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.
Because it tells you what you want to hear. If "Nones" beat Catholics and protestants separately, you could tell yourself that Christianity as a whole still beats "Nones". So they do, but this is just the "end of the beginning".
I could be wrong, and this could be a blip or a phase or a reaction to Trump, or any of the other explaining way of what seems to be happening. But I'm seeing here on the boards, and on the Internet more than shows up in the old Pew study. The nest one, whenever it is, (after a bit of "Don't say what you used to be - say what you are now" urging, might be quite astonishing. Or it might not. It might all turn out to be a damp squib.
If it makes you fee Secure and Happy to think that, no matter how much people don't buy the Religions any more, and even if they are giving up on Godfaith, you can tell yourself that you'll have the last Laugh, Billy, because you'll be counting your money and laughing while Hank kicks the crap out of all those who didn't kiss his ass. I just hope you bet on the right God, though
No. That's not how I see it.
I think the color and flavor of human societies across the globe won't change much either way.
IMO, whether the entire world's population becomes, believers or "none", we would probably still have rapists, pedophiles, killers, criminals, cheaters and liars etc among us - we will also have many good people amongst us who are helpful and merciful to others, who are continous about environment, kind to animals, active in volunteer work, give charity etc,,,, why because ??,,,,,,, we are humans!
We will always have good and bad among us regardless of whether all of us become believers or Atheists.
IMO, the data in the OP whether goes in favor of believers or "none"'won't change much, in the human nature and the way humans live.
The OP and yourself will be fools to think that the world will become an rosy place if everyone becomes an Athiest.
And I will be a fool if I thought that the world will be an all rosy place if everyone becomes a believer.
I think the color and flavor of human societies across the globe won't change much either way.
IMO, whether the entire world's population becomes, believers or "none", we would probably still have rapists, pedophiles, killers, criminals, cheaters and liars etc among us - we will also have many good people amongst us who are helpful and merciful to others, who are continous about environment, kind to animals, active in volunteer work, give charity etc,,,, why because ??,,,,,,, we are humans!
We will always have good and bad among us regardless of whether all of us become believers or Atheists.
IMO, the data in the OP whether goes in favor of believers or "none"'won't change much, in the human nature and the way humans live.
The OP and yourself will be fools to think that the world will become an rosy place if everyone becomes an Athiest.
And I will be a fool if I thought that the world will be an all rosy place if everyone becomes a believer.
I'm inclined to share your view. If everyone stopped hating others for having different religious views, they would find a substitute reason for hating others. The downfall of religion would represent a victory for truth, but that it would lead to some utopian future, well, that seems doubtful. Pathology of personality trumps all other concerns in terms of how and why things get done.
The OP and yourself will be fools to think that the world will become an rosy place if everyone becomes an Athiest.
And I will be a fool if I thought that the world will be an all rosy place if everyone becomes a believer.
I don't think the OP's hypothesis is that the dominance of atheism or irreligion would solve all of humanity's problems. Only that it would be a start.
Personally I don't feel humanity at large is ready to go "cold turkey" in this regard, that to push too hard too soon is to invite backlash and regression.
The growth of the nones seems to be an organic process thus far. My guess is it will level off and need a generation or so to "settle in" before the next spurt of growth.
Kudos to you for having realistic expectations of humans, religious or not.
I think the color and flavor of human societies across the globe won't change much either way.
IMO, whether the entire world's population becomes, believers or "none", we would probably still have rapists, pedophiles, killers, criminals, cheaters and liars etc among us - we will also have many good people amongst us who are helpful and merciful to others, who are continous about environment, kind to animals, active in volunteer work, give charity etc,,,, why because ??,,,,,,, we are humans!
We will always have good and bad among us regardless of whether all of us become believers or Atheists.
IMO, the data in the OP whether goes in favor of believers or "none"'won't change much, in the human nature and the way humans live.
The OP and yourself will be fools to think that the world will become an rosy place if everyone becomes an Athiest.
And I will be a fool if I thought that the world will be an all rosy place if everyone becomes a believer.
That's all quite reasonable observations. maybe all these charts and statistics mean nothing, much. And maybe they do, it's what we are working for anyway, and the insistence that it means nothing is achieving nothing. If it was intended to make us despair and give up.. it is a non -starter.
Nor is the strawman argument that world atheism will make the world a better place anything to make us go white -faced in shock (1). "He's right! Global atheism won't make any difference - we'd better all log out of the board and leave it to the Believers and their fairy -tale promises."
It might improve matters, and it might make it worse. Either way, not by enough to worry about, and it just might - if handled right - improve matters quite a lot.
So, while we can consider the valid points you are making, they are not terribly important and one wonders why you made them at all. It certainly wasn't to help us improve our strategy. No, rather it was the usual purpose of believers in such posted objections.
Bash, bash, bash.
(1) or whatever
Last edited by TRANSPONDER; 11-19-2017 at 04:01 PM..
I don't think the OP's hypothesis is that the dominance of atheism or irreligion would solve all of humanity's problems. Only that it would be a start.
Personally I don't feel humanity at large is ready to go "cold turkey" in this regard, that to push too hard too soon is to invite backlash and regression.
The growth of the nones seems to be an organic process thus far. My guess is it will level off and need a generation or so to "settle in" before the next spurt of growth.
Kudos to you for having realistic expectations of humans, religious or not.
I think the term “cold turkey” is accurate.
For all practical purposes, humans seem to be “addicted” to religion. Except for places like China.
I think China will rule the world from here on out, mainly because they don’t seem to have a psychological dependence on religion. They will support science and technology without hindrance from the religious. Europe is at the top of civilization now, but their low birth rates will ensure their demise by the end of this century. The USA will continue to devolve into a corrupt multi-ethnic second-world country like Brazil or South Africa.
For all practical purposes, humans seem to be “addicted” to religion. Except for places like China.
I think China will rule the world from here on out, mainly because they don’t seem to have a psychological dependence on religion. They will support science and technology without hindrance from the religious. Europe is at the top of civilization now, but their low birth rates will ensure their demise by the end of this century. The USA will continue to devolve into a corrupt multi-ethnic second-world country like Brazil or South Africa.
Sadly I can find nothing implausible in your predictions ... although there are many other possibilities that could play out, too.
America has ceded its leadership in world affairs as well as its thought leadership and what was left of its moral leadership to others, for good or ill. I am dubious that we can recover from it; the damage is likely permanent.
Sadly I can find nothing implausible in your predictions ... although there are many other possibilities that could play out, too.
America has ceded its leadership in world affairs as well as its thought leadership and what was left of its moral leadership to others, for good or ill. I am dubious that we can recover from it; the damage is likely permanent.
Your country, and the world, has to survive the reign of that guy with the thing on his head.
While I agree that many who are functionally non-theists may avoid the labels "atheist" or "agnostic" as too loaded,
My wife is, like me, a None, and, like me, fits the definition of atheist Yet the first time I suggested she was an atheist she had a fairly strong reaction to the label, for reasons she's not self-aware about but I suspect have to do with the loaded nature of the word and her total indifference to all things theological -- therefore, having devoted very little thought to it. After all if you're indifferent to theism and have no baggage from a theist past then "atheist" is not a very useful or relevant term to identify with -- ju
There are many people like this. Those of us who engage in these debates probably tend to discount their existence -- but they DO exist, and in significant numbers.
Terminology discussed:
Atheist-"there is no God."
Agnostic-"how would I know?"
This word, I believe, is a new one-apatheist. Someone who is apathetic towards religion. Someone who is indifferent to religion. Someone who can't get interested in religion. Someone who doesn't care if there is a God or not.
Functionally, people who fit the second and third terms may not seem all that different. They might go through the motions so as to appear to conform. (Such as being physically present at church).
It is the atheists who care enough about the topic to actually take a stand. The others may simply want to be left alone.
Your country, and the world, has to survive the reign of that guy with the thing on his head.
Long may it be short.
We'll survive it ... I don't think we're going to enjoy surviving, though.
Best estimates are that Mueller will hand down his final report not sooner than this time next year, more likely sometime in 2019 (assuming he's not fired or offed in the meantime). Things look reasonably good for the Dems to get back the House in the 2018 midterms, and possibly even the Senate. Even if these things don't produce the political will for impeachment (the latter being, despite its quasi-legal nature, essentially a political act) it seems unlikely that the Orange One will see a second term, or that the implosion of the GOP will not continue apace. I think the implosion of the GOP is now essentially synonymous with the implosion of evangelicalism as a political force. The open questions are just how it will play out and with what irreversible damage to our democratic institutions.
The lifetime appointments of many, many young wingnuts to the federal bench could take two generations to self-correct, for example.
The increase in the size and influence of the "Nones" needs to continue apace, that's for sure.
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.
Because it tells you what you want to hear. If "Nones" beat Catholics and protestants separately, you could tell yourself that Christianity as a whole still beats "Nones". So they do, but this is just the "end of the beginning".
it is a non -starter.
