Are Religious People More Prone to Internet Trolling than Non-Religious People?

[Boerseun]

Originally Posted by Buffy

*cough* Strange Claims *cough*....

Why?

Why, rather, should not the entire concept of religion, be it Christian, Muslim, or any flavour of your choice, be immediately thrown into the Strange Claims Forum instead?

[Boerseun]

Originally Posted by GAHD

see, my personal experience with the /b/ crew, MYGOT, and my real life friends tell me athiests are probably more prone to trolling. Just that they don't troll about RELIGION as much. I attribute this to them taking their love for "being right, damn it!" beyond ONE book.

I fail to see how this can be.

I also don't quite agree with your assumption that atheists have a love for "being right, damn it!". That is a very prejudiced view, and if that view was projected towards any of the mainstream religions, your previous post might well have been deleted and you would have been infracted for hate speech. Such is the dilemma, double standards, intolerance and prejudice faced by atheists. Somehow, it's all right to knock atheists about, but if you would insult any single religion on the same terms, your goose would be cooked.

Ironically, atheism is the only one of the lot able to logically justify its existence.

And besides that, as you wrote, the only reason atheists have a problem with religion, is that for some reason believers shy away from seriously discussing their scriptures with atheists. There is no way you'll get an objective discussion where a believer will discuss this universe on an objective, evidence-based manner without dragging in magical elements for which absolutely no, zip, zero evidence exist. And that irks atheists, because there is simply no discussing it any further once the magical fairies are blamed for the creation of the Universe.

The atheists, however, don't have a "I'm right, damn it!" attitude beyond what is presented by religion, because the dismissal of religion is what defines an atheist. Everything else falling outside the scope of religion can be discussed and criticized fairly, without you being beaten over the head with self-righteous indignation. For some reason religion is the no-go area for criticism. And once you start doing it in a rational manner, dissecting the realities of any chosen scripture, you will draw out the religious trolls en masse.

Is my current post an example of an atheist troll?

No. Because everything I said here can be supported rationally.

Religious trollers will spout unsupportable rubbish in their fight for their invisible friend - and there's the distinction.

[belovelife]

this is a funny topic
considering the definition of "trolling is so vague

now as a spiritual person
i could assume i troll
now not being religious
may mean i don't troll

now ignoring anothers statement and trying to prove my belief is right
well, i think we all do that to some extent

also i could say that based on my theory, (see strange claims)
the magnetic nature of matter in the univese give a direct path to different dimentions
of the personal spirit one that energy is freed from the body
and all the universe is connnected by it

but that would be beyond the point

i could be considered a troll when i interject my theory into topics that concern my theory
although since i have no proof
i would be considered off topic and or unfounded claims

similar to the whole flood thing
(which i think is based on the sea level rising and creating the medateranian)
i suck at spelling

anyway

as long as when i post someone doesn't tell me i'm wrong
and when i ask why
they say "it's written"

well then i'm ok

but i always welcome conversation

anyway, i think trollers are common in many groups
religious
political

and then you get ethics commities
i bet they troll the most

anyway, i think i troll more than anyone
with skill
and i am probably more annoying with my spelling misteaks,
distinct lack of structured sentences,
non-use of capitol letters,
and overall non structured writing pattern
(well its structured just not in the traditional way)

peace

[Boerseun]

Originally Posted by belovelife

and i am probably more annoying with my spelling misteaks,
distinct lack of structured sentences,
non-use of capitol letters,
and overall non structured writing pattern

You've got that right.

But then, that's just me.

[belovelife]

lol

[Buffy]

Originally Posted by Boerseun

Why, rather, should not the entire concept of religion, be it Christian, Muslim, or any flavour of your choice, be immediately thrown into the Strange Claims Forum instead?

Originally Posted by Boerseun

Is my current post an example of an atheist troll?

No. Because everything I said here can be supported rationally

Everything that's "rationally supportable" is not necessarily a good idea, dear!

My definition of a troll is any post that is intended to incite conflict, so folks that don't know you as well as I do B, might have a rationally supportable argument that it's a trollish post!

The best political weapon is the weapon of terror. Cruelty commands respect. Men may hate us. But, we don't ask for their love; only for their fear,
Buffy

[Boerseun]

Originally Posted by Buffy

Everything that's "rationally supportable" is not necessarily a good idea, dear!

Now why would that be? The truth may hurt, but shying away from it achieves absolutely nothing. Is atheism the truth? Is religion the truth? That's what it boils down to in the original post, and the zest with which opponents will defend their particular opinions, which might constitute the propensity towards trollishness we've been invited to discuss here.

My point is that an atheist might defend his position by merely saying "There is no God. You make the claim, you bring the proof." Not like GAHD said because they have a love for always being right.

A follower of any kind of religion will have to convince you with unsupportable notions of the supernatural. And there are so many different interpretations, each one of them being seen as perfectly valid by any particular believer, that they will have to go on and on in elaborately worded posts in various forms to defend their own individual take on matters. See my point in the previous post about "envy" regarding the supernatural.

Fact is, this thread is about whether believers or atheists are more prone to trolling, and the nature of the matter leads me to believe that religious folks would be more prone. Considering only atheists on the one side and just Christians on the other side (forget about all other religions for a second), you already have Protestants, Catholics, Coptics, Reformed, Anglicans, Methodists etc. on the one side, each one of which is split into millions of different viewpoints as each and every individual has his own personal take on the matter. I used to be a Dutch Reformed - in dry spells, half the congregation prayed for rain, the other half considered it poppycock; drought is, after all, God's will. Yet, they profess to be one united church. If there's a billion Christians on Earth, you have a billion individual takes on the matter; a billion different images of God, a billion different opinions regarding religious morality, a billion different takes on all matters Christian. If, opposed to this billion Christians, you have a billion atheists, you have one single opinion regarding the matter from the opposing side.

Who will be more prone to trolling? 1 billion vs. 1? You do the math.

My definition of a troll is any post that is intended to incite conflict, so folks that don't know you as well as I do B, might have a rationally supportable argument that it's a trollish post!

Good thing the entire concept of a "Troll" is totally subjective, innit?

You define it, and I'll tell you who's the bigger troll.

But in my mind, it's kinda like porn. You'll know it when you see it. We might not agree to what is porn or not, heck - maybe a brace of freshly plucked chickens turns you on, the sight of which will be hugely erotic and entirely pornographic as far as you're concerned, whilst I may just whip out my recipe book in the same circumstances.

As far as I'm concerned, a post which is supportable via rational and empirical means is not trollish. Those who don't agree to the post because it might leave them in doubt as to their own convictions, and expose the bedrock of their religious foundation to be built with so much mud, might see it as a trollish post, but for all the wrong reasons.

Especially at a Science Site.

Which brings the whole scenario back to our frame of reference. At a Christian site, the biggest trollers would be atheists. At an atheist site, the Christians would be the biggest trolls. So what you should do, since I'm banging on about empiricism, is to take x amount of Science sites, and count the amount of trollish posts as a percentage, and compare it to x amount of troll posts at a Christian site. Compare the percentages, and viola - you'll see who the biggest trolls are. All about context, you see.

But that brings me, once again, back to my original point about religious envy, and the evangelical mission that all good christians are supposed to be on: They have to spread the word. A good atheist will spread the word if and when he bothers to do it. A good Christian must spread the Word of God - it's a holy command from the Big Man hisself. Which, of course, means that trolling Christians have a much bigger incentive for trolling atheist sites than vise versa. Atheists will rarely visit Christian sites, because they're not on a mission to "save souls", as the Christians are.

So, once again, referring to the original post asking who the bigger troll would be, I'd have to stick to my opinion that the religious folks would win hands down.

[Zythryn]

I am really not sure, but edge a bit towards 'no' so that is the way I voted.
If you mean prone to 'taking the bait' of a troll, I would have to say no.
In my mind, the more passionate someone is about a subject, the more susceptible to trolling they are.
As for being 'trollish' I would say those that trolls fall into a few categories:
1) Those that are playground bullies and enjoy causing strife.
2) Those that have little command of logic and/or difficulty putting their idea on paper/pixels and allow themselves to get frustrated.
3) Those that have no true basis for their stance, yet want to convince others they are absolutely correct.
4) Those that allow themselves to get frustrated with a troll and end up responding in kind

I think trolls are more likely to USE religion, politics, gun laws, abortion and the environment as they are issues many people have strong feelings about. So using one of those topics gives them the best shot at getting a fight started.

[freeztar]

A small interjection...

What is the difference between trolling and flaming as it relates to this topic?
Is someone a troll simply because they vehemently disagree with the opposition?

For the sake of collaborative argument, can we please define what a "troll" is? Sure, it's subjective, as Bo points out, but surely we can come to a group consensus on troll-like behavior in general?

[InfiniteNow]

Originally Posted by Boerseun

Is my current post an example of an atheist troll?

No. Because everything I said here can be supported rationally.

Religious trollers will spout unsupportable rubbish in their fight for their invisible friend - and there's the distinction.

DING! Somebody give that man a prize.