1. Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Mocking in debates

Discussion in 'Interfaith Discussion' started by Kapalika, Jan 16, 2019.

  1. Kapalika

    Kapalika Well-Known Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2015
    Messages:
    1,976
    Ratings:
    +1,367
    "Sky daddy", "Imaginary Friends" ect

    I feel like if someone has used insults like this in a discussion, they have basically told you they have no interest in a real dialog, and lost any debate. While an insult can be useful to make a point more overt more often than not insults like this simply come from a lack of any substantive arguments.

    I think this also extends to other insults like calling some political stances "communist" when it's nothing like it at all, or using the word "socialist" in a derogatory way.

    Similarly sometimes conservative positions are called "fascist" when it's a bit of a stretch, or someone is called a "terrorist" to discredit them.

    All these insults don't really add anything of substance, so why even use them in the first place?
     
    • Like Like x 4
    • Winner Winner x 1
  2. Hubert Farnsworth

    Hubert Farnsworth Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2016
    Messages:
    2,113
    Ratings:
    +1,423
    Religion:
    Negative Atheist
    It's usually lack of intelligence that causes people to resort to ad hominems in their arguments. When they are incapable of using logic and sound reasoning, they just start the insults.
     
  3. Earthling

    Earthling David Henson
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2005
    Messages:
    3,184
    Ratings:
    +577
    Religion:
    Bible Believer
    Because they are very effective to communicate a general consensus and therefore justify one's position of disbelief or contention without having to rely on facts, evidence, research, etc.

    Pretty obvious, isn't it?
     
  4. Tony Bristow-Stagg

    Tony Bristow-Stagg A World Citizen
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2017
    Messages:
    5,257
    Ratings:
    +2,136
    Religion:
    Baha'i
    We are all of the human race. No man should exault himself above another.

    The greatest scientist, still need the basics of life for survival, to which many others spend their lives providing.

    We all play our part and all need to be appreciated, we need to find the good in all people.

    Regards Tony
     
    • Friendly Friendly x 1
  5. icehorse

    icehorse Well-Known Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2014
    Messages:
    7,907
    Ratings:
    +3,883
    Religion:
    spiritual anti-theist : )
    bingo
     
  6. Quintessence

    Quintessence Tale Weaver
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2011
    Messages:
    19,024
    Ratings:
    +11,728
    Religion:
    Druidry

    As a heads up, we can (and have) infracted people for using this language. It's not okay with the rules in most (but not all) contexts.
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
    • Useful Useful x 1
  7. BubbaGumps

    BubbaGumps Member

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2019
    Messages:
    26
    Ratings:
    +7
    Religion:
    Agnostic
    Very few people are interested in true dialogue and want to enter into a discussion to try to one-up the perceived opposition. Some are subtle about it. Other's not so much.
     
  8. Native

    Native Natural Philosopher

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2011
    Messages:
    1,241
    Ratings:
    +164
    Religion:
    Shamanism
  9. syo

    syo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 27, 2016
    Messages:
    2,131
    Ratings:
    +509
    Religion:
    pagan
    I laugh at insults. They are funny.
     
  10. xir

    xir New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2019
    Messages:
    8
    Ratings:
    +11
    I think it depends on the context, really.

    From my perspective as an ex-atheist, I'd say that most of the instances where I've seen this is when people use whatever religious text to support their ideological or political belief, rather than take responsibility for their own stance. Which makes sense, it's very natural for people who don't believe in your religion to be completely unswayed by your religious texts. When you start citing religious texts to support your position, it feels to them as if you're suggesting that deciding what is right or wrong should be done on the basis of the Lord of the Rings!
    At the same time, as a religious person, it makes sense to base your beliefs on your religion, of course. Lots of religious people use religious texts to avoid taking responsibility for their own opinions (since most religious texts can be interpreted in multiple ways), and that makes it very frustrating (and pointless) to discuss with them. At times like that, it makes sense why people ask you to stop talking about your "Imaginary Friends" etc.

    I'd say that as soon as a debate boils down to "I believe in Book X, which says Y" vs "I don't believe in Book X, so I see no reason to believe Y", it's pointless to continue the debate any further.

    If you're discussing e.g. tax policy and citing academic sources, and your opponent discards your opinion and calls you names because you're wearing a religious symbol such as a cross, then they're messed up!
    If you're citing a religious text on the topic of tax policy, you must recognize that people outside your religion will feel like you're asking them to make sacrifices based on what Gimli, son of Glóin, said in The Two Towers. From my perspective, in this case you're the one that messed up.
     
Loading...