To All those on REINCARNATION thread

by RavynX 27 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  JanH

  Just one question. Why do those who espouse the religion of science develop as rabid a conversion style as JWs in many cases? Is there some sort of punishment awaiting those who like to tinker in other areas?

  
  I sometimes wished we did. Alas, for every skeptic willing to step forward, there are a million charlatans.

  I have explained very well why I feel skepticism would be worth fighting and evangelizing for, in the "reincarnation" thread. No need to create new threads; try to answer what is there.

  Of course, most of us can't be bothered to do more than post a few messages on a message board. It's hard to evangelize when you believe that people hurt first and foremost themselves, and they bloody well deserve it. A bit of darwinian selection will hopefully thin out the worst examples as time goes.

  Your question could be framed another way: Why are many exJWs so concerned about what is the truth, what is factual, and to expose untruths, charlatans and frauds? However, even you see that if you put your question in this form, the answer would be very obvious.

  I, like many others, believe that facts have an enormous value. Facts and truths saves lives, untruths and lies cost lives and it cost people misery.

  For example, the comedian Peter Sellers died becuase he believed some Philipine "psychic doctors" who have been exposed as frauds, and refused medical science to cure his disease. This is just one celebrity example; there are thousands of oridinary men and women who have fallen prey to frauds. Even my father-in-law, a JW, visited a healer in his last days (didn't help). Well, I can understand him -- what did he have to lose? -- but I have nothing but contempt for the fraudster who used his misery to stuff his pockets.

  What concerns me most about ardent supernaturalists is their total disregard of facts and sound, logical thinking. New agers like those who started this thread are no different from other supernaturalists who deny and denounce science, be it young earth creationists, flat earthers or christian science's "faith" healers.

  - Jan
  --
  "Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen"
  -- Albert Einstein
• 

  RedhorseWoman

  Ah, I see, Jan. You feel you must save us from ourselves. I appreciate your concern.

  However, I am not so much concerned about the number of charlatans and snake oil salesmen out there (and there are many), as I am about the right to investigate any philosophy I damn well please without being labelled a fool.
• 

  willy_think

  john- is a fraud- if you watch him closly you will find, at least i did, that he asks questions and gives no answers, he is an expert on reading body language- he knows all the most popular names for every letter of the alphabet, and he is not afraid to use them, when people are alive thay know people who have died, when thay come to his tapings thay wont him to tell them there loved ones are ok- isn't it funny that people looking for flying saucers always seem to see them.- as to the people he can't see he uses general stuf to hone in on them. if i were to say to you " i see somone older who has past from you thay are making reference to clothes-like thay are allways trying to geet you to pick them up or a funny story to do with puting your clothes away" who would say no noone like that in my life? we see what we are looking for that is all....but as to telling us anything it is the audience who do that.
• 

  larc

  RHW,

  I didn't get the idea from the reading of the previous posts, that you were being attacked. Anyone can believe and explore anything they want. I think, however, the concept of "do no harm". The most recent comments here and the other thread are directed to those harm and/or take large amounts of money under false pretenses.
• 

  rem

  I think Jan and I (and most scientific or logical types) might be using terms, that for us, are very accurate, but for others may be derogatory.

  For example, when I say someone is ignorant - that is not a put down. That is an accurate way of saying that someone does not have all the information. It doesn't mean that someone is stupid or dumb. We don't feel superior to anyone, but we can recognize when someone hasn't done all of the applicable research on a matter. By this we are suggesting that they learn more on this subject because they very well might revisit their views if they did.

  When I say someone is uninformed, to me it is similar to being ignorant. Please understand that we are not saying anyone is incompetent - on the contrary - most of us were wise enough to see through the WT! I hope our jargon doesn't offend anyone. Maybe it's because Jan and I come from the more "in your face" style of H2O, where taking offense was never preferable to constructing a logical counter-argument. This place is a little cozier, and our style seems cold and sterile.

  I can only speak for myself in that I will try to be aware of this, but it is difficult to candy coat certain things. I think Jan is right. Many people are attacking the style and not the content. I agree that both are important, but I think that content should outweigh style.

  As far as why do we post such things? It is because we have come to know that certain frauds are making a lot of money by tricking people. If no one said anything, it could be some of our friends here being tricked. Certainly we don’t want to see anyone hoodwinked like that. The fact is that these frauds play to people’s heartstrings. Who do they target? Usually grieving parents or widows – to me that is sick! I don’t understand why so many people are taking offense when we point out that these people are LYING to people. It’s just like back in the congregation – I wanted to tell all of my brothers that the GB was lying to them, but I couldn’t. I had evidence, but they didn’t want to hear it. Are we acting any different here?

  The evidence is out there – we are providing it to you so you can check it out yourself. Until you do, you are clearly ignorant or uninformed because you do not know both sides of the story. When you do go and do the research, then if you can back up your position with evidence, then I will respect that decision. But until then, I’m afraid that many of you have been duped by professionals.

  These people are entertainers and there are many people helping them out behind the scenes so they can all line their pockets with the money of poor grieving people. Do you really think these people are doing this out of the goodness of their heart? It’s been going on for centuries, and finally the scientific method has been able to expose them. Shouldn’t we be happy that these liars are exposed?

  rem
• 

  larc

  James Randi, who I mentioned on another thread, exposed Uri Geller. He also exposed a minister named Popov, who went bankrupt as a result. I see he is back on tv again. Houdini exposed spirit mediums who made the same claims as channelers today. He also exposed those who claimed they could move objects with the power of their mind (telekinesis). Houdini's works can be read in the Scientific American journals written in the 1920's.
• 

  RedhorseWoman

  Larc, don't worry, I don't feel personally attacked. However, the wording of "ignorant" and "uninformed" indicates that those who are interested in non-scientific philosophies are not utilizing their intellect properly. My only point is that no one should be made to feel foolish because they like to investigate something that isn't considered mainstream.

  I've subscribed to the Skeptical Inquirer and Reason and other magazines along those lines. I have Carl Sagan's book. I heartily enjoy discovering scientific explanations for things.

  However, it still comes down to the fact that there are certain things that don't "fit" any explanation I've come across. Acupuncture was once considered to be totally unscientific and of no value. Vitamins and herbs were in the same category.

  I'm really glad that I frequently didn't take the popular "scientific" approach as the ONLY way to think. If I had, I would most likely not be here now.

  Yes, there are those who are being bilked and harmed by many charlatans. That is unfortunate. There are also people who are being bilked and harmed by scientific "facts" that are later shown to be flawed. That is also unfortunate.

  For example, when I say someone is ignorant - that is not a put down. That is an accurate way of saying that someone does not have all the information.

  Well, Rem, it IS a putdown. It indicates that the person discussing an idea that doesn't fit the scientific paradigm has never bothered to research anything. That generalization is simply not true, and it is derogatory. Sometimes, Rem, a person DOES have all the available information, and the thing being investigated STILL doesn't fit into the slot. So, then, are we to deny its very existence? Or is it better (and a lot more interesting) to investigate another possibility? This is no way indicates that the non-scientific explanation is correct, but for the present it works.

  The whole point here is that we need to be allowed to discover whatever suits US...not what someone (be it scientist or shaman) says should suit us. Many scientific discoveries have come about because someone had the courage to think outside the box.
• 

  rem

  RHW,

  Sometimes, Rem, a person DOES have all the available information, and the thing being investigated STILL doesn't fit into the slot. So, then, are we to deny its very existence? Or is it better (and a lot more interesting) to investigate another possibility? This is no way indicates that the non-scientific explanation is correct, but for the present it works.

  I don’t remember ever commenting on anything that science does not have an answer for. I remember saying that there are a lot of things that science doesn’t know and that maybe someday those phenomena will be explained. I’m sure you have experienced things that science has not adequately explained. I never said that invalidates the experience. I do believe that the more we learn, the more we will see that the explanation will be prosaic – not magical. But this is only my opinion after looking back on years of scientific research and discovery.

  Well, Rem, it IS a putdown. It indicates that the person discussing an idea that doesn't fit the scientific paradigm has never bothered to research anything. That generalization is simply not true, and it is derogatory.

  Main Entry: ig·no·rant
  Function: adjective
  1 a : destitute of knowledge or education <an ignorant society>; also : lacking knowledge or comprehension of the thing specified <parents ignorant of modern mathematics> b : resulting from or showing lack of knowledge or intelligence <ignorant errors>

  2 : UNAWARE, UNINFORMED
  - ig·no·rant·ly adverb
  - ig·no·rant·ness noun
  synonyms IGNORANT, ILLITERATE, UNLETTERED, UNTUTORED, UNLEARNED mean not having knowledge. IGNORANT may imply a general condition or it may apply to lack of knowledge or awareness of a particular thing <an ignorant fool> <ignorant of nuclear physics>. ILLITERATE applies to either an absolute or a relative inability to read and write <much of the population is still illiterate>. UNLETTERED implies ignorance of the knowledge gained by reading <an allusion meaningless to the unlettered>. UNTUTORED may imply lack of schooling in the arts and ways of civilization <strange monuments built by an untutored people>. UNLEARNED suggests ignorance of advanced subjects <poetry not for academics but for the unlearned masses>.

  I’m using the word in the sense of definition number 2. In this case we are all ignorant. I’m ignorant of nuclear physics and quantum mechanics. I’m ignorant of all of the pains of childbirth. It’s not a put down – I recognize that I’m ignorant in these areas. I was never trying to infer that anyone was ignorant in totality. Many on this thread are ignorant of the scientific studies that have been performed on this phenomenon. I was trying to help them be informed. You have done some research in this area – obviously that makes you informed and not ignorant. That means my comment did not apply to you.

  It doesn’t matter to me what you ultimately believe – what matters to me is that people are informed. If you come to the opposite position than me – that’s fine. At least you’ve done the research. I’m trying to encourage others who have not done it and already formed their opinions to check out this stuff.

  I’m sorry if my use of the word ignorant has offended some, but I stand by it’s usage. If it offends you to be labeled as ignorant, then become informed – poof – you are no longer ignorant. You don’t have to agree with me, but at least you are exposed to the facts.

  rem
• 

  unanswered

  ravyn-i'm sorry that even when you start a new thread and specificly ask that it not be a place for criticism your wishes are not respected. i enjoyed your post and can identify with some of your experiences. looking forward to your future posts.:) not everyone believes the same thing, it's too bad some can't be content with differences in a opinion. don't let it discourage you, though i doubt it will.-nate
• 

  rem

  If people don't want their ideas criticized, then they should email them privately. This is a public discussion board. I don't know about you, but discussions can get a bit boring if everyone agrees. I've never said people can't have their own opinions (are people even really reading what I'm saying??). I respect that people have their opinions - I was just offering some further research that can help people from being scammed. I guess I'm a bad person for that! :)

  rem