Who Watches the Watchers?

[Mr_Homn]

gomtuu20,

By saying atheism is a singular religion, you are implying theism is a singular religion.

Theism is not a religion. Not all by itself.

If Theism was by itself a religion, that would mean Hindus, Jews, Christians and Muslims, etc., are all the same religion. The religion of theism. Clearly, this is not the case.


Since Theism is NOT a religion by itself, there is no possible way that atheism (That's A-theism, not athe-ism) is a religion.

This is why you are wrong, plain and simple, whether you choose to accept it or not.

Of course, you're probably just going to ignore the logic and quote something from the bible in a condescending manner, like you did earlier in the thread. Have fun with that. Or maybe just this once, someone on the internet will admit that they are wrong, and spoke out of ignorance. Nevermind, I don't think that's possible.

---------------------

As far the topic goes, one of my favorite scenes in the entire series is in this episode. The scene where Picard is talking to the primitive girl, and says something like "Feel my hand, it is flesh and blood, like yours.." That whole part is amazing, the music, the acting, everything.

Picard getting shot with the arrow at the end is powerful as well. Overall I like this episode very much.

I also love the part when Troi says "mm hmm" and Data has to keep looking at Riker for a translation. It may make Data seem a bit dense, but it's funny nonetheless.

This episode is also one of the many reasons I will be purchasing the upcoming 14 disc Ron Jones collection.

 

[YARN]

No. Atheism is a lack of belief, not an anti-belief. Having a lack of belief in a giant invisible turtle does not mean one has an anti-turtle religion. It simply means one does not accept what does not exist. There is no "anti" anything involved. Being "anti"-belief would be actively against something. For example, "I do not believe in the existence of a god" is a lack of belief. However, if I said, "I do not believe your god is the right god", now we have an anti-belief, as it's not simply a statement of non-belief, but an active statement against the belief of another. Atheism is not a religion, and not everything is black and white.

I don't believe in unicorns, but I would not be so precious as to claim that I merely "lack belief" about unicorns. On the contrary, my belief is that they don't exist.

If I were a "unicorn agnostic" I might say I don't believe either way or that I have a "lack of belief."

To be sure, though, atheism is no more a religion than theism is a religion.

 

[T'Girl]

It's like calling the off switch on your television a channel.

Perfect, I love it.

But here you're confusing (or deliberately placing together) people who possesses no position or belief in the existence of God, with those who do possess the believe that God does not exist. These are two separate groups.

If your "television is off" then you would be describing an agnostic. If you however believe there is no God, you would appear to in fact be watching the atheist channel.

.

 

[Amaris]

It's like calling the off switch on your television a channel.

Perfect, I love it.

But here you're confusing (or deliberately placing together) people who possesses no position or belief in the existence of God, with those who do possess the believe that God does not exist. These are two separate groups.

If your "television is off" then you would be describing an agnostic. If you however believe there is no God, you would appear to in fact be watching the atheist channel.

.

No, that's not how it works.

 

[Flying Spaghetti Monster]

You see, the people who have "no position" would still be atheists. The reason is that "theist" means that the person has a positive believe in a claim of god and think that claim is true. So everything else, including I don't know whether or a god exists (agnostic) still would be atheist. If you don't have a positive claim in a good and think it is true, you are an atheist, and if you don't know if there is such a god, you cannot believe it is true either.

It's like a jury trial. The choice is guilty or not guilty. If I vote not guilty, I actually did not say whether or not I believe that person is innocent or not. This is because the burden of proof is always on whether someone is guilty. I could have meant by that vote that person was innocent, or I could have meant that there was not enough evidence to show that they were guilty. It could be my personal feeling that they were actually guilty or that they were actually innocent, but both are irrelevant, because I don't have to support either position, I just simply have to respond to the burden of proof the prosecution presented as to whether or not they were guilty. Atheism is a position that responds to the burden of proof theists present. No atheist believes that burden of proof was met, but some atheists might be strong (kind of like the juror that believes the subject was innocent) but in the end, atheism is simply a response to a claim. Atheists don't have to sell anything. They don't have to sell the idea of "no god' to people. What they are selling is "we are not buying what you (theists) are selling.' Even so, some atheist might want to sell their product of no god and that is fine and dandy.

Knowledge is a subset of belief. They are not mutually exclusive.

Philosophically, we don't know anything, particularly if solipsists are correct. The knowledge that we have are actually beliefs that are demonstrably true, that would be absurd and possibly world-altering if it was demonstrated that they were not true. So what a person knows falls underneath what a person believes. That's why you can have a gnostic atheist, or agnostic theist, or an agnostic atheist or whatever.

 

[Solarbaby]

I didn't see this as anti religious. It was about not altering the natural development of a society as per the Prime Directive.

Damage had already been done. If the away team had just simply left then the Mintakans would have gone back to worshipping gods. So Picard's actions were to try and restore the way their culture was developing. It wasn't about religion, it was about old superstitions from a long lost religion.

 

[Flying Spaghetti Monster]

I kind of agree with you, but the issue of whether people were religious in the future was something that ST was always vague about, so only a few lines or references here and there would hint at the answer, and this episode held what may be the sharpest position in the canon. In the end, for a society to function and get above the petty differences and embrace real scientific exploration that Roddenberry envisioned required religion to be dismissed. Even if you or someone else disagrees with that, it still can be said that the show has the guts and the vision to make the statement and call it a part of the world. I might like the character of the Hulk, but I might not dig the idea of gamma radiation being the cause of Bruce's changes. Still, i would embrace teh fact that the writers might think it was an adequate explanation.

 

[Solarbaby]

I forgot to add that that I enjoyed the story as a Christian viewer. I loved the location sets. The idea of Vulcanoids evolving on other planets- just like so many identical homo sapien "aliens" were-was really cool. The subcutaneous communicators were great and should have used more.

I thought this was a perfect episode; story; though provoking, visually stunning. I think it's the most powerful of TNG regarding religion.

 

[Amaris]

I forgot to add that that I enjoyed the story as a Christian viewer. I loved the location sets. The idea of Vulcanoids evolving on other planets- just like so many identical homo sapien "aliens" were-was really cool. The subcutaneous communicators were great and should have used more.

I thought this was a perfect episode; story; though provoking, visually stunning. I think it's the most powerful of TNG regarding religion.

I definitely agree about the subcutaneous transponders. While I often saw read about them in novels, never saw them often on screen. I can only think of "Who Watches The Watchers" from TNG, and "Patterns of Force" from TOS. I also agree it was a great episode that comments on religion, I also feel it comments on zealotry and what happens when people stop thinking through their faith and instead, act on it instinctively. I believe both viewpoints are represented well in this episode.

 

[gomtuu20]

"Of course, you're probably just going to ignore the logic and quote something from the bible in a condescending manner, like you did earlier in the thread. Have fun with that. Or maybe just this once, someone on the internet will admit that they are wrong, and spoke out of ignorance. Nevermind, I don't think that's possible." - Mr. Homm
Wow. So if I express an opinion that is different than yours, then I am speaking "out of ignorance". But I'm the condescending one? And I'm also responsible for everyone on the internet? I didn't realize that disagreeing with you meant I was speaking out of ignorance. I bow to your omniscience.

 

[Flying Spaghetti Monster]

Anyway, atheism fits the def'n of a religion.

The scary thing is that you believe this. What part of: atheism is not a religion do you you not understand.

I say i don't believe in god. I haven't actually made any statements about what I do believe. yet, you are saying that I am part of a religion. How nice.

 

[Amaris]

Hey guys, relax. There's no need to get heated. You're not going to change anyone's opinion that way.

 

[YARN]

Hey guys, relax. There's no need to get heated. You're not going to change anyone's opinion that way.

Stop making sense.

"Shut up Spock! We're fighting over a woman!"

 

[Mr_Homn]

"Of course, you're probably just going to ignore the logic and quote something from the bible in a condescending manner, like you did earlier in the thread. Have fun with that. Or maybe just this once, someone on the internet will admit that they are wrong, and spoke out of ignorance. Nevermind, I don't think that's possible." - Mr. Homm
Wow. So if I express an opinion that is different than yours, then I am speaking "out of ignorance". But I'm the condescending one? And I'm also responsible for everyone on the internet? I didn't realize that disagreeing with you meant I was speaking out of ignorance. I bow to your omniscience.

If this was a matter of opinion, you'd be justified in this response. However, it's not a matter of opinion.

That's like me saying it's my "opinion" that Christianity is not a religion. Or that it's my "opinion" that a dog is not an animal. Both statements are totally wrong. They are not up for debate. There is nothing to have an opinion about. Christianity is a religion, and dogs are animals. These are facts. Not opinions.

Atheism is not a religion. Fact.
You are wrong to call it a religion. Fact.
You were speaking out of ignorance when you classified Atheism as a religion. Fact.

Disagree with facts all you want, but don't act butt-hurt when you get called out on it.

You are perfectly within your right to have an opinion about what happens to us after we die, and I would never criticize you for that opinion. But that is a completely separate issue.
However, quoting a biblical passage which calls atheists "wicked fools" is a bit self righteous and condescending, in the context of this thread. Especially since it had nothing to do with the topic of whether or not Atheism can be classified as a religion.

 

[doubleohfive]

I'm no longer religious, but I can't say how I'd react if something "Supernatural" occurred right in front of me.... since I have no personal basis of reference.

You mean we have to die and be revived by aliens in order to discuss the merits of this episode?

"It would be impossible to discuss the subject without a common frame of reference."

 

[Willieck]

Hey guys. This was my thread and it was SUPPOSED to be about an episode in Star Trek not a religious debate.

 

[gomtuu20]

Hey guys. This was my thread and it was SUPPOSED to be about an episode in Star Trek not a religious debate.

Yes. And my original comment was that this episode in particular was anti-religion. The discussion in the conference room where the guy from the observation blind was suggesting that Picard go down to the planet as The Picard and give them guidelines is the point of the episode I was referring to. He said that any religious belief would inevitably lead to Holy Wars and inquisitions. A few lines of dialogue later Picard was shouting about he did not want them to believe in superstition and myth, I'm sorry, giant invisible turtles and unicorns(because those are obviously things that are equal to a Supreme God that most people naturally believe in). The implication was that they "evolved" past that. That's what I don't like about the episode.
What I do like is their attempt a little bit of humor. When they are asking Troi if the leader was the one moving she says Mmm Hmmm. The attempt at humor was Data giving a quizical look like he didn't quite understand it and Ryker translating. It was a nice moment, but doesn't it seem quite odd that Data had never heard anyone say this before?
And one other thing. The duck blind appeared to be way out of town. When what's-his-name and his daughter were walking to the sundial early in the morning, I got the impression that they had to walk quite a distance to get to it. Why would they put the sundial so far away from town? They did it that way, of course, as a plot device so that the two would be the only ones that observed what happened. But that brings up two more questions. If she was supposed to be an official timekeeper or something, wouldn't it make sense for the sun dial to be in the center of the village so that it would be easy to access? Also, why would they build the duck blind so far from the village? They said at the beginning that they were there for up close observation, but their blind was so far away that when it went on the fritz, no one inside the village saw it. Would this be a good place for up close observation? Or are we supposed to assume that they had invisibility suits like in Insurrection so that they could walk around?

 

[gomtuu20]

Mr. Homm- what is "butt-hurt"? I have never heard that expression.
PS- Atheisim is a religion - fact.

 

[Flying Spaghetti Monster]

PS- Atheisim is a religion - fact.

Sorry. Please explain. Thanks.

PM it if you want.

 

[Amaris]

Mr. Homm- what is "butt-hurt"? I have never heard that expression.
PS- Atheisim is a religion - fact.

Atheism is not a religion. It does not fit the definition of religion. If you wish to erroneously consider it a religion, that is your prerogative, but it is not a religion. Your insistence to the contrary does not help you in any way, neither does it advance any of your ideas.

That said, Willieck, there will be discussion of a religious/non-religious debate when this episode comes up. It tends to evoke strong feelings one way or the other, because it reflects back to our society both positively and negatively, so such debate will happen. However, I agree that more focus should be on the episode itself and not just another generic religious debate thread, so please accept my apologies if I have helped derail the thread.