Comments on: Official Discussion Board Now Open!

By: Harvard

Harvard — Mon, 09 Feb 2009 06:21:50 +0000

Dear Rhetorical Analyst:
People who believe in a god, by definition, believe in an afterlife where the good go to a heavenly paradise full of angels, yummy food, and untold pleasures, and the bad sinners go to a horrible Hell where they burn constantly, suffering excruciating pain for eternity. Of course, this worries the “faithful.” Since there is no evidence that any type of god or gods exist, and therefore no afterlife, there is no worry about this horrific possibility.
Now, you are going to bring up the idea of morals here on earth, and that is another question. Morals existed well before religions were invented; therefore, religions are not the source of morality — human nature is, and the necessity for rules in a community.

By: Devon

Devon — Sun, 08 Feb 2009 04:50:51 +0000

I take “stop worrying” to mean that you don’t need to worry that there is no god, its not such a bad thing…its not the end of the world

By: A Rhetorical Analyst

A Rhetorical Analyst — Sat, 07 Feb 2009 23:41:59 +0000

The most puzzling logic in the slogan, in my opinion, is this. “Now stop worrying…”

I have heard that atheists and agnostics are serious about inquiry and love to question things.

Therefore, as an analyst of the rhetoric of this advertisement, may I please ask, who is supposed to be worried that requires such a reassurance, and why are they supposedly worried, and will this spiritual hypothesis be a cure?

It could be taken to presume that people of faith are “worrying” more than others because of their belief in a God. If so, is that really true? Can it be proven that people of faith worry more, or is the opposite true, that it builds their sense of peace and confidence? That would be worth inquiring about.

But taking as a given that the ad is likely to address people who are “worried” about anything in particular, it is very likely to build instant identification (like a horoscope) since many of us would admit we are worried to some degree on a given day, and it also takes the soothing tone of a counselor.

This is psychologically effective rhetoric, but is it reasonable?

Shouldn’t a wise counselor be careful to inquire about whether the symptom (worry) is a sign of something bad, or of something healthy?

The presumption that worry is always bad is gathered from many self-help psychology books that tell all readers, regardless of any knowledge of their individual moral state, that they are “good” people. Well, of course, if you are selling a self-help book, or you are a psychologist who is being paid to reduce anxiety, you will have an economic interest in presuming that worry is always bad, no questions asked.

This ad seems to be afflicted with the same sort of universal blindness to audience and situation, and a bias toward selling a certain metaphysical cure. If you are an atheist or agnostic, then you will tend to presume that reality is material and that the metaphysical realm is nonexistent or irrelevant mumbo jumbo, and why? Because that is your personal belief preference.

Excuse me, but how do you know me, and who are you to judge my goodness or whether my feelings of worry are justified? Dear bus ad, how do you know that I don’t have a very good reason to worry about myself (or my family or society), especially in light of the possibility (which neither of us can disprove) that there could be a just God who will reward or judge fairly?

Even if we decide all worry is bad, if you have the specific diagnosis wrong (the real cause of the painful or bothersome worry), then the cure will not be relevant and might even be harmful.

Should murderers who realize they have done something wrong stop worrying about their moral goodness because “there is probably no god”?

Does “there is probably no god” help atheists stop worrying about whether faith groups are going to pass laws that make it impossible for them to practice atheism without risk?

Should citizens stop worrying about the policies of their government because “there is probably no god”?

Maybe the ad takes the word “worry” very broadly and is not referring to a painful emotional state but an intellectual desire to know what is real and what is true in the metaphysical realm. Sounds like the same good impulse behind scientific, ethical and political inquiry.

Is the ad presuming that a concerned inquiry about anything likely to have an uncertain answer is a state of inappropriate worry?

If so, we should stop inquiring about environmental degradation. We apparently can’t come to a conclusive answer about whether a particular global environmental crisis will occur in 20 or 1000 years from now, and even if we are certain, there is great debate about whether the solutions are worse than the problem. But what if it demands action now? What if stopping worry or discourse or inquiry will just leave us indecisively standing by?

By: Harvard

Harvard — Tue, 03 Feb 2009 09:38:46 +0000

Dear Trudy
I, too, am working hard to find out what is really true. I read and read, study, listen to audio books, and ask questions. But I’ve found there is no reason “why” we are here. Your parents got together, and here you are — there’s no why about it. But while we are here, we must make the best of it.
When one asks “why” humans are here on earth, it seems one is presupposing an intelligent force out there, beyond the wispy clouds, that has a plan. It seems there is no cosmic plan, Trudy, since there is no evidence to support a god.
Yes, you and your daughter are correct — most people have devoted their lives to the fantasy of religion. But the problem here, which is not pish-posh, is that they want us to follow their fantasy life, and they’ll pass laws to force us to do it.

By: Richard

Richard — Tue, 03 Feb 2009 02:03:11 +0000

Well…dialogue is not theonly goal..but keep in mind that there is no way in the world that anyone is going to convert the delusional…The campaign’s target is really the fence-sitter, the one with doubts but not the courage to question or assert his/her doubts. Let the UCC do what they want…it does not harm our campaign, it only brings it to the forefront. There is no crime if there is no victim.

By: Offgrid

Offgrid — Tue, 03 Feb 2009 01:43:45 +0000

“A long time ago, the raven looked down from the sky and saw that the people of the world were living in darkness.
The ball of light was kept hidden by a selfish old chief.
So the raven turned himself into a spruce needle and floated on the river where the chief’s daughter came for water.
She drank the spruce needle.
She became pregnant and gave birth to a boy, who was the raven in disguise.
The baby cried and cried until the chief gave him the ball of light to play with.
As soon as he had the light, the raven turned back into himself.
The raven carried the light into the sky.
From then on, we no longer lived in darkness.”

By: Trudy

Trudy — Mon, 02 Feb 2009 23:04:40 +0000

Pish Posh,,,whether there is a God or not, it would seem that alot of people, religious or not are spending alot of valuable time on this issue…I can understand the part of the slogan that says, live your life…I like that…but then again I think that’s what most of us do everyday anyways…lets be realistic, not everyone is created equal when it comes to intelligence. Some are brillant, some are average and then some are “unfortunate” as my daughter would say…:)

Don’t expect all people to understand or care about the validity of the slogan,,,either slogan….they are busy living their lives…

I’ve pondering the meaning of life myself and being an “average” person of average thinking capability I feel that I can think about it, question it, and spend time talking about it but ultimately I would like to know the answer to, why are we here…?

By: Devon

Devon — Mon, 02 Feb 2009 16:57:19 +0000

Richard, I do agree that there are advantages to letting the UCC’s adds, it would be unfair to say we were attacking them, they are the ones who copied the atheist bus add.

By: pwl

pwl — Mon, 02 Feb 2009 16:43:28 +0000

Dialogue is the goal? That’s a bit lame. I have dialog with the Delusional Belief Stricken all the time. Not many of them have changed.

Building a political base would be a better goal to ensure that the bible, the equally mystical queen, and all other non-rational nonsense are removed from Canadian Government.

Separation of State and Crutch is most important.

By: Richard

Richard — Mon, 02 Feb 2009 15:51:58 +0000

Don’t go after the UCC…that would defeat one of the purposes of the campaign…dialogue! Whether the dialogue happens verbally or on the side of buses, it is still dialogue. People who see either sign will be forced to think about it.

At the same time, as I stated in a previous post on another thread, it defeats McVety’s complaint about the atheist ad being an attack. His compliant won’t fly because it uses the same format and wording…Any complaint would have to be directed at both campaigns. However, if we complain on the grounds of copyright infringement…we’ll truly be seen as attacking religion and freedom of expression. We cannot allow that to happen.