Anger at God: The Scientific Facts

[rug]

Anger at God is a difficult phenomenon to quantify. There are several limiting factors, including dogmatic stigma against admitting anger, which has been prevalent among theists in past research. Additionally, there are definition issues when atheists and agnostics feel anger. Can we discuss anger about God in the same study as anger at God? Finally, there are both positive and negative aspects of anger, and it is difficult to tease out the difference between kinds of angry responses: Is anger at the suffering of millions of children in Africa the same as anger that a job interview went badly?

There is some data out there, and thankfully, some researchers have gone to the trouble of controlling for many of the potential confounding variables. Even so, it takes a good amount of digging to get at the real phenomena underlying anger at God. The following bits of data represent the most uncontroversial and best controlled studies I could find.

Demographics

•62% of Americans report feeling angry at God on occasion. (It should be noted that only 3% of respondents marked “none” as their religious belief.)
•Women are more likely to be mad at God than men. (This makes sense based on men’s position of superiority and authority in traditional Western monotheism.)
•African Americans are significantly less likely to admit anger towards God.
•Catholics and Jews reported more anger than Protestants. However, nonaffiliates — religious people who are not attending church — reported the highest levels.
•Age was negatively associated with anger. That is, young people reported more anger than old.

Events that Trigger Anger

In their effort to ferret out more specific data about anger, the researchers had to control for the problem of backward rationalization. That is, when we remember past events, we generally filter them through whatever coping mechanism we have employed to accept them. Social desirability, feelings of victimization, generalized anger responses, and other measures of “reverse memory engineering” were included in supplemental analyses of the data, providing a measure of isolation for the desired variable — anger.

http://livinglifewithoutanet.wordpress.com/2011/06/27/anger-at-god-the-scientific-facts/

[dmallind]

1. Few people will get to this part...

...Close examination of the test procedures reveals that non-believers were asked to imagine the level of anger they would have if they believed. Not surprisingly, they believed that their anger would be quite severe if they were convinced of a god’s existence. There is no evidence in these studies that non-believers actually do feel anger towards God.

Hopefully this will pre-empt the usual "See! Atheists really accept God they just resent him for setting limits to their hedonism!" bullshit. Somehow I doubt it.

[rexcat]

2. The use of "Scientific Facts" is misleading....

I am sure no scientist conducted the study but more likely a "social scientist" which is totally different from what I would consider in the realm of real science (e.g., biological sciences, physics, chemistry, etc.).

I wonder how many people are also angry at their other imaginary friends. How does this survey really help people deal with the real issues of the day?

[damntexdem]

5. The use of 'scientific facts' is totally appropriate if the study was conducted appropriately, ...

which would likely be by a social scientist (all "hard science" arrogance and narrowmindedness aside).

[rexcat]

7. One study does not make it fact...

reproducible experiments conducted by other independent teams are needed to make something a scientific fact. Where are the collaborative studies? When it is reproducible by other independent researchers then come back to me but I won't hold my breath!

And anytime "god" is put into the equation good science goes out the door. I work in the "hard sciences," not the social sciences so my expectations are high unlike some.

[mike_c]

6. there's the rub....

This is an excellent study to illustrate a major fallacy-- the notion that just because "scientific methods" were used, the outcome is science. There are LAYERS of fallacy here, beginning with the delusion that god exists. Peeling those layers aside, one is left with something fascinating-- perhaps an unwitting measurement of the strength of religious delusion. One cannot be "angry with god" without tacitly admitting to the god delusion.

[Taverner]

3. If the God of the bible were real, I'd be pissed and actively work against him

God the father was an asshole

Thank Darwin he is a figment of hateful writer's imagination

[damntexdem]

4. I'm never angry at God.

Of course I'm an agnostic, so I'm not sure there is a god to which to direct my anger. But I AM angry at how many religious people depict their God and Her actions.

[dimbear]

8. Please keep in mind that anger is a sin. A mortal sin.

Feedback loop, my friends. Beware.

[cleanhippie]

9. How can there be any scientific facts when discussionsabout god are anything but?

[ej510]

10. +1