Quote:
Originally Posted by Clodfobble
This is a classic logical fallacy, that someone who disagrees with you must only do so because they have not examined the evidence. You have just met someone who you can see has examined the evidence and arrived at a different conclusion than yours... and yet your response is that he is the exception, all the rest of the people who disagree with you still must have not actually thought about the issue for themselves. "Soften" the words all you want, you just readily admitted that you're not willing to be wrong.
But you can have a bonus point for not using the word "sheep" yet. Congratulations. :roll eyes:
|
Holy Pot-Calling-The-Kettle-Black Batman!
I have strong feelings about religion, and I'm sure that many of them are not very logical or even well-thought out. Life
is a learning curve, after all. As for not being willing to admit that I am wrong...NOT TRUE. In an earlier post I did just that.
In this post, however, I would say that my error is in using a bit of hyperbole...but I still feel that in general, religion needs indoctrination in order to succeed (and thus, faith follows that indoctrination). It is not made up of a bunch of individuals getting together because they have the same 'spiritual experiences', but rather members who were indoctrinated in the philosophy starting at a young age....either through their family or society. For a small example; when I was a toddler, my mother sent me to to Sunday School, even though she wasn't religious in any way. She didn't want me to feel alienated from society because I didn't 'have a religion'. Of course, this was in the Sixties and things have changed dramatically since. An affiliation with a church is not necessary anymore to be accepted in 'society'....although, in some circles it still does help...and if you are running for president.