|
|
What value, if any, do you see in arguing with believers?
Arguing with fundamentalists probably does little to convince them that they are wrong, but they are in a minority even among religious people. Demonstrating to the majority that the fundies arguments are pathetic, their logic flawed and their scholarship laughable where it isn't
actively deceptive makes it somewhat less likely that the majority might side with these frootloops against me.
Sometimes it *is* possible to bring someone around to a more reasonable stance through argument. It is rare, but it does happen.
Even if the religious person doesn't learn from an argument, I have
learnt a lot from reading other atheists contributions, and perhaps
some of the atheists have learnt a little from mine.
Most importantly, when I became an atheist in my middle teens, I didn't know any other atheists, I more or less had to figure it out for myself.
I like to think that somewhere out there, a fifteen year old looks at my arguments and says "Yes! That makes sense to me! I'm not the only one!".
(Niall McCauley #36)
Most believers aren't an issue. Those that are, however, are those that
are either actively trying to restrict the rights of everyone but themselves. They do this by making appeals to the illogic of the
audience, and make every attempt to try to sound reasonable while what
they say only makes sense with their own superstitions axioms.
Since most people in the western world have grown up with those axioms presented as the default, it's important to be able to break that chain cleanly without unneccessary flailing around when the fundies and others like them start to move against us.
Arguing against them, and seeing others arguments, can help you be
prepared next time non-religious partners are being excluded from
hospital rooms, or our children are being told their school experience
must contain worship for invisible space pixies. (Dewey Henize #122)
1) It helps better define my thoughts on many subjects.
2) It helps show theists problems with their thinking.
Two sides to the same coin, I suppose. (Nemo #1331)
There is the entertainment value: what could be described as theist "logic", the fact many don't know the bible very well (or at all), the total ignorance of science, history, etc., watching them run around in circles, the extreme loons, etc.
There is also the educational value, especially seeing other atheists
argue points that I may not have considered, or arguments from those
who are more knowledgable about the bible and its history than I am. Sharpens the debating skills.
Also, there is the educational value to some theists who are interested
in the atheist position (either for their own understanding, or because their own position may be wavering).
As I said, I don't engage in arguing much, but offhand I can claim I
have "won" at least two arguments (conceded by the theists themselves),
one about whether atheism is a religion, and the other a long-drawn-out battle about prayer circles. So sometimes it is not in vain to argue
with theists. :-) (Keith Brannen #713)
Learning Fallacies.
Keep you friends close, and your enemies closer and of course having fun.
I learn nothing from people telling me they agree with me. Nothing like having a good enemy to keep you subtle. (athought the believer offerings here are rather single minded, but they have taught me how easily it is
to manipulate them one-on-one).
(outside in the non-virtual world)
There is very little value to arguing in public, at least here in the virtual public newsgroups you can throw punches and not get hurt. (Death)
Oh ... almost forgot ... it can be a hell (pardon the expression) of a
lot of fun!!! :-) (George Ricker #146)
Click here to return to master question page.