Somebody asked how you can debate when there is a brain on one side of the exchange and merely a "believer" on

Question

the other side. Since a "believer" always infers one who believes without reason, who can object to this position?

Answer 1

Smile. For the Bible beaters there should be more info about what you so tactfully called "believers". They are ignorant about anything outside of their holy book. So, I will try to say it as clearly as I possibly can, so even religious fanatics can understand that you were referring to them.

Debates between intellectuals and religious fanatics are impossible and useless, because the first group has a brain, uses it all the time and questions everything. While the other groups does not need a brain at all, does not use it and questions nothing ever. It must be nice to live your adult life like a child, not taking responsibility for your actions, blaming God for everything and expecting Him to solve all your problems without question. I just think, when someone is not using one of the organs ( a brain ), it dies...

So, we simply should agree to disagree and leave it at that.

Answer 2

I think that's a pretty unfair assertion. That implies that the believer can't momentarily suspend their beliefs for the purpose of rational debate. Back when I was part of a clearly defined religious group, I know I certainly could. But then again, I guess most can't...or choose not to?

Answer 3

Why does a believer always infer one who believes without reason? Did Einstein not believe in his experiements. I think that a believer will actually know the facts better than someone who is just there to debate. They will avidly defend their position. If we believe in something we tend to work harder at it. So I will have to object to this position,