Conversion a duty or a pain in the arse.

[ogre]

I've noticed a lot of comments criticising the religous for their attempts to convert others to their way of thinking.

Quite a few comments of "I have no time for organised religion" "If they leave me alone I'll leave them" "they have no right to impose their view on others" etc.

BUT

Does not the sceptic have a duty to his/her fellow human to convert the religous from their mistaken POV and convert them in to sceptics for their own good?

[hotchic]

ogre said:

I've noticed a lot of comments criticising the religous for their attempts to convert others to their way of thinking.

Quite a few comments of "I have no time for organised religion" "If they leave me alone I'll leave them" "they have no right to impose their view on others" etc.

BUT

Does not the sceptic have a duty to his/her fellow human to convert the religous from their mistaken POV and convert them in to sceptics for their own good?

Ogre, please!

Everyone has a right to their own point of view and has the right to express it, either side. The believers feel that converting the sceptics is for their duty. However, it is no-one's duty per se. I understand that not everyone is intelligent and can see the bigger picture, others too stubborn, however there are many many places that people can search to find 'their' truth.....including sites such as this.

With Jon creating this site and others, he has given people the opportunity to see his opinions without always badgering them.

Just by saying you do something 'for their own good' just makes people's blood start to boil.

[bobdezon]

ogre said:

Does not the sceptic have a duty to his/her fellow human to convert the religous from their mistaken POV and convert them in to sceptics for their own good?

I wouldnt think it appropriate to evangelicise scepticism, people detest being preached at. However presenting a clear case agaiinst their argument is fine with me. Some folk need to believe in crap, right or wrong. Its what gets them through the day. It is advantageous for them to be sceptical too, in the long run that is.

[Koolg]

ogre said:

I've noticed a lot of comments criticising the religous for their attempts to convert others to their way of thinking.

Quite a few comments of "I have no time for organised religion" "If they leave me alone I'll leave them" "they have no right to impose their view on others" etc.

BUT

Does not the sceptic have a duty to his/her fellow human to convert the religous from their mistaken POV and convert them in to sceptics for their own good?

[ogre]

I'm not advocating a POV at the moment, just exploring the possibilities.

Thread after thread here is full of people being fleeced, conned and otherwise led astray.

Those BEING deceived are obviously incapable of helping themselves.

Is it right to just say "oh well, eveyone has a right to their own POV it's none of my business"

OR

would not the "best" solutions to the woo merchants be to dry up their supply of victims, by actively getting scepticism taught in schools, setting up sceptics societies etc?

(ducks and runs for cover)

[exile]

I think there should be more critical thinking taught in schools, rather than the kids being told something and not allowed to question it.

[hellyp]

I agree with exile. Critical thinking should be taught. I don't think conversions are ethical, whichever side they come from. I don't believe it's right to attempt to convince someone of something, the veracity of which cannot be proven. It's basically fraud.

[ogre]

Ah but to come to the skeptical side they would be moving from "believing" in that which cannot be proved to critiquing and only believing what can be tested and proven. Such a change of POV would benfit society as a whole.

[hotchic]

ogre said:

Ah but to come to the skeptical side they would be moving from "believing" in that which cannot be proved to critiquing and only believing what can be tested and proven. Such a change of POV would benfit society as a whole.

In your opinion.

[MoonRiver]

ogre said:

Does not the sceptic have a duty to his/her fellow human to convert the religous from their mistaken POV and convert them in to sceptics for their own good?

A sceptic is inclined to question or doubt accepted opinions, or the truth of Christianity and other religions. It may be OUR opinion that the religious have a mistaken POV, however to attempt enforcing the sceptic POV on believers would not only be extremely arrogant, it would be totally futile.

The facts, as revealed on sites such as this, are evidence of the psychic fraudsters in operation. However, should people, though armed with the facts, chose to continue using the 'services' of discredited psychics then it is their right to do so. With the exception of (non-medical) 'healers' who I believe are despicable charlatons. I agree that everyone should be protected from this extremely dangerous form of showmanship by making it illegal. Diversity of thought and belief is not a bad thing and should be embraced.

[exile]

Too many people are told what to believe in and it is almost ingrained into them and very hard for them to accept any other explanation. If different opinions are given then they have a choice rather than none at all.

[ogre]

Hi Hotchic, actually this is not necessarily my opinion in that I'm doing my Devil's Advocate role and (trying to) stimulate a bit of debate. Once the thread has petered out I'll post up what I think (not that I assume that I'm right or anyone is necessarily interested).

I'm taking the POV here that humans are a social animal and pass on our attitudes and beliefs to the next generation.

Without organising and converting believers, the sceptics cannot pass on their POV so will either die off, or be irrelevant (or both) to the society within which they exist.

Belief is a very powerful human condition, it has survived totalitarian states and lots of
(damn got to get some work done - be back later)

[ogre]

"The facts, as revealed on sites such as this, are evidence of the psychic fraudsters in operation. However, should people, though armed with the facts, chose to continue using the 'services' of discredited psychics then it is their right to do so"

AHhhhh and there raises the Bugbear RIGHTS it's ugly head.

So the believers have a right to continue to waste their money, support frauds in their parasitic lifestyles and spread their weakness to others?

IF that is a RIGHT, should it be? Should they have it? Humans have a "right" to keep warm, but we take matches away from children and arsonists. Children we convert by education, arsonists (well I'm stopping there before I sidetrack down a diatribe)

A Society is made up of humans co-operating together, to do that they must have some commonality and trust in each other. The Anarchists viewpoint that everyone can have their own belief and go their own way can only function if there is unlimited resources so that everyone can be satisfied.

As resources are NOT unlimited then there has to be competition for those resources.

This applies to believers / sceptics in that they are both competing for humans as the resource to fund (sorry Jon I know that doesn't happen, and I'm broke as well) disseminate and develop their identity (scepticism or belief).

It's also why the bitterest attrocities have mostly been "blue on blue" styles, committed by one faction of a belief system on another. Protestant / Roman Catholic Sunni / Shia.

Both identities see that they are competing most keenly for those who's belief is closest to theirs, so it is important to exterminate the schism / heresy as they are the most dangerous.

[hotchic]

As much as it is human nature to want to co-operate and live together and want to believe what others tell them, especially if it is an attractive option.....it is always human nature to have the others that will question it.

That won't change.

Some people are not that intelligent and that won't change either.

If you feel SO strongly about something that you feel the need to 'preach' about it then by all means do so. However those who do that are frowned upon all over the world. I just send the dog to the door when a Jehovah's Witness turns up.

If Sceptics went around like that, converting people back then you would be avoided too.

Not everyone wants to listen.

[ogre]

When i was a teenager (many decades ago now) 4 of us used to hang around the pubs and clubs together.

My mate Alan we used to call "Topex testing ground" because of his acne.

However he did have a direct way with women. Through the evening he would stand next to a girl and say straight out "you gonna buy me a drink then". If she said no he would move on.
If she said "yes" he stayed. After 1/2 hour or so he would say "You going to give us a shag then". 9 times out of 10 he got his face slapped, but by the end of the evening he always left with a bird.
Me Phil and Roger just looked on in awe and jealousy (and TBH I still haven't had the guts? to try it).

The Jehovahs Witnesses and the other wooos operate on the same principle (also Nigerian "bankers"). 9 times out of 10 they get the dog or their face slapped, but by the end of the day they will always have access to a bank account.

(and this is not an urban myth, I can supply names and addresses, I think the pictures are in the loft somewhere

[Tetchy]

You can supply names and addresses of Nigerian bankers?
You should let the cops know.

T

[ogre]

I did have to give Alan a lot of credit, he was the least prejudiced person I ever knew when it cam to women.

No matter what she looked like, talked like (or sometime smelt like), no matter her race or religion, if she said "yes" he would always be faithful to her.

Until the next weekend / party / opportunity.

I could never figure it out.

Sorry, memories of teenage jealousy re-emerging

[steje73]

One of my mates was a bit like that. One night in Newcastle he got punched by a bloke who was wearing a heavy ring, and it cut his head quite badly. We had to go to hospital and had a two hour wait. Eventually a nurse came out and apologised, saying she had just come out of the resuscitation room. He replied that she looked quite good, considering. Left with her number. Unbelievable.

[exile]

Women are suckers for men with a gift of the gab. They sort of have a twinkle in their eye and a cheeky smile usually.

[bobdezon]

I got all of those, Im well in ;D