Not sure I've understand the subject you are really talking about but :
Since faith and understanding stay a personnal matter (related to each ones experiences all together).
I've realised that the best way to informe anyone is to give the information (your own way - since we all have our own way) and let him/her free to interprate it ... wheither he/she understands/believes it or not at the moment is not the real point because for some it'll take a second for others it can take years ...
Not because they are more or less smart, but because each one of us deal with the same "kind and themes" of information in a different order of priority and ways (related to their immediate needs, personal experiences and habits related to how their thinking process have been built through years of education). So you can try to push them with any argument it won't really help (they will more likely reject it).
But every information stays as a hint in their subconscious which they will recover when something in their experience will call it and help them to resolve the puzzle by coherence through thinking from experiences.
Also it is still (and more over in the matter of religion / faith) to remind anyone that whatever says that you will gain something have a potential of manipulation ... So it's all about thinking about the matter without what we are suppose to gain out of whatever to get a clearer view (way less subjective) on the matter.
And, since we do not have the same (not basic = eating, sleeping, moving) needs and in the same order ... helping nor manipulating someone is not about pushing them to what pleases you, it's more effective to talk about what is unpleasant in general (it's a manipulation system - which give a sense of emergency to fasten the thinking process on the right or wrong side) So it can be for the good (unstead of the bad).
So : it's all about talking about the gains and losses (to put a red flag in anyonces conscious and subconcious)to get someones attention (for him/her to register the informationeven if he/she do not use it the right way or at all at first), way before the real arguments as logic.
Also as you saidplaying dumb is a good strategy ... it makes the other one wanting to help you by thinking himself about the subject ... that's when little by little you can in talking about his/her argument telling about your own thinking process and understanding ... which in fact is a way to put forth your argument without having the other one thinking that you are trying to convince him/her and allow him/her to put less subjective barriere to what you are saying.
That's why spychologists just ask question and let you answer them yourself (they just give you some hints along the process at if possible the right moment for patient - sometimes it's to early - and it does the reverses effect - because the patient is not ready to deal with it).
So it's never about who said what but how and when it is understandable relatevely to each one (regarding to what pressure him/her and please him/her = his/her priorities).
How can you be faithful yet not gullible or misled?
by The Dragon 26 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
RAF
-
RAF
Also to further on the subject : calling anyone stupid is a wrong and actually a stupid strategy it only works on weak minds (which always have a potential to become strong at any time = revolt).
Weak minds are those who needs other people to think for them because they miss self confidence but since it's not there thinking process which have lead to their new (but in fact accepted) understanding they won't "really" understandtill they have effectively done the thinking job by their own process if the argument is a good one).
The name calling nor adhominem attacks only talks about the talker fears, beliefs and need to put unusefull argument to win a point for free = red flag lazy tactic - which can work in the moment but not for good (again since any weak mind can become strong at any time for their own good or bad).
Also There are different " name calling " tactique : For instance the JW reasoning book and lots of their litterature is using it all along in a very subtle way : with this kind of sentences : is this the way this should be understood ?This is certainely not the way this should be understood or surely this is not what is to be understood ? ... and lots of others (so if you were thinking the reverse of what they want you to think you may feel dumb).
So : gains / losses / name calling (subtle or not) have to be put aside in the thinking process or in the information/argumentation method to be as honest and effective as possible in respecting the other one thinking process in reminding ourselve that the greater can be tiniest and the tiniest can be the greater (it seems also true, regarding to : faster / slower) at the end (the brain is amazing). That's why under or overestimate anyone (including ourselves) can be missleading.
-
funkyderek
bob1999:
By reading and trusting the bible alone.
You probably don't appreciate the irony of such a statement. But maybe, if you can take a mental step back and look at it from an outsider's perspective you'll see why it's so funny. The question that was asked was effectively: "How do I avoid putting faith in something that may be nonsense?" and your answer was "Put complete faith in this book and don't ever question it."
I'm sure that if any book other than the bible was mentioned, you'd realise the absurdity of your statement. Replace "bible" with "Koran" and you have the beliefs of a billion Muslims. With no external standard to determine which book if any makes sense and corresponds to reality, how would one possibly choose between them? (Of course, when it comes down to it, all but the most adamant "faith-heads" will usually claim that the evidence supports their belief - but with evidence, who needs faith?)
-
AlmostAtheist
From Merriam-Webster's:
Faith: a (1) : belief and trust in and loyalty to God (2) : belief in the traditional doctrines of a religion b (1) : firm belief in something for which there is no proof (2) : complete trust
The first one is what many on JWD express. They have faith in God as a being. Not faith that he'll do anything in particular, or that he demands anything in particular, but simply faith that he's there. In some cases, that he cares. Other than perhaps leaving a person with some unanswerable questions, this doesn't seem unhealthy to me.
The second is more damaging, because it specifically requires a person to ignore facts that contradict the "traditional doctrines" of their religion. That's pretty much where we were as JW's.
The last two get into solid gullibility, in my opinion. You are just setting yourself up for a fall if you have "complete trust" in anyone, let alone having "firm belief" in something unproven.
But then "proof" means different things to different people.
Dave
-
LongHairGal
Dragon:
The only fool-proof way to not be misled (even by sincere people) is to stay away from any religion or organization. Read the bible on your own and follow your conscience.
Even if they start out with good intentions, religions always end up the same way - with the few at the top taking advantage of the many gullible. It is the oldest, sadest story in human history and it is repeated over and over again. Only the names change.
LHG
-
Terry
It all comes down to cutting the losses.
If you believe in "god" what do you have?
Zeus? Krishna? Jehovah? Allah?
And if them/not them which sectarian view of them?
See?
You have to cut your losses.
The people who boast of "Faith" simply decide to refuse to view anything but the narrowest possible choice and call it TRUTH.
It reminds me of what Sadaam Hussein did by crawling into that spider hole of his. Instead of having a real plan for escape (which would have required actually thinking it POSSIBLE he could be defeated) he crawled off into a hole and hid.
Faith is that narrow and that scared. It doesn't look at the future with both eyes seeing clearly.
It burns all bridges except the imaginary one.
-
JamesThomas
Dragon, perhaps the answer to your question is to discover what is so undeniably genuine as to not require faith.
This of course would demand first hand realization -- as no testimony from books or other people is supplying the actual reality that you seek. You've outgrown storybooks and make-believe.
I suggest investigating into your own raw senses of conscious being and existing, and becoming aware of the mind's story of what it all may or may not mean. Shift attention from this energetic dance, into the silent purity of what is seeing it. Find what is at the core of your most intimate sense of silent being and existing.
Don't need faith in stories and deities for this (in fact they may only blind you). Don't need the Bible or any other book. Don't need religion or science. Don't need to go anywhere or earn anything. Conscious-awareness and a simple sincere and earnest desire for genuine truth is all you need. These simple keys, you already have.
Who/what, are you, really? Shift attention from out-there, to the vast immediacy of consciousness itself. Look beyond all that you believe "self" and universe to be.
Good luck.
j
-
The Dragon
I really wish I had a source of information I could trust and not have to question...
I wish we all did........I cannot think of a way that could be bad or "wrong".
But I would say trust in the wrong source leads to becoming gullible and prey to that source.
-
Mad
You must start with- and determine- what ARE facts!
Fact 1: God exists
Fact 2: Much can be learned about Him by the way things are made ( For example, we don't NEED color vision- but sure ENJOY it!)
Fact 3: The conscience indicates he wants to guide us; is there a further source of guidance?
Fact 5: The Bible is the ONLY book claimed to be inspired by God- that has the credentials!
Fact 6- is the toughest! What does it REALLY say? With the endless churches, philosophies- and human corruption, the only real way to discover that is tp pray for guidance, and
actually READ it!
Realise that the Truth & Mankind are TWO seperate entities!
Mad
-
BFD
Hi Mad,
I am reading it now for the first time! I've got to say again that it has all the elements of a Harliquain novel. Murder, lust, bigomy, incest, deceipt, wife swapping, and that's just God's people. What's up with that?
Jackie Collins couldn't make this stuff up!
BFD