All this does is add to their delusion that it's factual when it's completely not.
Let's be fair. If we expect writings about atheism and science to be in the nonfiction section, we can't really complain if the bible goes there as well. If you go down the path of 'whatever I think is incorrect can't go in the nonfiction section' what you have isn't intellectualism, or scientific thinking. What you have is authoritarian censorship, and supporting it is exactly the kind of behaviour that will validate the fears of the religious that atheists are arrogant and immoral.
Let there be competition over ideas. If atheism is the correct philosophy, then there shouldn't need be such censorship for people to follow it- it's superiority as a position should make it more convincing. And in the meantime, the debate brings up various interesting philosophical ideas by consequence for us all to think over.
In libraries, the "Fiction" section is only for relatively contemporary fiction. Religious works and classic literature go in "Non-Fiction" (per Dewey, in the 200s for the former and the 800s for the latter). It's not just the Bible -- it's Homer, Muhammad, and Shakespeare too.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Vive, vale. Siquid novisti rectius istis,
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
All this does is add to their delusion that it's factual when it's completely not.
Let's be fair. If we expect writings about atheism and science to be in the nonfiction section, we can't really complain if the bible goes there as well. If you go down the path of 'whatever I think is incorrect can't go in the nonfiction section' what you have isn't intellectualism, or scientific thinking. What you have is authoritarian censorship, and supporting it is exactly the kind of behaviour that will validate the fears of the religious that atheists are arrogant and immoral.
Let there be competition over ideas. If atheism is the correct philosophy, then there shouldn't need be such censorship for people to follow it- it's superiority as a position should make it more convincing. And in the meantime, the debate brings up various interesting philosophical ideas by consequence for us all to think over.
The Bible belongs in the fiction section because there is no evidence for the extraordinary claims made by it. At least that's what I thought until BS said that the fiction section is only for contempory fiction. It should be updated.
The Bible belongs in the fiction section because there is no evidence for the extraordinary claims made by it. At least that's what I thought until BS said that the fiction section is only for contempory fiction. It should be updated.
Why? Apart from "I don't like religion," what reason would you have to modify the Dewey Decimal System in such a manner?
The Bible belongs in the fiction section because there is no evidence for the extraordinary claims made by it. At least that's what I thought until BS said that the fiction section is only for contempory fiction. It should be updated.
Why? Apart from "I don't like religion," what reason would you have to modify the Dewey Decimal System in such a manner?
What reason do you have to believe that the Bible is a credible source?
The Bible belongs in the fiction section because there is no evidence for the extraordinary claims made by it. At least that's what I thought until BS said that the fiction section is only for contempory fiction. It should be updated.
Why? Apart from "I don't like religion," what reason would you have to modify the Dewey Decimal System in such a manner?
What reason do you have to believe that the Bible is a credible source?
Being a credible source is not a requirement for being in the non-fiction section, as per the Dewey Decimal System. It is a document of historical significance, which is reason enough for its inclusion. It is not any sort of statement of support for the Bible or Christianity.
In libraries, the "Fiction" section is only for relatively contemporary fiction. Religious works and classic literature go in "Non-Fiction" (per Dewey, in the 200s for the former and the 800s for the latter). It's not just the Bible -- it's Homer, Muhammad, and Shakespeare too.
I'll point out that the question also includes bookstores though and that not all libraries follow this system.
All this does is add to their delusion that it's factual when it's completely not.
Let's be fair. If we expect writings about atheism and science to be in the nonfiction section, we can't really complain if the bible goes there as well. If you go down the path of 'whatever I think is incorrect can't go in the nonfiction section' what you have isn't intellectualism, or scientific thinking. What you have is authoritarian censorship, and supporting it is exactly the kind of behaviour that will validate the fears of the religious that atheists are arrogant and immoral.
Let there be competition over ideas. If atheism is the correct philosophy, then there shouldn't need be such censorship for people to follow it- it's superiority as a position should make it more convincing. And in the meantime, the debate brings up various interesting philosophical ideas by consequence for us all to think over.
The Bible belongs in the fiction section because there is no evidence for the extraordinary claims made by it.
And most theists would argue there is very much sufficient evidence to support it. Who gets to decide?
That's authoritarian thinking.
All this does is add to their delusion that it's factual when it's completely not.
Let's be fair. If we expect writings about atheism and science to be in the nonfiction section, we can't really complain if the bible goes there as well. If you go down the path of 'whatever I think is incorrect can't go in the nonfiction section' what you have isn't intellectualism, or scientific thinking. What you have is authoritarian censorship, and supporting it is exactly the kind of behaviour that will validate the fears of the religious that atheists are arrogant and immoral.
Let there be competition over ideas. If atheism is the correct philosophy, then there shouldn't need be such censorship for people to follow it- it's superiority as a position should make it more convincing. And in the meantime, the debate brings up various interesting philosophical ideas by consequence for us all to think over.
The Bible belongs in the fiction section because there is no evidence for the extraordinary claims made by it.
And most theists would argue there is very much sufficient evidence to support it. Who gets to decide?
That's authoritarian thinking.
Let me explain it this way. We know the White House exists. In the movie Independence Day, the White House is destroyed by aliens. Does that mean the movie is real because the White House is a real building? No, it doesn't.
Let's be fair. If we expect writings about atheism and science to be in the nonfiction section, we can't really complain if the bible goes there as well. If you go down the path of 'whatever I think is incorrect can't go in the nonfiction section' what you have isn't intellectualism, or scientific thinking. What you have is authoritarian censorship, and supporting it is exactly the kind of behaviour that will validate the fears of the religious that atheists are arrogant and immoral.
Let there be competition over ideas. If atheism is the correct philosophy, then there shouldn't need be such censorship for people to follow it- it's superiority as a position should make it more convincing. And in the meantime, the debate brings up various interesting philosophical ideas by consequence for us all to think over.
The Bible belongs in the fiction section because there is no evidence for the extraordinary claims made by it.
And most theists would argue there is very much sufficient evidence to support it. Who gets to decide?
That's authoritarian thinking.
Let me explain it this way. We know the White House exists. In the movie Independence Day, the White House is destroyed by aliens. Does that mean the movie is real because the White House is a real building? No, it doesn't.
The reality of the situation is not what is under question- that in fact is the whole point.
As long as we allow people to write differing opinions equally, then there will always be people who are wrong about something who are allowed to have that opinion be published and sold at the same standard as the correct opinion. If we shut out wrong opinions, what will ultimately happen is either
a) nothing of substance changes because the standard for this exclusion is too high and only things that are already largely ignored are excluded.
b) writing about any controversial topic in general will no longer be viable because the standard is too low for exclusion
or
c) only opinions sanctioned by a select biased few will be allowed, creating a situation similar to b).
This being precisely because there is such disagreement in the first place.
Being a credible source is not a requirement for being in the non-fiction section, as per the Dewey Decimal System. It is a document of historical significance, which is reason enough for its inclusion. It is not any sort of statement of support for the Bible or Christianity.
Perhaps instead of asking "Why is the Bible in the non-fiction section?" (a question answered by the way the sections are defined in the system used), we should ask "Should we change/replace the Dewey Decimal System, and if so how do we improve it?"
That thread should be in the main forum rather than this subforum, but it could be interesting. However, with the thread subject we're currently presented with, as Highroller already posted, "[/thread]?"
All this does is add to their delusion that it's factual when it's completely not.
Let's be fair. If we expect writings about atheism and science to be in the nonfiction section, we can't really complain if the bible goes there as well. If you go down the path of 'whatever I think is incorrect can't go in the nonfiction section' what you have isn't intellectualism, or scientific thinking. What you have is authoritarian censorship, and supporting it is exactly the kind of behaviour that will validate the fears of the religious that atheists are arrogant and immoral.
Let there be competition over ideas. If atheism is the correct philosophy, then there shouldn't need be such censorship for people to follow it- it's superiority as a position should make it more convincing. And in the meantime, the debate brings up various interesting philosophical ideas by consequence for us all to think over.
The Bible belongs in the fiction section because there is no evidence for the extraordinary claims made by it.
And most theists would argue there is very much sufficient evidence to support it. Who gets to decide?
That's authoritarian thinking.
Let me explain it this way. We know the White House exists. In the movie Independence Day, the White House is destroyed by aliens. Does that mean the movie is real because the White House is a real building? No, it doesn't.
There is evidence that at least some of the events (not just the locations) in the Bible were real. Kings and other important people central to the "plot" of the Bible were real. Jesus is believe to have been a real person. There is some evidence that even The Great Flood may have been a real event so it seems unlikely that the entire Bible is a work of total fiction.
Is it possible that these events may be mis-attributed to a divine being? Sure. Is it possible certain "miracles" could be exaggerated. Of course. However, there are people who do believe that God did have a hand in these events. And, as much as you may not like it, there is a considerable amount of people who do believe the Bible is at least mostly true.
I guess the biggest thing to me regarding this question is: Who are the major purchasers or readers of the Bible? No matter what your personal beliefs are, the answer to this would be Christians and Christians believe it is true. Why alienate almost your entire consumer group by labeling it as Fiction when they believe it is Fact? What good does that do anyone? No one will walk into a bookstore to buy a Bible, see it is in the Fiction section, and change their beliefs on that fact alone. They will most likely just get mad that you are denigrating their faith.
There are plenty of things that are categorized a certain way to appeal to a certain consumer base. Keep in mind that I am not suggesting this categorization of the Bible is a marketing ploy. I am simply pointing out that the main consumers of the Bible see it as fact and there is no reason to label it otherwise.
What reason do you have to believe that the Bible is a credible source?
It's actually irrelevant for the purposes of this discussion whether it is or isn't. The Dewey Decimal System is not a political statement as to a book's credibility, it is a system of categorization. The Bible is a document of religious significance. It is therefore placed in the religion section.
And you didn't answer my question. What, besides "I don't like religion," is your rationale for changing the Dewey Decimal System in the manner you're proposing? (Hint: you don't have a reason.)
I'll point out that the question also includes bookstores though and that not all libraries follow this system.
Bookstores normally don't have "Fiction" and "Non-Fiction" sections as such. The Bible is under "Religion" or "Bibles" or something similar. Amazon's classification goes Books > Christian Books & Bibles > Bibles.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Vive, vale. Siquid novisti rectius istis,
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
Fiction doesn't mean "Wrong" in this context. Should scientific works that have since been disproven be moved to the fiction section? Browsing through the Dresden Files, do you expect to find an old textbook with an outdated quantum theory?
The bible isn't intended as fiction, whether it's correct or not.
Fiction doesn't mean "Wrong" in this context. Should scientific works that have since been disproven be moved to the fiction section? Browsing through the Dresden Files, do you expect to find an old textbook with an outdated quantum theory?
The bible isn't intended as fiction, whether it's correct or not.
In addition to the problem that Stairc is pointing out, in which we'd be putting something like, say, Isaac Newton (yeah, remember how general relativity disproved him?) into the fiction section, there's the really obvious problem with all of this.
What is every organization system meant to do? Right, organize things.
Why do we organize things? To make life easier by making things easier to find and/or categorize, right.
Now, which is easier to find:
A. The Bible, or any text with the subject matter on religion for that matter, when it's in the RELIGION SECTION of a library/book store in a conveniently labeled and numbered place, OR,
B. The Bible, or any text with the subject matter on religion for that matter, when it's in a section that is arranged by AUTHOR'S LAST NAME?
Yeah... Maybe that's why we separate things by genre?
Let's be fair. If we expect writings about atheism and science to be in the nonfiction section, we can't really complain if the bible goes there as well. If you go down the path of 'whatever I think is incorrect can't go in the nonfiction section' what you have isn't intellectualism, or scientific thinking. What you have is authoritarian censorship, and supporting it is exactly the kind of behaviour that will validate the fears of the religious that atheists are arrogant and immoral.
Let there be competition over ideas. If atheism is the correct philosophy, then there shouldn't need be such censorship for people to follow it- it's superiority as a position should make it more convincing. And in the meantime, the debate brings up various interesting philosophical ideas by consequence for us all to think over.
RUNIN: Norse mythology set (awaiting further playtesting)
FATE of ALARA: Multicolour factions (currently on hiatus)
Contibutor to the Pyrulea community set
I'm here to tell you that all your set mechanics are bad
#Defundthepolice
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
-Chandra Nalaar
[/thread]?
The Bible belongs in the fiction section because there is no evidence for the extraordinary claims made by it. At least that's what I thought until BS said that the fiction section is only for contempory fiction. It should be updated.
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
What reason do you have to believe that the Bible is a credible source?
I'll point out that the question also includes bookstores though and that not all libraries follow this system.
RUNIN: Norse mythology set (awaiting further playtesting)
FATE of ALARA: Multicolour factions (currently on hiatus)
Contibutor to the Pyrulea community set
I'm here to tell you that all your set mechanics are bad
#Defundthepolice
And most theists would argue there is very much sufficient evidence to support it. Who gets to decide?
That's authoritarian thinking.
RUNIN: Norse mythology set (awaiting further playtesting)
FATE of ALARA: Multicolour factions (currently on hiatus)
Contibutor to the Pyrulea community set
I'm here to tell you that all your set mechanics are bad
#Defundthepolice
Let me explain it this way. We know the White House exists. In the movie Independence Day, the White House is destroyed by aliens. Does that mean the movie is real because the White House is a real building? No, it doesn't.
The reality of the situation is not what is under question- that in fact is the whole point.
As long as we allow people to write differing opinions equally, then there will always be people who are wrong about something who are allowed to have that opinion be published and sold at the same standard as the correct opinion. If we shut out wrong opinions, what will ultimately happen is either
a) nothing of substance changes because the standard for this exclusion is too high and only things that are already largely ignored are excluded.
b) writing about any controversial topic in general will no longer be viable because the standard is too low for exclusion
or
c) only opinions sanctioned by a select biased few will be allowed, creating a situation similar to b).
This being precisely because there is such disagreement in the first place.
RUNIN: Norse mythology set (awaiting further playtesting)
FATE of ALARA: Multicolour factions (currently on hiatus)
Contibutor to the Pyrulea community set
I'm here to tell you that all your set mechanics are bad
#Defundthepolice
That thread should be in the main forum rather than this subforum, but it could be interesting. However, with the thread subject we're currently presented with, as Highroller already posted, "[/thread]?"
Two Score, Minus Two or: A Stargate Tail
(Image by totallynotabrony)
Is it possible that these events may be mis-attributed to a divine being? Sure. Is it possible certain "miracles" could be exaggerated. Of course. However, there are people who do believe that God did have a hand in these events. And, as much as you may not like it, there is a considerable amount of people who do believe the Bible is at least mostly true.
I guess the biggest thing to me regarding this question is: Who are the major purchasers or readers of the Bible? No matter what your personal beliefs are, the answer to this would be Christians and Christians believe it is true. Why alienate almost your entire consumer group by labeling it as Fiction when they believe it is Fact? What good does that do anyone? No one will walk into a bookstore to buy a Bible, see it is in the Fiction section, and change their beliefs on that fact alone. They will most likely just get mad that you are denigrating their faith.
There are plenty of things that are categorized a certain way to appeal to a certain consumer base. Keep in mind that I am not suggesting this categorization of the Bible is a marketing ploy. I am simply pointing out that the main consumers of the Bible see it as fact and there is no reason to label it otherwise.
And you didn't answer my question. What, besides "I don't like religion," is your rationale for changing the Dewey Decimal System in the manner you're proposing? (Hint: you don't have a reason.)
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
The bible isn't intended as fiction, whether it's correct or not.
Remaking Magic - A Podcast for those that love MTG and Game Design
The Dungeon Master's Guide - A Podcast for those that love RPGs and Game Design
Sig-Heroes of the Plane
What is every organization system meant to do? Right, organize things.
Why do we organize things? To make life easier by making things easier to find and/or categorize, right.
Now, which is easier to find:
A. The Bible, or any text with the subject matter on religion for that matter, when it's in the RELIGION SECTION of a library/book store in a conveniently labeled and numbered place, OR,
B. The Bible, or any text with the subject matter on religion for that matter, when it's in a section that is arranged by AUTHOR'S LAST NAME?
Yeah... Maybe that's why we separate things by genre?