The opposite of belief isn't disbelief.
Disbelief is a quaint starry-eyed quality usually prefixed by the word "utter" which adds even more charm, and is rather a nice word in itself. It might easily, for example, describe a child's eyes the first time they saw Frozen.
'People' would have the opposite of belief to be something actually very negative. So disbelief doesn't cut muster.
The people I'm talking about of course are those who want to have their minds closed by belief. Locked in infinite walls of lead. Let's call them believers. You don't hear so much from them nowadays since the argument was convincingly won and the Pope started punching people on planes, but nevertheless, bear with me.
The believers would not wish to face disbelief. Because disbelief is too strong a concept. It's too "aghast" at what you are thinking. So much so that really only pity can follow.
The believers would prefer to face "non-believers". Because they can define them in that way by looking down on them. They can give them a face. Let's say, oh I don't know, Thomas's for example. And then they have an off-the-peg script ready to go that their rigid brains can relay.
The problem is that this isn't a seesaw. At least not a balanced one with the fulcrum in the middle.
If you want to believe in supernatural fairies, gods, unicorns and celestial teapots, then you are very much going to be on a 1% seesaw. And you are on the shitty end.
You are very much not going to like the fact that the burden of proof is very much on you.
Very much.
No, you're not going to like that at all. So you'd need to change the rules so that you can look down on other people and reassure yourself so you can feel that your argument is something other than clinically deluded. And that there must be something wrong with "them".
But the open-minded people with whom you have such a problem are.. nice.
They are doing God's work.
Allahu akbar.
Disbelief is a quaint starry-eyed quality usually prefixed by the word "utter" which adds even more charm, and is rather a nice word in itself. It might easily, for example, describe a child's eyes the first time they saw Frozen.
'People' would have the opposite of belief to be something actually very negative. So disbelief doesn't cut muster.
The people I'm talking about of course are those who want to have their minds closed by belief. Locked in infinite walls of lead. Let's call them believers. You don't hear so much from them nowadays since the argument was convincingly won and the Pope started punching people on planes, but nevertheless, bear with me.
The believers would not wish to face disbelief. Because disbelief is too strong a concept. It's too "aghast" at what you are thinking. So much so that really only pity can follow.
The believers would prefer to face "non-believers". Because they can define them in that way by looking down on them. They can give them a face. Let's say, oh I don't know, Thomas's for example. And then they have an off-the-peg script ready to go that their rigid brains can relay.
The problem is that this isn't a seesaw. At least not a balanced one with the fulcrum in the middle.
If you want to believe in supernatural fairies, gods, unicorns and celestial teapots, then you are very much going to be on a 1% seesaw. And you are on the shitty end.
You are very much not going to like the fact that the burden of proof is very much on you.
Very much.
No, you're not going to like that at all. So you'd need to change the rules so that you can look down on other people and reassure yourself so you can feel that your argument is something other than clinically deluded. And that there must be something wrong with "them".
But the open-minded people with whom you have such a problem are.. nice.
They're nice people.
A bit speccy and greasy perhaps but they don't give you disbelief. Even if they had pity they would probably be kind enough not to tell you in case it upset you. Unless you really wound them up of course. Actually you might wish to take a note from that.
They are kindly, harmless, rational clear-thinkers who subscribe to scientific method and the endeavour of human observation.
Nerds!
Yes, they might wear black T-shirts, claim to like bands from the 70s, watch too many show starring the dead, sport unfashionably lanky hair and generally be a bit socially awkward. But they are good people.
They are people for whom suspending disbelief is their stock in trade. Being open-minded is how they do "being". That's why they own the middle ground, which by any measure, gives them 99% of the seesaw. And this is the same middle ground that the religious delusion probably frames as Limbo or Purgatory or some equally harmful metaphor.
They own the seesaw and offer you kindness.
And you offer them a shitload of damnation.
And still the disbelief that you have more than earned, they suspend.
They are kindly, harmless, rational clear-thinkers who subscribe to scientific method and the endeavour of human observation.
Nerds!
Yes, they might wear black T-shirts, claim to like bands from the 70s, watch too many show starring the dead, sport unfashionably lanky hair and generally be a bit socially awkward. But they are good people.
They are people for whom suspending disbelief is their stock in trade. Being open-minded is how they do "being". That's why they own the middle ground, which by any measure, gives them 99% of the seesaw. And this is the same middle ground that the religious delusion probably frames as Limbo or Purgatory or some equally harmful metaphor.
They own the seesaw and offer you kindness.
And you offer them a shitload of damnation.
And still the disbelief that you have more than earned, they suspend.
And if you fancied a game of Risk or Carcasonne, they wouldn't even bring it up.
They are doing God's work.
Allahu akbar.
