I think we're disagreeing on more than just utility of method. It would be closer to the mark to think of my viewpoint as that of someone introducing someone. Maybe a musician introducing a music teacher to someone who has never worked with them before. Even if (like in this exercise), it's the best music teacher who ever lived, all I can do is speak about my experience with him, speak to how he presents himself to the world at large, and do what I can to facilitate a meeting. It's up to the teacher and the musician to develop that relationship. I can have some influence on its outcome, buy the guitar, take the student to the lessons, etc., but ultimately the success of the relationship is not remotely up to me.
Well, yes. But after that introduction, I'm sure there would be other circumstances that might resurrect the topic (pun intended
). So reiteration would definitely be in play. More importantly, I'd do my best to play my instrument very well, and in addition to my intrinsic motivation to do that, there would be the fact that the quality of my playing also represents the quality of the instruction I'm receiving.
Just change the topic from religion saving your soul to a kid with a nasty drug problem that you see as threatening their happiness, health and life. Of course we would do everything we can to help our kid get clean. However, we might disagree on what approaches would work. Constant lecturing and badgering and warnings of ODs and threats are a low probability move. Those are the exact kind of strategies that fail over and over while fracturing the relationship (which is the one thing can help).
Interesting questions. Do other animals not have free will? What is it when my dog obeys a command?
Did you think of that by yourself, or did someone plant the seed?
I don't know but I am not saying we aren't free thinkers, just not sure we always have free will in our actions.Did you think of that by yourself, or did someone plant the seed?
Of course, a lot depends on how you define "free will" - because all of our life experiences influence the next thing we do/say. So we may "choose" an action - but we have been funneled into that decision by a lifetime of actions.I don't know but I am not saying we aren't free thinkers, just not sure we always have free will in our actions.Did you think of that by yourself, or did someone plant the seed?
I lean towards the latter
I mean more like everything that’s going to happen has already happened kind of thing. We are conscious so we are aware of what’s going on and we know if what we’re doing is a bad idea or if the path we are on is problematic but we often can’t do anything about it. People’s actions so often betray their own values or internal logic that I just question sometimes if our attempts to be someone who we are not are often futile. So many people do things and then don’t even understand why they did them or try to justify after the fact. Do we have freewill? To what extent? How much are we fighting against some other force driving us to be a certain way or commit certain actions?Of course, a lot depends on how you define "free will" - because all of our life experiences influence the next thing we do/say. So we may "choose" an action - but we have been funneled into that decision by a lifetime of actions.I don't know but I am not saying we aren't free thinkers, just not sure we always have free will in our actions.Did you think of that by yourself, or did someone plant the seed?
Sam Harris would agree with you.
Yeah, all these analogies fall flat for me, because the promise of a chance at eternal life vs. damnation is worth so much more than learning/hearing music, beating traffic, etc. And even if people have heard it all before, if I believed, I’d have a hard time not reiterating it ad nauseam.
You don’t lecture, badger, or threaten. You offer to help, in a nonjudgmental fashion.
Yeah but also the person needs to come to see they have a problem. If they don’t see the problem or see the benefit of changing, they won’t want help. I’m sure we mostly agree here.
6 attempts to quit smoking means the person already wants to quit and sees the value in it. Most people who “aren’t saved” are not so because it’s too difficult but because they don’t see value in it. Two totally different things.
You’ve never wanted to change something- maybe even something really important and failed repeatedly? Think of all the people wanting to lose weight, learn a new instrument, stop drinking, save money, etc. Also, the idea of where do our thoughts come from? Some of the most meaningful things I’ve ever done have been almost without any thought at all, they just happened or I just knew it what’s I would do. I often find the more I have to think about something, the less likely it is to happen. Why did I become a teacher? No idea just knew it was what I wanted to do and I love it. I was confident who I was going to marry pretty much 8 years before we ever even went on a date. When I cleaned up my health, it just happened. I went on a treadmill one morning, threw away all my weed, started eating less and just kept doing it. There was no plan or forethought.
what percentage of people do you think have this ability?
Our preferences are complicated. When I see a hot chick, I definitely notice that she's hot. My upper brain knows that I'm married and I have no interest in "stepping out." It also knows that lust isn't the healthiest emotion to marinate in. But my lizard brain still knows that hot chicks are hot and pleasant to look at.
Perhaps I deal with teenagers too often but it seems like so many behaviors I see all day long, the person is unable to explain why they are doing what they are doing. Even adults I encounter say 1 thing and then do another. Perhaps that lizard brain is driving things and if it is, how much control we do have over it? Or we are just passengers observing the lizard brain go. It even gets into dating where it’s been demonstrated people will list the qualities they find attractive then go through speed dating and the people they mark having an interest in generally don’t align with what they said they valued.
Interesting phrase given the thread subject
That was intentional. People who learned the value of critical thinking from reading Richard Dawkins in 2005 would do well to apply those same lessons to other areas of their lives. Dawkins himself does.
Well sure. And I remind people all the time, too. But do you remind people when you're not in the office? Do you bring up the topic out of the blue when there is something unrelated being discussed? You bring it up in a proper context, where your professional input will carry some weight. But I bet even if you have had special personal projects outside work, people who you intentionally work on with this proselytization, you don't bring these things up incessantly in a personal setting. If I'm wrong, how successful has that been?
Incredible topic, I spend way too much time in the SP
People always get hung up on the issue of when the gospels were written, but nobody disputes that Paul's epistles were written in the period immediately after the crucifixion (within 20 years or so). All the main tenets of what would go on to become Christianity were obviously in wide circulation by that time, as evidenced by Paul having to set some his congregations straight. (It doesn't help to argue that some of "Paul's" letters were likely written by somebody else -- they're still known to be early and serve as good evidence that the ideas later expressed in the gospels were already in play among early Christians).
I feel like you're being way too harsh of these "primitive" people. Biblical literature is regarded as pretty extraordinary and sophisticated. And, I've started to wonder if we are too critical of their oral culture. I suspect they were much better at the telephone game than we are today in our culture.
Excellent post, appreciate you introducing one of my favs. Paul helped approve executions of professed Christians for quite some time.
Why would they be better at it?
I just think a culture that relies on oral transmission of information is going to be better at a game requiring accuracy of relaying oral information. It's their world and not ours, so they'll be better at it. In first century Judaism, they relied on memorization which came out of repeatedly hearing the same thing over and over.
While it hasn't hurt our relationship, I've had many of these discussions with my father (he's born again, I'm an atheist). To your point, I'm as convinced we become nothing but worm food as he is that I'm turning down an opportunity to be in heaven. And while there are certainly militant atheists out there, I think by and large the "you should believe what I believe' conversations are instigated by the religious. I've certainly never tried to convert a religious person, so it's off-putting when someone tries to convert me.
This is another one of those things that was asked and answered 20 years ago.
Here is how I rationalize where we are going and I think it works very well with Christianity and the "heavens"
Don’t know, maybe 10%? But I think it’s worth trying, repeatedly, because you never know how receptive the listener may be, given the fluidity of individual circumstances.
Yes, liberally and repeatedly, while demonstrating behavior consistent with religious values.
You can see my post about my sister. I’ve offered help/insight in non-professional settings for substance use, weight loss and exercise, too, with varying degrees of success. And I don’t do it all the time.
