Some thoughts on "Open Mindedness vs. Close mindedness"

[Zundfolge]

The following is sort of a "Stream of Thought" that is not fully developed, but I thought would make an interesting starting point for discussion on the whole notion of "Open mindedness vs. Close Mindedness".

What is "close mindedness" and how useful is "open mindedness"?

In our culture we revere those that appear open minded, while we denounce those who appear close minded. But I think we're too quick to label people who have their mind made up about an issue as "close minded". And much too quick to assume that the "open minded" person is the wiser.

I believe that you should be open to hearing new ideas and new perspectives on old ideas, but ones position should not be made solely on the basis of whether or not they want compromise or to appear "open minded". See the completely open minded among us are spineless fools. They claim that open mindedness is the higher ground, but too often open mindedness is basically no mindedness. There are some issues where there is a clear right and wrong. Mathematics for example. Is it close minded to insist that the square root of 16 is 4? The overly open minded will say "Let's listen to all sides first" and when one side says 4 and the other side says 6 they conclude that both answers must be somewhat correct. Not because of any evidence but just because they want to strike a compromise, and don't want to appear "judgemental" (the cardinal sin of the "open minded").

What one SHOULD base their opinions on is a mix of the empirical data AND their own core set of values. Sometimes the data alone shows us the correct answer (in the case of the square root of 16, there is only one answer; 4). But when it doesn't then you must rely on a set of well formed values to guide you.

In the United States there are 2 major political parties, and these two parties loosely represent the two major political ideologies that make up American politics; Liberalism and Conservativism. Yes there are conservative Democrats and liberal Republicans, and then there's folk like the Libertarians that seem to be a bit of both. But basically there are 2 ideologies. So it annoys me when one side says the other is close minded. No, they aren't they just have their mind made up based on data and their core set of values. I don't believe that for the most part both sides can be right at the same time.

So where does this leave us?
I am a conservative. The best way to "Label" my politics is to say I'm "A Republican with a real wide Libertarian streak" I believe that not only do many liberals have the facts wrong but the core values of modern American liberalism are corrupt. I see these values as this; Government owns everything, your existence, happiness, safety, prosperity...all are to be bestowed upon you by the Government. You (as a citizen) cannot be trusted with your own life. Corporations are evil. Humanity is a blight on the earth who's prosperity must be held in check. Humanity is just a fancy word for "Smart Animals" and we deserve no more consideration then animals, in fact we're beneath the animal kingdom and should be punished for our transgressions against them.There is NO right or wrong... if it feels good then it's "right" (especially if a conservative or a Christian says it's wrong).

I see the core values of modern American conservativism as follows; Government is a necessary evil that for the most part is harmless, but once it becomes too powerful it's a danger. The free market is a natural force that should have as little controls placed upon it as are necessary to assure it remains free. Freedom does not mean entitlement, the government is not your mama. If you are able bodied then you MUST make it on your own or you are just a slave to the state. Humans are the superior species. There IS an absolute right and wrong, and this right and wrong descends from Judeo/Christian ethics.

Keep in mind that I do believe that sometimes the Republican party strays from these values (over zealous censors are one example, this is where my wide Libertarian streak shows up :) )


Anyway, I thought this might be a good place to start a discussion.
The main thrust of my thesis is not to discuss specific issues (at least not to be caught up in the discussion of them, I'm sure some specifics will pop up as examples) But to discuss what methodology people use to come to their positions.

So to Quote Caesar "Let the games begin!"

<center>http://home.kscable.com/biles/zundsig285.jpg</center>

[phatcat]

ok, no matter how much we fight it, we all label others.

and we all suffer from the occasional "tunnel" vision. just for example. check out this OLD thread.

Newbie Flames :( (http://unreal.infopop.net/OpenTopic/page?q=Y&a=tpc&s=10009422&f=76309922&m=125092516)

remember this post? that was me when I first came here. I was pissed off about the treatment of People who where not regulars on the board, and tolerance for there question and ideas.

see, I have figured out people work like this. when it come to change.

1. there will be one who stands up and refuses to walk the straight and narrow

2. the majority will shun this individual

3. people the majority have now become aware, and must face the fact at hand.

4. change may, or may not be taken, depends on the realization by the majority.

think of segregation. a few men and women choose to stand for something they thought was right despite what the majority thought. they where shunned. BUT in the end I can walk down the street with my friend Robert(who is African American) walk into a restaurant and grab a bite to eat and not worry about a thing.

As humans we tend to get stuck in social ruts. we go though our Black & White lives with, this being right, and this wrong, until... Some one says they think there should be change.

I have noticed the boards are a bit nicer now, and a lot of the people who flamed me are now my friends.

If you find a cause, Stand for it! Don't let Jack & Jill rep/dem tell you what you should stand for. let your voice be heard!

If you let your self be heard you become the catalyst in social change!!

<center><a href="http://phatcat.animedominion.com"><img src="http://phatcat.animedominion.com/phat-inf.jpg" border="0" alt="Jason, the Phatcat!!"></a>

<a href="mailto:castillo@hal-pc.org"><img src="http://phatcat.animedominion.com/newbie.jpg" border="0" alt="need help? e-mail me!"></a>
<a href="http://quake.hal-pc.org"><img src="http://phatcat.animedominion.com/quake.gif" border="0" alt="quake.hal-pc.org for all your Houston PC Game news!!!"></a> </center>

[Alpha_9]

Aside from your slightly demagogic description of liberalism vs. conservatism, I basically agree with what you're saying. Some people are too often ready to criticize others for sticking to opinions and positions they've developed over a lifetime.

And yet sometimes people can be so dead-set in their positions that they ignore or disregard evidence that contradicts them. For example, a conservative who strongly believes in leaving industry to regulate themselves when it comes to consumer protection, or environmental health, despite clear evidence that when things are done that way people suffer. Or another example, liberals who insist that the solution to our failing public school systems is to continue to throw billions of federal dollars at them, despite the fact that the hundreds of billions we've already spent have only resulted in the very system we're trying to fix.

The fact is, much of the trouble that our democracy has in dealing with certain hot-button issues arises from people who stubbornly stick to untenable positions.

Convictions are a good thing, I totally agree. But as with most things in life, too much of a good thing is not a good thing...


http://www.phragdoctors.net/users/phrag7/images/Alpha_9.gif

Infiltration Battlegrounds (http://www.phragdoctors.net/users/phrag7/)

Onecall.Net Extreme Servers forum (http://pub36.ezboard.com/fphraggersforumfrm3)

[Nihilizst]

I think that in a general sense, people support a group ideology before they actually come to terms with their own individual thinking. That is, they take a look around and pick and choose to gather information like fruit in the produce section of the supermarket soley on the ground that it is pleasing to the eye. I believe that it is quite common for people to use information as long as it works for them to further build and defend their personal outlook in life.

Here is where the mistakes are made; to be truly open-minded does not mean indecision. Rather, it is to acknowledge the tendency that we are fickle - that ideas are not concrete and thus are always open to debate. I think that, in dealing with mass groups of people, such as in government, it is difficult to ascertain those concepts of rule that are effective or ineffective.

I think that for all that individualism is stressed in some countries, there is too much concern for "the others", to the point that the lines between individualism and collectivism is severely blurred. It appears that division is an enemy to unity, yet unity's huge discrepancy are the varied individual ideas of the more or less non-affiliated that are treated like dividing factors that hinder the attempts at coming up with a solution for the perfect system.

Incidentally, in the belief that we as humans are highly intelligent, far and above the rest of the animal kingdom tells me really that given our highs and lows, we appropriately struggle to the degree with the intellect we have been given; much like how every living thing struggles to maintain its existence.

If it were but the pursuit of happiness one desired, I believe that it lies within appreciating the smaller things in life, and to focus on those that love you vs. those on the opposite side. The ability to seek positives is healthier and perhaps more challenging to some than dwelling in the disturbing news of what some stupid Joe did on TV. There are too many of them anyway.

There seems to be a mindset that, in order to achieve greatness, one must be staunchly set on beliefs carved in stone, it must involve having the world against you that must be defeated (which is a personal view, a self-induced mindset). We're great at picking up excess garbage, caring for small trifles that won't matter a year from now and all this other garbage wrapped up in enticing packages.

It would be nice to take a step back, let other people do their thing and walk on with your business; unless your business is everyone else's business. I am not supporting an unconcerned view towards the world, but the psychology of people in general. All those things that exist now in the realm of human thought are easily traced from the way we think and the way we feel; we will always be like this, or like that, and to be convinced that the question to ask is always "what is up with this world?" is at best, a question that conceivably has so many answers, there are better things to do.

Life is not simple, but it's made to be more complicated by the unfortunate slew of disinformation, excess baggage that is chosen to be picked up, difficult personal issues, and all that other stuff that either makes you stronger or makes you blow a bullet through your head, or keeps you stuck in a rut of severe apathy towards the world, being literally, a walking dead person until you choose otherwise.

Anyways, it is my belief that the key to understanding the way the world works is to have an intimate understanding of yourself, and to objectively look at the behavior of others. I think that once you dimiss someone and think that there is nothing to be learned of value from another, there begins your road to a self-induced world of negativity and ears that only choose to hear what they want, and a brain that only processes what information it wants to support its self-justifying ideas.

[Chrome]

Well. There is nothing wrong with open mindedness. Open mindedness is the ability to accept that you might be wrong about something at any given time. I guess that being closed minded could be alot of things. Saying that believeing that the square root of 16 is 4, can hardly be considered closed mindedness. It just is. However, when dealing with complex issues and statistical data, you cannot so quickly conclude what is right and what is wrong. For example, one might conclude at first glance that african americans are prone to violent crime and other deviant behaviour based on the incarceration rate for that paticular minority. However, one has to consider that african american families, on average, have substantially less access to quality public education, and that economically, african american families are in a much lower bracket than say, the average white family. (Please forgive me if this is a bad example, im not racist or anything)

Several white supremesist groups use statistics like this to justify their hate of religeous and ethnic minorities. When you examine the whole truth surrounding these issues, you find that white supremesists have no basis whatsoever for any of their disgusting beliefs.

Hmmm, went on a bit of a tangent there, but oh well.

My major "convictions" are as follows:

A: Corporations -=ARE=- evil
B: Television Media is evil
C: Christianity is poison
D: Republicans are evil

There... Let the flames ensue

ChROmE

[RogueLeader]

Nice Zund, this is so true. "Close-minded" is what someone uses to label their opponent when they've been proven wrong.

<a href="http://roguescript.hypermart.net" target="_top"><img src="http://roguescript.hypermart.net/lib/images/linktous/banner00.gif" alt="Infiltration Tactical Database" style="border: 0px solid #003000"></a>

<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: 8pt; color: #F5B800; font-weight: bold">"When one hunts monsters, one must be careful not to become a monster oneself—for when you look deeply into an abyss, the abyss looks deeply into you." -Nietzsche</span>

[Zundfolge]

Conviction! that was the word I was looking for.

I think part of my point is that many times in the course of retorical battle, someone with conviction is called out as "close minded". It's my belief that one who is completely "open minded" is an idiot, and has no convicitons, no beliefs and therefore their opinions are useless (because the will change every few nanoseconds with the next breeze).

The problem is that in modern discourse, people have started replacing "conviction" with "close mindedness" as a way to discredit their opponent without actualy tackling their arguments.

I think this fear of being labled "close minded" (and political correctness in general, which is where I believe this notion comes from) is one of the things that is destroying honest debate in our culture.

Consensus is not always best, sometimes one side has to defeat the other or you end up with nothing.

I also think Chrome's example of racism is an interesting place to draw the distinction between "close mindedness" and "conviction".


SIDE NOTE: let the record show that Zundfolge and Chrome agree on at least 1 thing; television media IS evil :)

<center>http://home.kscable.com/biles/zundsig285.jpg</center>

[Chrome]

Heh. Im glad Zundy...

[Jason]

Has anyone not learned yet that the primary dividing point amoung the Republicrats is the rate of the expansion of government? Both support an intrusive government, just to different extents.

I don't think government is a necessary evil. Mainly because I don't think the concept of government itself is evil. But this "a little bit of evil is necessary" mentality is similar to "a little bit of Socialism is good". As if good is bad and bad is good.

I remember finding an interesting word that describes those who create their ideology from rational thought. It is called having an active-mind. One which doesn't just seek to get as many opinions as possible but to PROVE their points. Close-mindedness, to it's strict interpretation, is hiding from someone else's opinion. Intelectual-cowerdice would be an appropriate description.

I agree with Zundy's assessment of the current mainstream educational philosophy, subjectivism. That concepts cannot be proven. (of course I would ask them to prove that statement. But alas! Their own philosophy dictates they can't! Whoops.. :D )

--------------
"If some men are entitled by right to the products of the work of others, it means that those others are deprived of rights and condemned to slave labor."

[Goat Fucker]

One simple, yet powerfull phrase comes to mind, The golden middle road!

Too much of anything is bad, beeing too "cloused minded" will have u klinging to youre own ideals like a rat to a lollypop, and render u blind to youre own mistakes.
Beeing too "open minded" will make u sacrifice youre own ideals in a utopian atempt to keep the peace (in itself a lost cause).

I try to walk the golden middle road whenever i can, i will keep an open enough mind to listen to other peoples ideas, and take a critical look on my own, but i'll allways stay clouse minded enough to stay true to what i belive, and not just ride a phat because everyone else is.
But every now and then i fall into one of the ditches on either side of this road, its what makes me human.

Life is not just black or white, just look al all dem purdy shades of grey!

http://baphometsplace.homestead.com/files/Gfsigil.jpg
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" color="white"size="2"><span style="font-size:10pt;width:100%;height:40pt;text-align:left;filter:wave_(freq=2,strength=5,phase=3,lightstrength=20)color="black"><span on_mouseover="this.style.color='white'"onMouseout="this.style.color='white'">Fighting the ****ing censorship!</span></font>

[RogueLeader]

Furthermore Zund, "openminded" people are more likely to be prejudiced. Studies have found that in our age of cultural relativism, people who have strong convictions have a better chance of relating to those with other beliefs, because they can understand how they feel.

And I must agree with you Jason. The Democrats like to call themselves "liberal", but they arn't. Liberalism is supposed to be the focus on individual rights. I hardly think that a party that promotes racism (affirmative action) and oppressive goverment (gun control) and crime (gun control again) is "liberal". As a TRUE liberal myself, I find that Democrats are more conservative on most points than Republicans...

<img src="http://roguescript.hypermart.net/sig2.jpg" style="border: 1px solid black">

<span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-weight: bold; color: #EFB720; text-style: italic">Webmaster of <a href="http://roguescript.hypermart.net/" style="font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-weight: bold; color: #EFB720; text-style: italic; font-decoration: underline">Infiltration Tactics</a>.</span>

[Zundfolge]

Every day I find myself closer and closer to becoming a Libertarian.

Rogue Leader, if it wasn't for your anti-capitalist beliefs, you'd make a damn fine Libertarian :)


Free Markets...Free Minds!
(that's kind of a Libertarian battle cry)

<center>http://home.kscable.com/biles/zundsig285.jpg</center>

[Snakeye]

Don't want to depress anyone, but..

The square root of 16 is not 4 alone; it's +4 and -4 (-> 4*4=16 and (-4)*(-4)=16).

Just to be mathematical correct..

Snakeye :D

anything you do can get you killed, including doing nothing

[CoffeyCan]

While I understand the liberalism v. conservative idealogy (idealogy is the key word here) creates some differences; Overall the two major parties appear much the same to me.
CC

RealMaps Site Co-Founder
http://www.planetunreal.com/realmaps/cc/ccsig.gif
Often Imitated, Never Duplicated; RealMaps Leads the Way (http://www.planetunreal.com/realmaps)

[Jason]

Have you read any of Frederic Bastiat's writings? Such as "The Law" and "What is Seen and What is not Seen". Those two works are incredible pieces of political/economic writing. In fact, it was The Law that changed myself from a moderate to a Capitalist. You can read his works at http://bastiat.org/

One political predjudice that has existed for many years is the "if you don't support a certain government sponsered activity then you're against it" mentality. Such as, if a person doesn't support an official organized religion then he MUST be an atheist. Both major political party's are guilty of this practice. It is sad that this was debunked 150 years ago and yet so many still participate in it.

The word "Libertarian" has a very interesting history and a diverse spectrum of those who claim to be Libertarians. The term was originally coined by an 18th century Anarchist who used this term to avoid being persecuted by his government. Those who call themselves Libertarians include: Socialists, Anarchists, Classical-Liberals, Capitalists, and Pacifists. Pacifists who claim to be Libertarian adopt a philosophy in which ANY type of force is immoral, including retalitory force. What's the moral of all this? Vote for the person who you know is closest to your mindset, don't vote for a person just because he is a member of XYZ political party.

On modern "Liberalism", it is interesting to note that it is very similar to Fascism. Fascists have several comparable attributes to the Liberals which are: Mixed econonmic structure, a welfare state, anti-individualistic and strong socioeconomic regulations. Of course there are differences, but it is peculiar how man can become the very thing he fears.

--------------
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> The state does not and cannot have one hand only. It has two hands, one to take and the other to give-Frederic Bastiat [/quote]

[This message was edited by Jason on Mar 23, 2001 at 16:48.]

[Zundfolge]

I've read exerpts of Bastiat's work (but never a complete book, probably should)

If you like him you also have to read Fredrick Hayek's "Road to Surfdom" (seem to be a lot of smart Fredddies out there)

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> One political predjudice that has existed for many years is the "if you don't support a certain government sponsered activity then you're against it" mentality. [/quote]

Yeah, that kind of non-sequitor thinking really annoys me. What's sad is how many people buy into it. I mean look at the abortion battle, the pro choice side says if you don't agree with them then you want to enslave women and keep them barefoot and pregnant. The pro life side says if you don't agree with them you want to kill babies :rolleyes:

What it leads to is a battle between two sides that are fighting different battles. That's one of the interesting things about the abortion issue (to continue to use it as an example) if you step back from the retoric from both sides for a minute, you see the two most noble of human causes battling each other. On one side you have the defense of individual liberty and autonomy and on the other side you have the defense of innocent life.

Makes for an interesting show at least :)

<center>http://home.kscable.com/biles/zundsig285.jpg</center>

[Buddy_Pickle]

Chrome: "Christianity is poison". Do you mean generally, or specific afiliations, or what? Some historical reasons? Wacko neighbors?

Just curious...

http://www.airlinkllc.com/pics/bpnew.jpg

[Mason]

I believe that being "open minded" means that, although you have your own set of beliefs, you are open to the fact that the beliefs of others are equally as valid as your own. You are also open to the possibility that you may not have all of the facts at your disposal(noone really does) and with that being the case, the possibilty exists that you may change certain aspects of what you beleive. I do not believe that open minded people are all 'fickle' and 'useless' as was suggested previously. That, in itself, is very close minded and, IMHO, a destructive way to think.


Being open-minded means that you are aware that there may be information out there that you have not found yet that may influence your opinion. One can take this too far and never make a concrete decision for fear of making the wrong one because they didn't have all of the information.

Each individual has to be confident that they have done all they can to make sure that their convictions are well founded and fair, yet at the same time be open to the possibility that something may eventually arise that could change their outlook. Not many of us have the same beliefs now as when we were children, or even teenagers(for those of us who are older). I know my BASIC beliefs, or morals, haven't changed much, but many other beliefs and truths that I held earlier in my life have. I, for example, DO believe in a "God". I was raised Catholic but determined through my own reading and education, that I did not believe the same things that 'they' did.

In retrospect, we all need to be a little close minded as to what we believe to be inherently 'right' or 'wrong', everything else, however, is up for debate. :cool:

I am the Walrus, koo koo kachoo.
Why do people insist on putting their 'two cents' in when they don't have a penny to spare?

[Buddy_Pickle]

Well put mason. My experience with some, from time to time, is that they confuse open mindedness with guilty justification. Case in point.

Had a buddy in high school that REAMED on me all the time because I was not a drinker, and refused to go to his parties and get wasted. I remember him specifically telling me how closed minded I was.... He got drunk one summer night in 88, and ran his truck over the rails on a canyon road. Police found later that he actually died of a self inflicted gun shot to the throat, which then made the truck fly over the edge with no one at the wheel.

Now, I am not saying that everyone who drinks socially or even hardcore sucks, or will end up like Dan. But I am saying this: Don't always trust other people when they tell you what THEY think is best for you. All that would have come of my giving in to his pressure, is him feeling temporarily better about his choices in life, because he could then share the misery with another. I certainly would have gained nothing...but would have lost my dignity, and my sense of conviction. (Call it stick-to-it-ness.)

Open mindedness comes from within you, not from others prying your mind open.

http://www.airlinkllc.com/pics/bpnew.jpg

[BlueSniper]

you guys realy know how to put things...

and to think that we get enjoyment outa killin people.

<c> C:\WINDOWS\Desktop\road to el der Pauldo\MGS2.jpg
-BlueSniper </c>

[Mason]

Excellent point BP! ..and yes, all this intelligence and yet we take great delight in putting a 9mm, 7.62, 5.56 or .50 cal round between someone else's eyes! We ARE a sick bunch!
:cool:

I am the Walrus, koo koo kachoo.
Why do people insist on putting their 'two cents' in when they don't have a penny to spare?

[Shag]

A belief in one's own "rightness" is often at the very core of what most would us think of as evil. Did Hitler have an open mind? Probably not. Was he sure of his "rightness"?

"Anyways, it is my belief that the key to understanding the way the world works is to have an intimate understanding of yourself, and to objectively look at the behavior of others."

This is exactly right, but it is an incredibly subtle process, and takes work. That's why nasty behaviors don't distinguish between philosophies, folks just use their views to justify them. I believe all of us have access to wisdom, just as we are all vulnerable to self deception. Belief doesn't change this; what is needed is a dynamic, moment by moment understanding.

I think conviction is great, but it's best to have few, and be serious about them. The more beliefs you have to defend, the more your mind is occupied by what is not in front of you, and the less likely you are to learn anything new. This is my problem with fundamentalist values, be it Moslem, Christian, whatever.

My core conviction?
1)All life is sacred, all infused with god, all connected, deserving of compassion, none above the other; yet we all gotta eat.

The big truths contain paradox, and a mind that can't relax with that is a mind trapped in little boxes.

I could be a Libertarian if I trusted people not to turn our country into a toxic wasteland. I like old growth forests, I like clean rivers with fish in them, and I like a few areas to be free of shopping malls. Of course these are just my preferences, others have different priorities. I'm not opposed to capitalism, but capitalism without some compromises = the nineteenth century, and I don't think many of us want to live there.

PS I got a knife kill the other night! Why does that fill me with a golden light?

[This message was edited by Shag on Mar 23, 2001 at 21:01.]

[This message was edited by Shag on Mar 24, 2001 at 12:23.]

[Keiichi]

<center>Like the herd animals we are, we sniff warily at the strange one among us.
- Loren Eiseley, The Mind as Nature</center>

-Keiichi

<A HREF="http://www.geocities.com/morisato_81/" TARGET=_blank><img src="http://unreal.infopop.net/OpenTopic/page?s=10009422&a=ga&ul=9770988621" border=0></A>

[Shag]

Did I say something strange? ;)

[Zundfolge]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>A belief in one's own "rightness" is often at the very core of what most would us think of as evil. [/quote]
See this is kind of what I'm talking about. I've debated with people for years on a myriad of topica, and after a while some of them will chastise me because I belive I'm "right".

The thing is, why would I claim to believe something if I don't believe I'm right?

Part of the problem with the overly open minded is that they have no beliefs and therefore can be so easily molded into anything.

I don't remember who said it but... "You have to stand for something or you'll fall for anything."

<center>http://home.kscable.com/biles/zundsig285.jpg</center>

[RogueLeader]

Actually Zund, I am a libertarian. Since the communist party isn't going to win any elections (for now....) I have to settle for the next best thing.

<img src="http://roguescript.hypermart.net/sig2.jpg" style="border: 1px solid black">

<span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-weight: bold; color: #EFB720; text-style: italic">Webmaster of <a href="http://roguescript.hypermart.net/" style="font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-weight: bold; color: #EFB720; text-style: italic; font-decoration: underline">Infiltration Tactics</a>.

Q: What do you call an unarmed citizen?
A: An organ donor.</span>

[Shag]

This is why conflict among us humans is inevitable. You have to have draw a line somewhere. Sometimes you may even have to fight for what you think is right. These lines are much easier understood by others when they are closer to home, ie, most folks would fight to protect their child. Many of these same people would hesitate to get behind a war set up by a government policy. The more abstract and removed from the personal things get, the closer they need to be examined. But I agree, it is easy to flounder around when you hold these things loosely in your mind. I have struggled some with that. I think it's all about balance. Too far either direction, and you can do some real harm, either by what you do, or what you don't do. A commitment to clear-eyed compassion is where the reality check is.

[Chrome]

Christianity is poison. What do I mean? I mean, that throughout history, Christianity has caused more hardship, attrocity and social problems that it has ever solved. The paradigm itself is counter intuitive, and it instills a disturbing "cause I(god) said so" attitude into people. It is my belief that this attitude and a thing I call the "martyr" complex permeates much of the world. Evangelic branches of Christianty (born again, johovahs witness, mormons etc.) prey upon children who are perhaps troubled and at a time in their lives where they are starting to ask themselves what matters and what doesnt. In order to be a devout Christian, you must blindly faithful, becuase otherwise, you would realize what a crock of **** Christianity really is.

Anyway, I have a bad habit of being extremely inarticulate, spelling badly, giving people the complete wrong inpression, so I will stop there for now.

ChROmE

[Zundfolge]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> Christianity has caused more hardship, attrocity and social problems that it has ever solved [/quote]

Yeah, and there's been so much good done in the name of Athiesm :rolleyes:

Too bad you completely discount the good things Christianity has done, instead you focus on the bad things a few Christians have done (usualy being completely disobedient to God when they do their evil). You can also replace Christianity in your statement with any other religion or political idology.

The root if it is, despite what people as individuals claim to believe, there are a lot of evil people in the world and they do bad things.

I'm a Christian, and I guess that if I'm wrong then at the worst I'll have wasted several opportunities to do some fun things that I wanted to do but Christianity says are wrong (I can think of several women I'd have nailed if there was no God) but that's all.

However if YOU'RE wrong I wonder which of us will suffer more :)

Oh well, it's your choice and if you're not doing evil to others then it's between you and God :D

<center>http://home.kscable.com/biles/zundsig285.jpg</center>

[Shag]

Ah, the threat of Hell, with a smily face attached. ;) A lot of good HAS been done by non-Christians, even Atheists, which is a huge assumption to make about Chrome. (maybe you know him?) At the heart of Christianity is the compassion of Christ. Love your neighbor as yourself, all that stuff. It's not a political philosophy. Ideally, it's a living, breathing relationship with God and the world. Dying to yourself and letting God live through you. Most religions have a similar center. Folks that are connected to this are a great help in the world, and (I believe) recognize each other in spite of their differences.

What is more important, what someone believes, or how they conduct themselves? Believing 100% in the Bible means nothing if you are in the KKK, which is a great example of the intricate justifications of a closed mind. On the other side, there are folks who would doom Mother Theresa to hell because of her liberal Catholic views. Christianity without compassion IS evil, any religion is. Being human is a messy, painful business, period. We are all in the same boat. Being open minded is important because it keeps dogma from getting in the way of the heart of things.

[Buddy_Pickle]

I read allot of 'as-a-whole's, and 'most-of's, and 'generaly's mentioned here. I could be wrong I suppose, but it seems like, at the end of the day that we call mortality, it kinda comes down to the individual. No one else really. Just you, and hopefully a few people that care about you.

But in the end, you have to answer yourself, and your God, (whomever or whatever that may be to you), and make an accounting of how the time was spent. Even if you have NO belief in a higher power or God, you still get left with nothing but your canvas...and what paint you used to pretty it up for 70 years, or however long you live.

So I guess what I am saying is, in the end, I wont care a lick about how the Crusades effected millions of people that simply did not share the belief system of the greater power. Nor will I really care that Jim Jones led 100's to their death in the name of Christianity. What I WILL care about is how I treated other people in my life, what kind of father was I to my children, what kind of husband was I to my wife, what kind of son was I to my parents, what impression did I leave on people I connected with throughout life, was it a positive or negative one, and did I always strive to be the best person I could be, keeping all my promises to others, and sticking to my convictions?

Those are the things that will matter to me. I just want to fight the good fight, be focused on the things that matter most to me...in short: Leave this heap of flesh with as few regrets as I can squeeze out of it.

Lets go back to the crusades for a second. Do you think that the innocent man protecting his farm from the onslaught of men with swords, who were intent on killing him in the name of God if he were to resist, do you think he was thinking, "I gladly lay down my life, for one day, my blood will cry out to the future generations who will plainly see the ghastly effects that Christianity has had on humanity!! Yes, then will be my time for revenge!"

I am betting my money on him saying something else. "I wont get to see my children again. My poor wife...God help them to get out of here before the house is taken over." You get the idea.

This is not at all to argue with anything said in this thread. Actually, I am happy to see that so many are willing to share pretty personal thoughts and feelings, and have the respect be consistent. Just wanted to put my perspective in the mix.

http://www.airlinkllc.com/pics/bpnew.jpg

[Shag]

Mr. Buddy Pickle, I like your style, dude. Nicely said!

[Jason]

First, by definition, Atheism's foundation is a logical fallacy. -Those who wish to prove God doesn't exist. It is a losing battle with reality to prove non-existence. Something that doesn't exist does not leave a trail of evidence to prove it's non-existence, because it doesn't exist in the first place... understand? :)

I comprehend morality as a two-sided system that involves the proper action in dealing with man. The dividing point is the dividing point of voluntary and coercive action. In effect it is: Not having to live for anyone else and not having anyone else live for myself. Essentially, being neither the slave nor the master.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> In any compromise between food and poison, it is only death that can
win. In any compromise between good and evil, it is only evil that
can profit. [/quote]

--------------
The state does not and cannot have one hand only. It has two hands, one to take and the other to give-Frederick Bastiat

[Keiichi]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>"First, by definition, Atheism's foundation is a logical fallacy. -Those who wish to prove God doesn't exist. It is a losing battle with reality to prove non-existence. Something that doesn't exist does not leave a trail of evidence to prove it's non-existence, because it doesn't exist in the first place... understand?"[/quote]

Atheism's goal isn't to prove that God doesn't exist. Atheism's goal is to prove that there's no proof that God does exists. However, let's not get into a religious debate. Those tend to get messy.

-Keiichi

<A HREF="http://morisato_81.tripod.com/Keiichi/" TARGET=_blank><img src="http://morisato_81.tripod.com/KeiSig.jpg" border=0></A>

[Zundfolge]

Athiesm is a belief that God doesn't exist. Christianity (and many other religions) are a belief that God DOES exist.

There is no proof for either, yet believers in both.

Ok, how's that muddy the water :)

<center>http://home.kscable.com/biles/zundsig285.jpg</center>

[Mason]

I believe that 'the Pickle' hit the nail on the head. It doesn't matter where you place your faith, what matters is how you treat others around you.

When I die, I find it hard to believe that I will be told "you were a good husband, a great father and a wonderful friend..but you didn't go to confession, so sorry!". What will matter, in the grand scheme of things, is how you treated those around you, and in my experience(note that I said "IN MY EXPERIENCE"), open minded people tend to treat others more fairly than their 'close-minded' brethren.

It is always better to be open to new ideas and ideals, as the more exposure you have to the world the better able you will be to make an informed decision. Is it any surprise that most members of "hate groups" usually haven't lived anywhere else and tend to be on the..umm..uneducated side. This is to say that they have a very limited scope of experiences from which to draw their conclusions about the world around them.


If you haven't guessed by now, I think that being 'close minded' is not necessarily a good thing. I do have some wonderful friends that ARE close minded, I just think they would be so much more valuable if they were open.
:cool:

I am the Walrus, koo koo kachoo.
Why do people insist on putting their 'two cents' in when they don't have a penny to spare?

[Zundfolge]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> It is always better to be open to new ideas and ideals, as the more exposure you have to the world the better able you will be to make an informed decision...I think that being 'close minded' is not necessarily a good thing. [/quote]

I think you missed my point. I'm not arguing FOR close mindedness, I'm just trying to point out that there's a difference between being close minded and having conviction, just as there's a difference between being open minded and having no center.

The problem as I see it is that self described "open minded" liberals get away with close mindedly sticking to their convictions while accusing conservatives with convictions of being close minded, and it pisses me off.

<center>http://home.kscable.com/biles/zundsig285.jpg</center>

[Mason]

OK, maybe I did miss the point, thanks for straightening it out for me. I agree with your last post in that so-called 'open-minded' individuals who do this are merely being hypocritical and are falsely labeling themselves as being 'open'. :cool:

I am the Walrus, koo koo kachoo.
Why do people insist on putting their 'two cents' in when they don't have a penny to spare?

[Chrome]

It seems Zundy, like many other Christians, that you think people who dont believe in or disagree with Christianity are atheists. Can you recall and heinous attrocities committed in the name of buddhism? I can't, and if im wrong please let me know, seriously. What good does Christianity do? I can't think of anything.

I am not an atheist. I just hate christianity. It appeared on this earth just the same way that every other "pagan" religion did. The just bask in their own glory and praise themselves and their self righteous god. I have never once engaged in a worthwhile conversation with a devout christian. They are self righteous pigs, who look down their noses at you from their throne of morality and virtue. It makes me ****in sick.

[Mason]

Chrome, do not get into a religeous debate here for I am pretty sure you will get your butt handed to you. On to other things...

I am pretty sure Zundie was not saying that if you are not Christian then you are Atheist. I am also pretty sure that he is not 'thumbing his nose' at those who aren't christian. As for you not having a meaningful conversation with anyone Christian, let me ask you..when you talk to someone, do you first ask them what their religion is? Someone's religion has no bearing on the kind of person they are. I believe you are rather young(in your teens, correct?) so your opinions are based on a limited exposure to life, these opinions are bound to change as you get older(for better or worse). As to the topic of this post, you have just shown yourself to be very close-minded(in a not-so-positive way) by making a grossly generalized statement about a vastly large group of individuals.

Christianity has 'saved' millions from destructive lifestyles, just because it gave them 'faith'..THAT in itself is a major 'positive'. Christainity is not 'poison', as you put it, what IS poison is when someones faith becomes obsession and they begin to put others down or think of themselves as superior to their fellow 'man'.

:cool:

I am the Walrus, koo koo kachoo.
Why do people insist on putting their 'two cents' in when they don't have a penny to spare?