Do we have to be respectful of people who talk to trees?

[CarbonDate]

What level of absurdity do we have to "respect" in the interest of being politically correct?

[MindPilot]

1. Tree-talkers would be more likely to earn respect

because the tree, at least, exists.

[trotsky]

2. That's the slippery slope.

If, say, Christianity is supposed to be given a favored status in society, being immune from any sort of critical discussion, then why shouldn't tree worship? MindPilot, you make a good point, at least the object of their worship is clearly real! But other than that, and the number of people in each, can anyone tell me a fundamental difference between Christianity and tree worship?

[CarbonDate]

3. I'm not even talking about Wicca.

The guy actually hears trees talking to him. At what point do we think, hmm... maybe this is not a religion, but a mental illness?

[EvolveOrConvolve]

6. It's what the person believes that's important

The existence of a deity is just as real (although less physically tangible) to most people as a tree, and far more important. In fact, a religious person might see a tree as a manifestation of his or her deity's power.

A more proper analogy might be an ancient tribe that worshipped a nearby volcano. Their "God" could communicate with them by showing his/her displeasure through deadly eruptions. Was the volcano actually talking to the village people? No. Did the village people believe that the volcano was speaking to them? Yes.

The thing that me and Christians have in common is that we don't believe in the volcano God. We differ in that I consider belief in any deity to be false.

[FM Arouet666]

4. Respect the religion or the persons right to have the opinion?

I have been reading all the posts about MB's tomb stoning and the hostility that act engendered. I must say, I was a bit shocked, she has been on DU for quite a while, and being an atheist myself, never found her posts that provocative.

What I gather from reading Skinner's post, is that we are not mandated to respect religion, but to respect the other person's right to have a contrary opinion. There have been threads indicating that an even hand was not applied toward the offending members on both sides, with atheists baring the brunt. Perhaps, but we have to pick up the pieces and move on.

Guard against Ad Hominem when arguing with anyone, and pick apart their argument in a logical fashion. Sorry, to sound preachy, but I would hate to see others tomb stoned, or worse, this forum dumped.

[CarbonDate]

5. I remember back when I was a Christian....

...on a Christian forum, there was a woman who claimed to see demons all the time. The other Christians were all supporting her delusions, but I spoke up and said, "Is it possible that you're hallucinating? Have you thought about seeing a doctor?" The other Christians absolutely *jumped* on me for suggesting that the demons might not be real.

I lump the talking to trees thing into the same category. If you believe that trees have a divine life force or something, that's religion. If you actually hear trees talking to you, that's a delusion that needs to be checked out. That's what I'm talking about.

[FM Arouet666]

8. You were a christian?????

Sorry, I am a bit shocked. Anyway, as an atheist I think all religion functions through delusional thinking. I would find it difficult to discern the difference between delusion and religion. I guess, where DU is concerned, we have to assume most overtly delusional religious topics fall into "religion" and we have to have an even hand when responding. Doesn't mean you have to be nice, or accept the insanity, you simply have to avoid logical fallacies, such as ad hominem, when responding. Guess I will have to refrain from posting "F$#@ Jesus" in my responses. :evilgrin:

[Az]

12. Its a natural outcome

Its suprising it doesn't happen more often in fact.

Many xian denoms focus on the idea of actually conversing with god. They train themself to listen for anything that they believe to be god speaking to them. Be it signs or their own internal voice.

The brain can learn to give a new identity to various aspects of internal dialog. If a person is stressed enough and begins having thoughts they consider wrong they may begin to attribute these thoughts to a demon or evil force. This is particularly easy if they have been trained to hear gods already.

[PinkUnicorn]

13. Self-talk

Well, "self talking" is common enough, everyone holds internal dialog fairly often ('hmm, will this work - nah - maybe this') it when the internal thought/voice is assigned a separate persona such as a god, aliens, ones dog, etc that problems occur.

What is interesting though is why don't believers follow the commands of the crazy guy in the park who claims he is Jesus. They say he is nuts, but at the same time happily accept rolling on the floor babbling is a sign of possession.

Mind you I'm curious what 'the trees' are saying....

Feeed Me Seymore! Feeed me!

[funflower]

30. A rational person should eschew ad hominen attacks because they

are illogical and wrong, not because they are worried about the consequences.

[BiggJawn]

7. To apply that standard, we should have respected David Berkowitz...

...instead of jailing him as the "Son of Sam"?

some people claim that "Political Correctness" is an invention of the Right, but after the events of the last 24 hours here, and the 100 post-PLUS thread exploding in GD about NA sports mascots, I don't think so anymore.

Hey, Ari Flyshit said it best: "Watch what you Say, Watch what you DO. You have been NOTED in the Building."

[funflower]

31. If all Berkowitz did was believe dogs were talking to him, he would not

have deserved jail (although arguably, he should have been hospitalized). Even if he had been hospitalized with schizophrenia, for example, he would have still deserved respect as a human being. Respect does not imply agreement, and it is not the same thing as admiration.

[beam me up scottie]

9. Oh boy.

Go over to the Skeptics group and post this question.

We've been crucified too many times to count for not "respecting" the beliefs of the PCTs and woo woos.
:banghead:

[onager]

10. Let me just say...

:rofl:

I know what you're talking about. What surprised me was the number of people willing to admit trees talk to them.

Maybe we'll hit the trifecta: a tree will start quoting prophetic quatrains from Nostradumbass.

[Az]

11. All sorts of people believe all manner of things talk to them

Yes it's easy to dismiss. But still they believe. Are they sick? Neurologically damaged? If this were true then how do so many believe they are conversing with gods and trees and distant beings?

Its part of our neurology. Due to the rise of spiritual beliefs in the US such thinking is becoming more and more common place. Its a created dialog within one's own mind that the individual has learned to differentiate a particular voice as coming from elsewhere. There is our nice rational explanation.

Trick is we are not experiencing this phenom. To those that have left their minds so open that their brain falls out the experience is real and far more convincing than any explanation we have to offer.

So why is this happening? Part of the problem is that science and reason have grown incredibly complex. For some the difficulty of keeping up with scientific discoveries outweighs the benefits. So they turn away. Instead they listen to explanations about life that are more palatible. That fit their comfort zones better.

Still more factors are not the result of simple laziness. There are institutions that desire the people to not be so educated. Corporations desire a pliable public to peddle their wares to and dogmatic authoratative churchs do not want critical thought messing with their propogation.

So science and reason not having any advocates working to actively promote them face two of the most powerful forces in our world. Upshot is we are returning to an Age of Delusion.

It can be stopped. But it is by advocating science and reason. Not by trying to destroy the delusions. Smash one delusion and there are a hundred to take its place. And as soon as you are off smashing those delusions the original grows back as well.

You can't wake people up. They have to wake themselves up. The only thing you can do is keep fighting for reason and science. Be the champions they need. Represent it proudly. And let the people come to it as they wake themself from their stupor.

[CarbonDate]

14. You're probably correct.

One of the things that awakened me is that I never heard voices or saw anything supernatural. I was raised as a Catholic, went to Wicca for a while, and the whole time, the common thread was this: people who were very devout in whatever religion claimed that supernatural beings spoke to them and that I could hear them too if I just opened my mind a little more.

My capacity for self-delusion was never high enough to actually bring myself to believe that something outside myself was talking to me. And I really, really tried. I finally came to the conclusion that the problem wasn't with me, but with them. The fact that I was made to believe there was something wrong with *me* for such a long time is why I have such little patience for their delusions.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

15. Short answer: No.

Long answer: Hell no.

[muriel_volestrangler]

18. I'm afraid the correct answer is:

"No, until they show up on DU, at which point you have to regard it as a 'sincerely and deeply held belief', and thus off limits, unless you can persuade the moderators that you had no idea that a DUer made the claim".

[morgan2]

16. thats the problem with religious discussions

One persons religion will inherently conflict with anothers. Should xtians call jews silly because they don't accept Jesus as the messiah? Should agnostics yell at atheists because they can't really "prove" God doesn't exist. Discussing religion honestly is always going to offend someone. Personally I believe the bible is a book of myths, and most Christians are offended by this.

There is a fine line one has to walk when discussing religion. We can't look down on people simply for believing in a crazy religion. Everyone has their mental crutches. Religion might be it for many, but we all have our faults. If you want to get along, you can't talk down too or look down on others idiocies.

[trotsky]

17. Good points.

But the problems always come in when not "looking down" on someone for their beliefs becomes a form of legitimization. And once that happens, all bets are off. We get "intelligent design." We get cloud spirits cleaning up the air. We get an astrologer running the White House schedule. And so on.

At some point, a line must be drawn to say that "This is real, and this is pretend." Without that line, we suffer as a society.

[morgan2]

19. I agree

I did add in, "if you wanna get along." I don't wanna get along with anyone spouting on about intelligent design as science, or running their life around what an astrologer says.

[funflower]

20. Who cares what they believe? Respect them anyway.

You're not obligated to give them your wisdom on the subject of tree-talking.

Their inherent value does not derive from their intelligence, logic or freedom from delusion. These are not the only attributes that are of value in human beings. Every person is in some way your superior.

"Let him who is without sin cast the first stone."

[trotsky]

21. The problem, as I mentioned to in post #17, is...

what happens when someone wants to teach their beliefs about the origins of life in a public school science class? How far does "respect" go? And what about our responsibility to humanity's overall progress - does it help or hinder our advancement to have vast numbers of people thinking that a magical sky pixie will make everything OK in the end?

[Az]

22. The simple out for that

Is science class is for teaching accepted theories of science and the scientific process. It is not the battle ground upon which to try to introduce controvercial theories(be they theories or not).

In the mean time we and others that support reason have to champion it in the public. That means calling shows that promote fantastical thinking and demand shows representing the benefits of critical thought. Demanding shows that show science as a revealer of light and not some stodgy unbending monolith.

We need to promote reason just as others are promoting delusion.

[trotsky]

23. In case you hadn't noticed,

"It's not science!" isn't working. It isn't stopping the IDers at all. Since they don't acknowledge the validity of science in the first place, that response won't bother them at all. Their thinking is more along the lines of "Good, I'm glad it's not science, because evil materialistic science has caused ALL our spiritual problems and teaching kids that everything happened because goddidit will fix it."

[Az]

24. Didn't say that was the only tactic

We need to get out there and represent for science. The battle being waged is cultural. Science will falter and fail if it is not supported by the people. Look around. Science is the boogeyman today. You said it yourself. That perception needs people speaking up to be countered. It needs people standing up for ideals.

Things don't just get better. People make things get better. You and I recognise the problem. Perhaps we are the only two that do. If we don't make other people recognise the problem it is not going to just fix itself.

[trotsky]

25. But then,

if we try and encourage people to use logic & reason to evaluate claims, then we get attacked for not "respecting" their beliefs.

No, I'll never quit trying, but every day this seems more like a lose-lose situation. We lose if irrationalism & religion take over, and we lose when we get attacked for "not respecting" people's beliefs.

[Az]

26. Demon Haunted World, Unweaving the Rainbow

We don't have to pitch it as an oppositional thing. Instead promote the joy and sense of freedom knowledge gives us and wonders the science exposes.

I love science. It is one of our most amazing creations. A process by which we can come to understand the universe around us and our own natures as well. The wonders it shows us continue to increase exponentially. Rather than diminshing the things were turn its eyes upon it increases the wonder of them by exposing more and more truths.

People are drawn to positive images and repelled by negative ones. If our image is one of contrariness and destruction of beliefs then people will turn to more embracing positions. Give them something to appreciate about science rather than the cold realities of reliance on its dicoveries.

[trotsky]

27. In theory, it's a great idea.

Doesn't go over so well in practice.

It doesn't matter if you're a mean old bastard or a happy smiling guy, it appears that if you make any effort that causes someone to question their beliefs, you're accused of not respecting them.

[Az]

28. I respectfully disagree

I understand what you are saying but I have had too many productive conversations with believers to accept that.

No you are not going to convince them to set down their beliefs as a result of the conversation. You may very well have to walk away agreeing to disagree. But you will make changes in their view. You will expose them to new ideas if you do so with respect and patience. You will open their mind relative to what they started with. Whether they know it or not.

Sure there will always be individuals that twig off at the merest hint of disagreement. But if you cultivate a report based on respect for the individual you can make great advances in far more cases than if you have no regard for them at all.

[funflower]

29. One can stand by a definition of science that centers around that which is

testable either in the lab, by observation or through mathematics. "Respect" need not mean standing by while religionists take over the science classroom, but it does mean respecting their intelligence, sincerity and essential value as human beings - something which the most enlightened person is not qualified to devalue.

Fundies love their children, too.

[trotsky]

32. If someone really believes that the earth was created in 6 literal days,

then I reserve every right to question their intelligence. I'm sorry.

This is not about painting us as bad guys or thinking that fundies are less than human or don't "love their children," this is about a core conflict: whose path will humanity follow? The way of reason, science, and humanism, or the way of blind adherence, religion, and fear?

[arwalden]

33. Give That Man A Kewpie Doll!

[Az]

34. I agree on this aspect very strongly and it is a major problem

We have a problem in this society. Post Modernism demands that we allow all cultures and beliefs to have an equal say in the process. This is the only way you can have a diverse society function. Shut someone down and they will reject the system and if their group is large enough they will bring it to its knees.

Thus we have all gone along in this society arm in arm. Admittedly we have had problems. We have had to learn that some voices were being unjustly silenced. So we expanded our understanding of rights. And we continued to progress.

But science and understanding progressed too. As it did so it began to knock the pillars out from under some beliefs. Those that could not weather such an assault died out. Their followers absorbed by the society. They joined other groups or became individual voices in the society.

But some belief systems were able to keep their hold on its adherants despite the pressures from society. And they learned how to use the tools of Post Modern society to drive a wedge into it. They try to posit that their beliefs and ways are threatened by the advances society has made and the teachings of science.

But because we cannot in good conscious unlearn the things we have we cannot allow them to drag us back into the dark ages. So they abandon the social contract and begin going after control of the society. Something has to give. Post Moderernism does not work in a progressive society for the simple fact that Post Modernism allows for individuals to not accept the things learned as a Post Modern society. It contains its own seeds of destruction.

So here we are. In a society that does not allow us to jetison any idea or culture being threatened by an idea that wants to jetison another idea. We have no way to directly confront this within our current social model.

The reason they are rejecting the social model is that their way of life is threatened. Their desperation has resulted in a resurgance. But it is still threatened. The only way to combat this without a violent social revolution is to raise the popularity of the things that threaten them. And that is science, reason, tolerance, and progressive social morality.

We cannot directly remove their belief system. The only thing we can do is immunize our society to the regressive mind sets they promote. And that is done by continuing to increase understanding and compassion for our fellow human despite their beliefs. Tolerance is one of their weak spots. They cannot abide a tolerant society. Use it. Work to build a more tolerant society and they will flee it. They will turn their energies from trying to take over this society and they will reject it and turn in on their selves.

[funflower]

35. Why would you not respect an unintelligent person?

It's not their fault they are unintelligent, and, anyway, intelligence is way overrated and impossible to define. Disrespecting someone for their "short" IQ is no more logical than disrespecting someone for their short stature.

I truly believe that, in the long run, humanity will follow the path of reason, science and humanism, while, perhaps, retaining an open mind about the man behind the curtain. However, I also realize that my decision to respect or not respect a fellow traveler based on their religiosity or their intelligence won't make much difference. I choose to respect people, while not necessarily agreeing with their ideas.

[Az]

36. Its sort of like the inverse of entropy and order

In the long run reason will win out. But in the short term there can be pools of ignorance where faith tosses reason from its tower.

[funflower]

37. Wow. That's a great metaphor! Some of those pools are oceans!