Religulous/ Sam Harris TED Response

Both Bill Maher's "Religulous" and Sam Harris' TED talk about science and it's ability to answer moral questions were very interesting to watch, and definitely thought-provoking. I felt that each effectively used humor/satire and scientific evidence, respectively, to evaluate many of the ideological points that conflict with the secular viewpoint. It is important to be able to draw the focus of your audience to important issues, and help guide their thought process by presenting them with new perspectives and information. However, what's truly important is what you achieve after you've gotten people to think-- if it is your goal to better society by spreading this idea of empirical rationality, then you must go one step further than 'proving your point'-- or proving that you can come up with a witty, cutting retort to stump the opposition-- and reach out to people in a way that will not cause a knee-jerk reaction, their defenses going up and shutting out any potential for change of thought. Use the same empathy that you would hope is extended toward you, recognize that for many people religion is a very personal and deep rooted part of their identity. In the same way that an nonreligious person may feel that a zealous evangelist preacher is 'cramming religion down their throat,'  this aggressive, personal attack is not well received by those who you are attempting to educate. In this respect, I do not think that Maher was as skilled, and perhaps it is simply because that is not his aim in creating "Religulous." If so, then it perhaps he should not portray his work as crusade to 'enlightment' and abolishment of religion in it's entirety-- because his approach is counterproductive.

Religulous Response

Bill Maher's Religulous was incredibly thought provoking and definitely forced me to question everything I have been told about religion since I was a child. Even though I don't consider myself to be religious, as my parents decided to let me choose what if religion is right for me, I have never had a very radical view regarding organized faith. However, it was very interesting to see Bill Maher interview people who had very strong views regarding Christianity, Islam and Judaism as it demonstrated how some people grow up in an environment that almost shuns science and reason. I think Bill Maher essentially interviewed people who were complete opposites to the protagonists (the two scientists) of The Unbelievers. To a certain degree or not I think religion has been the cause of many of the wars that have occurred in the past, but the strange thing about this fact is the idea that the three main religions in question are all the same when it comes to the basic roots. Somehow people manage to launch ideological wars against each other even though their core beliefs are very similar and because of that I can understand Maher's negativity regarding religion. However, Maher is also a staunch defender of gay rights and because of that he decided to interview many people who had incredibly archaic views regarding gay rights. All in all I thought that in order to elicit a response from people, Maher had to develop a piece that was radical and because of the negative sentiment towards the way he went out about making this documentary I think he was quite successful and delivering his message.

Religulous Response

Bill Maher's documentary revealed a lot of flaws with the way that organized religion works, but did so in a fairly biased and uncomfortable manor. Bill Maher's techniques for questioning consisted of asking loaded questions that he knew the answer to; he was just trying to see how the subjects would respond to his disrespect and disregard of their beliefs. Many of the interviews were quite uncomfortable to watch, as there was very thick tension because of some of the language Maher used, or because of the outright disagreement that existed between the two parties. Maher did have quite a few interesting and varied guests that, at times appeared quite crazy, such as Jesus, the second coming. Maher posed a powerful argument that religion is based on insecurities that are fulfilled by listening to someone telling a story for their own personal benefit, and that many of the back stories to religions are unoriginal. However, I do not agree with his method of trying to think for people. This way of self righteousness is intrusive and gives people who share similar religious beliefs as Maher a bad reputation.

Religulous Response

In Bill Maher's documentary Religulous, he makes it more than obvious that he against religion in all ways, shapes, and forms. Throughout the whole documentary he continued to discredit and talk down on religion and the followers of the religion. If the idea of the video was to point out the flaws in each religion, then I believe that he could have done this in an entirely different way. I also found this video to be quite ironic. Throughout the documentary, he says that everyone feels that they are right and in fact are wrong. But in fact, he is very arrogant and seems confident that his beliefs are right. What makes Bill Maher, a comedian, be the all knowing man for religion.

"Religulous"

Bill Maher in "Religulous" was rude in some ways, because he did criticize religions. However, when he explained how some religions force or impose their beliefs on others, I agreed with the idea that people should be free to have religious discussions and not feel afraid. Also, he stressed the concept of “doubt” and how it’s okay to have it. And I agree with that, sometimes people argue on matters even with they're wrong just to stay adamant in their claims. What I had a problem with was how he was very a staunch believer in promoting Athiesm, instead of arguing that religions may not have the right answer and they may also not be wrong either. Doubt could work for him too. He should also be able to critique science and how he lives. He should try to see the positives in religion too. He said the absence of religion would solve problems, but what about how religion can solve problems? It was a hasty generalization.

Response to Religulus

I did not like Bill Maher's approach in this documentary and I do not agree with him. He is very rude and never lets the other person finish what they are saying. I also already knew about some of his political views, which I do not agree with and are in no way peaceful although he accuses religion as being the source of all violence and hatred. I think it would be more constructive if two people that were both educated and also respectful had a debate.
Sidenote: I think it's kind of cool that the angguy in the mosque in Jerusalem recognized Bill Maher.

Religulous

My first thought when watching Religulous was that the way in which they went about proving their point was far more effective than in the documentary we watched that followed Richard Dawkins and Lawrence Krauss. Religion is such a heavy topic, so one cannot be too careful when asking questions about other peoples' religion.. and Bill Maher managed to make his encounters with people of various faiths humorous, despite the fact that he was very forward with them and even sometimes rude. One thing that I learned from the movie was the whole deal with how there had been many religions before christianity that had a profit who was born of a virgin woman, and who died for peoples' sins and then rose on the 2nd/3rd day; those, along with many other similarities in stories across the board, in my opinion, help to largely discredit a lot of what christianity claims... because how can every religion have the same story?

Reaction to "Religulous"

While watching, "Religulous," I realized that I much prefer intellectual explanations as to why humans should give up religion. Although I am an atheist who always enjoys watching religious people be explicitly questioned about the things they believe, I feel more comfortable watching an overzealous religious person be questioned by a scientist than I do a comedian. I feel this way because somehow religion has become a taboo conversation topic in recent years, as if people are afraid of offending someone else's faith. Maybe this is because of the recent examples we have seen around the world where religion is taken so seriously that people are killed for making fun of it. I believe we are at a point in time where we need to talk about religion and find out what it is that people truly believe: if people do not verbalize their beliefs and are never questioned about them, how can they ever be made aware that they believe something crazy? Without this discourse, people can continue to have irrational beliefs that they will act upon because they "believe" so strongly in them. I believe scientists should take on the role of educators when it comes to religion, because a majority of people know so little about science that they are willing to accept any religion that comforts them. This suspension of disbelief allows for people to believe things that make very little logical sense. Bill Maher does a great job of making a mockery of religion, but that only makes religious people defensive about their own faith, as a natural reaction to being made fun of. I think science is the only way to truly convince people that the workings of the universe are far too extraordinary for someone, or something, to create.

Reaction to Religulous

After watching Religulous, I felt as if atheism was being thrown onto me. Personally, I am very interested in the sciences. Biology is my major and I find it remarkable to learn how everything works and where the organisms living today have come from. So it would seem that I like to have answers for everything, and that would be correct. But what bothered me in this film was that it felt as if Atheism was the only correct option in this debate. I consider myself a semi-religious person. I believe that there is a higher up power, and I also like to look for proof, but my proof doesn’t have to be the same as the proof of Bill Maher. I completely support the idea of Evolution, but my only difference is that I believe there is some other force out there that can control what is around us. I may be right; I may be wrong, but I found it kind of insulting to have my ideas shot down in a biased documentary. If this documentary offered both sides of the debate, and with that information proved my opinion wrong, I would be more willing to accept it. However, since Bill Maher and his crew, although they were very educated about the topic, took a stance that completely attacked my beliefs, I felt pressured in that my ideas were wrong. For an Atheist, this documentary would be perfect and hilarious, but for me, some parts were funnier than others and ended up making a documentary that contradicted my ideals.

Bill Maher's Religilous

Bill Maher’s Religilous was definitely a controversial documentary. As a Catholic, while watching the documentary, I found myself confused about why I held the beliefs that I do. Then, after sitting for about five minutes without Maher’s influence after the documentary ended, I realized that even though the beliefs held by every religion may seem silly to someone who is determined to hate religion, religion is an important aspect of being human. Although Maher expressed the desire to rid the world of religion, and while I believe that religion and politics do not mix well, the human condition will never be independent of religion. I think Maher and many others need to work on gaining more tolerance for people who hold a different set of beliefs from them. Tolerance is the only real solution to the problems that arise because of religion, because the abolishment of religion will never be a feasible option.

Religulous

Bill Maher's Religulous to me was very similar to The Unbelievers, albeit much more difficult to sit through. In The Unbelievers, there was at least a semblance of scientific fact and rational argument used to refute opposing arguments. While The Unbelievers was certainly laced with contempt for religion and religious people, at least its arguments were based in science. Religulous focuses almost entirely on what would be considered "common sense" (which in truth is not so common), and furthermore, Bill Maher is simply an asshole. He ridicules, laughs at, makes fun of, and even verbally abuses people simply for the things they believe. These people are not doing anything to hurt anyone else (except for maybe the guy who's profession is to turn gay people straight again). They seem to be perfectly decent people, yet Maher seems entitled to belittle them simply because they believe something different. The "relig" portion should be removed from Religulous and the title simply replaced with the word originally implied. Maher's documentary was indeed Ridiculous.