How do people become so brainwashed?

How do people become so brainwashed?

Author
Discussion

menguin

3,762 posts

220 months

Friday 24th February 2017
quotequote all
p1stonhead said:
This one however is definitely genuine hehe

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fEJtsC5sVZA
Praise Jeebus!

Getragdogleg

8,737 posts

182 months

Friday 24th February 2017
quotequote all
menguin said:
p1stonhead said:
This one however is definitely genuine hehe

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fEJtsC5sVZA
Praise Jeebus!
That one is brilliant, you can even hear the door close and the helpers scampering away.

Morningside

24,110 posts

228 months

Friday 24th February 2017
quotequote all
People will conform to anything.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o8BkzvP19v4

Goaty Bill 2

3,393 posts

118 months

Friday 24th February 2017
quotequote all
Rawwr said:
I suspect if it was an international law that people couldn't choose a religion or belief system until they were 18 and deemed mentally competent to do so, all religion would probably die out in a few generations.
Anything you say comrade Stalin.


ATG

20,487 posts

271 months

Friday 24th February 2017
quotequote all
citizensm1th said:
Ossiantoad said:
Unfortunately it's just a question of bad men and women taking advantage of poor and gullible people on a huge scale. Ultimately people believe it because they really want it to be true.
and all religion was ever thus ,control,power and wealth nothing more
Rubbish. People want/need to find meaning and purpose in their existence and some sort of explanation about what makes the world tick.

Dagnir

1,836 posts

162 months

Friday 24th February 2017
quotequote all
...but if they weren't ever introduced to Religion as a concept, would it naturally take that form?

I suspect not and certainly not now, in this age of scientific understanding.

p1stonhead

25,489 posts

166 months

Friday 24th February 2017
quotequote all
Dagnir said:
...but if they weren't ever introduced to Religion as a concept, would it naturally take that form?

I suspect not and certainly not now, in this age of scientific understanding.
Someone said the below I cant remember who;

If every religious book and every science book that exist were destroyed today and no one was left who remembered them, in 1000 years, all of the science ones would be back because the tests would all yield the same results. The religious ones wouldnt exist or would be totally different.

Boring_Chris

2,348 posts

121 months

Friday 24th February 2017
quotequote all
DoubleTime said:
You think that's brainwashing?

Oh my fking GOSH, trust me, this ones a stinkah!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TQdIiEUFtqk
cloud9

Alex_225

6,234 posts

200 months

Friday 24th February 2017
quotequote all
Ossiantoad said:
....based on the two occasions he claimed to have been to Heaven and interviewed Jesus.
Did they ever do a drug raid on the guys house? Sounds like he was off his face!

Goaty Bill 2

3,393 posts

118 months

Friday 24th February 2017
quotequote all
Dagnir said:
...but if they weren't ever introduced to Religion as a concept, would it naturally take that form?

I suspect not and certainly not now, in this age of scientific understanding.
I don't think that attempting to ignore 5000+ years of human spiritual evolution is quite that simple.

How does one avoid introducing religion (of some description) without avoiding introducing atheism?
Atheism, while being a perfectly logical conclusion in today's world of science, is still a form of belief in itself.

Even the man who so famously declared "Gott ist tot", recognised that the human psyche required 'something' to escape nihilism.
"Must we ourselves not become gods simply to appear worthy of it?"

I think Ossiantoad (above) summed up the people in these videos quite well.
American television has channels dedicated to people like this, playing 24x7.
Youtube will find hundreds (thousands?) of hours of them, and their detractors and exposers.

Whatever form a new kind of religion would take, it would still attract people like that as the scammers and the scammed.



p1stonhead said:
Someone said the below I cant remember who;

If every religious book and every science book that exist were destroyed today and no one was left who remembered them, in 1000 years, all of the science ones would be back because the tests would all yield the same results. The religious ones wouldnt exist or would be totally different.
If that actually happened, I think we'd all be dead before the decade was out, long before 100 years had elapsed in any case, taking especial note of the underlined text.


p1stonhead

25,489 posts

166 months

Friday 24th February 2017
quotequote all
Goaty Bill 2 said:
Dagnir said:
...but if they weren't ever introduced to Religion as a concept, would it naturally take that form?

I suspect not and certainly not now, in this age of scientific understanding.
I don't think that attempting to ignore 5000+ years of human spiritual evolution is quite that simple.

How does one avoid introducing religion (of some description) without avoiding introducing atheism?
Atheism, while being a perfectly logical conclusion in today's world of science, is still a form of belief in itself.

Even the man who so famously declared "Gott ist tot", recognised that the human psyche required 'something' to escape nihilism.
"Must we ourselves not become gods simply to appear worthy of it?"

I think Ossiantoad (above) summed up the people in these videos quite well.
American television has channels dedicated to people like this, playing 24x7.
Youtube will find hundreds (thousands?) of hours of them, and their detractors and exposers.

Whatever form a new kind of religion would take, it would still attract people like that as the scammers and the scammed.



p1stonhead said:
Someone said the below I cant remember who;

If every religious book and every science book that exist were destroyed today and no one was left who remembered them, in 1000 years, all of the science ones would be back because the tests would all yield the same results. The religious ones wouldnt exist or would be totally different.
If that actually happened, I think we'd all be dead before the decade was out, long before 100 years had elapsed in any case, taking especial note of the underlined text.
Not quite the point I was making was it.

And no, atheism isnt a belief. Non belief in something isnt a belief. There isnt a word for someone who doesnt believe there are fairies down the end of the garden.

Its as simple as;

Religious - I believe there is a god.
Atheist - Do you have any proof?
Religious - No.
Atheist - I dont believe you then.


Edited by p1stonhead on Friday 24th February 11:08

Alex_225

6,234 posts

200 months

Friday 24th February 2017
quotequote all
I have to agree, atheism isn't about believing in something.

I'm an atheist because that's almost a default setting. I've had no evidence presented to me that proves the existence of any God therefore as far as I am concerned there is nothing to believe. From my own experiences God doesn't exist. It's not a case of believing he doesn't exists, as far as I am concerned there is no such thing.

If there was evidence put in front of me I'd be interested to see it, I don't mean that in a sarcastic way, I'm open minded. To me. without evidence or proof, there is nothing to believe in.


MOBB

3,575 posts

126 months

Friday 24th February 2017
quotequote all
Those kind of language belongs to hell

Goaty Bill 2

3,393 posts

118 months

Friday 24th February 2017
quotequote all
p1stonhead said:
Goaty Bill 2 said:
p1stonhead said:
Someone said the below I cant remember who;

If every religious book and every science book that exist were destroyed today and no one was left who remembered them, in 1000 years, all of the science ones would be back because the tests would all yield the same results. The religious ones wouldnt exist or would be totally different.
If that actually happened, I think we'd all be dead before the decade was out, long before 100 years had elapsed in any case, taking especial note of the underlined text.
Not quite the point I was making was it.
It would, if it were possible, be different...
Assuming of course that there is no deity that influenced things at some point in the past, and said deity didn't do it again in this brave new world. hehe

But I do think, though we would escape the pre-human development cycle of evolution and assuming we retained fundamental languages (minus all the words invented by/for science and religion), it would take us much longer than 1000 years to redevelop the science, and religions would still probably come first/simultaneously.
We also really can't ignore the human tendencies to tribalism, belief systems and greed for power, or our absolute reliance on power structures.


p1stonhead said:
And no, atheism isnt a belief. Non belief in something isnt a belief. There isnt a word for someone who doesnt believe there are fairies down the end of the garden.

Its as simple as;

Religious - I believe there is a god.
Atheist - Do you have any proof?
Religious - No.
Atheist - I dont believe you then.
Religious - I believe there is a god.
Atheist - Do you have any proof?
Religious - No.
Atheist - I don't believe you then.
Religious - Prove I am wrong.
Atheist - Scientifically impossible
Religious - If you can't prove it (your test), you believe that I am wrong, and now we have reached a point which we can agree upon;
We both believe in (or 'not in' if you prefer) something we can not prove.
There is no further need for conflict between us on this point. Can I buy you a beer?


0000

13,812 posts

190 months

Friday 24th February 2017
quotequote all
Goaty Bill 2 said:
Religious - I believe there is a god.
Atheist - Do you have any proof?
Religious - No.
Atheist - I don't believe you then.
Religious - Prove I am wrong.
Atheist - Scientifically impossible
Religious - If you can't prove it (your test), you believe that I am wrong, and now we have reached a point which we can agree upon;
We both believe in (or 'not in' if you prefer) something we can not prove.
There is no further need for conflict between us on this point. Can I buy you a beer?
Atheist - The difference is not that we both believe in something we can not prove. The difference is that of all the many Gods, fairytales, etc, that neither of us can prove exist I believe in none of them. You choose to believe in just one, but not the others for no apparent reason.

p1stonhead

25,489 posts

166 months

Friday 24th February 2017
quotequote all
Goaty Bill 2 said:
p1stonhead said:
Goaty Bill 2 said:
p1stonhead said:
Someone said the below I cant remember who;

If every religious book and every science book that exist were destroyed today and no one was left who remembered them, in 1000 years, all of the science ones would be back because the tests would all yield the same results. The religious ones wouldnt exist or would be totally different.
If that actually happened, I think we'd all be dead before the decade was out, long before 100 years had elapsed in any case, taking especial note of the underlined text.
Not quite the point I was making was it.
It would, if it were possible, be different...
Assuming of course that there is no deity that influenced things at some point in the past, and said deity didn't do it again in this brave new world. hehe

But I do think, though we would escape the pre-human development cycle of evolution and assuming we retained fundamental languages (minus all the words invented by/for science and religion), it would take us much longer than 1000 years to redevelop the science, and religions would still probably come first/simultaneously.
We also really can't ignore the human tendencies to tribalism, belief systems and greed for power, or our absolute reliance on power structures.


p1stonhead said:
And no, atheism isnt a belief. Non belief in something isnt a belief. There isnt a word for someone who doesnt believe there are fairies down the end of the garden.

Its as simple as;

Religious - I believe there is a god.
Atheist - Do you have any proof?
Religious - No.
Atheist - I dont believe you then.
Religious - I believe there is a god.
Atheist - Do you have any proof?
Religious - No.
Atheist - I don't believe you then.
Religious - Prove I am wrong.
Atheist - Scientifically impossible
Religious - If you can't prove it (your test), you believe that I am wrong, and now we have reached a point which we can agree upon;
We both believe in (or 'not in' if you prefer) something we can not prove.
There is no further need for conflict between us on this point. Can I buy you a beer?
My point wasnt that religions wouldnt spring back up, its that they wouldnt be exactly the same as they are now because the people who made up the original ones arent around. Science however would come back exactly the same because its evidence and testing based.

Agnostic Atheist is what I am. I dont know there isnt a god. But there isnt proof of it therefore I dont believe it. Its the default as far as I am concerned. Im happy with not knowing. But I wont make up sky fairies or believe in them to fill in the blanks without evidence.

'Prove I am wrong' is a ridiculous argument made by religious people to justify their blind belief in something. The onus is on someone making the claim not on the person saying they dont blindly believe it. Why dont you believe in the 3000 gods which have existed? Presumably you believe in just one? Why that one? None of them have proof. Your chances of having blind faith in the 'right one' is 0.0003%

Edited by p1stonhead on Friday 24th February 11:31

Alex_225

6,234 posts

200 months

Friday 24th February 2017
quotequote all
MOBB said:
Those kind of language belongs to hell
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gEPmA3USJdI

Edited by Alex_225 on Friday 24th February 11:33

Vizsla

922 posts

123 months

Friday 24th February 2017
quotequote all
ATG said:
citizensm1th said:
Ossiantoad said:
Unfortunately it's just a question of bad men and women taking advantage of poor and gullible people on a huge scale. Ultimately people believe it because they really want it to be true.
and all religion was ever thus ,control,power and wealth nothing more
Rubbish. People want/need to find meaning and purpose in their existence and some sort of explanation about what makes the world tick.
Look back through European history at the 'careers' of assorted popes, cardinals and archbishops. Not about control, wealth and power? OK.

I think the terminal decline of religion in Western society is a good indication that people increasingly no longer want or need to find some mystical meaning and purpose in their existence. I certainly don't, I'm perfectly happy to let my Selfish Genes get on with doing what they do best. smile Evolution doesn't give a hoot about the individual, billions come and billions go, causes me not the slightest discomfort that I'm simply one of them, no more and no less.

I and many others live a very rich (not financially!), rewarding and thoroughly fulfilling life without the slightest need for some invented explanation of what makes the world tick, and why I'm here. Well, OK I do go along with one explanation, but it involves lots of interesting astrophysics and more locally on this planet a guy called Darwin.

In the past when most peoples lives were a living hell (starvation, disease, high child mortality, oppression) it was only natural that religion provided comfort to explain an otherwise miserable and purposeless existence. I suspect it's not a coincidence that the poorest countries in the world (with, inevitably, a poorly-educated population) are the ones where religion still has some influence.



Nobaccymaccy

572 posts

201 months

Friday 24th February 2017
quotequote all
ATG said:
Rubbish. People want/need to find meaning and purpose in their existence and some sort of explanation about what makes the world tick.
Exactly - "If god did not exist it would be necessary to invent him "
he/she/it doesn't -so we did

can't remember

1,077 posts

127 months

Friday 24th February 2017
quotequote all
Goaty Bill 2 said:
Religious - I believe there is a god.
Atheist - Do you have any proof?
Religious - No.
Atheist - I don't believe you then.
Religious - Prove I am wrong.
Atheist - Scientifically impossible
Religious - If you can't prove it (your test), you believe that I am wrong, and now we have reached a point which we can agree upon;
We both believe in (or 'not in' if you prefer) something we can not prove.
There is no further need for conflict between us on this point. Can I buy you a beer?
Terrible logic on display here. The burden of proof remains with the believer. The prove I'm wrong method of debate should be left in the playground.