Discussion (38)¬

1. Jen says:

   February 25, 2009 at 8:55 am

   I was a Philosophy minor at a fairly small college, so I understand a bit about what you’re talking about. Unfortunately, I don’t have an easy answer for you. I think the best strategy is speak your piece and try not to take the wingnuts personally. Is the professor committed to keeping the environment safe for everyone to speak? In my experience, that’s the key factor. If he or she isn’t keeping things in as control as they should be, you can talk to him/her directly, or someone above him/her.
   • Foo-Foo McKinley says:

     February 25, 2009 at 10:35 am

     I wish he would cut-in more often, as what he’s posted in response to religion somewhat reflects my views (without him completely outing himself like me). He stated early in the semester, though, that he would only be watching interaction between everyone with an occasional statement. For the moment I’m just going to have to push my way through this section until we move on to more modern philosophers. Luckily the one we’re focusing on right now (Aquinas… ugh) is the last of the Christian section. I doubt, however, that this will be the end of the God spewing.
2. Elmo Lincoln says:

   February 25, 2009 at 9:47 am

   Isn’t the whole purpose of Philosophy debate? And learning how to make logical arguments? Simply bite your tongue when you want to be insulting, and counter their arguments with as logical and well-thought-out an argument as you can make. Believe it or not, from my own experiences with Fundies, they get even angrier and more spittle-laden the calmer and more rational you are when you tear down their fallacies.

   And if you have a problem with how your professor deals with the situation, talk to the dean.
   • Foo-Foo McKinley says:

     February 25, 2009 at 10:40 am

     Well yeah, of course, but I’m hitting roadblocks at every turn. Like I said in my post, if I’m nice to them and just let them speak without rebuttal they get encouraged by it, but if I tear down their statement (which I have been doing in the nicest way possible) I end up with no one wanting to talk to me. Getting ignored = no discussion = bad grade for me. But you’re right that countering them with a well thought out argument that isn’t directly insulting is the best option. I just have to continue what I’ve been doing (although I have had 1 minor spaz out which I will try to keep to a minimum).
3. Oskar Kennedy says:

   February 25, 2009 at 10:04 am

   Great first post. Kudos.

   Can you share some examples of how your classmates are turning the discussion of other areas of philosophy back to their religion?
   • Foo-Foo McKinley says:

     February 25, 2009 at 10:25 am

     Thanks! it was something I felt I needed to get off my chest, and I do feel better having vented in a public forum.
     As for examples, there are so many that I’ll give you one in particular. I was proud of my professor for saying this in regards to Plato and Aristotle (and the fact that my classmates kept linking them to religion): “It is worth noting that none of this arises from religious faith. These writers have escaped the impact of Greek mythology and precede by over 300 years the emergence of Christianity. The most pervasive influence of Christianity, like most other religions, often seems to be its introduction of new mythologies that lead people into superstition and intolerance of others rather than a rational understanding of truth and a determination to achieve goodness in everyday behavior.” I literally ::sqee::ed and wrote him back applauding his statement.
     Others, however, responded like this:
     “As for Christianity being corrupt – I disagree with that statement. Christianity is a concept, following the example and teachings of Jesus.” ::barf::
     “If everything happens for a reason, and everything is in Gods control then are there really mistakes?” ::punch computer::
     And so on… there are worse examples, but I’ll have to scavenge through the older comment threads to find some. At any rate, high-5 to my professor, but boo to everyone else.
     • Oskar Kennedy says:

       February 25, 2009 at 10:35 am

       Christianity is a concept, following the example and teachings of Jesus.

       Ah, like his well-known “Adam & Steve” sermon, or the gospel of “Take The Continent And Screw The Natives.”
       • Foo-Foo McKinley says:

         February 25, 2009 at 10:47 am

         Haha, exactly. I suddenly have a craving for wine and fish…
   • Foo-Foo McKinley says:

     February 26, 2009 at 11:54 am

     BRAND NEW EXAMPLE… Since this week’s topic was Aquinas, towards the end of the section Darwin was brought up regarding his theory of evolution and how it refuted any of the silly notions that Aquinas had. I mentioned it in a post. Here is a response that I received just now:

     “Since you brought up evolution. Is it possible that the heavens etc. that God created evolved under his watchful eye? Perhaps the first day of creation is a metaphor for thousands of years. The Bible says that God created sea creatures first. We know life began in the warm waters. Perhaps God breathed a soul into man somewhere along the evolutionary way from apehood. I know evolution has left scientific evidence that cannot bve refuted. However, tt is possible for the two schools of thought to intertwine. Yes, I could go on and on, but I hope you understand my gist.

     As a person who enjoys science, I understand that hybridization and cross-breeding bring new species. I believe that God gave human beings the ability to use our knowledge to better understand the world and help preserve it. We know that spontaneous generation does not occur – so where did that first seed of life come from?”

     *$(*&#$)%*&#)(!!!!!!!
4. Ryogam says:

   February 25, 2009 at 10:16 am

   That co-student of yours is really…chipper, huh?

   Well, you really are in a Dilly of a Pickle.

   I would approach it as a social experiment. I would go Poe on them. Totally go ass-over-head, fundi-Christian, on them. Find the most ridiculous Christian apologetic arguments and spew them in the most other the top, true-believer manner as possible. And them see how the respond. I would then cut and paste the most ridiculous responses and save them in a safe place on your computer. Then, when the class is over, you come back here and post for us to see, and stare and laugh at.

   As long as no one finds out, you should be able to keep communicating with them and keep your sanity, knowing that, some day, you will get the last laugh.
   • Foo-Foo McKinley says:

     February 25, 2009 at 10:44 am

     OMFSM that girl is SO chipper. I want to hit things whenever I read her posts. I guess ignorance really is bliss.
     Ha! That would be a fun experiment. I could pretend that they’ve “converted” me and that I now roll around in the theological poo they submit with a big grin on my face. That would certainly perk their sermon-listening ears up. Maybe I’ll give that a try next time one of them says something so ludicrous I feel like jumping out of the window.
5. Rav Winston says:

   February 25, 2009 at 1:14 pm

   Oops. I actually offered my opinion over on Facebook. Feh. I cannae be arsed to re-type it here. Cos that’s how I submit to my own inertia.
   • Foo-Foo McKinley says:

     February 25, 2009 at 1:40 pm

     And you do it well, Mr. Winston :). Maybe I’ll post something about the Marx brothers (or Karl Marx when I get to tat section in class) so we can have another quote-off!
   • Foo-Foo McKinley says:

     February 25, 2009 at 1:44 pm

     Here ya go, now you don’t have to retype it…

     Rav Winston:

     Well, being severely socially and emotionally anorexic without any yummy meds to alter my personality– I say “Fukkit!” and just tell the deluded mental deficients what’s what. Of course, the big advantage I have is that I don’t give a shit who talks to me or not. In fact, I prefer it if they DON’T talk to me. I enjoy having my social interactions filtered through the safety shield of my computer.

     I AM actually content with my choice, you know.
6. Terry says:

   February 25, 2009 at 2:02 pm

   Most Christians will simply try to convert you — not because of anything but because they feel it is their moral obligation to do so. They are not ripe to learn science as of yet. At that tender age, it is far easier to have a God, and explain the world, than it is to the busy work of science and trying to learn something new. At that age we want to know everything. Later on, we become much more comfortable without knowing everything.
   Show them the logical failures, debate them kindly — think of them as children who are just learning that Santa does not exist – -has to be frightening.
7. Darkwinter says:

   February 25, 2009 at 2:20 pm

   That’s quite the ordeal, from what you say; the only thing I can recommend is basically what others have suggested before – that you just state your case, and argue in a reasoned and calm manner. This is especially important if they blow up at you – remain calm and your viewpoint becomes the one associated with logic and reason simply by being more clear and less emotional.

   As a philosophy graduate myself, I can simply suggest that – if this course is well-run and fairly marked – that you will do best by arguing your case as best you can, and avoiding fallacies of logic. What you say of your professor sounds promising in this regard; hopefully “doing philosophy right” will be what gets you the good marks, not how many people agree with you at the end of the discussions.
8. igetpissed says:

   February 25, 2009 at 4:30 pm

   Foo-Foo, the wise and always best choice is to be true to yourself and your point of view. It is a philosophy class, not a christian theology class, so speak your mind, tell them to get off of their theological asses and, dare i say it, “THINK!” You are allowed your point of view too, and if your teacher is any good he will understand this. Philosophy is also about critical thinking. Not just make believe poo.
9. Oskar Kennedy says:

   February 25, 2009 at 6:14 pm

   I think we’re all overlooking the option with the greatest potential for hilarity. Pretend to be possessed a demon of some sort, and try to get someone to exorcise you.
   • Foo-Foo McKinley says:

     February 25, 2009 at 7:02 pm

     HAHAHAHA that is the greatest idea ever.
10. OneHandClapping says:

    February 26, 2009 at 10:29 am

    I have taken several online classes and run into the exact same thing, but I went more the militant atheist route. I didn’t much pander to their sense of entitlement of the sky fairy, and that actually got discussion up and kicking pretty fast. The more outspoken I was, the more they were inclined to attempt to defend their beliefs. Just a thought :) Good luck!
11. Jimmy says:

    February 26, 2009 at 10:56 am

    Be careful with that philosophy stuff. Steve Martin says he studied philosophy in college and “learned enough to screw myself up for the rest of my life!”

    Hang in there, you’re doing fine
12. catgirl says:

    February 26, 2009 at 11:39 am

    You should just tolerate what they say and nod politely until the class is over. Getting angry doesn’t help anyone. I once had a sociology class with a teacher who actually believe that 9/11 was a government conspiracy, among many other things. When he said that the plane that hit the Pentagon didn’t leave a plane-shaped hole in the wall, I was tempted to raise my hand and tell him that cartoons do not reflect the reality of physics, but I knew it would be pointless. So, I just listened quietly, regurgitated his ‘facts’ on the test (fortunately the 9/11 stuff was a side rant and not actually on the tests), and I got an A+ in the class and gave a terrible teacher review.

    So just participate as little as possible, be polite, and move on with your life when the class is over. If you insist on debating these people, make sure you are always calm, and brush up on Bible trivia so you know more about it than they do (which is probably very little). Don’t forget to mention that eating shrimp is an abomination and don’t hesitate to use Lot to your advantage.
    • Oskar Kennedy says:

      February 26, 2009 at 3:31 pm

      My (Methodist) church youth group used take camping trips, and each person in turn would have to read a bible verse and say a prayer before one of the meals. I kept getting in trouble because I’d choose abominations from Leviticus or begats from Exodus. Eventually, they started making me get my verses approved before I read them. Discovering that the adults in my faith tradition were uncomfortable with parts of their own holy book was a real eye-opener.
      • Foo-Foo McKinley says:

        February 26, 2009 at 3:44 pm

        AHAHA I can just picture you, smaller of course and maybe sanz facial hair, quoting fire and brimstone and everyone looking on, mortified.
        • Oskar Kennedy says:

          February 26, 2009 at 3:48 pm

          I have to confess that I did it because I knew that it would make everyone uncomfortable. My rebellions were small, but pointed.
      • catgirl says:

        February 27, 2009 at 10:10 am

        It would have been really ironic to read the Leviticus verses before a seafood or pork meal. Did it ever work out that way?
        • Oskar Kennedy says:

          February 27, 2009 at 3:58 pm

          I only got away with it a couple of times, and I went right for the stuff about lepers and menstruating women and men who lie down with goats being unclean. After that was nixed, I read a few pages of the serial begats from Exodus, which triggered the verse review policy. I never got a chance to talk about the prohibited foods.
    • Ryogam says:

      February 26, 2009 at 8:11 pm

      I don’t mean to be controversial or to tar any one group as especially error-prone, but what’s up with Sociology teachers? I had one who was all into “alternative medicine.” I mean, really into it. If doctors were against it, she was for it, and vice versa. I was outspoken in my opposition to it, and she gave me a book to read on the subject. I then used the book in a report and speech for the class in which I critiqued the book mercilessly. I have no idea now what the book was or if my report was fair, but she seemed to take it in stride. Until I got the class grade, a B, one of only two B’s I received as an undergrad. I tend to think I would have got an A if I was more willing to toe her line.

      The other B was in a History of South America class where I was an outspoken critic of the teacher’s interventionist view of el Salvador and Nicaragua. He was against the American support of the Contras against the Sandinista government in Nicaragua and against the American support of the El Salvadoran government against leftest rebels there.

      My view was that since all the parties in the two civil wars had bloody hands, we should not get involved at all and let them sort things out for themselves. He did not appreciate my line of thought. And I got another B.

      But enough about me, how are you?
      • catgirl says:

        February 27, 2009 at 10:15 am

        During my junior year of high school, I had a really bad English teacher. I wrote a good research paper supporting GM food and animals, and she gave me a bad grade because she disagreed with my views. In case you think I am just over-estimating my writing ability and I actually wrote a C-paper, she did the same thing to a straight-A student who did a well-written paper against gun control. After that experience, I learned my lesson that sometimes it’s just better to pretend to agree with certain people, which is how I got my A+ in that sociology class.
13. Terry says:

    February 26, 2009 at 12:51 pm

    There are some good points here. I sometimes mistake the ideal of a class with reality. The ideal is a free exchange of ideas — but that only works if you have a professor who can tolerate views besides their own. The reality is your fellow students are confused, and sometimes you can say — “hey, not that I necessarily believe this, but let me take the devil’s advocate just for the point.” Use the argument to engage them and then have serious discussion with them, privately, about their real beliefs. Those who are unshakable, may think. No sense to confront them head on — that is like me trying to tell my dog to give me the bone. Its ok to take a counter position if you take it as one “for argument’s sake.” Don’t invest your own personal energy in it – -then when people talk to you privately, you can ask – “Gee, do you really think they just left fossils around, I kind of don’t.”
14. Infinite Monkey says:

    February 26, 2009 at 1:43 pm

    May I suggest debate not to win, but debate to defend. My closest coworker is a devout christian, and we get along well. We have an agreement that we don’t debate to convert the other, we debate to defend our thoughts. It doesn’t get hostile, we don’t spout venom, and we have made a deal not to use the phrase “People like you”. I don’t represent all atheists, and she doesn’t represent all christians.
    • Foo-Foo McKinley says:

      February 26, 2009 at 2:03 pm

      Yes, absolutely. In our first week of class we had to do an “introduction” discussion board. I told them a bit about myself, including that I am an open atheist and skeptic. I put, basically, a disclaimer in it stating that I wouldn’t ridicule their beliefs as long as they didn’t ridicule my non-belief and that debates needed to be regarded as simply that: debates. I let everyone know that they would find me to be a relatively warm and open person as long as the criteria above was met and that they didn’t try to shove religion down my throat or “save my soul.”
15. Jackie says:

    February 26, 2009 at 2:46 pm

    I can sympathize. I have a hard time discussing my atheism with religious folks without making fun on them. Its important to not take anything personally and to kind of watch it rather than become emotionally involved in it, as if you’re studying their culture.

    One thing I tend to try to do is to keep asking them questions, I attempt to understand it and say things like. “Can you explain that to me, because it doesn’t make any sense considering xyz, what am I missing?” Usually this results in them getting frustrated because they’re eventually forced to come to the conclusion that they can’t explain themselves logically. From your evolution example I might say something like. “I’m glad to see someone else is giving elocution some thought, but I can’t get behind the god intervention bit. That all rests on an assumption of God’s existence and I’m not able to make that kind of huge assumption, can you tell me how that is more likely than a major fluke of chemistry? Also, I noticed you have God at 2 points in your idea, once giving a soul to man, but not to our ancestors and once giving the first life. Why do you think he needed to intervene 2 times? When in the course of human evolution to you theorize the soul came in? Would that be with the homo-sapian species exclusively, or one of our earlier ancestors”
    • Foo-Foo McKinley says:

      February 26, 2009 at 3:02 pm

      To be honest, when I initially responded I kind of flipped out. I’m sleepy, cranky, running low on caffeine to keep me sane and frankly I’m a cold-hearted bitch most of the time, haha. I quoted the bible to her and then went science all over her ass. After reading your thoughts I posted a second response (keeping my initial one because I’m trying to stay true to my opinions regardless or reaction) and used your idea of asking multiple questions. The other reason I posted it as a second reply is because I’m interested to see which one she responds to, if not both. Thank you for your opinion!
16. Tina says:

    February 26, 2009 at 3:31 pm

    Last summer, I took an online Religion class. Just what I picked from the required category. My class was 30 something students, and we were divided into groups (about 10?), to have our discussions with each other throughout the semester.

    In the beginning of the semester, we were asked to introduce ourselves.. A little bio. I noted that the majority of my classmates were in their 30’s or 40’s, female, and Christian. In fact, more than one bio quoted the Bible. I am positive that I was the only atheist in my group. Throughout our discussions, it felt like the philosophical questions our instructor posted weren’t being understood by those individuals. If he asked us about what a certain person’s philosophy was, they would eventually get around to comparing it to “what I believe is,” and almost fail to answer the question at all……. Telling us about Marxism does not require two paragraphs on what you believe about our God-given purposes.

    So.. It was two semesters ago, and I cannot really remember more pertinent examples, but I empathize. What I did was just post my answers, read the others, and made most of my required replies “I agree that, such and such” or “good job pointing out that so-and-so thought this,” and left it at that.
    • Tina says:

      February 26, 2009 at 3:33 pm

      I guess I should mention that I think we have the same instructor! Haha. He took the same, no-comment sort of stand, with a leaning toward “don’t be a bigoted theist.”
      • Foo-Foo McKinley says:

        February 26, 2009 at 3:42 pm

        Hahaha so you understand the huge sigh of relief I had when I read what he’d written about religion. That’s **exactly** my biggest problem. Of course trying not to rip their heads off about the religion section is an issure, but the fact that EVERY topic leads back to god for them drives me up the wall. My fear is that I’m not going to be able to enjoy the sections that I feel I would probably enjoy if it wasn’t for the classmates.
17. jessi says:

    February 26, 2009 at 9:54 pm

    I have the same problem being back in school after 10 years. However, you need to suck it up. Are you getting a degree for fun or because you want it to get a job? I work with Christian Fundamentalists that behave the same way and are in their 50s. You don’t have to agree, but just say enough to get a good grade. If there are 30 people in your thread, you can comment twice and be fine. Just make stuff up. It’s philosophy, it doesn’t have to be what you believe, just what you can support in a debate-like atmosphere. Plus, it’s online so you can react to comments at home however you want and post something completely different. Converting people from their beliefs shouldn’t be an issue for you either.