CreateDebate


Debate Info

15
26
I agree I disagree
Debate Score:41
Arguments:31
Total Votes:44
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 I agree (12)
 
 I disagree (17)

Debate Creator

atypican(4875) pic



Lack of faith is the primary cause of laziness and akrasia

I agree

Side Score: 15
VS.

I disagree

Side Score: 26
No arguments found. Add one!
3 points

No, there is no reason to believe that.

Side: I disagree
atypican(4875) Disputed
1 point

More truthfully....you aren't aware of a reason to believe it.

Side: I agree
MuckaMcCaw(1970) Disputed
3 points

And so your reasoning for this proposition is?

EDIT: Also, please define faith

Side: I disagree
Cartman(18192) Disputed
2 points

When there isn't a reason to believe it I can't find one.

Side: I disagree
3 points

Faith is a quality that applies to the rational, discoursive mind, laziness applies to the more fundamental, emotional parts of mind.

I can be a totally imperishable belief that eating healthy and working out will bring me more energy. Despite desiring having a surplus of energy, it can still be hard to motivate myself. Despite the that I know for a fact how working out affects me positively, I still have to convince myself to work out; i.e. there's still room for laziness despite having faith in an idea.

So presence of faith and presence of laziness is compatible as far as I can see. It's much harder to say if lack of faith is the primary cause of laziness. Still, I don't think so. I can be strongly motivated to eating tasty food in the absence of any discoursive thought telling me I should eat tasty food. That is, in the total absence of faith I can be extremely motivated regardless. So no, I don't think lack of faith is the primary cause of laziness.

Side: I disagree
atypican(4875) Disputed
2 points

laziness applies to the more fundamental, emotional parts of mind.

I agree with that. In emotionally motivated laziness, we tend to be focused on attaining what can surely be attained almost immediately. We rationalize.."why should I patiently toil for what I might or might not get, when there are things immediately gratifying I can do right now?" Think of the long term goals you would drop in a heartbeat if you found out you had only three days left to live. The primary reason that you don't drop those goals, is I contend because you have a large enough measure of faith in your ability to achieve them.

I can be a totally imperishable belief that eating healthy and working out will bring me more energy. Despite desiring having a surplus of energy, it can still be hard to motivate myself. Despite the that I know for a fact how working out affects me positively, I still have to convince myself to work out.

What if you were certain that you would die tomorrow unless you ate a healthy meal tonight? I hold that if you were sure enough, you would do everything in your power to ingest the healthiest meal you could.

i.e. there's still room for laziness despite having faith in an idea.

I agree with that too

So presence of faith and presence of laziness is compatible as far as I can see.

Where one is great, the other is small as I see it.

It's much harder to say if lack of faith is the primary cause of laziness. Still, I don't think so.

Imagine if I left two trails of money both 10 miles long:

Trail #1 has nothing but pennies each a thousand feet apart with the final pot at the end containing a million bucks

Trail #2 has various bills only 30 feet apart with the balance of the million bucks at the end.

Which trail would be more likely for someone to give up on? More importantly, Why?

I can be strongly motivated to eating tasty food in the absence of any discoursive thought telling me I should eat tasty food. That is, in the total absence of faith I can be extremely motivated regardless.

If you had no faith that the food available was tasty, even if you were strongly motivated to eat tasty food you wouldn't.

So no, I don't think lack of faith is the primary cause of laziness.

How about now?

Side: I agree
1 point

Where one is great, the other is small as I see it.

I have noticed this as well. I think you have a valid point, though I think your argument could use some clarity.

I think where people get spurned is the assumption that you are alluding to some sort of importance in having faith in god specifically. Not your fault, but some clarity might be beneficial in the future.

If it is your intention to eventually use such a correlation to justify strong faith in god, I’m afraid I would have to disagree with you on that point. There are different types of faith.

Side: I agree
1 point

Great analysis. I think you nailed it.

Side: I disagree

I dislike pseudo-intellect -_-

Side: I disagree
atypican(4875) Disputed
1 point

I looked through your waterfall and I couldn't help but notice how incisive and witty you are. I was struck by the depth with which you engage others in conversation. You are in a whole different class than me, and it would only make me look silly to try debating you. Please do me a favor though if you would, and only post to my debates if you DO find the topic interesting.

Side: I agree
1 point

Of course not. Not everybody is a "believer". I think that is a very judgmental statement.

Side: I disagree
atypican(4875) Disputed
1 point

For the sake of argument I will grant...Not everybody is a "believer".

Those who are not believers in their ability to effect positive change, tend to be depressed or at least lazy.

Side: I agree
Remy(9) Disputed
1 point

What kind of faith are we talking about? Faith in god? Or faith in ourselves?

Side: I disagree

I would argue that if this were the case, we'd see a markedly lower instance of laziness and akrasia amongst the religious as compared to the general population. To be fair, I can't back that with data- only my own personal observations which are somewhat limited. That said, my personal observations strongly suggest that there are plenty of lazy, akratic theists.

One could always argue that lazy, akratic theists are lacking in faith themselves as compared to their more industrious compatriots, but faith would seem to be a difficult thing to quantify, and that would also seem to have shades of One True Scotsman...

On the other hand, One could also argue that faith itself, while maybe not implicitly, in practice often represents intellectual laziness as well. This is by no means limited to faith in a deity.

Side: I disagree
atypican(4875) Disputed
1 point

I would argue that if this were the case, we'd see a markedly lower instance of laziness and akrasia amongst the religious as compared to the general population.

That might be convincing to someone who didn't consider practically everyone more or less religious. I think a person is more or less religious based on how earnestly their efforts are to be true to the best (highest) understanding they are aware of. Those beliefs one is least likely to change, those value system beliefs....those are religious beliefs.

To be fair, I can't back that with data- only my own personal observations which are somewhat limited. That said, my personal observations strongly suggest that there are plenty of lazy, akratic theists.

If that's the standard you're going to set, I'm going to one up you and pull out my secret weapon, The "RI Level" Scale. It was developed utilizing rigorous scientific experimentation and analysis....lol....Don't take the words in brackets absolutely literally...if you catch my drift :)

1. Very religious (Have high hopes for the future, even beyond personal death)

2. More religious (takes life seriously, tends to find success)

3. Moderately religious (back and forth from manic to depressed)

4. Less religious (sloppy and lazy, to mean and nasty, cynical at best)

5. Non religious (The seriously mentally ill, and of course the walking dead)

You aren't going to tell me you are a number 5 are you ?

One could always argue that lazy, akratic theists are lacking in faith themselves as compared to their more industrious compatriots, but faith would seem to be a difficult thing to quantify, and that would also seem to have shades of One True Scotsman...

You know I don't think whether someone is theist or not makes any difference when it comes to how much religious faith someone has. Either you look at the world and are inspired to pursue an imagined good, or you have a terrible imagination.

On the other hand, One could also argue that faith itself, while maybe not implicitly, in practice often represents intellectual laziness as well. This is by no means limited to faith in a deity.

I guess I should have typed "good faith" it in the DD !

:)

Side: I agree
1 point

That might be convincing to someone who didn't consider practically everyone more or less religious. I think a person is more or less religious based on how earnestly their efforts are to be true to the best (highest) understanding they are aware of. Those beliefs one is least likely to change, those value system beliefs....those are religious beliefs.

If we're using such a loose definition of 'religion,' doesn't it follow that the definition of 'faith' is too loose to draw such conclusions from?

If that's the standard you're going to set, I'm going to one up you and pull out my secret weapon, The "RI Level" Scale. It was developed utilizing rigorous scientific experimentation and analysis....lol....Don't take the words in brackets absolutely literally...if you catch my drift :)

1. Very religious (Have high hopes for the future, even beyond personal death)

2. More religious (takes life seriously, tends to find success)

3. Moderately religious (back and forth from manic to depressed)

4. Less religious (sloppy and lazy, to mean and nasty, cynical at best)

5. Non religious (The seriously mentally ill, and of course the walking dead)

You aren't going to tell me you are a number 5 are you ?

I would say that I'm a #5 in terms of religion, but in terms of overall outlook (the text in parentheses) I would fall under #2. I know you said not to take this absolutely literally, but I fundamentally dispute the assertion that the statements included in parentheses follow from the religious depth you associate with them here.

You know I don't think whether someone is theist or not makes any difference when it comes to how much religious faith someone has. Either you look at the world and are inspired to pursue an imagined good, or you have a terrible imagination.

Why does the good necessarily have to be imagined? Pursuing a better society for the sake of ones children and their descendants is a good that any parent can pursue.

I guess I should have typed "good faith" it in the DD !

What makes faith good or bad?

Side: I disagree
1 point

I do not find this statement to be universally true for the following reasons:

1. Lazy people can still "believe" - Faith doesn't require "action" it requires "belief"

2. Faith being a "belief" could actually manifest itself in a faith that believes inactivity makes one more faithful.

Are you trying to say if someone doesn't attend faith services they are lazy and therefore lack faith? I don't agree.

Side: I disagree