From: jimb@rcx1.csd.harris.com (Jim Burmeister)
Subject: Re: A point well missed ...
Organization: Harris CSD, Ft. Lauderdale, FL
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 20:54:45 GMT

In article <C1JuM7.6zB@darkside.osrhe.uoknor.edu>, bil@okcforum.osrhe.uoknor.edu (Bill Conner) writes:
> It seems odd that I never stated my
> position on the central question, do I believe in the existence of
> God, yet was attacked by all and sundry, what does it mean?

As mentioned by someone else, many people were just returning the attack.
You stated (essentially) that all atheists' arguments consisted of sarcasm,
ridicule, and hyperbole--not a good way to start a calm discussion!

> If atheists are veritable paragons of reason, the intellectual elite, the
> most rational of people, why do they get so hot when someone challenges
> their faith?

See above.  If you had asked simply "Why are you an atheist?", you would
have gotten any number of calm, rational responses.  When you ask to get
flamed, we flame you.

>    Your skeptical world-view is not really yours. To make the
> statement suggests (as Madalyn Murrey O'Hair likes to do about
> herself) that you are somehow exempt from the influences and pressures the 
> rest of us feel, that while we become ensnsared in folly, you managed
> to transcend beyond. Granted this is sarcastic, but this kind of
> attitude is so common, I have trouble remaining genteel.  My point is
> that we are all born into the same world with pretty much the same set
> of attributes; it seems ridiculous to pretend that some "special"
> people have an advantage, which in the case of the atheists who have
> responded to this posting, is exactly what is being implied.

I had a hard time understanding the above paragraph.  Why isn't my world-view
my own?  Where do you get the idea that I am "somehow exempt from influences
and pressures" others feel?  I state that my world-view IS my own, that I
have been developing it throughout my life, and that it is uniquely mine.
My world-view has developed throughout my life, and is a direct result of
the influences and pressures I have experienced.

It seems that you also are making the observation that atheists tend to
consider themselves superior to theists in some way.  I won't argue with
this observation; in fact, I would say that I am guilty of the same
prejudice, though I try to overcome it.  Many of us used to be believers,
and when we look back on that time we think, "Boy, I sure was a fool back then
to actually believe in that stuff".  It's not hard to see how this changes
into "Boy, that guy sure is a fool for believing in that stuff".  This
view is especially hard to shake when theists so often show up in this group
and make idiotic posts (Bill: I'm not including you in this statement--
If I did, I wouldn't have bothered with this response!)

>    All of us are exposed to various world-views, usually before we've
> developed the means to determine the most likely or valid. In my
> experience, skepticism follows belief else of what are you skeptical? At
> some time you believed in Santa Claus or something similar, you
> probably believed in fairness and justice, you may have even believed
> in God. You had, at that time, a different more credulous world-view.

I'm skeptical of everything.  You're exactly right--I used to have a 
different, more credulous world-view.  When I was a kid, I believed in
Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny.  I eventually outgrew these pleasant
childhood illusions.  As my world-view developed, I decided I didn't 
believe in superstition (unlucky numbers, walking under ladders, etc.)
I don't believe in astrology or "psychic" powers.  I don't believe in
95% of what's reported in the supermarket tabloids.  I don't accept 
theories unless they are reasonably proven by mainstream science.  All
of these are examples of my skepticism.  My atheism is simply another
facet: not believing in god is the same to me as not believing any of 
the other things I listed.

>    What I'm curious to know, is what made the difference, why did you
> change, and why atheism? Claiming to be a skeptical person begs the
> question it seems. The change from a child for whom God was at least
> possible, to a cynical adult for whom there is nothing greater than
> Man is radical at least.

The change was a gradual process.  Probably the thing that started the
ball rolling was the "origin of the universe" issue.  My Christian
upbringing taught me that God created the universe in 7 days out of nothing.
Then, in school, I was taught about the Big Bang, evolutionary theory,
and so on.  This was taught in the framework of "science".  Science and
the "scientific method" were taught as the best way to find out about the
world.  This started me in questioning my Christian beliefs, which were
not based on science, but on an ancient "holy book".

Then, when I started learning about ancient cultures and their mythologies,
my beliefs really took a hit.  I was taught that ancient people made up
myths involving gods, heroes, etc. as a way of explaining natural phenomena
and answering unanswered questions.  Of course, no one seriously believed
in these stories nowadays, because we had scientific explanations--we didn't
need the myths anymore.  Which brought up the big question--how were the
ancient "mythologies" different from today's "religions".  My conclusion
(which still stands today)--there is no difference, except that people still
believe in the "religions".

There were other reasons, too, but in the interest of brevity I'll cut it
off here.  Suffice it to say that by the time I graduated from college,
I was pretty strong in my atheistic views.  My time here on alt.atheism
(I didn't start reading until after I graduated) has only strengthened
those views.


Let me end this response by asking:  Bill, are you a theist?  If
so, which religion do you associate yourself with (if any)?  And the
big question, Why do you accept the beliefs of this religion?

-Jim Burmeister, jimb@csd.harris.com

Newsgroups: alt.atheism,talk.religion.misc