I'm going to congratulate you. It's taken me several replies before realising that you're a troll - you have gotten further than most.
Kudos.
- Posts
- 1
- Comments
- 107
- Joined
- 3 yr. ago
- Posts
- 1
- Comments
- 107
- Joined
- 3 yr. ago
You kinda did.
"Is that a crazy way to phrase..."
And now I've answered it twice, from two different angles. You're going to have to rephrase your question if you're not satisfied at this point, because I don't know what you want from me.
You asked what I meant by my sentence and I clarified it.
For example, I personally find the idea of transubstantiation weird. To my mind, that does not provide evidence that all religion is wrong, just that maybe strict Catholicism maybe isn't for me.
Ah, but they can get you because a bunch of zeros isn't "a number".
You could cross out the first 1000000... leaving just the last zero, though.
Not really. It's an observation that most religions have some dogmatic and scriptural aspects that can be seen as either absurd or abhorrent.
Most large religions have been co-opted at some point in history by powerful people to do some terrible things.
If you were anti-religion, there's a lot of things to take shots at.
OK, let's go through the motions.
"Conversion to atheism"
Ah, but atheism isn't a belief system, it's the absence of one.
Yes I know, I'm not asserting that atheism is a belief system or a religion or anything like that
But you used the word conversion, as if it was a religion
Yes because you're trying to change my beliefs and win me over to your way of thinking. Conversion is the correct word.
But atheism is the default human position, so you can't convert to it
Humans are social creatures. World views, philosophies and beliefs are cultural, not biological. Atheism is no more the default position than English is the default language. Whatever you start off with, that's your default position.
I'm sorry for putting words in your mouth here, and I hope I haven't put up a strawman argument, but like I said - conversion really is the correct word.
I realise I mightn't have won you over, and that's fine, but this is a mad thing to get hung up on.
BTW, I do appreciate you doing the legwork and actually digging out the definition.
I get what you're saying, but you're wrong. I've used the word correctly. Genuinely, look it up.
Sorry, but it's true. I'm afraid you're going to have to take it up with a higher authority than me (i.e. the dictionary people) if you want to change how the word is used.
It's the word for changing someone's belief system not, as you seem to think, giving someone a new belief system.
Sorry, but I'm correct here.
Also, here's additional lesson for you - you started your reply admitting that the question was asked in bad faith, that I did spot what you were talking about, and that you do know that I'm talking about atheism. Then you finish with "so my question stands".
No it doesn't. You understood fully what I was talking about in both the post you replied to and my response. So it doesn't stand - you already knew the answer.
Look, I don't mind you having a crack at being Mr I'm-Very-Clever-Catch-You-Out-On-Word-Meanings, but at least do it well.
Hmm. I'm going to go ahead and assume this is a bad-faith comment. Despite that, I'll try to help.
I'm guessing from the phrasing that you're not aware, but if you're trying to change someone's belief system, it's called conversion.
I appreciate that you were probably trying to do the "atheism isn't a belief, it's a lack of a belief" thing, but unfortunately that's how the language works in this case.
It always starts from the assumption that I'm an atheist too. They're all friends, by the way, so don't picture some kind of weird high-pressure pitches on the street.
Also I want to make it clear that I'm not trying to conflate being atheist and being anti-religious - my friend in this story however is in the "religion is ultimately the cause of every war in history" camp.
Anyway, very basically, I'd done something nice. Another work friend was talking about it, and my anti-religion friend responded with "see, he's an objectively nice person, no religion needed or anything". And it was at this point I revealed my secret identity, and the discussion began.
Just for balance, over my 44 years, I've also had a Scientology pitch, a Jehovah's Witnesses pitch (old-school knocking on the door style), and an uncomfortably high-pressure pitch from what I'm sure was one of those churches set up to scam immigrants.
But outside of those, the main people who have tried to change me have been friends with strong anti-religious views.
My experience has been the exact opposite!
I suspect it's a cultural thing, though. I'm British, but I know America has a very aggressive evangelical base. There are mega-churches and politicians and sports people are always talking about God and Jesus and we just don't have that over here.
On the other hand, a few atheists I know have tried to "convert" me before.
I'm guessing it's a certainty thing. From what I've seen of the American churches, some of them are absolutely borderline cults. So of course the folk are certain that they're right.
And there's certainly enough ammunition in religion as a whole for anyone who hates religion to think that they're right.
Absolutely love liquorice - well at least the British version of it which is like 50% aniseed. Not so much a fan of the Nordic version which tastes saltier than salt.
Other often-contentious dislikes of mine:
- Butter (ish - I have a really low tolerance before it tastes like it's gone rancid)
- Yogurt
- Fish (fish that doesn't really taste of anything, e.g. cod, is ok)
- Vinegar
I know taste is subjective, but as far as I'm concerned, those are three gigantic nopes. 😝
I wonder how many people dislike the same groups of things?
In the UK the two main categories for schools are private schools and state schools.
"Public schools" are, unintuitively, a subset of private schools, typically the very old very posh ones.
The term is archaic, but refers to the fact that they weren't run by the state or by the church - i.e. they were run by the public. Of course, this refers to a board of governors made of the super-wealthy, not the average man on the street.
Eton and Harrow are particularly famed for churning out people who end up as Prime Ministers and other high-ranking officials. It's not just the money, but the connections you build there as well. They're also famed for churning out borderline psychopaths who literally think the rest of the world is there to cater to their comfortable lifestyles.
It took me a second because, confusingly, our "public schools" are what much of the world would simply call private schools. These are the super posh schools like Eton or Harrow.
That's true, but in fairness all of humanity bears that legacy. The crusaders weren't doing what they did just because of Christianity, it was because they were humans, doing what humans always do.
People in power have always used religion as a tool to further their own ends. It's true throughout history, it's still true today.
I use ESUN PLA+ for printing minis and would recommend it to anyone.
For reference, the only filament I've used that came out nicer was SUNLU high-speed PLA, but would NOT recommend for minis (it can't cope with the constant retractions).
Oh, and also prime your models before painting them. I just use ordinary spray primer that you can get for dirt cheap - Tetrosyl Trade Spray / Hycote / Motip are all good brands. Just make sure you don't get gloss finish and you'll be fine!
Skullface Bookseller Honda-san is very respectable, though completely bonkers.
Yep, no more reaching the airport at the last second and being hurried onto a plane.
"Sorry, you didn't show up two hours early - there's no way we're letting you on".
No, it's fine.
I've grabbed your Collins as an example - I promise it's not been cherry-picked, it was the first I clicked on!
"If someone converts you, they persuade you to change your religious or political beliefs. You can also say that someone converts to a different religion."
Would it qualify as changing my religious beliefs? I think so. It's you that's inferring that it needs to be to another religion.
Ok, second part.
"I get that a large part of Abrahamic religions in particular is to obey and not question, as well as theism being necessary to be adopted into the religion"
No you don't, because you're wrong. I don't mean that in a harsh way - it's easy to look at listen to all of the hard-line religious folk and think that's the norm. The truth is that they're weirdos.
A big part of most Abrahamic religions is questioning the dogma, theology, even the scripture. It's been this way forever too.
And yes historically, bad people have used religions (and still do) as a pretext for horrific atrocities, but unfortunately that's a problem with any organisation that places too much power on an unhinged leader.
Look, an example might help. A little while back, the Church of England put out a statement about how they didn't intend to change their stance on not allowing gay marriage in churches. It was, to my eyes, an utterly unnecessary statement to make, and moreover, completely at odds with the "unconditional love" message.
I asked my vicar if we could talk about it and explained that I don't feel comfortable being associated with a religion that publicly makes statements like that.
I found out that she herself has performed several same-sex marriages, just not in a church. As have many of the other vicars around here. Some haven't. Her mentor in the church is transexual, not secret - she's written a book about it.
The truth is that the upper ranks of the Anglican church are trying to prevent a schism with the more hard-line Anglican churches in Africa. The statement was just one of many that have been put out, it's just that this one got attention from the press.
The rank-and-file vicars don't even share exactly the same theology as each other. Like I said, many officiate same-sex marriages, some will not. Some believe that when people die, their souls go straight to heaven or watch over us, some do not (why wouldn't they? Well, it isn't actually in the Bible).
There's a wide, wide range of interpretations and you are encouraged to keep asking questions.
Like I said, it's easy to look at the loud people and think they're the norm - but it's not the case. They're the very, very vocal minority.
Yikes I've written way more than intended. I hope that helps!