DFW Mustang Forums banner

Stupid people

4K views 58 replies 20 participants last post by  Mr Majestyk 
#1 ·
I wanted to address this idea that the typically stupid atheists have these days. It seems that some atheist, at some point, heard another atheist say, that christianity had somehow stalled out the progression of science. To them I would ask "Are you daft?" Are you assuming that the only people who existed in the world during the period of time you are talking about, lived in the relatively small region that christianity affected? Were there no asians of any kind back then? No one at all lived in south america? Or north america? There were no natives to the continent of australia? There were no people, outside of the small area that christianity could have affected, that could have possibly advanced science? You are either extremely ignorant, or a racist. Or both.

On top of that, I have a hard time believing that someone in shining armor with a cross on his shield, came by every time someone Developed a more efficient spinning wheel, or a better gearing system for the mill, and told them that it was "the devil" and made them take it down. How stupid do you assume people from ancient times were? Even the evil tyrant who would have been running such a charade, would have been like "Oh, you mean this lets you make more thread (or grain, or tax revenue, or whatever) for me to come and take from you? Yeah fuck that. I enjoy having less. I am not greedy at all. In fact, what's greed? Never heard of the stuff." So as you can see, this whole statement, and anyone who stands behind it, is obviously an idiot, with no common sense, and a very tiny understanding of the way the world works. The end.
 
See less See more
#5 · (Edited)
Cause that's what seems to be going around. Been hearing it more and more lately. The "Dark Ages". Well, maybe in that area. But I guess those were the only "smart people" who could have advanced science. So my take on it is that no, they did not hold us back 1000 years, as they all say. Not to mention that no one is saying buddhism did it. Cause they know they would be laughed at. Or any other peaceful religion, for that matter.

If you don't believe religion has held back technology, then does that mean that Atheism is holding back true technological advances?
I wouldn't think so, since not even the modern religious think that advances in science are "The devil". However I will say that atheism is by far not a new concept. There were just as many atheists in the old days as there are now, they just couldn't openly talk about it for fear of persecution. And as such, there would have been a few in power. Who either would have just used religion to their own ends, or ignored it completely when making decisions based on something like science, that would be helping them. I mean think about it. What would you have done? And then, what makes them any different from you?
 
#4 ·
The catholic church definitely put people under house arrest and killed some that made discoveries, mostly astrological discoveries back in the day. It doesn't mean that people didn't continue with their research though. I can't remember who it was, but somebody published a paper that with every first letter of each paragraph it spelled out "THE WORLD IS ROUND." or something like that.

It's been a few years since I've taken an astronomy class.

I won't consider myself an atheist though even though I don't believe in religion. The brand Atheist usually comes with other things like being a self-righteous asshole who thinks he's never wrong.
 
#7 ·
I think you are correct, that religion can't hold someone back from continuing their research. Faith does not hold one back from committing sin, so why would faith hold someone back in the area of research?

On the other hand, if one is a non-believer, and a God does exist, they would be handicapped from the beginning, believing in a limited world in an unlimited world of possibilities. Furthermore if that non-believer went as far as becoming an Atheist, he would force his handicaps on those who do believe and further hurt a societies ability to think and invent ideas in a realm of thinking where anything is possible. To sum it up, religion never stopped technological advances through history from happening, but Atheism hinders a society more than religion ever has.

More advances in technology has been made by those who believe, than those who don't.
 
#6 ·
I wanted to address this idea that the typically stupid atheists have these days. It seems that some atheist, at some point, heard another atheist say, that christianity had somehow stalled out the progression of science. To them I would ask "Are you daft?" Are you assuming that the only people who existed in the world during the period of time you are talking about, lived in the relatively small region that christianity affected? Were there no asians of any kind back then? No one at all lived in south america? Or north america? There were no natives to the continent of australia? There were no people, outside of the small area that christianity could have affected, that could have possibly advanced science? You are either extremely ignorant, or a racist. Or both.

On top of that, I have a hard time believing that someone in shining armor with a cross on his shield, came by every time someone Developed a more efficient spinning wheel, or a better gearing system for the mill, and told them that it was "the devil" and made them take it down. How stupid do you assume people from ancient times were? Even the evil tyrant who would have been running such a charade, would have been like "Oh, you mean this lets you make more thread (or grain, or tax revenue, or whatever) for me to come and take from you? Yeah fuck that. I enjoy having less. I am not greedy at all. In fact, what's greed? Never heard of the stuff." So as you can see, this whole statement, and anyone who stands behind it, is obviously an idiot, with no common sense, and a very tiny understanding of the way the world works. The end.
Wow, where to begin.. First of all, all of those areas you spoke about were always technologically behind Europe</ST1:p. Asian, South American, Native American, and Aboriginal Australian society all lived very differently than those in "western" cultures. That is not to say they weren't as intelligent since intelligence cannot be measured by a society’s technology alone, and it is not racist to say it. It is simply a historical fact. They were held back for various reasons of their own, not related to Christianity.

Secondly, the things you mention as examples: the spinning wheel and mill gearing, were not impeded by religion, and I have a hard time believing anyone has declared such. The fact is that much of the forward thinking in <ST1:place>Europe</ST1:place> was tightly controlled by the Catholic Church and there is plenty of documentation of such. Some of the primary areas where these limitations are documented were in medicines, study of human anatomy and astronomy (not to mention literature and the arts). To act as if this didn't happen is not only naive but ignorant on your part.

Now, by classifying Atheists (or more appropriately, non believers since we don't all deny God) as ‘typically stupid’ right out of the chute, you only lessen the validity of your argument. You are making a sophomoric attack, not valid arguments, on non-believers and are only making yourself look foolish in the process. I would finish with 'the end' but I am quite certain this is really the beginning....


<--- Chili
 
#12 ·
Wow, where to begin.. First of all, all of those areas you spoke about were always technologically behind Europe</ST1:p. Asian, South American, Native American, and Aboriginal Australian society all lived very differently than those in "western" cultures. That is not to say they weren't as intelligent since intelligence cannot be measured by a society’s technology alone, and it is not racist to say it. It is simply a historical fact. They were held back for various reasons of their own, not related to Christianity.

Secondly, the things you mention as examples: the spinning wheel and mill gearing, were not impeded by religion, and I have a hard time believing anyone has declared such. The fact is that much of the forward thinking in <ST1:place>Europe</ST1:place> was tightly controlled by the Catholic Church and there is plenty of documentation of such. Some of the primary areas where these limitations are documented were in medicines, study of human anatomy and astronomy (not to mention literature and the arts). To act as if this didn't happen is not only naive but ignorant on your part.

Now, by classifying Atheists (or more appropriately, non believers since we don't all deny God) as ‘typically stupid’ right out of the chute, you only lessen the validity of your argument. You are making a sophomoric attack, not valid arguments, on non-believers and are only making yourself look foolish in the process. I would finish with 'the end' but I am quite certain this is really the beginning....

Care to point out what hindered all other cultures? Cause there's no way in hell all of them had "various reasons of their own". There were just plain too many of them, that were far beyond the reach of Europe. Sure maybe some others had some problems. What, I don't know, but I'll allow for some. Not all of them could have been held back, is the point. All it is, is a jaded attempt to label something that a certain group doesn't like, as "bad". Atheists clearly don't like religion. Don't try to tell me otherwise, I know a great many of them personally. So, in conclusion, we are right where we should be, and would be, technologically. Hell, if anything we are a little farther along due to Hitler's Atrocities.

<--- Chili
A nice attempt at a defense of the medieval christian church I guess.
Not really. I could really care less about the medieval church, as this is not medieval times. A nice attempt to show the major flaw in a modern day debate, maybe.

Fact is, the church frowned upon and officially sanctioned so many things that this thread could go on in perpetuity.
No, there is a finite amount. For that to be true they would have had to have done it to quite literally everything.
The most obvious was the idea that the world was not flat. Darwin struggled with revealing his theory because he was sure that he would be labeled a heretic. And gunpowder, from its very conception, was labeled as something of demonic influence for at least a century.
He lived well outside the dark ages that the whole debate is about.

People who point these things out aren't necessarily against christianity. They are just realistic. History holds a lot of lessons that people really love to ignore, that is why we repeat it.

Realistic is a relative term. For those who believed in an unseen world, it was completely realistic to think that gunpowder could have been "inspired". Now does this mean the everyone was completely closed minded, and were somehow hindering it? No. They still used it, didn't they? You bet they did.
 
#9 ·
A nice attempt at a defense of the medieval christian church I guess.

Fact is, the church frowned upon and officially sanctioned so many things that this thread could go on in perpetuity. The most obvious was the idea that the world was not flat. Darwin struggled with revealing his theory because he was sure that he would be labeled a heretic. And gunpowder, from its very conception, was labeled as something of demonic influence for at least a century.

People who point these things out aren't necessarily against christianity. They are just realistic. History holds a lot of lessons that people really love to ignore, that is why we repeat it.
 
#11 ·
Fact is, even if the inventor struggled with deploying his ideas due to religion, it still got out nonetheless. Even if these ideas or inventions were hindered from religion, it only pressed the inventor to move forward with his or her theories and inventions. Without resistance, improvements would never have been sought after as much as it would without resistance.

Wat?

Where do you get that from?
Can you prove me wrong?
 
#27 ·
Wow, exclude is really struggling.






See how vague that comment is? :ugh:
 
#29 ·
Ok well at least this time everyone can tell what you are talking about. As in, I was struggling in my argument? I couldn't tell whether you were talking about that, or with religion in general. Might try being a little less vague next time.
 
#31 ·
Go ahead. I would welcome that. We could go round and round in circles for eternity. However, I did think that I needed to clarify some of the stuff I said. So some of what you would point out, would just be my own fault, and not some hole that your almighty logic poked.
 
#32 ·
i know you weren't quoting me. but, i was going to just say that the argument wasn't very well laid out in my opinion.

the idea that atheists only look to Christianity as hindering technology. I would think that if an atheist made this argument, he or she would just use the broader sense that religion has hindered technology. i have not heard this argument from atheists so i would assume they would make the strongest argument possible, and by adding different religions, especially islam, would strengthen the argument.

there is a lot of evidence that religion has hindered technology throughout the ages. i think there have been many examples laid out in this thread.

but, it isn't clear if you mean that because of religion the atheists you start the argument with are claiming we would be any more technologically advanced than we are now. There is no way to know this because we can only assume either side.

a case could be made that God has given us just as much technology as he desires us to have.

or,

that without religion we could possibly have more technology than we do now.

no way to really know.

I would say that by making the claim that atheists are typically stupid weakens your argument from the get go. Intelligence can't be measured on belief in a God. There are stupid atheists and stupid theists, or deists or polytheists. but, if you are going to go this route and label atheists as typically stupid, you being a theist should have known the definition of heretical before claiming the false definition as fact.

but i am rambling, i do that drunk. i should go to bed.
 
#34 ·
@ tenacious J

Where I got it from was that retarded chart they love to whip out every time they want to bash what they dislike. I'm sure you have seen it. It clearly shows that christianity is the reason for no less than a loss of 1000 years of technological development. (It's in another thread here, but I have seen it popping up all over)This is completely laughable, and based on no fact whatsoever other than the dark ages. As stated by some of the other members in this thread, they would not have, and in fact could not have, help technology back from advancing, least of all for 1000 years.
 
#35 ·
If you READ the books instead of burning them you would learn:

Wikipedia:

After 1610, when he began supporting heliocentrism publicly, he met with bitter opposition from some philosophers and clerics, and two of the latter eventually denounced him to the Roman Inquisition early in 1615. Although he was cleared of any offence at that time, the Catholic Church nevertheless condemned heliocentrism as "false and contrary to Scripture" in February 1616,[8] and Galileo was warned to abandon his support for it—which he promised to do. When he later defended his views in his most famous work, Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems, published in 1632, he was tried by the Inquisition, found "vehemently suspect of heresy," forced to recant, and spent the rest of his life under house arrest.

Book Burning: A True Christian® Tradition
The burning of books is nothing new to True Christians®. We invented the practice over two-thousand years ago as a way to promote our faith in the Lord Jesus. In the early days of Christianity, when new believers in Christ were converted, they were naturally moved by the Holy Spirit to grab as many books as they could and pitch them into a fire. Unlike the sissy "Jesus is Love" fake-Christians (whom both the Lord Jesus and we loathe) we have running around today, the early followers of Christ were never ashamed to burn books. In fact, if you ever find yourself being grateful for the destruction of most of the works of pagan nincompoops like Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle, you have a Christian to thank! In the Book of Acts we learn that anyone who wants to follow Jesus, should get ready to start burning books at the drop of a hat. The Book of Acts teaches us that burning someone's books is a great way spread God's word.
http://www.landoverbaptist.org/news1002/bookburning.html

That took a one minute search. Apparently to Book of Acts will answer your question!

So the Christian repression of knowledge and science is well recorded and one would need a great deal of imagination to see it any other way. Of course, you'd need that to believe in God, the Immaculate Conception and talking snakes. So y'all can burn all YOUR books and teach YOUR kids that the Magical Man in the Sky made the world in seven days or any other cult you worship, but I don't understand why you need everyone else to pretend with you.
 
#37 ·
If you READ the books instead of burning them you would learn:

Wikipedia:

After 1610, when he began supporting heliocentrism publicly, he met with bitter opposition from some philosophers and clerics, and two of the latter eventually denounced him to the Roman Inquisition early in 1615. Although he was cleared of any offence at that time, the Catholic Church nevertheless condemned heliocentrism as "false and contrary to Scripture" in February 1616,[8] and Galileo was warned to abandon his support for it—which he promised to do. When he later defended his views in his most famous work, Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems, published in 1632, he was tried by the Inquisition, found "vehemently suspect of heresy," forced to recant, and spent the rest of his life under house arrest.
LOL at using Wikipedia, intentionally, as a source for backing up any e-argument.

theASP! said:
Book Burning: A True Christian® Tradition
The burning of books is nothing new to True Christians®. We invented the practice over two-thousand years ago as a way to promote our faith in the Lord Jesus. In the early days of Christianity, when new believers in Christ were converted, they were naturally moved by the Holy Spirit to grab as many books as they could and pitch them into a fire. Unlike the sissy "Jesus is Love" fake-Christians (whom both the Lord Jesus and we loathe) we have running around today, the early followers of Christ were never ashamed to burn books. In fact, if you ever find yourself being grateful for the destruction of most of the works of pagan nincompoops like Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle, you have a Christian to thank! In the Book of Acts we learn that anyone who wants to follow Jesus, should get ready to start burning books at the drop of a hat. The Book of Acts teaches us that burning someone's books is a great way spread God's word.
http://www.landoverbaptist.org/news1002/bookburning.html

That took a one minute search. Apparently to Book of Acts will answer your question!
Apparently it will, if you actually READ (using caps as you so effectively did above) the Book of Acts. When I READ the referenced chapter, I see the Ephesians doing the book burning themselves, voluntarily, by their own hand.

TheASP! said:
So the Christian repression of knowledge and science is well recorded and one would need a great deal of imagination to see it any other way. Of course, you'd need that to believe in God, the Immaculate Conception and talking snakes. So y'all can burn all YOUR books and teach YOUR kids that the Magical Man in the Sky made the world in seven days or any other cult you worship, but I don't understand why you need everyone else to pretend with you.
So, if Christian repression of knowledge and science is so well recorded, where are YOUR (gotta love those caps) legitimate sources to back up YOUR claim. Certainly not in YOUR post. Also, in case you didn't know this, we Christians don't burn our books.
 
#45 ·
Eh, I never really looked at those book burnings as a 100% bad thing. People like to use it as an example of something completely and utterly stupid to do, that no one who had any sense would ever do. Well, kinda, but not to that extent. First of all, are they going to be able to burn all of the copies of the particular book or books that they are buring? No fucking way in hell. There are still going to be shitloads out there in homes, in other countries where the book burnings are not going on, in circulation, etc. So no, the knowledge that they contained is not going to be lost to the world.

Secondly, if I burn a book (or books) that are deemed by me or my society to be worthless or stupid, what's the harm? Maybe we have a bonfire and drink a little beer. We could have a mass book burning of books that retards like Oprah Winfrey or Dr Phil or someone like that wrote, (or take your pic of whoever) and all you guys that are using book burning as an example would join in and sing and laugh and dance around the fire. So in conclusion: Does it make you look kinda stupid? Yeah sure. Is it necessarily a bad thing? Not really. And thus, I write "book burning" off as a bad example.
 
#47 ·
And you sir, are one of those sheep I was talking about, who can't read any deeper into a given situation, so they just follow the next sheep. How lame.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top