On 17-Jan-09 3:40, Patrick Elliott wrote:
> andrel wrote:
>> I don't know if it is where I live or who my friends and acquaintances 
>> are but in my experience the group that tries to express their believe 
>> by living as an example of what faith can do to a person is so large 
>> that you can not neglect them. The group that you refer to is more 
>> visible as a group, but I are less likely to meet them as they tend to 
>> stick together. The group I mean is not so recognizable as they are 
>> friendly people and you have to know them better to understand what 
>> rôle faith plays in how they interact with other people. Sometimes it 
>> may turn out that that faith happens to be atheism, but we were not 
>> talking about those.
>>
> 
> Hmm. Just to be clear here, what "faith" are you talking about with 
> atheism? 

That sentence was meant to be short for: "Sometimes when you find out 
what makes them tick and what is their ultimate motivation it turns out 
that they don't believe in a god but are atheists and have taken the 
non-existence of god as their primary inspiration for helping others."

Small question, possibly on behalf of my daughter (see separate 
'international english' thread): is this a rhetorical device that does 
not carry across cultures?

> Last I checked the only "faith" involved there was the same 
> ones those who have "faiths" apply all the time, like, "I have faith 
> that the laws of physics will let my car start in the morning, not turn 
> me into a grapefruit." Sorry to be picky here, but since we are, 
> supposedly trying to make "clear" distinctions about things talked 
> about, and people, it might be useful what "faith" you seem to think an 
> atheist has that makes it the "same" as a religion...
> 
> That said, your comment does re-bring up a point that Saul danced around 
> a bit. Since he won't read the blog of an atheist, 

given the way you tried to force it on him, I can't blame him.

> I will post a 
> paraphrase of his statement on "compassion", as it was applied to a case 
> of a family that had a child diagnosed with hydrocephalus. 

I did not understand the following until I followed the link in he other 
post. So, as an abbreviation it leaves something to be deserved. ;)

> The doctors 
> stated that she would either be still born, or only live a short time. 
> The chaplain's statements about the matter:
> 
> 1. Thumbs up to the christians that chose to follow their own creed of 
> loving others.
> 
> 2. The two who they helped might not have made it without such help and 
> compassionate people with them.
> 
> 3. Not impressed with the god in the story, who seemed to be unable to 
> do anything at all that the doctors didn't already predict.
> 
> 4. "Four, I wish that the friendships that abound in this story would 
> have been accomplished without the framework of religion to constrain 
> them. This story speaks poignantly of both the power and the depth of 
> human empathy and compassion. Danny, Danielle and Bobbi didn’t need a 
> deity; they needed other people. The Christians didn’t need a deity; 
> they had tremendous strength and love within themselves. Danny, 
> Danielle, the pastor and all of the church people have sold themselves 
> short. Instead of recognizing their own virtue, they believe that the 
> source of all their goodness is a small god who performs pitifully small 
> miracles. That’s almost as tragic as the death of baby Bobbi."
> 
> Mind, the first poster on the reply thread suggested that #1 may have 
> been a bit "artificial", in that many such people are far more 
> interested in getting people "into" the club, and saving souls, than 
> truly showing compassion, without strings attached. And, he is right. 
> Its very hard to tell the difference some times.

There is nothing is this story that suggests that the people in the 
church did it with the goal of converting the father. Suggesting that 
that was the actual goal and from that building up to a condemnation of 
their actions is rhetorically not sound and I would be livid if someone 
would question my intentions in this way.

To answer what I think is your underlying question: Compassion exist and 
is present both in atheists and theists. When people interact closely 
for some time they can grow philosophically closer together. Sometimes 
that results in people dropping out of a church sometimes into it and 
sometimes they move churches. The fourth option will not result in 
anything visible from the outside, that does not mean that the internal 
changes can be just as profound. If I or e.g. Saul behave friendly 
towards a fellow human being we do that just to do that. We might hope 
that the other follows our example, but that does not make any of us 
missionaries.

Post a reply to this message