Has Religion Brainwashed even Atheists?

[Ramaraksha]

I agree with Tom Sawyer. All of those questions known and are asked by atheists when discussing religion with theists. Some of them much more often than others. (because some of them are just not very fruitful)

Maybe Ramaraksha associates with a different circle of atheists.

Same question that i asked him: Can you give me an example - a link to a website article perhaps? How about a TV show episode? That latter might be a bit difficult. Well how about Youtube? Can you give me a link to a youtube video asking the questions that i have posed?

 

[Ramaraksha]

Brainwashing is a metaphor. No ever washed a brain, outside of a coroner's lab.

What exactly does the metaphor "brainwashing" mean, in literal context?

Meaning something is right before you but you can't see it. Heaven being a metaphor for the womb, childhood - a time when we were coddled, fed, clothed, taken care of, kept safe, made sure we were always happy - basically we lived in a bubble. Well Heaven is supposed to be the same way

I can clearly see the above - somehow i have yet to hear anyone say it - should have been clear to any psychologist esp an Atheist psychologist - which is where the Brainwashing comes in

- - - Updated - - -

"you said that rich people don't get into Heaven too easy, so we can be content with being poor, but why then are we going to be Rich in Heaven?" So, here's another one to be added to my list - is Christianity then promoting poverty? Telling people not to succeed and get rich?

- - - Updated - - -

When i was eight, they were telling me about how the streets of Heaven were gold and how we'd be given buckets of jewels just for the asking.
"But last week, you told us that Heaven was beyond all Earthly concerns, didn't you? Why would we care about gold and jewels if wealth is just something that happened to us back on Earth? And you said that rich people don't get into Heaven too easy, so we can be content with being poor, but why then are we going to be Rich in Heaven?"

And that wasn't even as an atheist. I have since left the Church and left Christainity and left Theism, at least partially because no one seems to have a decent answer for why we get meaningless rewards in an afterlife that's nothing like life here...

There was a man who was very good and it was his time to die. So God sends the angel of death down to pick him up. The Angel of Death appears to the man and says "Congratulations, God is pleased with you so it is time for you to die and come be with him forever and ever in eternal bliss!"

But instead of being happy and excited like most people who are "saved" are when the Angel of Death appears, he gets a sad face.

The Angel of Death does not know what to do so he flies back up to God and tells him what happened. God then tells the A.o.D. that he has to come, it is his time, but he,God, does not want anyone coming with any sadness. So, God tells the A.o.D to tell he man he can bring one thing from earth to heaven with him to make him happy.

And it is done. The man asks for five minutes to get what he wants and comes back to the angel with a suitcase stuffed with something The man dies and goes to heaven and gets the grand tour. Jesus and Peter and Moses show him around the place. The guy ends up getting a mansion on the same street Billy Graham, Pope Sylvester, and Corrie Ten Boom live on. After getting the grand tour all the angels gather around the man and ask him to show them what he brought in his suitcase. He gladly opens it up and shows them a bunch of gold he brought.

The angels look bewildered but remain kind and polite.

After the angels fly away to go sing praises to God he asks the Angel of Death, who is his best friend now, why the angels looked at him so weird. The angel said "They were confused because they did not understand why anyone would want to bring pavement up here to heaven".

Ba ding!

lol - No.6 on my list

 

[Ramaraksha]

This reminds me of the 72 virgins thing. This isn't motivating in my view. Who wants 72 virgins? How about 72 hawt women that know what the fuck they're doing. Much more preferable.

The 72 virgins was just a sales pitch, created to appeal to the customer base at hand. You will receive 72 former virgins who have gained a bit of experience in the process.

Exactly - no wonder those poor women have to hide under Burkhas to escape these lecherous men's eyes. The whole thing says these men are nothing but sex-crazed animals

But basically religions have found that they get more converts simply by telling people what they want to hear

 

[bilby]

Ok, which of those questions don't you feel atheists have asked? The all seem like fairly common topics of conversation from an atheistic point of view.

Well i do watch a fair amount of TV and have never seen an Atheist raise what i am asking about? How about the print world? Can you give me an example of an article or editorial, i will take even in an Atheist site. Or how about YouTube? Can you find me an Atheist video talking about what i have posted?

It seems to me that the problem is not with atheists failing to speak out, but rather with your inability to successfully Google.

There are plenty of instances of people saying what you claim they don't say, and asking the questions they don't ask. Posting a thread on TFT complaining that you haven't seen them is likely not the best way to find them.

Googling "Heaven is a metaphor for childhood" returns 3.2 million hits. Perhaps you could start there.

 

[Ramaraksha]

Well i do watch a fair amount of TV and have never seen an Atheist raise what i am asking about? How about the print world? Can you give me an example of an article or editorial, i will take even in an Atheist site. Or how about YouTube? Can you find me an Atheist video talking about what i have posted?

It seems to me that the problem is not with atheists failing to speak out, but rather with your inability to successfully Google.

There are plenty of instances of people saying what you claim they don't say, and asking the questions they don't ask. Posting a thread on TFT complaining that you haven't seen them is likely not the best way to find them.

Googling "Heaven is a metaphor for childhood" returns 3.2 million hits. Perhaps you could start there.

I just did - perhaps you should take a look at the results - not just the top number. It's a mix - the results return anything that has Heaven and childhood somewhere in it - not that they are all talking about Heaven being a metaphor for childhood

 

[Ramaraksha]

It seems to me that the problem is not with atheists failing to speak out, but rather with your inability to successfully Google.

There are plenty of instances of people saying what you claim they don't say, and asking the questions they don't ask. Posting a thread on TFT complaining that you haven't seen them is likely not the best way to find them.

Googling "Heaven is a metaphor for childhood" returns 3.2 million hits. Perhaps you could start there.

I just did - perhaps you should take a look at the results - not just the top number. It's a mix - the results return anything that has Heaven and childhood somewhere in it - not that they are all talking about Heaven being a metaphor for childhood

lol - 2nd page - Speaking tree - that was me - my post

 

[bilby]

I just did - perhaps you should take a look at the results - not just the top number. It's a mix - the results return anything that has Heaven and childhood somewhere in it - not that they are all talking about Heaven being a metaphor for childhood

lol - 2nd page - Speaking tree - that was me - my post

And this surprises you?

Hint: If you post something on the Internet, then a Google search for that thing is likely to find it. That's the whole point of Google - it finds stuff on the Internet.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

But the best part about the Internet is that whatever position you take, you can find more than a few people who agree with and support you. That statement is backed up by several online comments and articles, so you know it's true.

 

[skepticalbip]

lol - 2nd page - Speaking tree - that was me - my post

And this surprises you?

Hint: If you post something on the Internet, then a Google search for that thing is likely to find it. That's the whole point of Google - it finds stuff on the Internet.

As I understand it, Google also customizes searches by each individual's search history. If true, this means that someone with a history of searching for a particular slant on a subject will be presented with more links that agree with what their their search history indicates. It also means that someone's earlier post on the subject will appear near the top of the list of links offered.

Personally, I think this is a piss poor idea. It only serves to reinforce confirmation bias.

 

[bilby]

And this surprises you?

Hint: If you post something on the Internet, then a Google search for that thing is likely to find it. That's the whole point of Google - it finds stuff on the Internet.

As I understand it, Google also customizes searches by each individual's search history. If true, this means that someone with a history of searching for a particular slant on a subject will be presented with more links that agree with what their their search history indicates. It also means that someone's earlier post on the subject will appear near the top of the list of links offered.

Personally, I think this is a piss poor idea. It only serves to reinforce confirmation bias.

I agree; Google are giving people the results they want, rather than the results they need.

 

[Kharakov]

As I understand it, Google also customizes searches by each individual's search history. If true, this means that someone with a history of searching for a particular slant on a subject will be presented with more links that agree with what their their search history indicates. It also means that someone's earlier post on the subject will appear near the top of the list of links offered. Personally, I think this is a piss poor idea. It only serves to reinforce confirmation bias.

I've TORed anonymously into German Google (my port out was in Germany) and got very similar results (a few things switched order) to what I get with my normal weighted search results, except for the local advertisements. Did it to test search results actually- TORed to various out nodes and checked the results.... ok, and I'm pretty sure I recall that other places in the USA gave me slightly different results. It was just the German results that were almost exactly the same as mine. Which is sort of funny. Maybe I should watch Man in the High Castle.

 

[skepticalbip]

As I understand it, Google also customizes searches by each individual's search history. If true, this means that someone with a history of searching for a particular slant on a subject will be presented with more links that agree with what their their search history indicates. It also means that someone's earlier post on the subject will appear near the top of the list of links offered. Personally, I think this is a piss poor idea. It only serves to reinforce confirmation bias.

I've TORed anonymously into German Google (my port out was in Germany) and got very similar results (a few things switched order) to what I get with my normal weighted search results, except for the local advertisements. Did it to test search results actually- TORed to various out nodes and checked the results.... ok, and I'm pretty sure I recall that other places in the USA gave me slightly different results. It was just the German results that were almost exactly the same as mine. Which is sort of funny. Maybe I should watch Man in the High Castle.

As I said, I don't know how true or, if so, how their search software decides on how to list the sites. Formerly, the lists were supposedly ordered by the number of times that each site was opened. It's a shame that there isn't some method to determine which site has the most accurate information then list them in that order - they could, of course, ask me which sites are real and which are BS but I don't want to be bothered...

Maybe if you did a lot of searches on "real UFO abductions" or did a lot of searches on the WOO end of ideas then entered "UFO reports" you would see a different list than if you had never searched the WOO sites and entered "UFO reports".... I dunno.

 

[KeepTalking]

I've TORed anonymously into German Google (my port out was in Germany) and got very similar results (a few things switched order) to what I get with my normal weighted search results, except for the local advertisements. Did it to test search results actually- TORed to various out nodes and checked the results.... ok, and I'm pretty sure I recall that other places in the USA gave me slightly different results. It was just the German results that were almost exactly the same as mine. Which is sort of funny. Maybe I should watch Man in the High Castle.

As I said, I don't know how true or, if so, how their search software decides on how to list the sites. Formerly, the lists were supposedly ordered by the number of times that each site was opened. It's a shame that there isn't some method to determine which site has the most accurate information then list them in that order - they could, of course, ask me which sites are real and which are BS but I don't want to be bothered...

Maybe if you did a lot of searches on "real UFO abductions" or did a lot of searches on the WOO end of ideas then entered "UFO reports" you would see a different list than if you had never searched the WOO sites and entered "UFO reports".... I dunno.

Page hits (the number of times a page is opened), has little to do with search engine results. There are too many ways to game a system like that. What is more important is reciprocal links (linking to relevant sites, and having those sites link back to you). In order for this to be effective, however, the sites also need to make extensive use of meta tags and descriptions. So, sites that just aggregate links are not going to necessarily skew results, because they aren't going to be able to customize their tags and descriptions to match search terms for all of the links.

When it comes to customized searches based on your search history, this is going to depend on whether or not you are logging in to Google with a Google account. If you are in the habit of doing that, then they will track your history, and customize your results to a degree. In the example Kharakov provided, he was likely not logged into Google with an account before using the TOR anonymizer, so that would explain there being very little difference in the search results.

 

[skepticalbip]

^ ^ ^

Thanks.