Why are there so few Atheists outside of Wrongplanet?

Post Reply New Topic

Hmph! Meaning! Hmph! Romance!
An Atheist craves not these things!

(With apologies to Master Yoda.)

I feel sorry for you market and church. I really do.

The OP makes a great question. I find it very hard to express my disbleliefs outside this forum as the xstrians find it hard in here. I've been unfriended and put down by several people without even poking fun at religion b/c of my atheism. I had one guy on FB whom I was honest with. He didn't ask, he told me that as long as I believed that Jesus was my savior, nothing could go wrong. Normally I try to stay away from religious talk but I'm pretty honest when people ask for my personal opinion. I told him I didn't believe in Jesus or a god and that was it. The next day he unfriended me leaving a snide message saying how people like myself we're ruining "his" country. In my country and especially in my state, atheists are looked down upon. I use to let it slide or be dishonest about my opinions. These days I'm honest when given the ultimate question. I use to believe in this notion of christianity or that people who followed Christ were humble. Now I'm finding this to be the opposite. Most Christians do more judging than they care to realize.

i wasn't speaking about myself. Faith is required in either direction since we're both reasoning in the dark. Im ready to accept that this life is meaningless and that my faith in God is wrong, but I have my reasons and I'm not the average person.

atheists are also hawkish in their atheism. Kindness does a better job of converting people then logic.

Atheism is not attractive and not romantic. For a meaningful life, the human being gravitates towards the attractive and the romantic... and rightfully so. You have a richer life.

Wtf is wrong with the world? Meaning non atheists are wrong? People who think they hold the truth and they are the only ones right is what is wrong with this world. That is the kind of people who discriminate others and do not stand diversity. Not different from religious people, the people supposedly you cannot stand. And no, I am not an Atheist.

Speak for yourself. You little know the atheist I was or the atheist Herself was. No, I was not into romance - keep the emotion away from me, it might spill and burn my skin. But meaning was a desideratum, and I believe Herself was after both.

Unless you differentiate atheist lower case from Atheist upper case? In which case please define.

A working mirror neuron system allows a person to experience feelings that an individual with a non-working mirror neuron system is not able to experience. And recent research suggests that not all people with Autism are able to assign the same meaning and purpose in their life as most others do because of the inability to think teologically.

For the people that are able to feel this connection of empathy with the world, there is no mistake in the reality of the feeling; if research is correct, it is non-existent for the minority of people and varies in degree for the rest of people

The estimated 2.5 percent of the world population that identifies themselves as Atheists is probably less than the actual total number of people diagnosed and not diagnosed that are on the general autism spectrum; particularly in developed countries.

If a person does not experience mysterious feelings generated by an active mirror neuron sytem they wouldn't be likely to generate mysterious explanations for something they can't experience.

While obviously this isn't the cause of all atheism or all religious experience, it is very possible that when some atheists talk to some religious people, that it is not possible for some atheists to understand the feelings that are behind his "power of God" thing that some people may categorize this experience of life under.

I find Fnord' comments over atheists not needing meaning or romance, particularly, interesting, in the possibility that he like many of us may not have the ability to experience this as others do.

Without a properly working mirror neuron system what is labeled as faith and prayer may do little to nothing for an individual with this issue. In this case, it is not a matter of miracle cures, answered prayers, or proof of the existence of a deity, but a matter of feeling a reality that some may not be able to feel. It would be hard to provide evidence of the value of faith or prayer, for someone that is not able to feel and benefit from the positive effects of the experience.

It could be the reason that people that use positive beliefs, visualizations, in tandem with shared human connections that they label as faith and prayer, rarely question the value of the positive effect of it in their life.

I can't find a more logical reason why only 2.5% of the world's population consider themselves atheists.

The percentage of scientists that consider themselves religious is low, in the single digits; however the percentage of physicians that consider themselves religious is close to 80%. Both groups are comprised of individuals with higher than normal intelligence; the difference is one group work is people centered and the other groups work is not people centered. Is the answer in biology? I think it is possible that it is part of the answer.

Although religion is probably more dominant than atheism in the world I seriously doubt that people brought up in a religious context think it worthwhile to question their background. Religion is more than theological philosophy, it is a social milieu with all sorts of connections to social activities and economic connections. Few people want to buck these trends in life for abstract mental constructs about the nature of the universe. It is not stupid to conform if conformity provides sufficient rewards. It's only in the dead of night when deep personal questions provoke a view of how limited life is and how perverse luck can be that people start to wonder about reality and perhaps the questions on a beneficent universe arise. That's where atheism rears its ugly head.

The numbers are growing. I think it's just a matter of time and pressure.

And hopefully a reduction in the volume of magical thinking will have some benefits one day.

There are plenty of us atheists that aren't hawkish about it. Granted we may not care about "converting" people.

Religion is a deeply emotional matter and it invades all areas of making sense of the world. Conversion does not come out of discussion but by personal experience that evokes an understanding that much of the basic assumptions of religions does not stand up to actuality.

The reward is an ongoing life experience for some; as indicated here, there is plenty of reason why people don't discard it and leave it behind.

Philosophy relies on dialog and rules of debate. The goal of a debate is to argue the opposition into a philosophical corner where they are forced to either capitulate or look foolish.

Religion relies on arbitrary doctrine and faith. The goal of religion is to impose conformity and arbitrary doctrine on a fearful and ignorant public.

Science relies on methods of inquiry and empirical evidence. The goal of science is to acquire and refine all knowledge and understanding.

All over again deja Zsa Gabor!

Was it here or where you said that with slightly different wording and I pointed out - as I point out again but more compactly:

Your definition of philosophic goals, if true, is stupid. Philosophers who are out to WIN? Oy!

Your words on religion are completely wrong - if you are trying to be descriptive. If you are instead attempting a normative definition of religion, you just defined huge chunks of Christianity and Buddhism at least as non-religions.

Your statement on science is better than the other two but seriously flawed - unless you are defining the mainstream Western scientific community- which deliberately removes some areas of knowledge from the picture - as non-science.

Science also inquires on why some do not experience faith in the way others do and provides empirical evidence as to why they don't. Faith and prayer is as real as positive visual imagery that can provide motivation in life to obtain goals. It has a different label and "mysterious" overtones. It reduces anxiety and increases hope for some; science has been able to measure this.

Humans gain comfort and experience less anxiety with tradition; cultures throughout time have been full of tradition; our current culture in the US lacks many traditions that stand, other than those associated with religion.

All of these factors are enhanced by the social connections provided by religion. For those that do not fully experience empathy, the experience of those connections and the relationship to the shared experience of hope through faith and prayer is not the same.

The 80% of people that participate in religion and may gain these rewards, established as solid factors, by science, are hardly ignorant in participating in an activity like religion that can be the source of these rewards.

For those that have no choice to ignore the rewards because they do not fully have the capacity to experience the rewards, as science suggests; they need not participate, in a country like the US where there is a choice not to participate.

One could argue their entire life that Faith does not prove God; but there is no need for proof because there is scientific evidence that some people can experience an intrinsic reward from the experience of faith and prayer their entire life. Regardless, of what God is or is not, the reward of participation in religion is real and measurable, at least for some.

So are the people that "succumb" to religion fearful and ignorant? Yes, as we all are; some less, some more, but never truly in control in a chaotic world, and ignorant of all things one cannot observe, experience, or understand.

Depends where you live in the world. Where I grew up in England the minority were those with religious beliefs. They are the ones likely to be "closet Christians". Most of the people I know just don't give a fig about religion, it is totally irrelevant to their lives. One or two have got married in a church but that is only for the tradition rather than beliefs and they are unlikely to go to the church again until they (maybe) visit it feet first in a box.

I gather America is the pole opposite to many parts of England and atheists have to remain in the closet or they face discrimination and problems in school/workplace. In England you are more likely to be discriminated by being regarded as "a religious nut" - not my words - just the sort of typical phrase used for anyone who openly expresses religious beliefs/sentiments in the workplace or school.

Different culture, different stance, same discrimination.