h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Hello Good News

Do you not think that you can feel very strongly about something without getting angry. I you really do feel strongly and secure about something, especially your faith, then is there not a lovely air of serenity. Anger always, without exception, comes from fear.



Alex.

Good_News:

"Very interesting but of course, completely made-up."

No, actually, not made up. It really IS my opinion, based on my experience and knowledge. To suggest that I have made it up is to deny my existence. Do you deny that I exist, that my opinions and knowledge exist? I should not be surprised if you do, as your faith requires you to practice denial of the evidence of reality every day.

"Did you learn that in some atheist, diploma-mill psychology school by any chance?"

No, because I have never been to or even heard of such an establishment. Such qualifications that I have - an honours degree in chemical engineering, for instance - I obtained from accredited UK educational institutions by the usual method of hard work and successful performance in examinations.

Those institutions were not "atheist", in the sense that they were not actively opposed to your beliefs. On the other hand, they *were* (and remain) "atheist" in the sense that when one is learning how to design a distillation column or a heat exchanger, your god and beliefs are, quite simply, irrelevant. The ideal gas constant is 8.314 kJ/kgK whether you are a Christian, Muslim, or devotee of the tooth fairy. To attempt to disparage such an institution by calling it "atheist" simply exposes you as a fool.

My knowledge of psychology comes from my observations of reality. You should try it some time.

My knowledge of the terminology comes from a lifelong interest in extending my education beyond that which I received at school and university.

"Getting angry is a sign that you feel strongly about something."

No. Getting angry is a sign that you have lost control of your feelings about something. I feel very, very strongly about the judicial killing, for instance. Having the death penalty means having the state kill innocent people - this is inevitable and undeniable (unless you're the kind of delusional idiot who denies the obvious. Oh... hang on.). Having the state kill innocent people is intolerable. I feel strongly about this, but I cannot imagine ever actually getting *angry* about it. I have more control than that.

"Even Jesus got angry."

Jesus was a man, just like any other man. An imperfect human. Of course he got angry.

"And if you don't, then it could be said that you don't believe in anything".

It could be said, yes. It could be said ignorantly and inaccurately, but it could be said.

There are many, many reasons why a person may simply not get angry about things. If you have a realistic view of the world, one that acknowledges the evidence of reality, and accepts the fundamental unfairness of life and meaninglessness of existence, anger is revealed as a waste of energy.

However, until you accept that unpalatable truth, your anger will remain, for you persist in the delusion that things matter. Good luck in getting better.

SoRB

Well said SORB. Hear, hear!

"Anger is a very common trait among fundamentalist literalist Christians. My personal opinion is that this anger is the expression of their frustration with themselves. At some deep level, they *know* that their beliefs are nonsense."

I have to disagree.

IMHO they feel anger because they feel guilt (instilled in them since childhood), and guilt creates anger because the guilt means they can never feel at peace and must always live with the once-outer voice which is now internalised telling them how unworthy they are and how much they deserve punishment.

Christianity seems to me to win out for the guilty/enraged for three main reasons:
(1) it provides a rationale for their inner feelings of unworthiness and need for punishment
(2) it also provides reassurance that everyone else is the same
(3) it gives a sense of being better than others by enabling them to speak with the "authority" of the ultimate authority figure, and tell everyone how much they should be punished, or do this or that, and observe how others are "worse" than they are because they do not do these things

The best thing, obviously, would be to find some means of help to shed their massive inferiority feelings and guilt by some healthy process.

But yes - the cognative dissonance you describe is also experienced.

'IMHO they feel anger because they feel guilt (instilled in them since childhood), and guilt creates anger because the guilt means they can never feel at peace and must always live with the once-outer voice which is now internalised telling them how unworthy they are and how much they deserve punishment.'

Another daft theory promoted by a wanna-be Freud which is utter nonsense when properly looked at. The main problem with your theory is you assume that all Fundamentalists/evangelicals were brought up that way. That is utter rubbish. I was brought up in an agnostic home.

Secondly, your theory would refer to Roman Catholics more than Protestant fundamentalists. Simply because Protestants know that Jesus died for them and if they are born-again, they will get to Heaven. Catholics are more work oriented and place a greater emphasis on confessing sins and doing penances.

Have you ever thought that evangelicals are angry because they are constantly told by people that they are stupid, ignorant and no nothing? Have you ever thought that they are frustrated that nobody listens to them or just ignores their opinions? Have you ever thought that they are annoyed because they have discovered the Truth and nobody else listens? Why don't you think before insulting people with your amateur psychology?

And I notice Richard Dawkins tends to get very angry. Why don't you discuss him and his atheism?

Hi Good News

I'm sorry mate but I couldn't pass this one up:

"Have you ever thought that evangelicals are angry because they are constantly told by people that they are stupid, ignorant and no nothing?"

Surely you mean "know nothing"?

Seriously though what sort of religion saddles new born babies with the concept that they are infected with Sin - a concept I hear as often from Protestants as I do from Catholics? According to the Evangelicals I know well we are all sinners who can only be saved by being born again. Isn't that just the ultimate guilt trip?

My own take on this is that original sin was a concept thought up by the fathers of the church in order to keep the dumb proles in line.

I do agree though that anger is not the sole preserve of 'fundamentalist christians'. I have seen as many atheists here and elsewhere express themselves in terms that can only be termed as 'vehement' in the extreme.

Guilt though, that is a different matter altogether....

Blessings,
Matholwch /|\

I'm certainly not going to try to analyse Creationists,etc.

I can't say that I've noticed any greater degree of anger in that camp than any other, either.

I will say, however, that I imagine that if I were in that camp I would feel inconceivably lonely and frustrated, having a Truth of which I am absolutely certain, but being equally absolutely unable to share it in any meaningful way with anyone.

Just as I am unable to share my orbiting teapotness.

Good_news, if you're so confident that your way is the truth, why would it anger you if you were told you were wrong all the time. If you *really* know you're right, it shouldn't bother you to the point of making you angry.

'If you *really* know you're right, it shouldn't bother you to the point of making you angry.'

I beg to differ. If you were sure you knew the truth but everybody kept on telling you that you were wrong, it would be very frustrating. And that would get you angry.

How about we just agree that there are angry people, no matter what their beliefs. I would not call myself a very angry person but then I do know some atheists who are VERY angry people. And you might know some Christians who are angry people.

And yes, that was a stupid mistake to say 'no' instead of 'know'. I should have re-read what I wrote before posting.

<>

But that's the nub of it, really, isn't it? Is it the Truth (and I note the capital T)? This claim, in the absence of any evidence, is what annoys a lot of other people too.

You've probably noticed that I have a philosophical interest in questions about what makes something true (form rather than content), and how we know things, and what the limits are. What you claim to know seems to fall outside the limits of normal usage, so this is why I ask what you mean by these terms, and (occassionally) get annoyed when the questions are not addressed.

Noggin

"Another daft theory promoted by a wanna-be Freud which is utter nonsense when properly looked at. The main problem with your theory is you assume that all Fundamentalists/evangelicals were brought up that way. That is utter rubbish. I was brought up in an agnostic home."

My dear, so are many who are brought up to feel guilt. As are many who are religious brought up not to suffer that burden. What I am discussing does not have religion as its root cause, though religion can be used as a tool to effect these psychological problems. I am describing how, once the problem is established, certain forms of Christianity can be viewed as a means to assuage it.

"Secondly, your theory would refer to Roman Catholics more than Protestant fundamentalists."

Not at all: the doctrine of the human beings being born into sin and requiring to be saved is one common to all branches of Christianity. Have you not studied Paul's Letter to the Romans?

"Have you ever thought that evangelicals are angry because they are constantly told by people that they are stupid, ignorant and no nothing?"

The word is spelled "know".
And I certainly did not encounter that when I was an evangelical. And if that surprises you so much that you are tempted to think I wasn't, not really, I will say this: over the 20 years I was a Christian I began as a Calvinistic fundamentalist, became a conservative evangelical and finally ended up mainstream evangelical. I worshipped low church, then high church, then liked a mix. I taught Bible and studied theology. I went to London Bible College. And no, I cannot ever recall being told my anyone that I was stupid, ignorant and knew nothing on account of my beliefs whilst I was a christian - I only experience that now, as a pagan, and from monotheists (but especially Christians).

" Have you ever thought that they are frustrated that nobody listens to them or just ignores their opinions? Have you ever thought that they are annoyed because they have discovered the Truth and nobody else listens? Why don't you think before insulting people with your amateur psychology?"

GN, sweetheart: why don't you think before insulting peopel by telling them they will burn in hell?

"And I notice Richard Dawkins tends to get very angry. Why don't you discuss him and his atheism?"

sorry, I'm not familiar with Dawkins.

<> (Good News)

I can understand the frustration, but why anger? I mean, if you are sure you KNOW the TRUTH that you are RIGHT?

There may well be angry atheists, but not any I've seen on this thread. I've only seen angry Christians posting here.

I still wonder how you KNOW that you are RIGHT. It seems you don't really if others questioning you can upset you so much. But I actually see this as a positive thing - one should always question rather than believe blindly. I think your anger is about the questions this debate raises within you, personal questions about your God that you'd rather not have happening for yourself. But because you are obviously intelligent, you cannot help but have doubts - and these doubts anger you because you have decided you are X, so Y,Z,etc options are bound to upset you.

I don't see how opening one's heart up to Jesus precludes opening up one's heart to everyone. I rather doubt Jesus ever wanted his words to be taken to such an extreme.


az

"And I notice Richard Dawkins tends to get very angry. Why don't you discuss him and his atheism"

ah, sorry - I was being thick.

I was not postulating that all people who suffer guilt/anger become Christians, but that it is a very good fit for those who do.

There are all sorts of other ways: join an organisationw that gives one a uniform, or some other fundementalist cause such as Marxism. Or other religion which enables one to speak for some god who will punish anyone who doesn't agree with you.

Well, basically any organisation that doesn't require that you think for yourself . . .


az

Or actually prefers it if you don't . . .


az

"Well, basically any organisation that doesn't require that you think for yourself . . ."

Not quite. The requirement to be able to apply the dogma one signs up to backed up by some sort of authority is necessary - otherwise, why should anyone listen? Hence the need for god, uniforms or a dictator who will kill those who disagree with you.