Why doesn\'t Sklansky give it up?
 

Why does he constantly insist on arguing with people about religion? He's not going to change any Christian's mind. The entire concept of faith relies on being devoid of logic. Thus, trying to use logic to disprove faith is silly. Why doesn't he just let it go and make some poker posts instead of something ridiculous about God every week?

I realized a long time ago it was pointless to debate religion and I wonder why he hasn't done the same.

Re: Why doesn\'t Sklansky give it up?
 

He enjoys it.
His purpose isn't to change the minds of those he argues with.

Re: Why doesn\'t Sklansky give it up?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Why does he constantly insist on arguing with people about religion? He's not going to change any Christian's mind. The entire concept of faith relies on being devoid of logic. Thus, trying to use logic to disprove faith is silly. Why doesn't he just let it go and make some poker posts instead of something ridiculous about God every week?

I realized a long time ago it was pointless to debate religion and I wonder why he hasn't done the same.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think he does so to learn more about the topic and, more specifically, about believers. Although, he may just enjoy debating that topic like someone would enjoy a sport. I often feel that way about debating topics i enjoy. In any case, i enjoy his posts.

Re: Why doesn\'t Sklansky give it up?
 

I wonder if he enjoys repeatedly bashing his head into a brick wall too...

Re: Why doesn\'t Sklansky give it up?
 

[ QUOTE ]
He enjoys it.

[/ QUOTE ]

I havent read most of his religious posts but I'm pretty sure it begins and ends here. He is a theorist, he likes to think and challenge his mind. Is there a better topic to do so?

Re: Why doesn\'t Sklansky give it up?
 

[ QUOTE ]
I wonder if he enjoys repeatedly bashing his head into a brick wall too...

[/ QUOTE ]

Apparently you do, because you completely missed the point.

Re: Why doesn\'t Sklansky give it up?
 

The true reason is probably psychological. He needs to feel better (and more intelligent than others) to be "happy" (or his perceived form of happiness). So, he seeks out those who disagree with him, and try to engage them on a battle field (logical debate) which they are unable to fight back (due to the nature of religious belief).

Re: Why doesn\'t Sklansky give it up?
 

[ QUOTE ]
He is a theorist, he likes to think and challenge his mind. Is there a better topic to do so?

[/ QUOTE ]

There are many.

Re: Why doesn\'t Sklansky give it up?
 

I pride myself on the ability to reformulate questions so those who had trouble with the original question, or were confused about something, enjoy an "aha" experience.

While the specific precepts of a specific religion cannot be totally logically disproven, it is clearcut for many different reasons, that those precepts are very unlikely to be true. It bothers me that I have not as yet been able to come up with the right words that will make this clear, even to those who are afflicted with whatever problem they have, that causes them not to realize what is obvious to most educated thinkers.

I might be selling myself short though. While most of my posts are met with real rebuttals, some elicit responses like "because the bible says so" or "enough" or "these are hard questions" or "I admit I can't prove such and such with argumentation alone" or "when will you realize that religion is not based on logic and doesn't have to meet your definition of rational" or "what's the harm in someone believing even if it is not true as long as it gives them comfort". Perhaps I should let these responses tell me that I already accomplished what I set out to do.

Re: Why doesn\'t Sklansky give it up?
 

[ QUOTE ]
The entire concept of faith relies on being devoid of logic.

[/ QUOTE ]

The thing that surprises me most about a majority of logical thinkers is that they fail to recognize a key property (or limitation) of logic -- that it is only useful for turning one type of truth, an axiom or a premise, into another. It has no role whatsoever in creating the premise or axiom in the first place.

The explanation is probably psychological. These people cling to logic because they are more adept at it than most and it gives them a certain sense of power. In an overpopulated world we are faced with the sad reality of being insignificant and our psyches create ways of fooling ourselves on this point. For some, religion is the answer, while for others it's that "I'm more rational than you and you can't prove me wrong". This second approach, while obviously arrogant, is also about as irrational as can be IMO yet so many otherwise rational people seem to adopt it.

To me this is just a testament to the incredible strength of our ingrained survival instincts.