I think you might be over estimating the IQ of the average JWs in the 90s. I don't think average was ever above 100 for them... I think the prevalence of really obviously unintelligent people in the org was my very first concern about the religion.
OneEyedJoe
JoinedPosts by OneEyedJoe
-
25
The Internet Proves JWs Are a Joke Now
by jw07 ini'm a born in, born in the 1980s and old enough to remember studying beefy (albeit full of crap) material like the the evolution book and revelation book (which we studied over and over and over and over).
books and brochures were wordy and chock full of legalistic language explaining away teachings and policies, some explanations slightly above the iq of the average person.. watchtower studies were longer (30 paragraphs sometimes), talks were longer and thus meetings were longer, pioneering was harder (70 hours if i remember correctly), assemblies and conventions were longer, and there were intricate food provisions to feed thousands of people (for a cost of course).. the average jw could recite watchtower propaganda for hours to indoctrinate others or defend their faith.
jws were interested in having meaty discussions at the door and challenging even pastors on doctrinal points.. i know this has been said many times, but the organization has gone through a massive dumbing down.. i can't figure out if it's due to the oblivious nature of the current governing body, a premeditated attempt by them at dumbing down the organization, or just the effects of life becoming easier around the globe due to reliance on technology.. i can only speak on my era, and i know that from the early 90s until around 2004 the organization was allot more doctrine savy.. over the past decade or so i'd say the collective iq of the followers has moved from 105 to 85.. indoctrination and blind belief has allot to do with being prone to be emotionally manipulated, but thinking ability has a say in that too.. social media is a decent gauge of how and what the average person within a certain demographic is thinking, and doing a simple hashtag search on twitter, instagram, or facebook reveals allot about how the current generation of young jws (15-28 or thereabout) are thinking.. many have become self obsessed, internet obsessed, hubris filled and passive, i can see an even bigger decline in growth over the next 5 years.. take a look:.
-
-
-
84
Satan and the demons, ghosts, spirits, fortune tellers. Are they real?
by KateWild ini believe in god.
i don't believe he punishes or rewards people.
so by the same extention i don't believe any spirit beings can communicate with or influence humans.. many who do not believe in god though, have gone to fortune tellers.
-
-
OneEyedJoe
sowhatnow, it sounds like your mother suffered from sleep paralysis:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sleep_paralysis
That phenomena is resonably well understood, and is probably to blame for most experiences of visions and "being held down" that occurs while waking or drifting off to sleep. Definitely nothing supernatural there.
I have to agree with cofty on this, each one of those accounts can be explained with no appeal to the supernatural
-
51
The limits of science.
by Seraphim23 infor a long time i have accepted that when a theist inserts god into some as yet not understood scientific matter, it constitutes a god of the gaps argument.
as a theist myself, the problem with this for me, is that it implies an arbitrary limit on gods ingenuity.
for example, the idea that god created automatic processes to do certain things in nature, and yet with other things the need for a direct hand to either tweak or directly organise!
-
-
OneEyedJoe
Science often does a good job of explaining how. However some of us also want to know "why".
For the types of "why" questions that I suspect you're talking about (why is the universe here, etc) science has an answer. The answer to "why did x happen" is "because x can happen." Just because you find it unsatisfying doesn't invalidate the answer.
-
51
The limits of science.
by Seraphim23 infor a long time i have accepted that when a theist inserts god into some as yet not understood scientific matter, it constitutes a god of the gaps argument.
as a theist myself, the problem with this for me, is that it implies an arbitrary limit on gods ingenuity.
for example, the idea that god created automatic processes to do certain things in nature, and yet with other things the need for a direct hand to either tweak or directly organise!
-
-
OneEyedJoe
Lets not overextend the metaphore. The point is, one is solid and proven, the other resides only in a land of fantasy and wishful thinking.
There will always be some problems that are mathematically impossible to solve, but barring that, I don't think there's any practical benefit to debating the limits of science, since we've certainly not reached them, and it doesn't seem likely to happen in our grand children's lifetime (or, as defined by the WTS, in 'this generation'). Asserting that god must exist simply because someone's hypothesized a limit to what science can review is asinine.
-
51
The limits of science.
by Seraphim23 infor a long time i have accepted that when a theist inserts god into some as yet not understood scientific matter, it constitutes a god of the gaps argument.
as a theist myself, the problem with this for me, is that it implies an arbitrary limit on gods ingenuity.
for example, the idea that god created automatic processes to do certain things in nature, and yet with other things the need for a direct hand to either tweak or directly organise!
-
-
OneEyedJoe
Thank you, but I'm happy with my ladder. Turns out it's an extension ladder that's getting taller all the time!
-
51
The limits of science.
by Seraphim23 infor a long time i have accepted that when a theist inserts god into some as yet not understood scientific matter, it constitutes a god of the gaps argument.
as a theist myself, the problem with this for me, is that it implies an arbitrary limit on gods ingenuity.
for example, the idea that god created automatic processes to do certain things in nature, and yet with other things the need for a direct hand to either tweak or directly organise!
-
-
OneEyedJoe
your stance is akin to someone who's shopping for a ladder, and keeps complaining that they might one day live in a house that's got a lightbulb that would still be out of reach while on any particular ladder. They then go off in search of a magic carpet that can fly you to any height instead.
Many theists want to see their religion as compatible with science and complain when there appears to be some sort of 'religion vs science' debate. The problem is, though, that religion is the polar opposite of science. Science presents evidence and draws conclusions, whereas religion relies on blind faith.
In short, I wish you the best of luck with your search for a magic carpet.
-
51
The limits of science.
by Seraphim23 infor a long time i have accepted that when a theist inserts god into some as yet not understood scientific matter, it constitutes a god of the gaps argument.
as a theist myself, the problem with this for me, is that it implies an arbitrary limit on gods ingenuity.
for example, the idea that god created automatic processes to do certain things in nature, and yet with other things the need for a direct hand to either tweak or directly organise!
-
-
OneEyedJoe
Well, science may have it's flaws, but what's religion done for us lately? Nothing that I can put my finger on aside from making it a little easier to scare kids into behaving. Meanwhile science has given us practically every improvement in our standard of living for the past several centuries. That's not a preconcieved notion, it's an evaluation of the merits of science and religion.
-
84
Satan and the demons, ghosts, spirits, fortune tellers. Are they real?
by KateWild ini believe in god.
i don't believe he punishes or rewards people.
so by the same extention i don't believe any spirit beings can communicate with or influence humans.. many who do not believe in god though, have gone to fortune tellers.
-
-
OneEyedJoe
Its a bit like UFO/Alien sightings, which always seem to have an up-tick when people start drinking.
There's also a number of relatively strange physical phenomena that, if you didn't know about them, they could cause you to present them as 'proof' of sprits. For example, when in the presence of low frequency sound waves (inaudible for humans) that match the resonance of the human eye, it can often cause you to see ghostly figures that pop in and out of your periphrial vision. This has been confirmed as the cause of a number of 'haunted' buildings.
Fortune tellers are just con artists taking advantage of the human weakness called confirmation bias, or in some cases, they do lots of prior research on clients in order to appear as though they posses supernatural knowledge. There's been so many examples of these folks being debunked that I feel like your inclusion of them in your question may indicate that you're attempting to troll us a bit. Just because someone doesn't believe in god, doesn't mean that their mentally acute and able to recognize when someone is taking advantage of them and manipulating them.
-
51
The limits of science.
by Seraphim23 infor a long time i have accepted that when a theist inserts god into some as yet not understood scientific matter, it constitutes a god of the gaps argument.
as a theist myself, the problem with this for me, is that it implies an arbitrary limit on gods ingenuity.
for example, the idea that god created automatic processes to do certain things in nature, and yet with other things the need for a direct hand to either tweak or directly organise!
-
-
OneEyedJoe
In cosmology, many common theories require something to have existed prior to the big bang. In theology, the requirement prior to the universe is to have a sentient, powerful god that's always existed. In cosmology, the pre-universe state is typically a relatively simple environment. Depending on the theory, it could be essentially nothingness, or it could be large blobs (think of a soap bubble) floating around in 11 dimmensional space. Whatever the theory, though, you must agree that it seems more likely than a sentient, all-powerful being who's just 'always existed.'
Interestingly (and couther-intuitively) enough, our universe appears to be made up of a net sum of zero energy. This means that it can essentially spring from 'nothing.' There will likely always be questions to be answered by science, but saying that there are questions that science will never be able to answer is a bit pessimistic considering all the so-called unexplainable things that now are well-understood.
If you want to learn about science, don't only watch you-tube videos that seem to confirm your preconcieved notions, challenge yourself and challenge your confirmation bias. However, if you wish to remain a theist, best not look too deep.
-
32
Have you ever been called for Jury Duty? before or after registering to vote?
by EndofMysteries ini've never been called for jury duty and i'm not yet registered to vote, although i'm hoping to get that done this month.
i know someone who within a few months of registering to vote was called for jury duty.
i've read some articles that said voter records 'used' to be used to call on people but that was a thing of the past.
-
-
OneEyedJoe
My sister had to do jury duty and (like any good JW) had never registered to vote.