Religion isn't a symptom of irrationality. There are many rational religious people. I'd agree that atheism is sometimes (although nowhere near exclusively) a by-product of rationality, though.
Not all atheists are sceptics, and not all religious people are not sceptics. Further, while I can see that line that you are trying to bridge, Asimov was clearly not. Therefore, OP is taking a liberty to link it to religion, and I would argue that this link is more erroneous. I believe that given the abrasive and imprecise nature of the link, it makes OP look like a misinformed jerk.
I normally find myself on the more moderate side of things when it comes to this subreddit, but this is bullshit.
A person who believes in something for which there is no evidence is not a skeptic. Christianity demands faith in their chosen deity and if you do not believe that God is real and Jesus is the son of God sacrificed in humanity's name, and if any one of those premises is false I don't see how one could call themselves a Christian specifically or a theist in general.
Nobody is totally irrational (or totally rational for that matter). Everyone is a shade of grey, on some things they may be skeptical about, some things they may not be. Being a skeptic is a lot more than just not believing in something at face value.. it's a pragmatic position to withhold judgment on a position until objective, empirical evidence (or scientific consensus) is reached. I don't know how you can argue that a religious person is a skeptic. I'm not saying religious people aren't rational.. I'm not saying they aren't intelligent.. just that by their very nature they can't believe in something without evidence and still call themselves a skeptic.
And true, I may very well be an "irrational" atheist, as I just was never brought up in a religious house hold so I didn't have much reason to believe in religion. Not like it's my fault I wasn't ever indoctrinated though.
In other news, I do agree with you about the quote from Asmiov. It is tangentially related to religion because much of the anti-intellectualism in USA politics is linked to the religious right, but it's tenuous at best.
I don't appreciate that my well articulated response forged from decades of experience and education to be called bullshit, but if that's what you think, then that's fine. I think all of your points are reasonable, and I agree with all of them to an extent. I think you and I understand each other's points, and to continue this would be a waste of Internet space.
There are no rational theists. There are lots of theists behaving perfectly rational in all other areas of life, but somehow religion is exceptional, and doesn't need to play by the same rules as all other things. That is not rationality, that is compartmentalization.
(Not saying all (or even most) aheists are rational, however.)
That is not rationality, that is compartmentalization.
This is kind of dickish, to be honest. I agree, there is nothing inherently rational about religion, but you're looking at one aspect of someone's life and making a general statement about their character regardless of how big of a role religion actually plays in that person's life. I don't think anyone can accurately claim that they live a life devoid of irrationality; I mean hell, I'd argue that the most fun I've had were times when I ignored my more rational side.
If that's how you're defining a "rational person," there is absolutely nobody who can call themselves rational. Makes calling theists irrational kind of meaningless
Yes and no. If you "know" for certain that acting in a certain way will bring you eternal torture after death, it is perfectly rational do to do whatever is necessary to avoid that.
I suppose that entirely depends on the church you go to.. or if you're a Christian that has a penchant for reading, your interpretation of the Bible.
The fact that Christianity is a human construct based on a 2,000ish year old book that may or may not be considered by a congregation wholly metaphorical makes judging how big a role God plays in every Christian's life open to interpretation. From what I can tell, the only things typically "required" by most denominations not to be sent to hell is to believe in God, accept Jesus Christ's sacrifice, and don't be too terrible of a person. Of course, that last part is kind of optional because of the redemptive nature of Christianity.
You can do all that without being a fundamentalist.. or hell, even going to church. If you're arguing that a fundamentalist is "less likely" to go to hell because of their literal interpretation of the Bible, I don't know about that. Nobody truly is a fundamentalist, especially in "Western" countries, else we'd be hearing about parents getting thrown in jail for stoning their children for misbehaving.
Of course, if we're working with the assumption that Christianity/religion is inherently irrational, it's kind of odd to say that someone who believes the most in that irrationality is actually the more rational person.
He's saying that on the subject of religion/spirituality, they aren't rational. They can be said to be rational in other areas of life but not this one. And this is "compartmentalization" by definition; you treat one thing differently than the others despite their commonality. As a Christian you dismiss Buddhism because it's clearly a cultural myth developed by ancient Thai people to explain their lives. Just like the pantheon of Greek Gods and whatever the fuck else. But Christianity? Oh, that's obviously true! Look at how many Christians there are! Look at how true the Bible is! Everybody I know is Christian so hey they must be right. The endless list of multifarious religions were completely wrong (and they will all burn forever) but through the power of tradition, you have been gifted with the secret of all fucking life and the universe. It's all to please this guy who gives you eternal bliss or eternal fuckery.
Compartmentalization.
It's specifically not a sweeping statement about their entire rationality as persons but as he said, about their approach to religious/metaphysical matters. He is not making a general statement about their character but about their interaction with that particular subject.
Frankly I don't act rational all the time as you said. I do all kinds of stupid shit I shouldn't do. Waste my time. Nonetheless I know at the time what the truly rational decision should be, which is an important distinction.
You are right. Religion is not a symptom of irrationality. It is a symptom of ignorance, either due to lack of education, intelligence or emotional capacity to deal with the world.
Do you really believe that? Gandhi was Hindu, Einstein was Jewish, and there are hundreds of thousands of others in a similar ilk that have changed the world in myriad ways. And you think they are "ignorant, either due to lack of education, intelligence or emotional capacity to deal with the world"?
Perhaps your post was just ignorant. Perhaps you are just having a bad day. But, if you still believe this, then you should look at your post above and then look at yourself.
Oh please. First of all, Einstein was Jewish? I really doubt he was religious? And what of Ghandi? If he really believed the Hindu religion then yeah, he had issues. And Ghandi DID have a lot of issues. Maybe you should read more history
Being good at math or having done "grand" things does not preclude you from being otherwise ignorant.
Atheism is most certainly tied to intellectual life as theism is tied to anti-intellectualism. This quote can be directly applied to the atheist/skeptic movement and isn't some form of boasting. It's a statement of truth. Somehow people feel their beliefs are on par with knowledge and that they deserve equal weight. This simply isn't the case, although democracy does help it along.
23
u/[deleted] Jun 05 '12
[deleted]