Comments on: Superstitions: Why you believe
Add a Comment
- For those who wish to understand why so many are eager to believe that which is not based in fact, I recommend you read Carl Sagan's "Demon Haunted World: Science As A Candle In The Darkness.
- Reply to this comment
- by julianpenrod October 28, 2012 9:09 PM EDT
Those who can't disprove what I say often resort to using words like "rant", "tirade" and "diatribe".
---
That's because they are too polite to call you stupid. - Reply to this comment
- by julianpenrod October 28, 2012 2:20 PM EDT-Those who despise God..
----
You are verbose and obviouly a very shallow thinker. Rejecting a particular fairy tale as being something factual is no indication of hatred towards the star character whatsoever. - Reply to this comment
- Count yourself lucky if you're NOT superstitious. Connecticut College psychologist Stuart Vyse says most people ARE. In a world where we prize science, it may not be something to be proud of.
---
Many prefer superstition to proveable fact. Take religion, for example..... - Reply to this comment
- I believe it is bad luck to back up without looking and step on a black cat and have him dig his claws into your ankle which happened the other week.
- Reply to this comment
- Those who do not have a view of supreme deity as fact have no reason to spell god as "GOD".
- Reply to this comment
- Cleary - some "supertitions" were rooted in fact. Perhaps walking "under" a medeival ladder was far more of a dangerous thing than today. But in general, HOGWASH! Superstitions are just so completely dumb as to be laughable! As are the people who "believe" in nonsense!
- Reply to this comment
- Those who despise God so often demonstrate the illegitimacy of their sentiments broadly in their very attempts to promote them.
To begin with, note that God haters, who also tend to be rabid "science" devotees, roundly condemn both superstition and religion. But nowhere, for example, is there a single "scientific" "study" that demonstrates that superstitions aren't legitimate! No one has ever tried flaunting the rules of various superstitions to show that they don't work! Certainly, for all their displayed animosity towards anything not included in the writings of Carl Sagan, "science" devotees could be the test subjects since they wouldn't have even the uncertainty to make any problems that might arise a foregone conclusion.
In the same way, God has never been disproved by "science", but "science" has taken to weaseling around it by essewntially establishing the principle that, if something is too big to examine, it's okay to say whatever you want about it.
But, in fact, the general viciousness these individuals display towards religion goes hand in hand with their inability to discuss it with even borderline sense.
Note the insistence, for example, of murkymook and FFOFFO to write the name of God with a lowercase "g". God is an entity and, by the rules of English, His name should be written with a capital letter. In fact, God haters know God exists, but, because He has not performed like a giant gumball machine, giving themeverything they wanted when they ordered it, they undertake the program of writing His name with a lowercase "g" to spite and insult Him. Look at it, "science" devotees depict themselves as the only ones capable of making the wisest most effective decisions. What good is achieved by writing the name og God with a lowercase "g"? really? What is accomplished? The most it could do is insult God and, if they don't believe God exists, who are they insulting?
Incidentally, notice bmankin's provably laughable claim that many superstitions have a basis in religion. Opening an umbrella indoors comes from no specific religion. Neither does fear of a black cat, breaking a mirror, spilling salt, walking under a ladder, stepping on a crack, or lesser known, even regional superstitions, like not knocking on a door inside a house or putting shoes on the table. Consider that condemning such actions can have a beneficial effect on someone. Each of them is so pathologically frivolous and unwise as to be gratuitously bizarre. And gratuitously bizarre actions frequently, if not mostly, lead to disaster. To be sure, fear of unknown beings unleashing punishment for breaking the rules can be part of it, too, but "science' has never proved such beings not to exist, either. "Science' sinmply insists that they don't and orders the gullible and malleable to believe them.
And notice bmankin's invocation of supersititons supposedly being "consistent with" the nature of religion. Everyone who ever broke a bone drank water, so one can say there is a strong coirrelation between drinking water and bone fractures.
And, as for many if not most Americans not trusting "science", there's thalidomide; fen-phen; the claims of banned weapons systems in Iraq, condemnations of salt, fat, sugar, carbohydrates, coffee, wine, chocolate, followed by their exoneration. There are such things as the recently revealed fact that the "scientifically" recommended program of breast exams is far too frequent. "Science" is a tool of the rich, tossing ouit edicts that favor big business then requiring the public to comply. - Reply to this comment
- "Vyse says only 40 percent of Americans believe in evolution."
The actual number is far lower.
A Gallup poll last week showed that only 15 percent of Americans believe in evolution -- evolution by chance and without guidance from an external being, the Dawkins/Hitchens definition of evolution.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/21814/evolution-creationism-intelligent-design.aspx - Reply to this comment
- What is superstition? "A belief or an action that is inconsistent with science," said Vyse. "And it needs to be aimed at bringing about good luck, or avoiding bad luck."
-----------------
Sounds like OCD to me. - Reply to this comment
