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.
In a second experiment, Heywood and Bering compared 27 people with Asperger’s with 34 neurotypical people who are atheists. The atheists, as expected, often invoked anti-teleological responses such as “there is no reason why; things just happen.” The people with Asperger Syndrome were significantly less likely to offer such anti-teleological explanations than the atheists, indicating they were not engaged in teleological thinking at all. (The atheists, in contrast, revealed themselves [statistically speaking] to be reasoning teleologically, but then they rejected those thoughts.)
It looks like the non-Asperger atheists also thought of reasoning for events from a social-instinctual perspective and then had to shut that down (perhaps feeling like they recognized no validity of the "why" question to that personal experience to begin with) --although without reasoning further or redescribing the situation as if though that was an answer to a "why" question (which the people with Aspergers seemed to do).
This "fallacy of common sense" is also seen in physics knowledge, so I would suppose that those handfuls of atheists might be better educated than the non-Athiests in the study, at least in the sense of Empiricism (rather than thoroughly-verbose reasoning).
New physics students want to think of physics as if though it was common sense, but if they want to get a lot of major problems correctly answered, they have to inhibit their baser instincts for quick-thought.
Last edited by LuminousTruth; 03-11-2018 at 08:42 PM..
People are drawn to religion as a coping mechanism for death.
The thought of ceasing to exist after death is too much to bear for some, so we humans in our ingenuity, have created an everlasting paradise you can go to if you just waste years of your life praying and worshiping things that don't exist. And if you don't believe in it, you just need a little faith. And you better choose the right God too.
You even get religious bonus points for creating a mega church and hating homosexuals, transgenders, evolution, per-marital sex, masturbation, and abortion doctors because "it's not God's will." So that checks off the boxes of feeling superior.
Region has everything one could need to calm their anxiety of mortality.
Indeed, ancient polytheists religions (especially Old World western ones) seemed to be majorly about the immortality of the personal-human "identities," their partial/major separation from our normal human world, and getting to sing kumbaya with each other (syncretic) traditionally in order to make a strong society that would last as long as possible.
Here's an interesting look at why people are drawn to religion. The author states 16 basic human needs involved. Also interesting is how the same religious imagery and symbolism can be so diverse that it can apply to people with completely opposite needs.
Thats not a theory, its just an idea, an opinion.
Science theory is far more rigorous than that.
Calling speculation a theory is scientism, it uses scientific pretensions to pretend to be scientific.
Dawkins said we are enabled by evolution to seek God. The concept plays an evolutionary role.
Theism is a fantasy for people who are afraid of the dark.
John lennox, oxford mathematician said,
Atheism is a fantasy for people who are afraid of the light.
the truth is, they are both 1/2 correct. if you spoke to them about people having logical and emotional solutions to the events around them and that all people are a mixture of both sets of "loops", they would agree.
whats not correct, and the major thing we fight, is forcing people to pick either side, and only, one side.
again, understand yourself first, then their comments fall nicely into place.
Thats not a theory, its just an idea, an opinion.
Science theory is far more rigorous than that.
Calling speculation a theory is scientism, it uses scientific pretensions to pretend to be scientific.
Dawkins said we are enabled by evolution to seek God. The concept plays an evolutionary role.
wrong. minimizing notions doesn't make them less true. "beating a dead horse", 'just a theory", "No change in my life" do not change the facts. Those words are basing a belief on personal need.
Your "god belief" is not a bad belief per-say. Its like the wheel; the wheel was a good idea the day they made the first one. Its still a good idea. But; Using stone wheels makes no sense these days. The presentation of "how the universe works" threw a christian type god makes o sense these days.
That doesn't mean you have it all wrong. Most atheist will agree that aligning mind, body, and "human spirit" is a good thing. Most atheist will say we are part of a larger system better described as "life". I am in the sciences, I haven't met one trained person that didn't agree with that. In person. On forums, we have a ton of anti religion-ers just denying everything.
some religious are forcing beliefs on others. Or making laws based on "what god said". Thats is our main objection.
Make no mistake, its not science versus religion. that would be like "accounting" versus "the arts". You should understand its scientist against priest. again, its scientist versus priest. Some times the two fighting are 1/2 correct. sometimes the two of them are completely wrong.
How do we know? Well, its hard, we have to do the best we can. "what sounds more reasonable?" and "what one has observations?"
but the best tool we have is aligning a personal belief to the "Big three"
1) does a belief offer an explanation?
2) does it offer a mechanism?
3) does it make predictions that we can "see" within a reasonable time frame.
well, guess what feller ... that measuring device is independent of a belief. despite what some denominations of atheists tell you.
Theism is a fantasy for people who are afraid of the dark.
John lennox, oxford mathematician said,
Atheism is a fantasy for people who are afraid of the light.
I've heard John Lennox speak. I have no doubt he is a fine mathematician. He evidently also turns a phrase well. But he understands little about atheism and doesn't make a good case for theism.
The difference between the two quotes is that Hawking was right. God -belief is based on a real fear - of death, and a false one: punishment if you don't believe. This is fear of darkness in both senses.
Lennox' little quip is well -poisoning. Rather than saying that we do not believe theist claims and will say why, Lennox implies that we are afraid of it. Bad argument. Atheists are not afraid of the light (by which you mean the truth of religion - one in particular, I'd presume) but they are afraid of Believers getting power over them. This is a real fear as we have seen what it does.
I know what Lennox is thinking as we have heard it before "Atheists are afraid of being sent to hell, so they try to deny God, Judgement and hell". As I say, he understand little about atheism.
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.
