-Removed-The difference is that I am willing to hear how I am irrational and be persuaded of the rational stance. Once you convince me that I am irrational I will immediately change my beliefs. You on the other hand choose to hold on to your beliefs despite acknowledging that they are irrational. I do not understand why. I find it more of a puzzle than comedic.
-Removed-Incorrect. I am judging your impact without any reference whatsoever to your specific beliefs. I am stating categorically that holding any belief whatsoever harms other people. That is the very nature of beliefs. They also cause you to do good to other people. To claim otherwise would be to claim that either:
a) your belief has no impact on your behaviour whatsoever.
or
b) your behaviour as a result of belief has no impact on other people whatsoever.
And I think I said as much earlier. Are you just so desperate to call me prejudiced and irrational that you are not reading my posts?
For some people, the 'irrational' act of believing in God provides a powerful motivation to reform their life. Now, it is easy for a skeptic like myself to write off belief in God as a 'crutch for the weak-minded' in a case like that, but I can't argue with the results.
Point is, a little 'irrationality' can actually help in some cases.
In general, I don't admit that irrationality is always harmful. Mostly, perhaps; but not always.
Originally posted by SwissGambitFor the record, I am not saying it is harmful in sum total. I am saying all belief causes some harm and some good, and the balance is what is important. But to simply say 'my belief causes nobody any harm' I think is naive.
In general, I don't admit that irrationality is always harmful. Mostly, perhaps; but not always.