benlehman | My conversation starter for Atheists

My conversation starter for Atheists

It goes like this.

1) Consider a hypothetical world in which there is a study that conclusively proves that certain aspects of religious practice, or the practice of particular religion, has an immediate benefit to your health. (I'm aware that such studies exist in the real world, but they're flawed. I'm asking you to consider one that, to your eyes, is conclusive.)

a) Okay -> Go to 2.
b) I would never find such studies conclusive, regardless of the methodology or repeated results -> Go to END.
c) I cannot imagine such a world -> Go to END.

2) Now you've imagined this world. Would you take up that religious practice?

a) No, it's a bunch of superstition -> Go to END.
b) No, I barely even eat right anyway -> Go to 3.
c) Yes, of course -> Go to 3.

3) Consider yourself/someone else who purported to be an atheist, but took up this practice. Are they still an atheist?

a) No, duh -> Go to 4
b) Yes, duh -> Go to 4
c) Maybe, it's complicated -> Go to 4

4) Do you consider them more or less rational?

a) Yes, they're helping their health -> Go to End
b) No, they're practicing a superstition -> Go to End
c) Huh. -> Go to End

End) Huh. Isn't that ... interesting?

Threaded | Flat

The informal fallacy of false dilemma (also called false dichotomy, the either-or fallacy, or bifurcation) involves a situation in which only two alternatives are considered, when in fact there are other options. Closely related are failing to consider a range of options and the tendency to think in extremes, called black-and-white thinking. Strictly speaking, the prefix "di" in "dilemma" means "two". When a list of more than two choices are offered, but there are other choices not mentioned, then the fallacy is called the fallacy of false choice.

A placebo is a substance or procedure which a patient accepts as a medicine or therapy but which has no specific therapeutic activity for the condition. Any effect is thought to be based on the power of suggestion.

A placebo effect or placebo response is a therapeutic and healing effect of an inert medicine or ineffective therapy,[1] or more generally is the psychosocial aspect of every medical treatment.[2] Sometimes known as a non-specific effect or subject-expectancy effect, a placebo effect (or its counterpart, the nocebo effect), occurs when a patient's symptoms are altered in some way (i.e., alleviated or exacerbated) by a treatment, due to the individual expecting or believing that it will work. The placebo effect occurs when a patient is treated in conjunction with the suggestion from an authority figure or from acquired information that the treatment will aid in healing and the patient’s condition improves. This effect has been known since the early 20th century.

Do you mean religious practice without belief?

It seems to me that it's the belief that's a key factor. But I imagine that you can also get similar benefits from non-religious social practices. As long as you believe in them.

In the hypothetical world that you describe, such a practice wouldn't be religion - it would be science.

I base that on this: for a study to be conclusive, it must conform to the scientific method.

If it conforms to the scientific method it is both knowable and repeatable.

That means it can't be religous, by definition. No element of faith required, no particular mystery, no unseen forces at work.

It's an interesting thought experiment, though.

End) Huh. Isn't that ... interesting?

Well... no? I mean, I don't get it. Lots of helpful/interesting/good/healthy things have at one time been part of religious practice, and have since been adopted to non-religious contexts? What does it have to do with whether or not there is a god?

Sure it's interesting. Plenty of human beliefs/convictions are interesting. :)

Man, what. I don't care. I have arrived at my answers. Others have arrived at theirs. I don't care to talk about how we can't see eye to eye on something. That's tedium, and I have no place for it, being a devotee of fun.

Beyond which, I think you're being breathtakingly disingenuous with John, above, by claiming your post topic mentioning atheists has no bearing on whether or not the "test" should be regarded within the context of religion. I call shenanigans!

Granted, I find the kind of aggressive declaration of atheism John practices to be pretty tedious too. Even if I happen to share the atheist's viewpoint.

I'd like to see a similar conversation starter for theists, in which you find out if they'd practice a different religion if it had proveable health benefits.

a
b
b
a

Sadly, I find these questions kind of lacking something to actually start a conversation. After all, the answers are kind of fairly obviously biased.

1) Some of your readers might possibly lack the imagination for your scenario (b/c), but given you post to a bunch of gamers who spend a decent chunk of their time in imaginary worlds, that's not too likely.

2) Option A directly contradicts your stated facts, and is not a valid choice. Options B and C are not incredibly intersting, though perhaps somewhat informative as to how much a given respondee cares about their health on a regular basis.

3) Given that being an atheist is about what you believe in and not what you do, the only sensible answer is B.

4) Well, I think doing things to improve one's health is usually considered rational unless it hurts others/etc (though I do not think that is your premise). So, there is really only one answer again - A.

I think more interesting questions are:
Imagine if you lived in a world where devout believers of Religion A lived longer and healthier lives then devout believers of Religion B and both lived longer than those that did not truly in their hearts believe in A or B. Furthermore, imagine that these facts were well known throughout the world. What kinds of people would not believe in either A or B and why? What kinds of people would believe in B, but not A and why? What kind of people would believe in both and what how long would they live?

1) A (see: accountability w/o democracy)

2)C

3)B/C (probably? By some definitions of atheist, anyway)

4)A

End)Well, we've had this conversation before, so...

While maybe more people are familiar with the concept of thought exercise, maybe they're not able to connect with the idea of it existing or being enacted upon the internet?

At some point, I'll have to ask you a bit more about this in terms of how it's worked out as a conversation starter from you.

ACCC here, more or less. And I've got some actual experience with this scenario, too. I have been - at various points, on and off - a praxis-only Buddhist, a magician, and a neopagan ritualist. I don't believe in (in the theological sense) any of these things. Nonetheless, I find them useful to do. And "atheism" makes no sense to me as a concept - it depends on a concept of religion that makes no sense either.

I refer to ritual praxis as DIY brain-hacking/social engineering, and I think of most religious practices over human history as fundamentally instrumental - aimed at producing some beneficial result for *somebody*. Some are more well-aimed than others.

The complicating factor for me has always been the social one: "bad faith" isn't exactly a nice thing to bring into other people's community of practice (or at least I feel that way), so I tend not to fully participate. Which means I probably lose out on some proportion of the benefits available to a more genuine practitioner.

2d) I would take up the study of why the specific practice has the effect it does.

Interesting? Not really. Too "open", as a question, to say anything at all.

Three examples::

A) A world very much like our own, where in many parts of the world practicing the local religion has the immediate benefit of avoiding a lot of trouble, get the better work, eat better, not be shunned by the neighborhood or beaten by the police.

So...
Would you take up that religious practice?
c) Yes, of course, I am a coward.

Consider yourself/someone else who purported to be an atheist, but took up this practice. Are they still an atheist?
b) Yes, duh

Do you consider them more or less rational?
c) Huh. It's matter of courage and integrity, not rationality

Isn't that ... interesting?
No, not really.

Example B
A world very much like our own, where everybody worship money and always try to screw everybody else. (If you worship money and consider this description offensive, I can change it to Satanism, it's not so important for the example)

So...
Would you take up that religious practice?
b) No, I barely even eat right anyway

Consider yourself/someone else who purported to be an atheist, but took up this practice. Are they still an atheist?
b) Yes, duh

Do you consider them more or less rational?
c) Huh. It's matter of honesty, not rationality

(you can use this same example for every religious practice that push you to screw other people, so you can use it for almost any religion, really. Money and Satanism were only two example that I hope will not cause a backlash)

Example C:
This world. An orgiastic cult that practice as the only religious practice safe sex very often. Some scientific study demonstrate that it's good for stress relief and lessen depression.

Would you take up that religious practice?
a) No, I can't. My girlfriend would murder me, nullifying any health benefit.

Consider yourself/someone else who purported to be an atheist, but took up this practice. Are they still an atheist?

c) Maybe, it's complicated. For my neighbors I would even be more atheist than before, but my friends cultist would see me celebrate the cult with great fervor.

4) Do you consider them more or less rational?
I would tend to lose rationality every time I practiced...

End) Huh. Isn't that ... interesting?

No, not really. These questions are grounded in air, the only answer can only be "it depends". Maybe you should consider a simpler way of communication. Telling us what you want to say, for example...

Moreno R.

You should clarify what you mean by "certain aspects of religious practice, or the practice of particular religion". Does this refer to the carrying out of a physical ceremony? Social behavior? Mental/psychological belief?

These are fundamental different, and call for different answers.

Threaded | Flat

False Dilemma

Also, Placebo

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

Well, religious studies people keep calling me an atheist...

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject