Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Nah I don't buy it, we're all born atheists and we are TAUGHT religious beliefs. There's nothing they could say to convince me otherwise.....it's not genetic.
Nah I don't buy it, we're all born atheists and we are TAUGHT religious beliefs. There's nothing they could say to convince me otherwise.....it's not genetic.
I suspect you're being facetious ("There's nothing they could say to convince me otherwise" raises a red flag and is not typically the sort of thing that an atheist would say.)
But just to clarify whatever further discussion is about to happen: The study does not show that particular religious beliefs are genetic; it shows that a tendency toward spirituality is genetic to some extent.
I am an atheist, but I also have a tendency toward spirituality. I suspect there could be a neurological underpinning towards spiritual tendencies, and these tendencies could stem from genetically-influenced brain organization or development. You can, after all, take certain drugs, for example DMT, to provoke a feeling of "god" or mystical oneness. It is certainly possible that some brains are born with a tendency to produce a bit more or less of this or that chemical that plays a role in this "oceanic feeling" or what have you.
Last edited by Gaylenwoof; 02-26-2015 at 12:27 PM..
Nope not being facetious, I was very serious. I am an atheist and it is very much something an atheist without spiritual "tendencies" would say, unlike you who claims spirituality. Don't see the connection and to me what you are saying is suspicious.
I suspect you're being facetious ("There's nothing they could say to convince me otherwise" raises a red flag and is not typically the sort of thing that an atheist would say.)
But just to clarify whatever further discussion is about to happen: The study does not show that particular religious beliefs are genetic; it shows that a tendency toward spirituality is genetic to some extent.
I am an atheist, but I also have a tendency toward spirituality. I suspect there could be a neurological underpinning towards spiritual tendencies, and these tendencies could stem from genetically-influenced brain organization or development. You can, after all, take certain drugs, for example DMT, to provoke a feeling of "god" or mystical oneness. It is certainly possible that some brains are born with a tendency to produce a bit more or less of this or that chemical that plays a role in this "oceanic feeling" or what have you.
I agree there are innate tendencies in individuals that predispose them for or against spirituality / religion.
Also I think the predominant predisposition, if you will, is in favor of theism, unfortunately. That is because humans generally have a tendency to see patterns that either don't exist or aren't significant, and to infer agency where it doesn't objectively exist. It doesn't take much indoctrination to nudge most kids in the direction of theism.
That said, I don't really disagree with Northsouth and others either, when they say children are a blank slate. It is more a question of how easily that slate is filled in, and with what, and by whom. Magical thinking is king in early childhood; I daresay that some children would develop their own magic kingdom if someone didn't promote one to them. Others would not.
This also speaks to the several systems of spiritual development that are out there. In those theories, everyone passes from chaotic / disorganized to magical thinking to rational thinking, it's just that you might spent 5 minutes or 5 decades in any one of those phases depending on your proclivities and what your environment supports.
None of this provides the slightest credibility for the various theisms, it simply provides vulnerability for them to exploit and hook into.
every habit of an animal can be traced back to a protein or a code. Every habit. I think the codes send out an endless stream of proteins and then the surroundings help the habit to be expressed. maybe its even done between the dna and protiens productions.
The internet, much like the individual's brain will reinforce any "belief" a person has. The question then becomes how can we remove the code from a time long gone?
I agree there are innate tendencies in individuals that predispose them for or against spirituality / religion.
None of this provides the slightest credibility for the various theisms, it simply provides vulnerability for them to exploit and hook into.
Don't worry about a hook. worry about the truth. I think you are more worried about a "hook" many times then what might actually be. Then there's the little matter of revenge.
Nope not being facetious, I was very serious. I am an atheist and it is very much something an atheist without spiritual "tendencies" would say, unlike you who claims spirituality. Don't see the connection and to me what you are saying is suspicious.
I was referring specifically to the "nothing can convince me otherwise" comment. I see atheists as being, in general, more "data driven" and thus open to new evidence than theists. If you are stone-cold serious about the "nothing can convince me otherwise" portion of your comment, then I am suspicious that you have more in common with the "religious" thinkers than I do - even though I am the one who is more likely to be mystical. I would find a deliciously amusing sort of irony in that - if it's true.
In any case, I agree with mordant (and you?) about the "blank slate" insofar as we are not born with beliefs one way or the other. This is why I wanted to clarify that the article did not suggest being born with religious beliefs - it was talking about tendencies toward spirituality. Mozart was not born knowing how to play music, but from what I've heard, he sure as heck had tendencies that were very favorable toward becoming a musician. I don't think that music was the only thing these tendencies could favor - with a few tweaks in his environment, he might have been, say, a great mathematician, but probably not a great linebacker - I mean, you know, if there had been a NFL in those days.
A quote from the article:
In an attempt to separate the '3 Bs'--belonging, behaving, and believing, the three elements that make up religiosity--they asked a range of questions attempting to get a handle on individual differences in spirituality. They defined this as "the capacity to reach out beyond oneself and discover or make meaning of experience through broadened perspectives and behavior." The scale is based on three main factors: self-forgetfulness, transpersonal identification and mysticism.
This is a pretty generalized notion, and I have no trouble believing that these genetic tendencies could result is a statistical correlation between these spiritual tendencies and religious thinking - or not, depending upon whether this study is confirmed in the long run by other studies.
I was referring specifically to the "nothing can convince me otherwise" comment. I see atheists as being, in general, more "data driven" and thus open to new evidence than theists. If you are stone-cold serious about the "nothing can convince me otherwise" portion of your comment, then I am suspicious that you have more in common with the "religious" thinkers than I do - even though I am the one who is more likely to be mystical. I would find a deliciously amusing sort of irony in that - if it's true.
.
They worry about a hook. "not them"
they should worry about the truth. "whatever it is ... it is"
then there is the small matter of revenge for some.
Emotional debris that distorts a world view.
I was referring specifically to the "nothing can convince me otherwise" comment. I see atheists as being, in general, more "data driven" and thus open to new evidence than theists. If you are stone-cold serious about the "nothing can convince me otherwise" portion of your comment, then I am suspicious that you have more in common with the "religious" thinkers than I do - even though I am the one who is more likely to be mystical. I would find a deliciously amusing sort of irony in that - if it's true.
In any case, I agree with mordant (and you?) about the "blank slate" insofar as we are not born with beliefs one way or the other. This is why I wanted to clarify that the article did not suggest being born with religious beliefs - it was talking about tendencies toward spirituality. Mozart was not born knowing how to play music, but from what I've heard, he sure as heck had tendencies that were very favorable toward becoming a musician. I don't think that music was the only thing these tendencies could favor - with a few tweaks in his environment, he might have been, say, a great mathematician, but probably not a great linebacker - I mean, you know, if there had been a NFL in those days.
A quote from the article:
In an attempt to separate the '3 Bs'--belonging, behaving, and believing, the three elements that make up religiosity--they asked a range of questions attempting to get a handle on individual differences in spirituality. They defined this as "the capacity to reach out beyond oneself and discover or make meaning of experience through broadened perspectives and behavior." The scale is based on three main factors: self-forgetfulness, transpersonal identification and mysticism.
This is a pretty generalized notion, and I have no trouble believing that these genetic tendencies could result is a statistical correlation between these spiritual tendencies and religious thinking - or not, depending upon whether this study is confirmed in the long run by other studies.
Yes you're right, but on this subject I don't think they can provide any kind of accurate data because of the nurture aspect of it. There is absolutely no way to prove an innate spirituality unless these twins were raised in a laboratory and they were never, ever exposed to any kind of religion. Religious conditioning can start from the cradle so there's no way someone would remember that they were talked to about god at that young of an age, it could be something as simple as singing religious hymns to an infant. The laboratory experiment will most likely never happen but if it does THEN I will re-think my stance.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
