Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Religion
In reply to the discussion: Scientists discover that atheists might not exist, and that’s not a joke [View all]Jim__
(14,351 posts)43. I believe the full article is available elsewhere.
From Current Events:
...
Norenzayan has yet to work out the relative importance of these different routes to atheism, partly because they are mutually reinforcing. But he says his hunch is that apatheism is the most important. "That is probably surprising to a lot of people who think you get atheism by analytical thinking. But I see striking evidence that as societies become more equal and there are social safety nets, secularisation follows," he says.
To some religious proponents, this is evidence that most of the "nones" aren't really atheists at all a claim that is backed by a recent survey from UK-based Christian think tank Theos. It found that even as formal religion is waning in the UK, spiritual beliefs are not. Almost 60 per cent of adults questioned said they believed in some form of higher power or spiritual being; a mere 13 per cent agreed with the line "humans are purely material beings with no spiritual element".
Some scientists notably Pascal Boyer at Washington University in St Louis have even claimed that atheism is psychologically impossible because of the way humans think. They point to studies showing, for example, that even people who claim to be committed atheists tacitly hold religious beliefs, such as the existence of an immortal soul.
To Norenzayan, this is all semantics. "Labels don't concern me as much as psychology and behaviour. Do people say they believe in god? Do they go to a church or synagogue or mosque? Do they pray? Do they find meaning in religion? These are the variables that should interest us." By these measures, most of the nones really are irreligious, meaning atheism is much more durable and widespread than would be the case if the only route to atheism was actively rejecting religious ideas.
...
Norenzayan has yet to work out the relative importance of these different routes to atheism, partly because they are mutually reinforcing. But he says his hunch is that apatheism is the most important. "That is probably surprising to a lot of people who think you get atheism by analytical thinking. But I see striking evidence that as societies become more equal and there are social safety nets, secularisation follows," he says.
To some religious proponents, this is evidence that most of the "nones" aren't really atheists at all a claim that is backed by a recent survey from UK-based Christian think tank Theos. It found that even as formal religion is waning in the UK, spiritual beliefs are not. Almost 60 per cent of adults questioned said they believed in some form of higher power or spiritual being; a mere 13 per cent agreed with the line "humans are purely material beings with no spiritual element".
Some scientists notably Pascal Boyer at Washington University in St Louis have even claimed that atheism is psychologically impossible because of the way humans think. They point to studies showing, for example, that even people who claim to be committed atheists tacitly hold religious beliefs, such as the existence of an immortal soul.
To Norenzayan, this is all semantics. "Labels don't concern me as much as psychology and behaviour. Do people say they believe in god? Do they go to a church or synagogue or mosque? Do they pray? Do they find meaning in religion? These are the variables that should interest us." By these measures, most of the nones really are irreligious, meaning atheism is much more durable and widespread than would be the case if the only route to atheism was actively rejecting religious ideas.
...
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
103 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
That premise is not obvious in the short excerpt above. Which mostly suggests hard-wired values.
Brettongarcia
Jul 2014
#19
At best he's illustrating that there can be a spectrum of belief as well as non-belief
AtheistCrusader
Jul 2014
#21
What does the existence of a soul have to do with religion or belief in a god?
Starboard Tack
Jul 2014
#47
My sister used to say that anything I did that was good, that was because her god put
djean111
Jul 2014
#30
Another religious bigot proudly displaying his scientific illiteracy and intolerance.
beam me up scottie
Jul 2014
#54
Exactly. But why let facts get in the way of perfectly acceptable religious intolerance?
beam me up scottie
Jul 2014
#59
He is promulgating a bigoted belief, as if true. He's begging the question on an assumption.
AtheistCrusader
Jul 2014
#71
He's saying that atheists behave worse. That is categorically untrue as a society.
AtheistCrusader
Jul 2014
#78
Don't bother. This is acceptable intolerance in this forum because it comes from a believer.
beam me up scottie
Jul 2014
#81
The 'no atheists in foxholes' meme is generally considered offensive and bigoted.
AtheistCrusader
Jul 2014
#64
I don't see that assumption at all, particularly given his thesis that humans are so predisposed.
rug
Jul 2014
#65
Um, he's deliberately bending over backwards to accomodate people of faith in that eulogy.
AtheistCrusader
Jul 2014
#76