All topics related to atheism, agnosticism and secularism welcome.
How to avoid arguments
Yesterday I was talking with a Christian friend of mine, and he seemed determined to argue with me about religion. I'll admit, I probably should've walked away sooner, but I couldn't help get sucked in by just how badly he was misuderstanding evolution, the Big Bang and whatnot. It was infuriating how dumb he thought I was for not believing in God. Does anyone have any things to say, mantras to think, or other ways to avoid arguments? I love a good discussion every now and then, but this guy was not looking for that.




So I would start off by finding a common ground between you two. I would tell them what I think are some good things about their religion and what are some values they have that you agree with. Find a way to make them see how similar you two are.
Keep your answers simple. Don't get lost in the details of scientific theories, physics, quantum mechanics, psychology, etc. Its not a compelling argument to someone who isn't interested in it. Instead, try to make your argument something they can level with or relate to.
For example, maybe you could ask them what they think the reason is people have to have faith instead of knowing for certain that God exists, because if we knew for certain, there would be no need for faith, it would just be an accepted fact that God exists.
That right there, that state of unknowing, is what puts doubt in your mind and basically you don't want to jump to conclusions. There are currently over 4,200 religions. They all have come up with their own conclusions. Why just pick one that feels right if the answer could be something completely different? Maybe it's a god no one has thought of yet? Or maybe it's that there is no God at all? Until that answer is known, maybe we shouldn't be so specific with what we think god wants or doesn't want.
If I come up with any other advice, I'll let you know!!! Great post! Great question! And I'm sorry your discussion didn't go so well :/
Looking for common ground is good. When I was Mormon I heard that we should look for common ground when trying to convert people in that direction, but somehow I hadn't realized it could go both ways.
Ah I see... typically I just want to be, at the very least, understood. I have no interest in converting/deconverting anyone, unless they're an extremist and I feel they may be of harm to themselves or others, but I've never come across that. I feel finding common ground could maybe get them out of offense/denfense mode? Those ways of thinking are for arguments, not discussions. If they were the one who wanted to start the conversation, maybe something had been bothering them about your stance on things, or maybe they felt you were misunderstanding them. So, I feel like that's a good time for both sides to feel some support from each other...that was really my strategy as far as that goes. At least let them know you two are not opposites that way the conversation may go smoother... hopefully I helped a little lol.
Thanks, I think that's good advice.
I would probably use something like, "You seem more interested in changing me than respecting me. I'd be glad to talk about this in the future when we're both in the mood to listen and consider, but for now I'm going to end this." And walk away.
Actually, I would think that could apply to either side of any "discussion" with someone unwilling to "discuss," depending on who the obstinate person was.
I think this a great tactic! This is a situation where the discussion has already began and has started to turn aggressive so, BQuirky is suggesting to be respectful and let them know that you still wish to discuss things and do not want the discussion to be an argument for the sake of your friendship.
It varies quite a bit, to be honest. But if I encountered someone who was clearly just looking to berate me about being wrong in their eyes, I would probably start with something to the effect of:
"Don't try to beat people over the head with the truth. Show it to them. Let them examine it carefully to see for themselves that it is the truth. They aren't going to be able to see anything if you keep poking them in the eye, and then they're just going to think you're a jerk and won't want to look at your 'truth' at all. Do you want to have to tell your God you spent your ministry losing souls for him because you were too proud of your beliefs?"
And go from there.
So powerful, and so true. Just...wow.
Wow, that's powerful. I'm not sure if I'll be able to be that well spoken in the moment, but I'll try!
The important thing isn't the specific words, really, so much as it is to remain calm and remember that the goal is always to leave a conversation closer to the truth than you arrived.
To that end, it is almost always instructive, if not always productive, to remind people of the standards they claim to hold themselves to and the purpose of their stated ideology.
In retrospect, it probably isn't the best way to /avoid/ an argument outright (I'm bad at that, really), and I can't say it will necessarily de-escalate someone who is spoiling for some sort of winner-takes-all ideological confrontation...a lot depends on how honest they're being with themselves and what their objectives really are.
Another more pertinent challenge for someone who is trying to 'disprove' evolution or big bang cosmology or what have you is to ask how attacking any of those ideas does anything to prove their position correct. Even if we could prove we didn't evolve or weren't apes, it wouldn't subsequently prove that we were created from dust by a god of some sort.
To be sure, the theory of evolution and the many, many standing theories concerning cosmology and the architecture of the universe constructed via the scientific method likewise do nothing to disprove god, and actually disproving god would not make any of them more valid just because they weren't implemented by an all-whateverful sophont.
Love this VaporWare! I get the feeling sometimes people think atheists are this way, jerks who are poking people in the eye by throwing details about the Bible that are contradictory or scientific explanations of the way things are to show how wrong the Bible is at times. That's usually not gonna get you very far. It's just going to hurt people's feelings and make them think you are attacking them. Coming from someone who was religious, it felt as though people were attacking a parent or friend when you attack God or religion. God and religion are something that people get a lot of joy and support out of. Time to show you can give them the same support! I like the bit of tough love at the end as well, leveling with them and kind of trying to make them realize what they were doing was just aggravating you and discouraging you from listening.
Oh, don't get me wrong. I will absolutely tear scripture to ribbons if I have to. I am an anti-theist, and I think people get joy and support out of /each other/ irrespective of their ideology...religion tends to just be way of discrediting our own humanity by convincing us we are the source of all evil and no good in the world, convincing us we /can't/ be joyous or supportive of one another without a higher power coercing us to behave. It's principle contribution to our sense of community is through it's imposition of conformity.
I just tend to think that a gentle, patient and surgical approach is generally far preferable to firebrand sermonizing, both for the above discussed stick-poking issues and to avoid obvious hypocrisy on my own part. If I can't respect people like Shirley Phelps or Kent Hovind because of how they belittle people for nothing more than disagreeing with them, how can I expect respect if I belittle people for nothing more than disagreeing with me? (Besides which, if I act like a close minded jerk I might miss it if someone else is /right/ about something, and wouldn't /that/ be embarrassing?)
I do have some thoughts on what you note regarding the feeling that one is attacking a family member or friend when one attacks one's faith, but I digress and that's probably an entire discussion unto itself.
At the end of the day, no position is immune to the presence of fools...plenty of people /do/ become atheists for the wrong or no reasons at all. People can often be persuaded by little more than what feels good at the time (as Antonio Damasio put it, we are not thinking machines that feel...we are feeling machines that think) and there is certainly a contingent of people in the greater 'atheist' community who are as dogged and dogmatic as any theist.
The remedy there is, as always, patience, moderation, care and honesty.
You are very well spoken and very helpful vaporware. I enjoy reading your comments and want to thank you for participating so often in this community's discussions.
I'd love to hear your thoughts on what I mentioned about the feeling people get of a family member or friend being attached when their religion and/or God is attacked or questioned.
I'll make a post about that today at some point and we can speak more about that there if you'd like.
I think we are on the same page as I've read from your comments. I'm a bit of an anti-theist myself. I'm just not very active in trying to snuff out religion (not saying you are). Religiosity is declining, or so I hear, but I don't know that it will ever go away. With that being said, i don't try to get in the way of people being religious. But like you, I could definitely dissect and explode religious text if need be or if asked. I just typically don't for the sake of a peaceful conversation.
I'll admit to still being a bit neurotic about speaking up about things, so it's good to hear people are getting something out of my rambles. XD
I think where a lot of people go awry in their argumentation, and this is true fairly irrespective of what you're arguing about, is in assuming or comporting oneself as if anyone who is 'wrong', that is 'anyone who disagrees with a position I hold' is stupid or even just ignorant.
The most obnoxious theists and atheists I've ever encountered tend to be very /reductive/, and the truth is that 'being religious' isn't a product of stupidity, or even ignorance (quite the opposite: you have to /have/ information in your head, you have to 'know' your religion in the first place to at least some degree before you can 'believe' anything about it). The fact of the matter is, as wrong-headed as religions often are, as much as they fail to reliably and accurately describe reality, they're still the product of many brilliant minds struggling /to/ reliably and accurately describe reality and many (indeed, /most/ yet) of the most brilliant minds in human history have believed in such things. Intelligence is not proof against error, especially when a clearer picture is not available or is obfuscated by human failings (of which there are, let's be honest, /many/).
So it's important to bear that in mind and to treat people with respect even as we disagree with them. This is why we /have/ 'free speech', because 'being wrong about something' should not be a crime, and generally should not warrant serious recrimination. It isn't the same thing as /doing/ wrong, and most religious people don't /do/ most of what the worst of scripture demands of them. Even people like the Westboro Baptists fall well short of that line, noxious as they make themselves.
There's really no /need/ to 'snuff out' religion in an active, persecutory sense, and indeed, that plays into the fears many religious systems feed their believers about trials and tribulations and the end of the world. More than anything, we should be working to /dispel/ such fears...something we can't accomplish by being fearsome.
I'll certainly look out for your thread on the feeling of being attacked, St. :) There's a very interesting space to explore there, I think, about how we /think/ about things like gods and tribes.
The trouble is that the Christian religion actively tells its followers to recruit others, and even tells them it's their fault if you go to hell. Not all churches, but the ones I was forced to go to as a kid and teen definitely advocated that view. We were taught that we should not respect other people's desires to stop a discussion about Christ because it was 'the devil' speaking through them and trying to keep them from being saved. So depending on how much of a fundamentalist you are talking to, you may just be falling victim to an unfortunate soul's brainwashing. Sometimes if you see things going south, you have to just firmly say 'I'm sorry but I don't want to discuss religion any more and I hope you can respect that." if they can't or won't, then you are justified in walking away.
And I get it. If I truly thought some of my friends were going to hell I'd want to prevent that. Oddly, rebelling against god never seems to be an option on the table. So friendships are ruined.
Luckily, I suspect there is neither a hell or deity of any kind.
If someone is actually determined to argue, all you can do is disengage. Maybe come back to it later. The other thing is to shock them enough they fall off their script. Perhaps an emotional appeal to how they are making you feel. I prefer productive conversation, should I would probably try to wind down based on where you agree. Like the importance of knowing what is actually true.
[Content deleted by author]
But blowing someone away doesn't accomplish anything other than stroking your ego, and strengthening the social dynamic that disagreement must mean battle. The OP asked for help in defusing an argument, not throwing fuel onto it.
My suggestion was to remain as respectful as possible and let them know that you are in no way "against" them or their god. Simply not convinced. That right there was me trying to show them that disagreement does not mean battle as you have said. So that's why I was saying go about it in a way that you are not stroking your ego by not "getting lost in detail of physics, quantum mechanics, etc...". If my reply sounded like I was "blowing someone away" then my apologies. It certainly wasn't my intent. It was the exact opposite really. Thank you for your feedback BQuirky!!
BQuirky, it came to my attention that there was a comment which isn't showing now where someone mentioned "blow them away". I suppose this is the comment you were trying to reply to, not mine. That makes sense now... My apologies for misunderstanding. I feel foolish 😳 lol... Let's continue with the advice for writergirl!!
Yes, exactly, SLIJLG, thanks for understanding the disruption in this particular time stream. 😉
I'd also like to point out, writergirl, just for your own knowledge, if you didn't already know, the Big Bang Theory was actually formed by a man named Georges Lemaitre who was a catholic priest. So my point is the Big Bang theory isn't necessarily at odds with Christianity. Your friend may find that interesting as well if you wish to tell them. I'd hope that wouldn't start any other arguments though lol.
That's very interesting, I'll have to research that more sometime. A whole lot of science came out of religion- one could argue that all of it did. I think that science and religion can co-exist, as long as you're willing to be flexible with your interpretation of one or both. But he was taking every word of Genesis literally, and I was, well, not.
I believe that intellectuals in the 18th and 19th Centuries who were religion had a specific belief. That was the world was created by their god directly. The Bible was preserved by people. Where the bible and the world contradict each other, the world is the most direct work of their god, whereas the bible passed through fallible humans.
At the end of the 19th Century and the start of the 20th Century fundamentalism was a reaction to this idea, and turned it the other way. It really took hold in the US. See The Fundamentals essays from the 1910s.