Lie Detector For Catholics. [Archive] - Two Plus Two Older Archives

David Sklansky

11-02-2005, 01:41 PM

I've stated half jokingly that I believe that Catholics are less nuts than Protestants. Obvious reasons being their willingness to accept evolution and their willingness to accept that good non Christians can escape hell.

Others have stated that they are more nuts because of some of their silly beliefs like transubstantiation if I spelled it right.

My guess is that this paradox is resolved by the fact that most Catholics don't actually truly believe it. Social pressure makes them say otherwise. Wonder what percentage of American Catholics would pass a lie detector test that asked them if they were almost positive that transubstantiation is true?

imported_luckyme

11-02-2005, 02:02 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Wonder what percentage of American Catholics would pass a lie detector test that asked them if they were almost positive that transubstantiation is true?

[/ QUOTE ]

Our minds are full of tricks and the results you get from that experiment would depend heavily on the exact wording and tone of the question(s) and the questioner.

You can do litte experiments of your own that get different answers to essentially the same question just by rewording. The abortion issue is a classic, you can get swing between the 40-60% range depending on the buried slant of the question.

In this case, when and where you asked them would play a role also ( that's part of the 'tone')

luckyme,
if I thought I was wrong, I'd change my mind

David Sklansky

11-02-2005, 02:09 PM

I'm sure you are right but so what? My post was not about the accuracy of polygraphs.

RJT

11-02-2005, 02:11 PM

I think it is more the case that we don’t really understand it. Nor can we really – as bigdaddy said, it is a Mystery (the capital M differs from the lower case m within our Church) Yeah, sounds like a cop-out. What can I tell you. But and without getting into the theology of it – it is a big issue among the different Christian Faiths – whether it changes or is merely a metaphor.

Had we more geniuses on board, that is believers, to help decipher the Bible it sure would help matters. But,nooooo you guys have better things to do like cure cancer – and because you are all so frigging absent-minded can’t do two things at once.

But to answer your question: I would guess the lie-detector thing would parallel the same results of - if the question were asked of one’s faith in general. Some might fail this specific question more than the general question, but I don't think it would necessarily be a significant number.

Btw, I take the 5th with both questions at this time. I am hoping to be “given” more time by God to get my act a bit more together in this regard. That is until He hooks me up to the poly. I wouldn't bet against Bluff and bigdaddy, though.

vulturesrow

11-02-2005, 02:18 PM

BluffTHIS!

11-02-2005, 03:08 PM

I think that the majority of catholics who attend Mass every sunday (i.e. not the Christmas/Easter/wedding/funeral catholics) would pass this test. One reason is that so many went to catholic schools and learned the catechism at a young age, and that doctrine is one that is stressed highly. Another reason is that if they didn't believe in transubstantiation, then they are basically a protestant and would most likely just migrate to one of those denominations, especially if they have issues with catholic teachings on divorce/birth control, etc.

I want to stress that I don't believe a lot of church-going catholics know their faith particularly well in depth, but they do know the core beliefs and that is one, even if they don't fully appreciate it.

I would bet big money that ALL the catholic supreme court justices discussed in the other thread would pass this test.

valenzuela

11-02-2005, 04:22 PM

Im not sure a lie detector would work. I think many christians would fail the test and that would leave them puzzled.( according to my philosophy teacher ppl cognitive defence mechanisms are exposed on lie detector tests, Im not sure if he included rationalization but negation is certainly exposed )

imported_luckyme

11-02-2005, 04:45 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I think that the majority of catholics who attend Mass every sunday (i.e. not the Christmas/Easter/wedding/funeral catholics) would pass this test.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ah, no True Scotsman. So, it needs to be decided what we mean when we say, "he's a catholic" ..only those who pass DS's lie detector test?

imported_luckyme

11-02-2005, 04:58 PM

[ QUOTE ]
My post was not about the accuracy of polygraphs.

[/ QUOTE ]

Good point. I did wander too far down the "who will bell the cat?" path. Taking your question less literally I'd say the churchs offical doctrine on every topic is not ingrained in each individuals head. We choose our religion ( mightily swayed by culture/nuture) and there are only so many of them out there. Essentially you end up in one that you fit best, the beliefs of Xmillion people don't end up congruent.

luckyme,
if I thought I was wrong I'd change my mind

BluffTHIS!

11-02-2005, 06:09 PM

[ QUOTE ]
So, it needs to be decided what we mean when we say, "he's a catholic" ..only those who pass DS's lie detector test?

[/ QUOTE ]

If you call yourself a member of an organization without truly believing in its principles, then you aren't really. The reason dissenting catholics stay in the church and try to change that which is unchangeable, is that they lack the integrity to declare themselves protestants and go join a different denomination, and because they would no longer be the "progressive" dissenter media darlings but just another in a long line of breakoffs from the catholic church.

AleoMagus

11-02-2005, 06:14 PM

[ QUOTE ]
My guess is that this paradox is resolved by the fact that most Catholics don't actually truly believe it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe this goes back to all the discussion about beleif and certainty, etc... but I also think this is the case.

In fact, I suspect that a large number of religious people of many different faiths would fail 'beleif tests' on many issues central to their particular religious doctrine. (I say belief tests to avoid the tangential questions about polygraph accuracy, etc...)

Maybe this has something to do with what religious faith is. Accepting something as true, even if we know that we rationally shouldn't and cannot really bring ourselves to believe in it in the same way that we believe in our past experiences. In a way that would pass your hypothetical polygraph.

Of course I say this as a very non-religious person. I guess I just have too much confidence in people's inherent rationality to think that they truly accept such things. I think it's more about wanting to believe (understand?) what we actually don't believe or understand.

Another thought - Do you suppose most mathematicians would pass the same test if asked whether there are some infinities which are greater than others, along with all the other bizzare consequences of transfinite arithmetic?

Regards
Brad S

David Sklansky

11-02-2005, 06:22 PM

"Another thought - Do you suppose most mathematicians would pass the same test if asked whether there are some infinities which are greater than others,"

Certainly as regards to the difference between aleph null and the continuom. Higher alephs maybe not.

11-02-2005, 06:59 PM

[ QUOTE ]
In fact, I suspect that a large number of religious people of many different faiths would fail 'beleif tests' on many issues central to their particular religious doctrine.

[/ QUOTE ]

Very true. Most believers have more faith in science & technology when it comes to serious issues - like life and death.

Lestat

11-02-2005, 07:12 PM

How many atheists might contemplate God aboard a plane that lost its engines?

AleoMagus

11-02-2005, 07:32 PM

[ QUOTE ]
How many atheists might contemplate God aboard a plane that lost its engines?

[/ QUOTE ]

Every month, when I am paying my bills, I wish I was a millionaire and contemplate what life would be like if I was one. That doesn't mean that I AM a millionaire.

Wanting something to be true is a poor justification for believing it to be true.

Regards
Brad S

imported_luckyme

11-02-2005, 07:33 PM

[ QUOTE ]
How many atheists might contemplate God aboard a plane that lost its engines?

[/ QUOTE ]

Cheeesh, Bluffthis just told us that answer. None. Because if they did they they weren't true atheists to begin with. :-)

I don't know what is special about the threat of an airplane disaster that would case an atheist to do anything but hang onto his seat. Atheists are faced with life-threatening situations as much as anyone, and the usual loved ones dying etc so if there was a significant force in those scenarios they'd have all converted by now.

Atheists had to face the finality of death in order to reach their conclusions, so it isn't the shock to them that others may expect. Agnostics of the 3rd order may be a more interesting study.

Lestat

11-02-2005, 07:39 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
How many atheists might contemplate God aboard a plane that lost its engines?

[/ QUOTE ]

Every month, when I am paying my bills, I wish I was a millionaire and contemplate what life would be like if I was one. That doesn't mean that I AM a millionaire.

Wanting something to be true is a poor justification for believing it to be true.

Regards
Brad S

[/ QUOTE ]

I didn't mean to imply otherwise. I took Sklansky's post to be about doubt in ones beliefs and then taking it a step further and wanting to claim it could be proved.

Most people doubt their beliefs at one time or another. In fact, I'll go so far as to say that those who don't, lack intelligence. Doubt is not indigeous to Catholics.

Lestat

11-02-2005, 07:50 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
How many atheists might contemplate God aboard a plane that lost its engines?

[/ QUOTE ]

Cheeesh, Bluffthis just told us that answer. None. Because if they did they they weren't true atheists to begin with. :-)

I don't know what is special about the threat of an airplane disaster that would case an atheist to do anything but hang onto his seat. Atheists are faced with life-threatening situations as much as anyone, and the usual loved ones dying etc so if there was a significant force in those scenarios they'd have all converted by now.

Atheists had to face the finality of death in order to reach their conclusions, so it isn't the shock to them that others may expect. Agnostics of the 3rd order may be a more interesting study.

[/ QUOTE ]

One of us is missing the point. I took the OP to be about doubt in one's beliefs. I could be wrong and maybe he was suggesting that people outright lie about their beliefs. If that's the case. I won't argue that.

Lestat

11-02-2005, 07:52 PM

I think I missed your point, which I often do.

After further review, I now realize you were claiming that people "lie" about their beliefs and not as I orginally thought, "doubted" their beliefs. So never mind me.

11-02-2005, 07:59 PM

[ QUOTE ]
How many atheists might contemplate God aboard a plane that lost its engines?

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't know about every atheist, but I have been in a plane crash, and for a while, thought I would end up incinerated. And, no, defintely not, the idea of god didn't enter my mind The idea of dying and my existence being over, however, was present.

bearly

11-04-2005, 12:06 AM

'half-jokingly'...protestents...catholics....nuts. is this really the road you want to go down sir david. let me ask you: you sound like a bigot, are you? hasn't bigotry caused a lot of horrors in the last century?..........b

David Sklansky

11-04-2005, 03:22 AM

Is it OK to say people who believe in astrology are nuts?

bearly

11-04-2005, 12:59 PM

unhappily, your response is sophmoric, evasive, and not deserving of a response. in your present state i think it's best to leave you either, in denial, or unwilling to face up to the issues involved. it was, perhaps, my mistake to forget that this is a gambling forum, and that this sub-forum is little more than 'table talk'..............b

11-04-2005, 03:00 PM

I haven't quite figured out if you are an absolute genius, or a complete moron. I'm sure you think the former. Curious what everyone else thinks.

Borodog

11-04-2005, 03:01 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I haven't quite figured out if you are an absolute genius, or a complete moron. I'm sure you think the former. Curious what everyone else thinks.

[/ QUOTE ]

Here's a clue:

"..............."

RJT

11-04-2005, 03:38 PM

[ QUOTE ]
unhappily, your response is sophmoric, evasive, and not deserving of a response. in your present state i think it's best to leave you either, in denial, or unwilling to face up to the issues involved. it was, perhaps, my mistake to forget that this is a gambling forum, and that this sub-forum is little more than 'table talk'..............b

[/ QUOTE ]

Gee, and all this time, I thought we were going to be able prove whether God exists or not.

tolbiny

11-04-2005, 03:42 PM

Wouldn't that depend on what kind of benefits that they felt they recieved from believing in astrology?

11-04-2005, 04:37 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I haven't quite figured out if you are an absolute genius, or a complete moron. I'm sure you think the former. Curious what everyone else thinks.

[/ QUOTE ]

Here's a clue:

"..............."

[/ QUOTE ]

And here: http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Number=3702174

Not a math genius, at least.

(I'm only picking on him, because he's always scoffing at other people's posts, while never contributing anything of value to the discussion.)

Borodog

11-04-2005, 04:45 PM

I have a few rules of thumb when trying to weigh the credibility of an unknown poster on the internet. Gratuitous use of punctuation and lack of capitalization both seem to be inversely corelated with factual or useful content.

RJT

11-04-2005, 05:08 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I have a few rules of thumb when trying to weigh the credibility of an unknown poster on the internet. Gratuitous use of punctuation and lack of capitalization both seem to be inversely corelated with factual or useful content.

[/ QUOTE ]

Bdog,

I hope that you either make an exception to my use or misuse of commas; or that my remarks over-ride your rule of thumb. For some reason I have a mental deficiency when it comes to commas. I either, use too, many, or not, enough or place, them, in, the, wrong spots.

Reminds me of the Seinfeld episode with Elaine and exclamation points!!!!!

RJT

p.s. Sorry for the hi-jack. I will continue to post what I think is humor in spite of just recently being reprimanded by one poster for doing so. I will apologize for my humor if (when) it is bad, but not my right to use it!!!!

beset7

11-04-2005, 05:13 PM

Good question.

One problem, and maybe I'm missing the point, is that Catholics of different theological hues understand the doctrine in radically different ways but all profess to believe in the "real presence."

I believe in the real presence in the Eucharist. But I'd be very interested to see what a lie detector would say if you plugged me into it and asked me that. I believe I'm telling the truth if that makes any difference.

bearly

11-04-2005, 05:32 PM

hi, i certainly do not think i'm the former and i know i am not the latter......................b

bearly

11-04-2005, 05:35 PM

that's pretty heavy stuff, isn't it?................b

bearly

11-04-2005, 05:40 PM

hi---don't i both comment that the forum subject is too complex for me, and tell the folks how much i admire the fact that they are able to do that sort of thing? i don't know, but cheap-shots from among the cream of the posters...................kinda strange..............b

bearly

11-04-2005, 05:44 PM

perhaps, (no, actually it's a fact) you have no idea why i post my 'marks' the way i do. i have told the story to several 2+2'ers with whom i correspond---no need for a public airing.................b

bearly

11-04-2005, 05:47 PM

do you consider 'something of value' being spoon-fed? if so we had different teachers..............b

Borodog

11-04-2005, 05:51 PM

[ QUOTE ]
perhaps, (no, actually it's a fact) you have no idea why i post my 'marks' the way i do. i have told the story to several 2+2'ers with whom i correspond---no need for a public airing.................b

[/ QUOTE ]

No, I have no idea. All I'm saying is that posters do not make a good impression on me when they fail to use proper capitalization and at least a semblence of proper punctuation. Since I'm sure it isn't one of your life's ambitions to impress me, you shouldn't let this trouble you.

Best wishes.

Bigdaddydvo

11-04-2005, 07:59 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I've stated half jokingly that I believe that Catholics are less nuts than Protestants. Obvious reasons being their willingness to accept evolution and their willingness to accept that good non Christians can escape hell.

Others have stated that they are more nuts because of some of their silly beliefs like transubstantiation if I spelled it right.

My guess is that this paradox is resolved by the fact that most Catholics don't actually truly believe it. Social pressure makes them say otherwise. Wonder what percentage of American Catholics would pass a lie detector test that asked them if they were almost positive that transubstantiation is true?

[/ QUOTE ]

Social pressure for American Cathlics today is neglible. Maybe not seeing prominent public figures who claim to be Catholic openly opposing core Church teachings (e.g. John Kerry on abortion) would lead me to think otherwise.

I surmise many Catholics like myself who've forged their faith in Christ's true Eucharistic presence through years of attending Mass and Eucharistic Adoration would easily pass this test. (For the Catholic N00bs, Eucharistic Adoration involves exposing the consecrated hosts to the Faithful for the purposes of quiet prayer.) Most who regularly pray to the Eucharistic Lord can attest to the warm feeling in their hearts and spiritual intimacy they feel with God. Two of the happiest moments in my life, my First Holy Communion and my wedding, involved the Eucharist (the honor of busting out of the 2005 WSOP ME at Sklansky's table is a close third /images/graemlins/smile.gif ) While in Iraq, I served as a Eucharistic Minister and kept a pyx w/Eucharist attached to my body armor. It's surreal that, even with IEDs blowing up in my face and RPGs flying over head, that I could fear nothing with God literally at my side. So for me the question of true Eucharistic presence is little more than an afterthought since it's been an essential part of my whole life.

For the casual Catholic who makes Mass twice a year at Easter and Christmas and maybe attends a wedding/funeral or two, it's hard to have the same confidence in their beliefs.

11-05-2005, 05:17 AM

Once more I have to agree with Bigdaddydvo. I am sure that the whole of what Bigdaddydvo says is apparently true to him and he would not fail a lie detector test, since, in my understanding, it detects internal inconsistencies rather the trueness of the facts.

In fact it precisely this belief, or suspension or rationality allowing inconsistencies, that I deplore in all theists. It think it is nefarious for the well-being and happiness of man.

OTOH, lets talk about a deeply totemist in a very "primitive" culture. He believes that his gris-gris (talismanic object) is efficacious and will protect him, even from bullets. I have no doubts that he would also pass the lie detector test with flying colours when being asked if it was so.

jt1

11-05-2005, 06:07 AM

[ QUOTE ]
In fact it precisely this belief, or suspension or rationality allowing inconsistencies, that I deplore in all theists. It think it is nefarious for the well-being and happiness of man.

[/ QUOTE ]

If used properly any and all religions can greatly enhance ones life. For example, if I truly believed that I was going to Heaven and that Jesus was coming to right all wrongs and rule an Empire of Peace for 1000 years then I'd be as serene as the blue sky.

11-05-2005, 06:15 AM

[ QUOTE ]
If used properly any and all religions can greatly enhance ones life. For example, if I truly believed that I was going to Heaven and that Jesus was coming to right all wrongs and rule an Empire of Peace for 1000 years then I'd be as serene as the blue sky.

[/ QUOTE ]

The operative word is "properly" for one, secondly, as long as it doesn't infringe on my available freedom, and, thirdly, as long as it does not try to refute rationality and thereby stymie the progress of mankind.

I hope we agree here /images/graemlins/smile.gif

jt1

11-05-2005, 06:28 AM

[ QUOTE ]
If used properly any and all religions can greatly enhance ones life. For example, if I truly believed that I was going to Heaven and that Jesus was coming to right all wrongs and rule an Empire of Peace for 1000 years then I'd be as serene as the blue sky.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The operative word is "properly" for one, secondly, as long as it doesn't infringe on my available freedom, and, thirdly, as long as it does not try to refute rationality and thereby stymie the progress of mankind.

I hope we agree here

[/ QUOTE ]

BTW, anyone who did truly believe in Heaven for believers and Jesus ruling from Jurasalem couldn't be angry or fearful of anything. They would simply preach their faith to any and all, go to work, raise their kids, and love life in general. How could someone without a fear in the world and nothing but joy in their hearts bother with organizing protest rallys or even going to the voting booth? All that stuff would seem irrelevant to a True Believer.

jt1

11-05-2005, 06:47 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Heres a thought, I don't think that Bigdaddy truly believes in the resurrection 100% Everone whom I've encountered that believes 100% in the bilble word for word looks at me like I'm crazy when I explain my objections. They either quote the bible to prove the bible or they honestly think that I'd believe the sky was purple if enough scientist said it to be true. (not an actually quote but pretty good, eh)

My point is that true believes can't possibly be open minded enough to accept that others are reasonable for having objections. If they were then they'd begin exploring those objections and reason would eventually prevail. So Bigdaddy, if you want to maintain your faith, I suggest you stop thinking about it before you loose it.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is my quote and if you compare it to my previous post in this thread you can clearly see how confused I am. At one turn, I say that Christians who truly believe in the bible 100% (my term was true believers) would be blissful beyond caring about mundane things like politics. And the next turn, I say that those people who think you can't see your nose from your face for not believing in the bible are the only true believers.

So if I had to choose between my two opinions, I would choose the opinion in this thread. Those people who believe that non-Christians are deluded don't truly believe in the bible. They may desperately want to, but the shoe their wearing doesn't exactly fit. lol -- they're shoving their foot in there and insisting that it fits and when someone says 'look you see, clearly you should get a new shoe' they get indignant and quote 'though thy shoe be too small thy foot it do fittith.' then admonish you for not seeing the obvious.