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.
I ran across a fascinating study by the “Understanding Unbelief” project of the University of Kent in partnership with other universities and institutions. The study was reported in 2019 and included thousands of atheists and agnostics from Brazil, China, Denmark, Japan, the United Kingdom and the United States.
The Understanding Unbelief project appears to be sympathetic to unbelief; it’s scarcely a religious think tank. The website is here: https://research.kent.ac.uk/understandingunbelief/. The mission is stated thusly: “Understanding Unbelief is a major research programme aiming to advance the scientific understanding of atheism and other forms of so-called ‘unbelief’ around the world. Its central research questions concern the nature and diversity of ‘unbelief’.”
Atheists were those who self-identified with the statement “I don’t believe in God.” Agnostics were those who self-identified with the statement “I don’t know whether there is a God, and I don’t believe there is any way to find out.” Another option was simply “Don’t know,” but those respondents weren’t categorized as atheists or agnostics.
Regarding supernatural beliefs, the study included the following:
Life after death
Reincarnation
Astrology
Objects with mystical powers
People with mystical powers
Significant events “meant to be”
Supernatural beings
Underlying forces of good or evil
Universal spirit or life force
Karma
The percentages of belief in the above phenomena, shown in graphs on pages 13 and 14 of the report, are pretty eye-popping. The general population results are predictably much higher than those of agnostics, and the agnostic results are higher than those of atheists. American atheists show approximately 15% belief in almost every category, well above 20% for “Significant events ‘meant to be’”, “Underlying forces of good or evil” and “Universal spirit or life force.” “Supernatural beings” were right at 20%.
The study also identified those atheists and agnostics who were “thoroughgoing naturalists.” They either “strongly” or “somewhat” disagreed with the existence of any and all supernatural phenomena. I quote from page 15:
As can be seen above, in none of our six countries surveyed does the percentage of unbelievers who qualify as naturalists approach 50%. Even among American atheists, the most naturalistic group across our surveyed countries, only a third seem to have a wholly naturalistic world view. Among Chinese atheists meanwhile, fewer than one in ten does.
As one might predict from the previous graphs, agnostics are consistently less likely to be naturalists than atheists. In no country does more than one in ten agnostics qualify; in China, it is more like one in fifty.
Probably not what you were expecting, eh? Not exactly the New Atheist gospel, eh? Not exactly even the C-D atheist gospel, eh?
Probably not what you were expecting, eh? Not exactly the New Atheist gospel, eh? Not exactly even the C-D atheist gospel, eh?
I'm an atheist, and I'm not at all surprised. Atheism generally corresponds with lower levels of what I call 'nonsense belief', but not with no belief at all in such. The link you posted states as much.
Quote:
Unbelief in God doesn’t necessarily entail unbelief in other supernatural phenomena. Atheists and (less so) agnostics exhibit lower levels of supernatural belief than do the wider populations. However, only minorities of atheists or agnostics in each of our countries appear to be thoroughgoing naturalists.
I personally know atheists who believe in ghosts, astrology, and karma. If I thought about it - and actually asked everyone I know whether or not they are atheists and if they believe in such things - I'm sure the list would balloon. It is not surprising because different attributes govern why people believe in different things, even if all of those things might fall under the umbrella concept of 'supernatural'. People are atheists for all sorts of reasons, only one of which is strict evidentiary rationality. The fact that you think a great many atheists are going to be stunned by this says nothing about them. But it does say a bit about you.
Thank you for highlighting the general misconceptions of atheists held by you and other non-atheists. It is much appreciated.
I ran across a fascinating study by the “Understanding Unbelief” project of the University of Kent in partnership with other universities and institutions. The study was reported in 2019 and included thousands of atheists and agnostics from Brazil, China, Denmark, Japan, the United Kingdom and the United States.
The Understanding Unbelief project appears to be sympathetic to unbelief; it’s scarcely a religious think tank. The website is here: https://research.kent.ac.uk/understandingunbelief/. The mission is stated thusly: “Understanding Unbelief is a major research programme aiming to advance the scientific understanding of atheism and other forms of so-called ‘unbelief’ around the world. Its central research questions concern the nature and diversity of ‘unbelief’.”
Atheists were those who self-identified with the statement “I don’t believe in God.” Agnostics were those who self-identified with the statement “I don’t know whether there is a God, and I don’t believe there is any way to find out.” Another option was simply “Don’t know,” but those respondents weren’t categorized as atheists or agnostics.
Regarding supernatural beliefs, the study included the following:
Life after death
Reincarnation
Astrology
Objects with mystical powers
People with mystical powers
Significant events “meant to be”
Supernatural beings
Underlying forces of good or evil
Universal spirit or life force
Karma
The percentages of belief in the above phenomena, shown in graphs on pages 13 and 14 of the report, are pretty eye-popping. The general population results are predictably much higher than those of agnostics, and the agnostic results are higher than those of atheists. American atheists show approximately 15% belief in almost every category, well above 20% for “Significant events ‘meant to be’”, “Underlying forces of good or evil” and “Universal spirit or life force.” “Supernatural beings” were right at 20%.
The study also identified those atheists and agnostics who were “thoroughgoing naturalists.” They either “strongly” or “somewhat” disagreed with the existence of any and all supernatural phenomena. I quote from page 15:
As can be seen above, in none of our six countries surveyed does the percentage of unbelievers who qualify as naturalists approach 50%. Even among American atheists, the most naturalistic group across our surveyed countries, only a third seem to have a wholly naturalistic world view. Among Chinese atheists meanwhile, fewer than one in ten does.
As one might predict from the previous graphs, agnostics are consistently less likely to be naturalists than atheists. In no country does more than one in ten agnostics qualify; in China, it is more like one in fifty.
Probably not what you were expecting, eh? Not exactly the New Atheist gospel, eh? Not exactly even the C-D atheist gospel, eh?
It's exactly what I'd expect.
It's exactly what I've been saying for multiple posts.
Irkle you seem to think this is all a revelation.
Atheism means absence of belief in god ONLY.
It rules out nothing else.
I wonder if you would benefit from spending some time in Britain?
Atheism is not at all unusual there. It's freely talked about. It's a cultural norm. I'd say approximately half my family and friends in the UK are atheists. The ones that are atheists have individual beliefs in all kids of other things, some of which I share, some of which I don't. This is what I've been saying from the beginning.
My brother believes his departed wife's spirit is nearby. He's an atheist. I mentioned exactly this in a post only very recently.
This survey is exactly what I'd expect from my personal knowledge of other atheists, which is extensive in comparison to US standards.
I actually lived in Kent for 15 years about 2 miles from this University. I miss it with every fibre. It's a wonderful place to live. The fact that this study was conducted through the University of Kent doesn't surprise me either. Brits are very open minded people don't you know?
Yes I said my last post was my last one for a while but how could I skip past this?
I'm an atheist, and I'm not at all surprised. Atheism generally corresponds with lower levels of what I call 'nonsense belief', but not with no belief at all in such. The link you posted states as much.
I personally know atheists who believe in ghosts, astrology, and karma. If I thought about it - and actually asked everyone I know whether or not they are atheists and if they believe in such things - I'm sure the list would balloon. It is not surprising because different attributes govern why people believe in different things, even if all of those things might fall under the umbrella concept of 'supernatural'. People are atheists for all sorts of reasons, only one of which is strict evidentiary rationality. The fact that you think a great many atheists are going to be stunned by this says nothing about them. But it does say a bit about you.
Thank you for highlighting the general misconceptions of atheists held by you and other non-atheists. It is much appreciated.
It only mildly surprised me. I have interacted extensively with atheists who believed firmly in the survival of consciousness. "Supernatural beings" and "underlying forces of good and evil," not so much.
But let's be honest: The New Atheism is desperate to portray all this as woo-woo, unworthy of belief by anyone this side of a credulous dolt. As I've mentioned, one of the really higher-level forums on which I've participated was the atheist-created and atheist-dominated Forum for Active and Critical Thinking Skills. Ridicule of woo-woo was one of the primary topics. I guarantee you, they would've been completely flummoxed by these results.
I actually think these sort of studies underscore what many have said about the New Atheist fad of the past 20 or so years. It actually has almost nothing to do with belief or disbelief in a deity. It has to do with lifestyle and largely sexual lifestyle. I want a lifestyle that simply doesn't mesh with religious belief, especially Christian belief, and thus I refuse to allow thoughts about a deity onto my radar screen.
It only mildly surprised me. I have interacted extensively with atheists who believed firmly in the survival of consciousness. "Supernatural beings" and "underlying forces of good and evil," not so much.
But let's be honest: The New Atheism is desperate to portray all this as woo-woo, unworthy of belief by anyone this side of a credulous dolt. As I've mentioned, one of the really higher-level forums on which I've participated was the atheist-created and atheist-dominated Forum for Active and Critical Thinking Skills. Ridicule of woo-woo was one of the primary topics. I guarantee you, they would've been completely flummoxed by these results.
I actually think these sort of studies underscore what many have said about the New Atheist fad of the past 20 or so years. It actually has almost nothing to do with belief or disbelief in a deity. It has to do with lifestyle and largely sexual lifestyle. I want a lifestyle that simply doesn't mesh with religious belief, especially Christian belief, and thus I refuse to allow thoughts about a deity onto my radar screen.
Do New Atheists lack belief in God, like Old Atheists? If so, what is the difference, since the lack of a belief in God is the only defining characteristic?
It's exactly what I'd expect.
It's exactly what I've been saying for multiple posts.
Irkle you seem to think this is all a revelation. Atheism means absence of belief in god ONLY.
It rules out nothing else.
Thank you. That is all it means.
I do not believe in any gods. Therefore I am an atheist.
It really do not see what there is to misunderstand about that.
I know atheists who believe in life after death.
I know atheists who believe in some kind of cosmic energy or interconnected oneness. Some believe this along the lines of Buddhism. Others believe it has to do with various principles of space, time, and physics that are way over my head to try to understand (and I'm okay with that!).
I know atheists who believe in reincarnation, astral projection, clairvoyance, ghosts, astrology, twin flames, and even souls.
They don't believe in gods, however. Therefore, they are atheists.
Probably not what you were expecting, eh? Not exactly the New Atheist gospel, eh? Not exactly even the C-D atheist gospel, eh?
I am totally flummoxed. But not really surprised as I learn more about atheist, at least American atheists. The Brits I think are a different tribe. Maybe because they live in a country that has a state sponsored religion.
Why do you think people who were studied still identify themselves as Atheists? Why is it important?
Do New Atheists lack belief in God, like Old Atheists? If so, what is the difference, since the lack of a belief in God is the only defining characteristic?
The New Atheism is an aggressive anti-religion atheist proselytizing movement popularized by Richard Dawkins and his cronies over the past 20 years or so. The large majority of New Atheists are quite young and embrace the New Atheism at pretty much the level at which teenyboppers once embraced The Beatles. It has lost much of its steam, and Dawkins has lost much of his former luster because he just became too foaming-at-the-mouth crazy for even some of his followers to stomach. The New Atheism was and is widely criticized by thoughtful atheists - people of the caliber of atheist philosopher Thomas Nagel - who recognized that it was turning a serious philosophical position into an embarrassing clown show.
Your question is a little like asking "What's the difference between the Eastern Orthodox Church and a fundamentalist, Young Earth, Flat Earth snake-handling sect - don't they all just believe in the same God?" Well, yes, but there are important distinctions.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cb2008
I am totally flummoxed. But not really surprised as I learn more about atheist, at least American atheists. The Brits I think are a different tribe. Maybe because they live in a country that has a state sponsored religion.
Why do you think people who were studied still identify themselves as Atheists? Why is it important?
Honestly, I think it's what I suggested. I believe much of modern atheism has essentially nothing to do with the existence or nonexistence of a deity. I think it's (1) a fad, just as Christianity was during my university days, and (2) a lifestyle choice. Atheism fits nicely into the cultural shift whereby Judeo-Christian morality is fast collapsing if not long gone; as Dostoevsky wrote, "Without God, everything is permitted."
Although I am surprised that a significant portion of atheists claim belief in things like supernatural beings and forces of good and evil, the obvious disconnect just shows me that it's really not a reasoned position about the existence or nonexistence of a deity at all. The indoctrination of the two or three generations below mine has been sufficiently effective that many people have never really given the existence of God or the related issues any more thought than they give the Tooth Fairy. "I'm an atheist!" has essentially no meaning other than "I don't believe childish nonsense!" - which is why these ostensible atheists see no disconnect in believing what serious atheists have traditionally regarded as woo-woo. It means no more than "Obviously, I don't believe in the Tooth Fairy or God - but, sure, I do believe in astrology, supernatural beings, forces of good and evil, and karma because they aren't childish nonsense like God and the Tooth Fairy."
If I'm flummoxed, it's by the prevailing atheism on C-D forums, where the big defense seems to "Don't accuse us of having any convictions about the nonexistence of God! We just disbelieve in a vacuum, for no reason other than we think a deity is childish nonsense. Our atheism has no real impact on our lives." I think this reflects what I've said about the New Atheism. Based on my past interactions with serious internet atheists, this attitude of "Mindless and Proud of It" isn't what I was expecting and is kind of disorienting.
The New Atheism is an aggressive anti-religion atheist proselytizing movement popularized by Richard Dawkins and his cronies over the past 20 years or so. The large majority of New Atheists are quite young and embrace the New Atheism at pretty much the level at which teenyboppers once embraced The Beatles. It has lost much of its steam, and Dawkins has lost much of his former luster because he just became too foaming-at-the-mouth crazy for even some of his followers to stomach. The New Atheism was and is widely criticized by thoughtful atheists - people of the caliber of atheist philosopher Thomas Nagel - who recognized that it was turning a serious philosophical position into an embarrassing clown show.
Your question is a little like asking "What's the difference between the Eastern Orthodox Church and a fundamentalist, Young Earth, Flat Earth snake-handling sect - don't they all just believe in the same God?" Well, yes, but there are important distinctions.
Honestly, I think it's what I suggested. I believe much of modern atheism has essentially nothing to do with the existence or nonexistence of a deity. I think it's (1) a fad, just as Christianity was during my university days, and (2) a lifestyle choice. Atheism fits nicely into the cultural shift whereby Judeo-Christian morality is fast collapsing if not long gone; as Dostoevsky wrote, "Without God, everything is permitted."
Although I am surprised that a significant portion of atheists claim belief in things like supernatural beings and forces of good and evil, the obvious disconnect just shows me that it's really not a reasoned position about the existence or nonexistence of a deity at all. The indoctrination of the two or three generations below mine has been sufficiently effective that many people have never really given the existence of God or the related issues any more thought than they give the Tooth Fairy. "I'm an atheist!" has essentially no meaning other than "I don't believe childish nonsense!" - which is why these ostensible atheists see no disconnect in believing what serious atheists have traditionally regarded as woo-woo. It means no more than "Obviously, I don't believe in the Tooth Fairy or God - but, sure, I do believe in astrology, supernatural beings, forces of good and evil, and karma because they aren't childish nonsense like God and the Tooth Fairy."
If I'm flummoxed, it's by the prevailing atheism on C-D forums, where the big defense seems to "Don't accuse us of having any convictions about the nonexistence of God! We just disbelieve in a vacuum, for no reason other than we think a deity is childish nonsense. Our atheism has no real impact on our lives." I think this reflects what I've said about the New Atheism. Based on my past interactions with serious internet atheists, this attitude of "Mindless and Proud of It" isn't what I was expecting and is kind of disorienting.
You could have saved a lot of effort by simply answering the question. Does everybody have to subscribe to whatever Dawkins says?
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.
