Improving communication with theists

[Jakeness]

I apologize if this article has been posted before, I don't come here often anymore. This struck me as something many people here (people in general, actually) could benefit from reading.

How to Not Lose an Argument

[Philosophos]

Classic article.

[Brian37]

Exactly how does one "improve" with family and friends or co-workers who insist on living in a mythological past? It is not to say we should be cruel or mean, but when someone claims the moon is made of cheese, and you know it is not, where do you draw the line?

Even outside the issue of religion, I cant count the amount of friends on the left who have family and friends on the right who AGREE with us on a multitude of topics, but because our loved ones or friends are stuck in loyalty issues, cant get passed that time has passed them by.

You don't improve by coddling insecurities. You don't improve by living in the past.

[Davka]

Exactly how does one "improve" with family and friends or co-workers who insist on living in a mythological past? It is not to say we should be cruel or mean, but when someone claims the moon is made of cheese, and you know it is not, where do you draw the line?

Even outside the issue of religion, I cant count the amount of friends on the left who have family and friends on the right who AGREE with us on a multitude of topics, but because our loved ones or friends are stuck in loyalty issues, cant get passed that time has passed them by.

You don't improve by coddling insecurities. You don't improve by living in the past.

This paragraph from the article addresses your question:

"So try to show you're not just starting Standard Debate #4457. I remember once, during the middle of a discussion with a Christian, when I admitted I really didn't like Christopher Hitchens. Richard Dawkins, brilliant. Daniel Dennett, brilliant. But Christopher Hitchens always struck me as too black-and-white and just plain irritating. This one little revelation completely changed the entire tone of the conversation. I was no longer Angry Nonbeliever #116. I was no longer the living incarnation of All Things Atheist. I was just a person who happened to have a whole bunch of atheist ideas, along with a couple of ideas that weren't typical of atheists. I got the same sort of response by admitting I loved religious music. All of a sudden my friend was falling over himself to mention some scientific theory he found especially elegant in order to reciprocate2. I didn't end up deconverting him on the spot, but think he left with a much better appreciation of my position."

One thing to remember as you debate with religious people is that most of them are not the moronic, illogical idiots you tend to encounter on Internet discussion boards. Many of them are thoughtful, intelligent, and educated. They simply happen to be caught in a morass of compartmentalized thinking that was taught to them from an early age, and the idea of abandoning that worldview is terrifying. So don't attack their faith head-on. Instead, find common ground. Maybe you are in awe of the cosmos (if you're not, you should be!). Perhaps there are areas of the Human Experience which you agree are mysterious and difficult to explain. Maybe you just like the same music.

Ex-Christians like myself are not the result of hard-headed arguments with atheists who were out to prove us wrong. We are the result, rather, of a slow dribble of information over time, which caused us to recognize how tenuous our theistic positions really were. When someone claims that there is "evidence" that proves a Young Earth, gently steer them towards the mountain of evidence indicating the opposite, and then change the subject.

[GurrenLagann]

^ Well said Davka. And as a former Fundamentalist turned atheist, I too can attest merely expelling vitriol at a theist during a discussion is an instant non-starter. I do somewhat disagree with that guys opinion of Hitchens, in the sense that he wasn't so black and white about it. The one thing that mostly bugged me about him though was how he usually ended his 100,000 years argument, often by saying something like "This isn't believe by me, and cannot be believed by a thinking person." That is probably the one thing I wish he hadn't said so much, because it stops most of the theists that listened to him from accepting the Reductio that preceded it because they likely felt insulted.

[Colanth]

How does one "not lose an argument" when a 4-year-old insists that there's an invisible monster under his bed?  One doesn't.  If one cares about the child, one doesn't point out how stupid 4-year-olds are (if one is comparing them to adults - most 4-year-olds are pretty intelligent for 4-year-olds).  But one doesn't modify one's statements to indicate that, yes, it's possible that there really is an invisible monster under the child's bed.

[Davka]

How does one "not lose an argument" when a 4-year-old insists that there's an invisible monster under his bed?  One doesn't.  If one cares about the child, one doesn't point out how stupid 4-year-olds are (if one is comparing them to adults - most 4-year-olds are pretty intelligent for 4-year-olds).  But one doesn't modify one's statements to indicate that, yes, it's possible that there really is an invisible monster under the child's bed.

True.

Neither does one reply "there's no such thing as monsters, don't be ridiculous!" The most caring and effective method would be to go get a flashlight, take the child by the hand, and look under the bed together. Then one can say "See? No monsters. There's nothing to be afraid of, it's OK. Heck, there's not even enough room for monsters under here! Maybe a bunny-rabbit or a kitty-cat could fit under your bed. Next time you get scared, think about the bunny-rabbits that could be under here, wiggling their little noses!"

Fundamentalists need to be shown that the demons they fear are not really there, and that there is no room for demons in the known Universe. Telling them that it's stupid to believe in demons won't help. We need to take them by the hand and help them shine the light of logic on the darkness of their ignorance and fear.

[Colanth]

Fundamentalists aren't 4 years old, so they don't need to be treated like 4 year olds - unless they accept being treated like 4 year olds in all things.  If they want to be treated as adults - one of the things adults do is face reality.  Not by being shown with a flashlight, but by accepting that the only thing that's real is reality.  Religion is for those too mentally young to accept reality.

[Thumpalumpacus]

I treat people like people.  With some, we can discuss faith, or its absence, because we can agree to disagree.  With others, the topic isn't mentioned, because they cannot leave it at disagreement.

I personally don't care what someone else thinks, so long as it doesn't affect my son or myself.

[WitchSabrina]

If your goal is to convert theists - then by all means - sure.  Show them all the patience and care you can muster.  Not all non-believers have the GOAL of converting people.   Some of you wish this nicey-nice PCness all the time when dealing with theists and of course you're entitled to your opinion.  Just as I and others are entitled to OUR opinion that working to convert theists is ridiculous.
"You cannot reason a person out of a position they did not reason themselves into"
(who said that?)

So........excuse me if Some of us find converting theists similar to watching a three ring circus.  You want the headache or that makes you feel better about yourself - go ahead.  Quite frankly I find the practice  as nothing more than theists wishing to convert us.  But arrogance has it's place among non-believers same as anywhere else, I suppose.

I don't save people.  I gave that up for Lent.  

And I HAVE a 4 yr old grandson and Yes I say to him "Don't be silly. I don't think there's monsters under your bed, Julian.  In fact, I'm convinced there's no monsters under your bed.  Now, curl up here and explain to me why you think there's monsters under your bed, son?"
He explains.  We examine, reach the conclusion there's no monsters and then he sleeps soundly.
Saying "NO there are no monsters"  works Juuuuuust fine.  In fact, since we introduce children to mythology to help them think creatively we should always back that up with some good, healthy reality.  Teaching children the difference between fantasy and reality is part of parenting and grand-parenting, teaching and mentoring.

I don't consider grown up adults to be 4 yr olds; especially not theists.  All I can really do is prove I am NOT the monster in believing differently than they do.... primarily by how I live my life.   If they are yet unconvinced and need the crutch of Jesus to hold them up or complete their lives - Who the FUCK am I to tell them otherwise???
And if they take it upon themselves to Sell me Jesus so I can be complete as they are - that's when I can frankly say "shut the fuck up"  -  "Nope." Or ............  "naaa............that's not gonna work for me."  My choice.
I don't owe them a damn thing.   I don't owe You a damn thing.  I don't owe the body of Atheists as a whole a damned thing.  Nor last time I checked is there some non-believer Cult I took vows to uphold and live by whereby my task and goal is to convert the theists-du-jour.

[aitm]

I don't go around telling people about my ideas or beliefs, and I don't try to convert anyone. When ever a discussion comes up I always take the semi-agnostice stance, typical opening line such as: " I have trouble with religion for a lot of reasons, from the amount of gods in our history, to the similar stories of many of them that pre-date christianity, to somthing more obvious like cultural evolution, to the size of the universe which is makes us even smaller than the atom is to us. Put all that together and I think its a little crazy to start thinking a god did all this just to tell us women should be separated from society when they are on the rag, or that a dragon can live inside the earth big enough to gather 1/3 of the stars in its tail...I mean, thats a little silly ya know?"

[widdershins]

Thanks to bri and aitm, I need add nothing.

[Brian37]

Exactly how does one "improve" with family and friends or co-workers who insist on living in a mythological past? It is not to say we should be cruel or mean, but when someone claims the moon is made of cheese, and you know it is not, where do you draw the line?

Even outside the issue of religion, I cant count the amount of friends on the left who have family and friends on the right who AGREE with us on a multitude of topics, but because our loved ones or friends are stuck in loyalty issues, cant get passed that time has passed them by.

You don't improve by coddling insecurities. You don't improve by living in the past.

This paragraph from the article addresses your question:

"So try to show you're not just starting Standard Debate #4457. I remember once, during the middle of a discussion with a Christian, when I admitted I really didn't like Christopher Hitchens. Richard Dawkins, brilliant. Daniel Dennett, brilliant. But Christopher Hitchens always struck me as too black-and-white and just plain irritating. This one little revelation completely changed the entire tone of the conversation. I was no longer Angry Nonbeliever #116. I was no longer the living incarnation of All Things Atheist. I was just a person who happened to have a whole bunch of atheist ideas, along with a couple of ideas that weren't typical of atheists. I got the same sort of response by admitting I loved religious music. All of a sudden my friend was falling over himself to mention some scientific theory he found especially elegant in order to reciprocate2. I didn't end up deconverting him on the spot, but think he left with a much better appreciation of my position."

One thing to remember as you debate with religious people is that most of them are not the moronic, illogical idiots you tend to encounter on Internet discussion boards. Many of them are thoughtful, intelligent, and educated. They simply happen to be caught in a morass of compartmentalized thinking that was taught to them from an early age, and the idea of abandoning that worldview is terrifying. So don't attack their faith head-on. Instead, find common ground. Maybe you are in awe of the cosmos (if you're not, you should be!). Perhaps there are areas of the Human Experience which you agree are mysterious and difficult to explain. Maybe you just like the same music.

Ex-Christians like myself are not the result of hard-headed arguments with atheists who were out to prove us wrong. We are the result, rather, of a slow dribble of information over time, which caused us to recognize how tenuous our theistic positions really were. When someone claims that there is "evidence" that proves a Young Earth, gently steer them towards the mountain of evidence indicating the opposite, and then change the subject.

Thank you for your lecture. Hitchens was damned good and despite what you or others may think, he had lots of friends and Christians he debated with who liked him. He worked at the most famous media magazines in the world, such as Vanity Fair and Newsweek. He was a great defender of oppressed Muslims and Muslim women.

Life is never either or or only one way will work all the time. Hitchens I am quite sure had plenty of family and friends throughout his life who believed to some extent. You don't make it in mass media without knowing how to deal with diversity.

There is no one way to skin a cat, and there is no one right way to approach people because people respond differently to different things. Please speak only for yourself and do not dare falsely criticize Hitchens. If anyone is going to be the spark of the Age Of Enlightement for the east, he most certainly would be one of the biggest reasons.

He empowered me merely being an atheist, and I am quite sure many atheists that are Arab and even Muslims who cant be openly liberal in the east, more and more people can and will be emancipated by his words. You don't coddle bullies or tyrants and Hitchens was the person that did just that, stood up to bullies and tyrants.

I hate it when people try to suggest atheists always play nice. No, context matters and it depends on the context. And still, there are always nuts who won't listen no matter how nice you try to be. I am sorry this long convoluted tripe is just fancy PC crap. You can do things the way you wish, ok, but there is no script to being an atheist. If we are to have theists to see us as individuals, then these internal debates are exactly what they need to see.

So speak for yourself, but do not speak for me.

[Davka]

If your goal is to convert theists - then by all means - sure.  Show them all the patience and care you can muster.  Not all non-believers have the GOAL of converting people.   Some of you wish this nicey-nice PCness all the time when dealing with theists and of course you're entitled to your opinion.  Just as I and others are entitled to OUR opinion that working to convert theists is ridiculous.
"You cannot reason a person out of a position they did not reason themselves into"
(who said that?)

Point taken. If you have no desire to share your worldview with those who disagree, by all means don't bother with fake niceness. When JWs knock on the door, "fuck off and never come back" is a perfectly legitimate response.

And I HAVE a 4 yr old grandson and Yes I say to him "Don't be silly. I don't think there's monsters under your bed, Julian.  In fact, I'm convinced there's no monsters under your bed.  Now, curl up here and explain to me why you think there's monsters under your bed, son?"
He explains.  We examine, reach the conclusion there's no monsters and then he sleeps soundly.
Saying "NO there are no monsters"  works Juuuuuust fine.

Except what you just described isn't simply saying "there are no monsters," it's using a combination of love and reason to discuss the possibility of monsters, so as to help your grandson realize for himself that there are no monsters.

I don't consider grown up adults to be 4 yr olds; especially not theists.

I consider all people to be little kids who are pretending otherwise. YMMV.  :P

All I can really do is prove I am NOT the monster in believing differently than they do.... primarily by how I live my life.

Amen! Preach it! Praaaaise the FSM and IPU!   :-D

I don't owe them a damn thing.   I don't owe You a damn thing.  I don't owe the body of Atheists as a whole a damned thing.  Nor last time I checked is there some non-believer Cult I took vows to uphold and live by whereby my task and goal is to convert the theists-du-jour.

True, you can ignore the theists and go on with your life. For myself, that's not an option, for two reasons: first, as a former fundamentalist, I feel a moral obligation to help others who are stuck in that ugly mindset. And secondly, I am painfully aware that, in the USA (where I live), fundamentalist Christianity is responsible for some of the most insane, bizarre political views out there - and those people are actively attempting to impose their insanity on me via legislation. In many states the lunatics are already running the asylum.

So, yeah, if you don't want to talk to theists, or don't care what they believe, by all means fire off a salvo of "go fuck yourself." If for some reason you do wish to attempt conversation with these people, however, a little bit of decency goes a long ways.

[Davka]

Exactly how does one "improve" with family and friends or co-workers who insist on living in a mythological past? It is not to say we should be cruel or mean, but when someone claims the moon is made of cheese, and you know it is not, where do you draw the line?

Even outside the issue of religion, I cant count the amount of friends on the left who have family and friends on the right who AGREE with us on a multitude of topics, but because our loved ones or friends are stuck in loyalty issues, cant get passed that time has passed them by.

You don't improve by coddling insecurities. You don't improve by living in the past.

This paragraph from the article addresses your question:

"So try to show you're not just starting Standard Debate #4457. I remember once, during the middle of a discussion with a Christian, when I admitted I really didn't like Christopher Hitchens. Richard Dawkins, brilliant. Daniel Dennett, brilliant. But Christopher Hitchens always struck me as too black-and-white and just plain irritating. This one little revelation completely changed the entire tone of the conversation. I was no longer Angry Nonbeliever #116. I was no longer the living incarnation of All Things Atheist. I was just a person who happened to have a whole bunch of atheist ideas, along with a couple of ideas that weren't typical of atheists. I got the same sort of response by admitting I loved religious music. All of a sudden my friend was falling over himself to mention some scientific theory he found especially elegant in order to reciprocate2. I didn't end up deconverting him on the spot, but think he left with a much better appreciation of my position."

One thing to remember as you debate with religious people is that most of them are not the moronic, illogical idiots you tend to encounter on Internet discussion boards. Many of them are thoughtful, intelligent, and educated. They simply happen to be caught in a morass of compartmentalized thinking that was taught to them from an early age, and the idea of abandoning that worldview is terrifying. So don't attack their faith head-on. Instead, find common ground. Maybe you are in awe of the cosmos (if you're not, you should be!). Perhaps there are areas of the Human Experience which you agree are mysterious and difficult to explain. Maybe you just like the same music.

Ex-Christians like myself are not the result of hard-headed arguments with atheists who were out to prove us wrong. We are the result, rather, of a slow dribble of information over time, which caused us to recognize how tenuous our theistic positions really were. When someone claims that there is "evidence" that proves a Young Earth, gently steer them towards the mountain of evidence indicating the opposite, and then change the subject.

Thank you for your lecture. Hitchens was damned good and despite what you or others may think, he had lots of friends and Christians he debated with who liked him. He worked at the most famous media magazines in the world, such as Vanity Fair and Newsweek. He was a great defender of oppressed Muslims and Muslim women.

Life is never either or or only one way will work all the time. Hitchens I am quite sure had plenty of family and friends throughout his life who believed to some extent. You don't make it in mass media without knowing how to deal with diversity.

There is no one way to skin a cat, and there is no one right way to approach people because people respond differently to different things. Please speak only for yourself and do not dare falsely criticize Hitchens. If anyone is going to be the spark of the Age Of Enlightement for the east, he most certainly would be one of the biggest reasons.

He empowered me merely being an atheist, and I am quite sure many atheists that are Arab and even Muslims who cant be openly liberal in the east, more and more people can and will be emancipated by his words. You don't coddle bullies or tyrants and Hitchens was the person that did just that, stood up to bullies and tyrants.

That's all very fine, but WTF does it have to do with anything I said? I merely quoted the article, I didn't endorse it.

I hate it when people try to suggest atheists always play nice. No, context matters and it depends on the context. And still, there are always nuts who won't listen no matter how nice you try to be. I am sorry this long convoluted tripe is just fancy PC crap. You can do things the way you wish, ok, but there is no script to being an atheist. If we are to have theists to see us as individuals, then these internal debates are exactly what they need to see.

I don't think the article is suggesting that atheists always need to play nice. I read it as saying that IF you wish to engage in debate with theists with the aim of changing their minds, THEN you should play nice.

So speak for yourself, but do not speak for me.

Hah! I'll speak for you any time I like, buster! Just try and stop me!