Do U think the reason you can't get anywhere debating with religious zealots could be that they're delusional

Question

It sure is fun aggravating you religious people and seeing you're unereligious responses.

What does debate mean? The religious people I speak with will not acknowledge logic in argument. I feel that anyone who can not accept logic and go only give answers relying on "faith" and "believing" have know substance to there argument and sound crazy, frankly. They never acknowledge the validity of a counterpoint. I think some of you don't know what debate is because you're not capable of independent thought.

Answer 1

When you say "get anywhere," where, exactly, would you like to get?

If you are debating, the presumption is that you are looking for truth--not just to espouse your own view. If you are trying to get somewhere in particular through debate--which is to be distinguished from teaching--then you have prefigured the outcome and therefore you are lecturing or asking leading questions for your own personal amusement.

I have never heard it asked before if religious people are delusional! How original! Did you come up with that all by your lonesome?

Answer 2

my friend socrates once said to plato after a long debate they had and plato had said that this argument has no end, socrates said every argument has an end its just that you should know how to bring the other person to his knees,bec in every argument or debate one of them has to be wrong thats why they r arguing it. I have done that many times to many religious minded people , it takes time and patience.And you cannot argue with them if your facts are not clear.Most of the religious minded people win because people like u dont know the existence of mankind.You reach the big bang theory and life after that.They have two questions the easy one is how can a non-living thing give birth to a living thing, or say how can life which led to us being a human, come out of nowhere.I dont know how you tackle this, the other one is which is difficult to ans, from where did the first matter come which led to the big bang, or say whatever there was in the universe before big bang from where did it come and why was it there.If you have the ans to these two questions even osama wont be able to argue with u. otherwise god save you from them.

Answer 3

The problem on BOTH sides is this type of Q/A site Where you only get one shot then you go on to the next question. True debating is done with many exchanges from both sides.

You need to stop being so arrogant. Truth is truth no matter where its found one wonders if you are just like the people you accuse of not being willing to really listen to the other side.

Answer 4

Quite probably. Thei "faith" that zealots have shares all the characteristics of severe delusions. As far as the zealots are concerned, anything that does not fit into their dogma is either a test of their faith or just outright evil. Either conclusion only reinforces their beliefs. It's like what happened in Waco: Koresh convinced his followers that the End Of The World was at hand. Along came the BATF and the FBI with tanks and heavy weapons camped on their doorstep and their conviction about TEOTW were set in stone.

Answer 5

Well, they are delusional and there are 50,000 different answers to every question that isn't answered specifically in the bible (and there are a LOT).

How can athiests get anywhere debating with believers who don't even agree with each other?

I'm thinking if there was a such thing as an absolute truth, then there wouldn't be so many 'dissenting opinions' in religion.

Answer 6

Superstitious people are often ruled by fear. Open an umbrella in the house of someone who is superstitious and watch them have a panic attack. They want to believe in that nonsense, and it is the same with fanatics. Regardless of how they cannot prove their points, they will cling to the notions that were written in a book ... myths and fables. It is their security blanket.

Ask them about the rapture and they will insist that they will go through walls and car rooftops to be airlifted to somewhere, but yet ask them why the same God couldn't airlift people from the World Trade Centre and see what type of excuses you will get.

Answer 7

Well, that is true, to a point.

I have met a few theists that were fairly rational folks, that admitted that their beliefs were all about faith, etc, and were not afraid to study science and so forth. (I imagine these people will eventually become atheists/agnostics, however. They just haven't read enough yet)

But for the folks that guard themselves from anything that might harm their faith (ie: rational thought), it is pointless to debate the subject with them. In doing so, they view you only as the enemy, and won't ever concede any points, anyway.

All you can do to be constructive is to be a friend to them. (And that can be hard, sometimes) But if you can approach them as a friend and not an enemy, perhaps you'll be able to talk them into doing the research on their own. (They really do need to do it for themselves. And that requires them to have a desire to do so.)

Answer 8

Debating is a 2 way street and both sides always think they are correct and refuse to back down. We have to learn to accept each other wither zealots or not and that goes for each side of the wall.

Answer 9

In Psychology, there is concept of 'loci of control'. In other words, what do you think controls you 'life'. Some people believe their lives are controlled by primarily external forces (fate, God, society, disease) while others believe their lives are controlled by internal forces (will, desire, etc). I think that many 'humanists' tend to focus on the Internal while the religious focus on the External. This is a profound difference, which makes it hard for one group to understand the other.

Answer 10

You are quite right, you cannot get anywhere with religious people on debating. Truth cannot be debated. You must be open minded if you intend to make head way. If Saul of Tarsus didn't get anywhere, I don't think you will.