Tangible ways a nonbeliver can not help as much as a believer

[StrawberryJam]

Reminder:

Debating Evolution is Banned.

We do not have to debate Evolution. That is why it is banned. There is no debate.

 

[Nixbits]

Ben Quincy:

Reminder: Debating Evolution is Banned.

What on earth prompted that intervention? Am I missing something? As far as I can tell the debate never even veered in the direction of evolution. Ben’s post seems to be a complete non sequitur.

 

[ThinkingSapien]

What on earth prompted that intervention? Am I missing something? As far as I can tell the debate never even veered in the direction of evolution. Ben’s post seems to be a complete non sequitur.

It’s just a warning. I think the picture of Dawkins s suggested an increased likelihood of a discussion of the big-E and the warning preemptively lowers that chance.

Pardon my mistakes. Sent from my mobile device.

 

[Mount_Carmel]

There are things that both religious and non-religious people say and do that seem to provide some amount of comfort. I mention both dispositions because the utterance of such a phrase does not imply that the speaker is religious, not is is such a phrase something that is not available to non-religious people. Checking in on a person, doing other things for the person to reduce their burdens and responsibilities, or even telling the person that you are thinking about them can have some comforting impact. Though the question earlier was specifically about providing hope.

There is a talk available on YouTube by Prof. John Lennox that mentions a mega collective survey that found belief in God to be by and large significantly more therapeutic in mind and body when compared to atheism

This talk he made to the students of Hong Kong University mentions the survey, and lists the benefits found in being a believer.

You are warned that the whole talk is over one and a half hours long, but I found it all very riveting and moving.

youtu.be/srSLd6ZeR54

 

[StrawberryJam]

There is a talk available on YouTube by Prof. John Lennox that mentions a mega collective survey that found belief in God to be by and large significantly more therapeutic in mind and body when compared to atheism

This talk he made to the students of Hong Kong University mentions the survey, and lists the benefits found in being a believer.

You are warned that the whole talk is over one and a half hours long, but I found it all very riveting and moving.

youtu.be/srSLd6ZeR54

This is a hijack of my thread. I never asked anyone to come up with ways things are perceived to be therapeutic in mind and body, but thank you for the hijack.

The thread itself was clear, it took a long time for anyone to reply to it, and to this date no one has offered a way that a nonbeliever can not help as much as a believer in a tangible way.
The challenge continues.

 

[tonyrey]

Let’s consider what these ways may be.

A non-believer cannot console or give hope to others when a person they love has died or has an incurable disease or has been treated unjustly. They cannot console lonely persons who have no one to love them and are convinced no one loves them. They cannot give depressed and suicidal people a good reason why we are alive and have a lot to live for. They cannot justify belief in human rights or the principles of liberty, equality and fraternity. As Lear said, nothing shall come of nothing…

 

[tonyrey]

Huh? Atheism isn’t a “world view”. (never mind being a “brutal” one)
It is merely not believing a god exists. After that, two Atheists can differ in their views on politics, religion, science, biology, morals, ethics, etc, to the extreme.
There is no set belief or doctrine or rules to being an Atheist.

People don’t kill over Atheism.
Religion, on the other hand–yes.

.

How about Marxists who have persecuted and slaughtered millions of people?

 

[ThinkingSapien]

A non-believer cannot console or give hope to others when a person they love has died or has an incurable disease or has been treated unjustly. …] They cannot give depressed and suicidal people a good reason why we are alive and have a lot to live for. …]

This is very untrue. I say that as a close friend of a terminally I’ll friend that has considered suicide, and as a person that has had to convince others of better physical health not to kill themselves.

 

[inocente]

This is very untrue. I say that as a close friend of a terminally I’ll friend that has considered suicide, and as a person that has had to convince others of better physical health not to kill themselves.

I’d tend to agree. Having looked a lot at depression, grief and death, for personal reasons, there is no single magic answer, it depends on who is asking.

I think Wittgenstein has a pretty darned good non-religious answer - “Death is not an event in life: we do not live to experience death. If we take eternity to mean not infinite temporal duration but timelessness, then eternal life belongs to those who live in the present”.

Meaning that if we no longer exist after we die, we won’t be aware of it, because we won’t be there to know, so it’s irrational to fear it. And we will always still be there in the eternal now. c.f. “For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also … Therefore do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about itself. Each day has enough trouble of its own” - Matt 6.

 

[fhansen]

I’d tend to agree. Having looked a lot at depression, grief and death, for personal reasons, there is no single magic answer, it depends on who is asking.

I think Wittgenstein has a pretty darned good non-religious answer - “Death is not an event in life: we do not live to experience death. If we take eternity to mean not infinite temporal duration but timelessness, then eternal life belongs to those who live in the present”.

Meaning that if we no longer exist after we die, we won’t be aware of it, because we won’t be there to know, so it’s irrational to fear it. And we will always still be there in the eternal now. c.f. “For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also … Therefore do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about itself. Each day has enough trouble of its own” - Matt 6.

Kind of hard to offer much consolation with, “Don’t worry about your loved one, they may or may not exist anymore.”

 

[tonyrey]

A non-believer cannot console or give hope to others when a person they love has died or has an incurable disease or has been treated unjustly. …] They cannot give depressed and suicidal people a good reason why we are alive and have a lot to live for. …]

It remains a fact that a non-believer** cannot console or give hope to others** when a person they love has died or has an incurable disease or has been treated unjustly. It doesn’t follow that believers can** always** give suicidal people who are in unremitting pain a good reason why they have a lot to live for.

 

[tonyrey]

Kind of hard to offer much consolation with, “Don’t worry about your loved one, they may or may not exist anymore.”

It would be far better to give them hope rather than be negative. They have everything to gain and nothing to lose by being optimistic.

 

[fhansen]

It would be far better to give them hope rather than be negative. They have everything to gain and nothing to lose by being optimistic.

Yes, but faith is much more than optimism, of course.

 

[ThinkingSapien]

It remains a fact that a non-believer** cannot console or give hope to others**

Well, no, that’s not a fact. It may be your expectation or your belief but not a fact.

It doesn’t follow that believers can** always** give suicidal people who are in unremitting pain a good reason why they have a lot to live for.

You are arguing against a stance that no one has taken. Whether religious or not there is no guarantee that any one can “always” convince someone to go on living. However, your earlier assertion that that a non-religious person cannot do this (that this is outside of their capabilities, that it is impossible for for them to do this) remains false.

 

[tonyrey]

Well, no, that’s not a fact. It may be your expectation or your belief but not a fact.

How can a non-believer console - and give hope to - a person who is going to die or who has lost a loved one?

You are arguing against a stance that no one has taken. Whether religious or not there is no guarantee that any one can “always” convince someone to go on living. However, your earlier assertion that that a non-religious person cannot do this (that this is outside of their capabilities, that it is impossible for for them to do this) remains false.

Precisely how can a non-believer** console - or give hope to -** a person whose loved one has died or who has an incurable disease or has been treated unjustly?

 

[ThinkingSapien]

How can a non-believer console - and give hope to - a person who is going to die or who has lost a loved one?
Precisely how can a non-believer** console - or give hope to -** a person whose loved one has died or who has an incurable disease or has been treated unjustly?

With respect the consoling or comforting, your request for a “precise” answer after innocent and I have already told you there’s no magic bullet seems a bit odd. If I had told you that there’s no one size of pants that fits all people would you then ask me for the precise measurements that a left handed tailor would use to make a pair of pants that would fit everyone? In the absence of such measurements would you conclude that it is not within the capabilities of left tailor’s to make pants? Does this say anything about the capabilities of right-handed or ambidextrous tailors? Let me explicitly say there is not a precise solution of universal effectiveness to be used for what are now unidentified people. You can try the solutions that come to mind or that are suggested but please be prepared to change your strategy.

If you were to ask for a pair of pants that fits a vital detail would be information about the person (or people) for which the pants are to be made. This information would be needed irrespective of the dominant hand of the tailor. If you are trying to console a person that is in depression then it would help to know about the person. Pants made for one person might not fit another. An approach effective for treating one person’s emotional turmoil might not be effective in treating another. There’s a reason that the approach of mental health specialist often includes dialog instead of monologues.

With respect to hope, let’s make sure that we are talking about the same thing. Among other usages it is used to indicate that one expects the conditions that are causing some negative emotional or physical state to diminish or go away. It is also used to refer to giving a person a more positive emotional disposition even in the presence of unchanging or worsening conditions.

In the case of the present conditions diminishing or going away, depending on the condition contributing to such an expectation could be harmful. It can influence someone’s behaviour and encourage the person to not address current conditions. Sometimes conditions don’t improved. The incurable disease not only might not get better but might get compounded with other conditions. The loved one passed away and buried won’t be seen walking around again among the living. I usually don’t want to engage in giving someone false hope.

Acknowledgement and acceptance of a situation doesn’t mean that one’s permanently and persistently sad. Though it does pose a situation against which constant work might be needed. It is going to require effort from the person going through the bad situation and may need some ongoing effort from the person that is trying to help for a period of time that may be longer than a single conversation. There may be days when the absence of that loved one is felt much stronger than others, that the pain and discomfort of the disease is more intense, or feelings about embracing that ones self will most likely not be mobile enough or even alive to experience and share future, or the realization that the best times with an irreplaceable loved one are only in the past. As conditions change your approach might need to evolve too and vary away from some precise method that someone has suggested. Whether a person’s pain is emotional or physical the pathway to improvement might involve medication (which can also have varying impact on people). For the person that has lost a loved one if there’s someone in their life trying to console them then that may mean there’s someone in their life that possibly still cares about them. Friends and loved ones can play an important role in helping the person.

Just as various approaches used by tailor’s making pants are not dependent on if she is left handed or right handed what I’ve said above isn’t dependent on whether the people helping are religious or non-religious. If a person is in need of emotional support I wouldn’t automatically feel that one can’t be part of a helping approach based on whether or not the person describes them self a religious.

I hope that you don’t equate the absence of a universally effective solution to mean that a non-religious person can never contribute to helping a person depressed or suicidal. I’ve got my own approaches that I have taken with people that have considered killing themselves and that I use with someone that I think will die as a consequence of her current medical condition. At times this has involved consulting mental health professionals. The people are still among the living today. While I believe my approaches to have been effective for them I don’t assume it will be helpful for every one. None of us has a universally effective precise answer.

BTW: I don’t know whether or not you’ve dealt with helping a depressed or suicidal person. If you’ve haven’t please be aware that after talking the person “off the ledge” that the person might not be out of danger; Continued involvement may be needed to ensure the person doesn’t climb back up on the ledge when things get emotionally difficult again.

 

[tonyrey]

With respect the consoling or comforting, your request for a “precise” answer after innocent and I have already told you there’s no magic bullet seems a bit odd. If I had told you that there’s no one size of pants that fits all people would you then ask me for the precise measurements that a left handed tailor would use to make a pair of pants that would fit everyone? Let me explicitly say there is not a precise solution of universal effectiveness to be used for what are now unidentified people. You can try the solutions that come to mind or that are suggested but please be prepared to change your strategy…

With respect to hope, let’s make sure that we are talking about the same thing. Among other usages it is used to indicate that one expects the conditions that are causing some negative emotional or physical state to diminish or go away. It is also used to refer to giving a person a more positive emotional disposition even in the presence of unchanging or worsening conditions.

In the case of the present conditions diminishing or going away, depending on the condition contributing to such an expectation could be harmful. It can influence someone’s behaviour and encourage the person to not address current conditions. Sometimes conditions don’t improved. The incurable disease not only might not get better but might get compounded with other conditions. The loved one passed away and buried won’t be seen walking around again among the living. I usually don’t want to engage in giving someone false hope.

Acknowledgement and acceptance of a situation doesn’t mean that one’s permanently and persistently sad. Though it does pose a situation against which constant work might be needed. It is going to require effort from the person going through the bad situation and may need some ongoing effort from the person that is trying to help for a period of time that may be longer than a single conversation. There may be days when the absence of that loved one is felt much stronger than others, that the pain and discomfort of the disease is more intense, or feelings about embracing that ones self will most likely not be mobile enough or even alive to experience and share future, or the realization that the best times with an irreplaceable loved one are only in the past. As conditions change your approach might need to evolve too and vary away from some precise method that someone has suggested. Whether a person’s pain is emotional or physical the pathway to improvement might involve medication (which can also have varying impact on people). For the person that has lost a loved one if there’s someone in their life trying to console them then that may mean there’s someone in their life that possibly still cares about them. Friends and loved ones can play an important role in helping the person.

Just as various approaches used by tailor’s making pants are not dependent on if she is left handed or right handed what I’ve said above isn’t dependent on whether the people helping are religious or non-religious. If a person is in need of emotional support I wouldn’t automatically feel that one can’t be part of a helping approach based on whether or not the person describes them self a religious.

I hope that you don’t equate the absence of a universally effective solution to mean that a non-religious person can never contribute to helping a person depressed or suicidal. I’ve got my own approaches that I have taken with people that have considered killing themselves and that I use with someone that I think will die as a consequence of her current medical condition. At times this has involved consulting mental health professionals. The people are still among the living today. While I believe my approaches to have been effective for them I don’t assume it will be helpful for every one. None of us has a universally effective precise answer.

BTW: I don’t know whether or not you’ve dealt with helping a depressed or suicidal person. If you’ve haven’t please be aware that after talking the person “off the ledge” that the person might not be out of danger; Continued involvement may be needed to ensure the person doesn’t climb back up on the ledge when things get emotionally difficult again.

I succeeded in keeping a suicidal woman alive for five months but unwisely trusted a doctor’s judgment that she was manipulating me, took her home and the next day she killed herself by walking along a railway track. It taught me that reasoning alone is not enough to help people but it plays a vital role in giving them hope and a desire to stay alive. She rarely spoke but one day she said “No one loves me.” I replied “What about your son?” (who was only twelve). She didn’t say anything but I’m sure that thought helped to sustain her in her deep depression.

Her main problem was that she was a Catholic who had lost her faith. So even though she said very little I talked a lot about the purpose of life and how we are created to love and be loved, reasons an unbeliever couldn’t have given her. Even though I failed in the end at least she spent the Christmas holidays with her son when all her friends had written her off as a hopeless case. She was gradually recovering from her depression but the odds were against me because I also had to care for my elderly mother who thought she had lice in her hair and drove her out of the house. I explained that Carol kept scratching her head because she was mentally disturbed but to no avail. One thing I do know is that I would have had great difficulty in helping her if I didn’t have any firm beliefs about the purpose of life rather than explain why it doesn’t make sense to think there is no reason why we exist - and at the very least we should have an open mind. Then we are no longer trapped in a box of our own making. Life ceases to be boring and becomes much more mysterious, fascinating and precious.

 

[inocente]

Kind of hard to offer much consolation with, “Don’t worry about your loved one, they may or may not exist anymore.”

Bereavement contains sadness for the loved one. If the loved one was in pain or otherwise had very poor quality of life (loss of dignity, etc.) then the most important consolation is to believe with absolute certainty that they are out of it now. This is more difficult for someone who believes in ghosts (perhaps the loved one can’t rest for suffering), or in hell (perhaps the loved one is burning for all eternity) or even in heaven (perhaps they still suffer from the memory of suffering).

Bereavement also contains sadness for yourself, because you lost a loved one. I’ve met people who have never recovered from a loss simply because they still “talk” to their loved one (they always look up, the loved one is always looking down on them) and so have never been able to move on.

That’s not to say Wittgenstein or Matthew would be right for everyone. Bereavement is a very complicated thing, no two people grieve in the same way, and I think if you want to help someone through it, you need to empathize with them, and with honesty do what is best for them as an individual, rather than just offer them platitudes or a canned version of your own beliefs.

 

[inocente]

I succeeded in keeping a suicidal woman alive for five months but unwisely trusted a doctor’s judgment that she was manipulating me, took her home and the next day she killed herself by walking along a railway track. It taught me that reasoning alone is not enough to help people but it plays a vital role in giving them hope and a desire to stay alive. She rarely spoke but one day she said “No one loves me.” I replied “What about your son?” (who was only twelve). She didn’t say anything but I’m sure that thought helped to sustain her in her deep depression.

Her main problem was that she was a Catholic who had lost her faith. So even though she said very little I talked a lot about the purpose of life and how we are created to love and be loved, reasons an unbeliever couldn’t have given her. Even though I failed in the end at least she spent the Christmas holidays with her son when all her friends had written her off as a hopeless case. She was gradually recovering from her depression but the odds were against me because I also had to care for my elderly mother who thought she had lice in her hair and drove her out of the house. I explained that Carol kept scratching her head because she was mentally disturbed but to no avail. One thing I do know is that I would have had great difficulty in helping her if I didn’t have any firm beliefs about the purpose of life rather than explain why it doesn’t make sense to think there is no reason why we exist - and at the very least we should have an open mind. Then we are no longer trapped in a box of our own making. Life ceases to be boring and becomes much more mysterious, fascinating and precious.

Tony, if you ever beat yourself up about it, don’t. You did your best and I think her main problem wasn’t so much that she was a lapsed Catholic, but that she was clinically ill with an illness which causes the brain to mis-function, and as a result despite everyone’s best efforts is sometimes a fatal illness.

 

[tonyrey]

Tony, if you ever beat yourself up about it, don’t. You did your best and I think her main problem wasn’t so much that she was a lapsed Catholic, but that she was clinically ill with an illness which causes the brain to mis-function, and as a result despite everyone’s best efforts is sometimes a fatal illness.

I did blame myself for being a fool who forgot Carol had asked me to help her kill herself a few hours earlier but that evening she was curled up on a settee in a friend’s flat drinking whisky as if she didn’t have a care in the world. I have good reasons to believe she was not clinically ill but possessed. For one thing she was terrified of being on her own and followed me everywhere like a lost dog - even to Mass on Sundays which she hated, with tears streaming down her cheeks all the time she was in church. If she had really wanted to kill herself she could have easily slipped out of the house and walked in front of a bus.

One day she looked at me with so much hatred in her eyes I have never forgotten it. I’m not superstitious in the slightest but I felt I was in the presence of sheer evil. It is the only time in my life I have ever felt so afraid - not even when I was being mugged by a thug. There are other reasons I believe she wasn’t responsible, her son being one of them. Why didn’t she take an overdose rather than choose such a terrible way to die?

I don’t believe she did it of her own free will. She was definitely obsessed but lucid and down to earth in every other respect. Even though I often questioned her she wouldn’t or couldn’t tell me why she wanted to die. The question remains: “What caused her to walk along the track with a smile on her face?” Her son, her friend and I all phoned her in the morning on that fatal day but there was absolute silence at the other end, no sound in the room whatsoever. The telephone company told me the next day there was no fault in the line or the phone…