- Home
- Find a Therapist
- Topic Streams
- Get Help
Mental Health
Addiction
ADHD
Anxiety
Asperger's
Autism
Bipolar Disorder
Depression
Eating Disorders
Insomnia
OCDPersonality
Passive Aggression
Personality
ShynessPersonal Growth
Happiness
Goal Setting
Positive PsychologyRelationships
Low Sexual Desire
Relationships
SexEmotion Management
Anger
Procrastination
StressFamily Life
Adolescents
Child Development
Elder Care
Parenting
SiblingsRecently Diagnosed?
Diagnosis Dictionary
- Magazine
- Tests
- Psych Basics
- Experts
Atheists are heavily concentrated in economically developed countries, particularly the social democracies of Europe. In underdeveloped countries, there are virtually no atheists. Atheism is a peculiarly modern phenomenon. Why do modern conditions produce atheism? In a new study, I provide compelling evidence that atheism increases along with the quality of life. Read More
The Others
Organized religion is not the only kind of supernatural or paranormal belief. I know more than a few self-described atheists and agnostics who nonetheless believe in astrology, magic, and ghosts.
Is it just traditional religion people abandon? Do other beliefs decline as well, or do they still flourish?
While literally correct not substantively so.
Is it just traditional religion people abandon? Do other beliefs decline as well, or do they still flourish?
I can assure you that while they may ascribe the literal term Atheist to themselves. The individuals whom you describe are not what the public or myself would describe as such.
What is today considered Atheism is a rational skeptical view of all religio-mysticism which asks us to believe that an event or events defy the laws and nature and science.
That would not only strike out Yahweh and other such fictional characters but also ghosts, magic and astrology.
Athiest believing in Ghosts magic, and -or astrology.
I am a Christian and I agree with you that that belief in ghosts, magic, and astrology is rare among atheists. I do not understand why a Christian would raise such an argument.
Your post should be in the
Your post should be in the dictionary next to "No True Scotsman Fallacy".
"Atheist" means "lacking belief in god". It says nothing about anything else. You can be an atheist and still believe in astrology or ghosts. Surely someone as rational and thoughtful as you would understand this.
and of course greenhouse gases and other liberal lies, huh?
goddess forbid that there might be a God of the Heavens. At least, according to you. You know, the scientist's theorize that previous to modern science was astrology, the first science. Prior to that was nephomancy, knowing what's about to happen by seeing in the clouds. before that was no one else but the goddess. Why do you mention Yahweh? Well, that's your deep-seated fear. And I mean to tell you, it's deep. because that God is considered "Lord of Hosts" and that's maybe armies of men coming to rape and pillage. Goddess can't protect you, and you've snubbed Lord of Hosts. Last is to cut down that cloudscapes god. Know what'll happen then? You'll probably end up selling cigarettes with the rest of the flat-earth-level-of-functioning scientists who can lip it that gods-don't-make-no-junk-science. What gods, you demand? your idols of denial of climate change, exchanged for your idols of pretense that you can stop it from happening, probably with something like FrankenAir that your genetically modifying buddies will become the new Team Christ superheroes with.
imagine that
Why is it that when anyone tries to talk about religion in a calm, objective way it always brings out those I would term "the crazies/nutso's/zealots/'hardcore believers'/those that heal by faith aka 'faith-healers'"?
The article simply states that atheism is higher in countries where resources and education are more readily available and attainable.
That's it.
The author makes no disconcerting comments as to "who's right". It's amazing, in my experience those that identify as religious tend to be some of the most highly sensitive people i have ever met, really.
I know that I am being one of
I know that I am being one of those terrible "I agree" people that have nothing to add but I cannot help it. No where in the article does the author say that Atheism or Christianity is stupid. Fingers are not being pointed and nothing harmful is being said. I find this article very informational and non-biased. I wish people would actually pay attention to the content instead of reading the title and saying "Oh, well the author must support such and such and I can't believe this person for writing something that goes against what I believe so it must be wrong." Please, if you are going to comment on the article then actually read it once, maybe even twice, before sharing your nonsense with other readers. I am glad that Andrew and other people have taken the time to read the article and see it for what it is.
Not who's right or wrong, but 'will rise'
You make a good point:
"The article simply states that atheism is higher in countries where resources and education are more readily available and attainable."
The article makes lots of other valid points, too. It's the title that's the problem for me, and I'm a (highly sensitive?) atheist.
The assertion in the title that atheism will increase rests on an assumption that prosperity and education will continue to increase, not any evidence in this specific research.
I'm a bit surprised that anyone can be so sanguine, not to say complacent, just now. I would not be amazed if people who see their living standards threatened and their future prospects diminishing are more likely to be, or become, religious, and that religion would therefore rise in some places, if not overall, at least in the short term. That possibility would surely also be in line with this research.
BTW does Buddhism count as religion or atheism in this study?
Well, I'm a Christian, I've
Well, I'm a Christian, I've seen how this sort of thing works, and I've got to say I thoroughly dislike how heated things get in argument about religion vs. atheism and when nobody comes away in the least bit moved or satisfied. However, (and I'm not saying this article does this, but) you must understand that when you start trying to talk about "fictional characters such as God", you attack a part of any Christian. It would be like somebody insulting your best friend or taking a whack at him, that's the kind of relationship we have with the God we believe in and why we can't help feeling the need to speak out. You may say "calm, objective way" but to the unprepared Christian, by eliminating even the possibility of God, you have already made it a personal attack. I am all for rational debate, it's a very educational process if done correctly, but I am afraid I cannot be taken from my beliefs; the life I have in Christ is far better than one without in my opinion, so in the all-too-appropriate words of CS Lewis in The Silver Chair, "We're just babies making up a game, if you're right. But four babies playing a game can make a play-world which licks your real world hollow. That's why I'm going to stand by the play world. I'm on Aslan's side even if there isn't any Aslan to lead it. I'm going to live as like a Narnian as I can even if there isn't any Narnia." and that's the truth. I believe Jesus still loves you even if you refuse to acknowledge him.
If you're for "rational debate"
Then why haven't you made any rational points. All you have said is that you're offended when people point out that there is no more evidence for any god than there is for Paul Bunyan.
Theists are making the claims. The burden of proof is on them. Atheists are mostly saying, there is no proof for and a certain body of proof against any gods.
Like may atheists, I would have to change my position if definite, undeniable proof were presented. But quoting the bible, circular arguments, and "you must have faith" are not proof nor "rational debate".
Jesus does not love anyone because there is no proof that he ever existed. There is not a single contemporary account of any jesus and lots of proof against. Look up Krishna, Horus, Attis, and Mithra. Learn how the jesus myth originated.
Of course there is no proof!
It is out of God's character to offer proof. He says, all creation declares His existence, but this is not proof if you still choose to believe the cosmic accident theories. Throughout the Bible God requires faithful obedience. Think of this: Which would You treasure more, a mechanical robot/doll that would obey your every command, or a living thing with a free will that could choose to do anything but by faith (without proof) was totally dedicated to serving and honoring you?
It would be like somebody
It would be like somebody insulting your best friend or taking a whack at him ...
The difference is that my best friend is real and he can take care of himself. The only people who get bent out of shape like this are those whose best friend is imaginary.
It must be fun to be a
It must be fun to be a complete nut. Really. I'm envious.
Not really. >.>
interesting
Interesting article.
I find it surprising though that numbers of atheists are so high. I mean I could see not having any specific religion or agnostic but believing in nothing that we just evolved from bacteria through the big bang is crazy.
Wrong
Your assertion that atheists believe in nothing is completely wrong. The Big Bang theory and other scentific theories are based on compelling imperical evidence, how is accepting that 'crazy'?
Theories
Wrong, I can't agree more with you. I was a practicing preaching Catholic for 40 off my 44 years including being a Eucharistic Minister, Catechists and contributor to the Eucharistic program. However, for many reasons, three years ago, I woke up, had an Epiphany and realized it isn't so and it can't be and it is what it is and no one could understand, I lost friends, many couldn't relate to me, was pissed off at me and so on and so on..... I was even called an Atheist and devil worshiper...........WOW, really? After all I had done, practiced and preached for many years this is the SLAP in the face I get?
That put it all into perspective and the fact "theories" is what these people based their beliefs in start to make no sense to me. So to clarify I started looking into the sciences, big bang and other resources to validate my Epiphany. Although this is under investigation on my behalf, I neither believe, follow, trend nor ridicule others for their choices, beliefs nor expect others to disrespect me for having nothingness when it comes to believing in an equally fictitious character with stories written by man thousands of years ago translated in many languages most American's can't relate to much less know if the translations have the same meaning or not but they believe every word of it.
I on the other hand have realistically come my senses and see things for what they are worth. If I can feel it, touch it, taste it then its real. If someone tells me how these feel, taste and look, that's a different story, so to me it is what it is and my end conclusion of fear is why people push, press and insists their beliefs are superior to everyone else when its not the same as theirs.............the unknown is scary for many who haven't an outlet nor accepted its just life and when you die, you die, what does it really matter what happens after that?
Theories
Wrong, I can't agree more with you. I was a practicing preaching Catholic for 40 off my 44 years including being a Eucharistic Minister, Catechists and contributor to the Eucharistic program. However, for many reasons, three years ago, I woke up, had an Epiphany and realized it isn't so and it can't be and it is what it is and no one could understand, I lost friends, many couldn't relate to me, was pissed off at me and so on and so on..... I was even called an Atheist and devil worshiper...........WOW, really? After all I had done, practiced and preached for many years this is the SLAP in the face I get?
That put it all into perspective and the fact "theories" is what these people based their beliefs in start to make no sense to me. So to clarify I started looking into the sciences, big bang and other resources to validate my Epiphany. Although this is under investigation on my behalf, I neither believe, follow, trend nor ridicule others for their choices, beliefs nor expect others to disrespect me for having nothingness when it comes to believing in an equally fictitious character with stories written by man thousands of years ago translated in many languages most American's can't relate to much less know if the translations have the same meaning or not but they believe every word of it.
I on the other hand have realistically come my senses and see things for what they are worth. If I can feel it, touch it, taste it then its real. If someone tells me how these feel, taste and look, that's a different story, so to me it is what it is and my end conclusion of fear is why people push, press and insists their beliefs are superior to everyone else when its not the same as theirs.............the unknown is scary for many who haven't an outlet nor accepted its just life and when you die, you die, what does it really matter what happens after that?
Crazy?
what part of your brain tells you that a ghost with floating castles in the sky makes sense? Remember I said what part of your brain tells you that not what part was brain washed.
why you're going to wash out
of this argument: you're "not brainwashed" by physical come natural come material. guess what, buddy? that's materialism. your green-hoping peer group of liberal people are going to wonder how long they can keep overlooking the fact that you're in denial of your own gods. yours are idols of covetousness of your religion of materialism that you preach day-in day-out. you've never questioned your own faith. "they" are going to question why you deny the greenhouse gases you spew while you drain more than a leftist's fair share of the resources of the earth. And don't bother to reply with excuses if you think they're a salve for your guilt, Mr Hungry. Just refuse to face up to your own belief system and laugh at me for teasing you with a free initial consultation of my analytical thymiotherapy.
But its not crazy to think
But its not crazy to think some magic man in the sky got bored one day and made people to worship him?
It's crazy to be liberal and green as a materialistic polluter of those skies
read the subject line
Atheism
"...believing in nothing ... is crazy." ???
Please stop drinking the Kool-aid.
Atheists most certainly do NOT "believe in nothing." We believe in pretty much anything that is supported by evidence. And that's why we do not believe in an invisible man who lives in the sky and hates foreskins. If you have evidence to support the existence of this monster, please produce it -- you'd be the first.
wow..
First the big bang theory isn't supported by evidence. There are tons of flaws it really doesn't even make sense.
And essentially, believing in the big bang theory is believing in nothing.
And who says that you have to believe in the Christian God?? Saying that a "guy" is floating on clouds is stupid. God exists in everything and is a part of everything. And it's not far fetched to believe in an afterlife and spirits if you've done ketamine and shrooms. Or other psychedelics.
flaws?
Psychedelics can have that effect but it isn't real, its an illusion created by your brain.
Tell me what flaws you know of in the big bang theory.
Not really, it's real
It's proven to be a spiritual experience. You can say that it's all an illusion but then you could also say that all of life is just an illusion.
Plus K-holes are very real. YOu're just too closed minded to believe that drugs can give you a better understanding of life and afterlife. And really I can tell there is no debating with you because you are all the same, you won't believe anything, at all, unless it's supported by 1000 "peer reviewed" studies by a specific organization or else it's all preposterous and stupid.
Have a nice day
Regardless of what you prefer
Regardless of what you prefer to call it, it's the product of chemical interactions. It's purely physical, you're interpretation is subjective.
No one is saying that life is an illusion, we're saying that your subjective experience is not proof of anything, nor is subjective experience a reliable tool for finding truth (as evidenced by things like memory reconstruction).
The experience of a k-hole is merely proof that the experience of a k-hole exists, anything else is conjecture on your part. Additionally, surely there are people who have gone through similar experiences, yet learned wildly different things than you learned? How can you account for this discrepancy?
It's not that our standards are high, it's that you have no standards at all. Well, at least for the things that you like.
*your interpretation
*your interpretation
with all our "chemistry," buddy, give your own thoughts & feelings a shot
time to face up to the chemicals in yourself. how does overpopulation, climate change, and dwindling natural resources feel? sexy, isn't it? or maybe you're just hallucinating, like Stephen Hawking taught you to do.
And obviously Ecstacy (great
And obviously Ecstacy (great name to pick btw if you want to be taken seriously) you will believe anything that supports using mind altering drugs :)
the antipsychotics you need aren't themselves an "illusion"
how come you hallucinate? Yes, you. It's 'cause your Big Bang isn't witnessed in its final contraction by people. In fact, your genius buddies haven't witnessed the extinction of mankind, the ultimate humanistic triumph of progressive morality. If a universe contracts and no people are there to witness it, does it really go out with a fizzle? fell that tree, Jerry Bear.
Post new comment