Well, I have to say that there are those on both sides who set up the false dichotomy. And when people feel they have to choose between faith and science, many will reject faith, but too many will reject science.
A study of atheism worldwide
- Thread starter Masquerouge
- Start date
warpus
Sommerswerd asked me to change this
Which is why YECs exist, because they're indoctrinated to believe that science contracts scripture and thus that they should reject science. It's a shame, really.
What is worse is that some of them think they are accepting science but have no clear idea of what that science is.
For example, it is my opinion that most LDS YECs (and there are plenty, despite that it is by no means necessary) are that way because of faulty science education.
warpus
Sommerswerd asked me to change this
Maybe you should take it upon yourself to re-educate these lost souls 
GenMarshall
High Elven ISB Capt & Ghost Agent
Actualy, there are Christians out there who believe in Evolution and only see the creation story in scriptures as metaphoric stories and don't take them litteraly like most YECs do.
I myself am a Catholic and yet I still believe in Evolution.
I'd have to say that Evolution did more than just convince me that the church elders were mistaken about fact, it convinced me that their method of determining fact was fruitless.
Too many people rely on faith. Personally I side with Abraham Lincoln:
Honest Abe said:
Religious Faith is just a type of passion, in my opinion, as it has no basis in fact or reality.
I think people do generally have to choose between relying on faith or science to determine what truth is. Fact is, science is utterly superior to faith in this regard. Science and faith have come into conflict many times in the past, they come into conflict in the present, and they will conflict in the future. When one has to choose sides between reason and faith, reason is the better way to go.
-Drachasor
Chandrasekhar
Determined
This seems to be a key point in the issue. I'd say it's sort of like how people say that if any part of the Bible is untrue, it all must be.
Well, it wasn't really all that simple for me. It was more the elders saying "God told me that He exists, and this god told me that the Bible is totally true!" Clearly whatever being they were communicating with was deceiving them.
Not to fall behind at all, but certainly being Jewish is very different from believing in God:
http://www.simpletoremember.com/vitals/JewsDontBelieve.htm
From Gene Weingarten, one of those atheist Jews:
"So I thought I would aggravate matters today by presenting my Mathematical Proof That The Likelihood of A Deity and/or Other Supernatural Explanations For Life and/or Afterlife Declines to a Probability Approaching Zero(http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/liveonline/images/weingarten/gene_magic2.jpg)
Please note that I retain the copyright for this illustration, which probably will be studied and cited by theologians for generations. I thank Ms. Elizabeth Kelly for the colorful artistic enhancements.
As you can plainly see, the line representing Presumptions of Magic has a steadily downward slope of approximately 43 degrees, beginning in the era when hominids attributed all observed phenomena to supernatural causes. These include such things as Thor creating lightning with thunderbolts, dyspepsia being caused by disruption of bodily humors, torrents being attributed to the weeping of Matlalcueitl, the Aztec rain goddess, plus your occasional Cacodaemons, Simulacra, Succubuses and whatnot. EVERYTHING had a mystical explanation. That's because people were fearful, ignorant, and desperate to give meaning to life.
If a philosopher or social scientist were to try to encapsulate a single principle that yoked together the intellectual process of civilazation, it would be a gradual dismantling of presumptions of magic. Brick by brick, century by century, with occasional burps and hiccups, the wall of superstition has been coming down. Science and medicine and political philosophy have been on a relentless march in one direction only -- sometimes slow, sometimes at a gallop, but never reversing course. Never has an empirical scientific discovery been deemed wrong and replaced by a more convincing mystical explanation. ("Holy cow, Dr. Pasteur! I've examined the pancreas of a diabetic dog, and darned if it's NOT an insulin deficiency, but a little evil goblin dwelling inside. And he seems really pissed!") Some magical presumptions have stubbornly persisted waaaay longer than others, but have eventually, inexorably fallen to logic, reason and enlightenment, such as the assumption of the divine right of kings and the entitlement of aristocracy. That one took five millennia, but fall it did.
There remain many unanswered questions about how the world works, how our bodies work, where we came from, and so forth. We're workin' on 'em. When you think about it, though, there is only one fire-from-the-sky booga-booga notion left. But it's a biggie.
So here we are in 2007. And the question we must ask ourselves, as dispassionate truth seekers, is: Which is the most likely place that civilization will find itself in the year 3000? Will it be position A, or position B?
I'll wait here while you examine the chart. Feel free to use rulers, protractors, calipers, etc.
Sheesh."
http://www.simpletoremember.com/vitals/JewsDontBelieve.htm
From Gene Weingarten, one of those atheist Jews:
"So I thought I would aggravate matters today by presenting my Mathematical Proof That The Likelihood of A Deity and/or Other Supernatural Explanations For Life and/or Afterlife Declines to a Probability Approaching Zero(http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/liveonline/images/weingarten/gene_magic2.jpg)
Please note that I retain the copyright for this illustration, which probably will be studied and cited by theologians for generations. I thank Ms. Elizabeth Kelly for the colorful artistic enhancements.
As you can plainly see, the line representing Presumptions of Magic has a steadily downward slope of approximately 43 degrees, beginning in the era when hominids attributed all observed phenomena to supernatural causes. These include such things as Thor creating lightning with thunderbolts, dyspepsia being caused by disruption of bodily humors, torrents being attributed to the weeping of Matlalcueitl, the Aztec rain goddess, plus your occasional Cacodaemons, Simulacra, Succubuses and whatnot. EVERYTHING had a mystical explanation. That's because people were fearful, ignorant, and desperate to give meaning to life.
If a philosopher or social scientist were to try to encapsulate a single principle that yoked together the intellectual process of civilazation, it would be a gradual dismantling of presumptions of magic. Brick by brick, century by century, with occasional burps and hiccups, the wall of superstition has been coming down. Science and medicine and political philosophy have been on a relentless march in one direction only -- sometimes slow, sometimes at a gallop, but never reversing course. Never has an empirical scientific discovery been deemed wrong and replaced by a more convincing mystical explanation. ("Holy cow, Dr. Pasteur! I've examined the pancreas of a diabetic dog, and darned if it's NOT an insulin deficiency, but a little evil goblin dwelling inside. And he seems really pissed!") Some magical presumptions have stubbornly persisted waaaay longer than others, but have eventually, inexorably fallen to logic, reason and enlightenment, such as the assumption of the divine right of kings and the entitlement of aristocracy. That one took five millennia, but fall it did.
There remain many unanswered questions about how the world works, how our bodies work, where we came from, and so forth. We're workin' on 'em. When you think about it, though, there is only one fire-from-the-sky booga-booga notion left. But it's a biggie.
So here we are in 2007. And the question we must ask ourselves, as dispassionate truth seekers, is: Which is the most likely place that civilization will find itself in the year 3000? Will it be position A, or position B?
I'll wait here while you examine the chart. Feel free to use rulers, protractors, calipers, etc.
Sheesh."
Enkidu Warrior
Ultramagnetic
If you're talking about religion in the western sense, Japan is one of the least religious countries in the world. Everyone goes to a shinto shrine at the new year, everyone has a Christian wedding, and everyone has a Buddhist funeral, but very few have any use for religion beyond cultural decoration. Oh, and even if they did, neither Buddhism nor Shinto (which is not even really a religion by most standards) have a God.
Verbose
Deity
Noticed this, and couldn't find an a real explanation what's up with these figures, so I'll just provide some.
"Census data" in Sweden and Denmark are not based on the US or UK kind where people are asked how they would describe themselves. It's not self-description. Public records already specify what memberships and affiliations people have, so there's no need to go ask them. In essense a census isn't a specific event, but an ongoing process. Census data is collected continously.
As for the "Lutheran" thing, that specifies membership in the CoD and CoS, both of which are centuries old state churches. What happens is that you are born into them. The only way to escape registering as a blip of data in this kind of census is to actively leave the church. If you don't, you register as a "Lutheran", and so do your kids automatically.
Well, most people don't care enough about religion to make a whole song and dance of actively rejectining it. Many, like me, think paying the eqv. of 100$/month in taxes to support all those historic churches dotting the landscape out of a somewhat foggy general respect for cultural heritage is OK.
There is no belief involved, just databases being maintained, and taxes automatically collected for the church alongside all the other taxes (community and state).
If you want to know what people actually think and believe, you have to go and actively poll them. Obviously the CIA Factbook won't do that.
MayNilad Man
King
There are Lies, Damned Lies, and Statistics!
-not me.
The problem I feel with this is that people don't really think about their faith, they just answer anything they think they are without going beyond the superficial.
-not me.
The problem I feel with this is that people don't really think about their faith, they just answer anything they think they are without going beyond the superficial.
Cuivienen
Deity
- Joined
- Nov 26, 2003
- Messages
- 8,011
Perhaps more importantly, the "atheist" nations cited as having high suicide rates were, as admitted, Soviet bloc states. Now, atheism is prevalent in the former Soviet bloc, but it was generally forced atheism and probably does not accurately reflect the views of the population. In any case, the economic upheaval going on in those areas is surely a greater factor, and the correlation is mostly coincidence.
Atheism in the former soviet states might be partially attributable to Stalin's failure to break the Orthodox church and its later use by the state to help maintain itself... thus... in the former soviet states, those incorporated by force, the Orthodox church would be something to reject and oppose for its past collusion. Now of course they have better things to do than worry about damnation... like enjoy economic growth and the like...
Buddhism has no God... but it has a wide range of deities and beings of veneration.
Shintoism does have gods.
How can polytheist religions be atheist? O_o
Buddhism has no God... but it has a wide range of deities and beings of veneration.
Shintoism does have gods.
How can polytheist religions be atheist? O_o
dh_epic
Cold War Veteran
I, too, am a Catholic. And I, too, believe in Evolution.
Read what I said carefully -- it's a small group of radical religious leaders who insist you can either believe in God, or you can believe in evolution, but not both. People like you and me are smart enough to not get trapped a false choice, and instead say "why not both?"
Uneducated people are more susceptible to false choices, IMO. "You're either with us, or with the terrorists" -- a very dangerous but powerful false choice.
Enkidu Warrior
Ultramagnetic
None of whom amount to a God. Buddhism is quite compatible with either an atheist or theist worldview.
Shinto is hardly a religion at all and certainly doesn't have gods in the western sense. The Japanese conception of a "God" is really just some minor spirit that can have only trivial effects on the real world. And more importantly, nobody actually treats Shinto that seriously anyway. It's more of a folk tradition. Nobody in Japan describes themselves as "Shintoist". I never said it was atheist however.
For not taking religions seriously I certainly found most of the jinja and otera of Kyoto and Nara to be well maintained Though I concede with the exception of a handful of elderly people I didn't see anyone engaged in what I'd call an act of worship at the shrines, though, certainly in the temples the monks seemed quite engaged.
Of course I could make the same statement about churches here... I'd comfortably put money on there being fewer people attending these services because they believe in it rather than they are merely keeping up appearances.
You'll notice for Buddhism I use the capitalized "God" so as to differentiate a creator god from any other divine being, I also say beings of veneration... but as you say, its not entirely consistent with other examples of theism nor is it a solid fit with atheism either.
Though I concede with the exception of a handful of elderly people I didn't see anyone engaged in what I'd call an act of worship at the shrines, though, certainly in the temples the monks seemed quite engaged. Of course I could make the same statement about churches here... I'd comfortably put money on there being fewer people attending these services because they believe in it rather than they are merely keeping up appearances.
You'll notice for Buddhism I use the capitalized "God" so as to differentiate a creator god from any other divine being, I also say beings of veneration... but as you say, its not entirely consistent with other examples of theism nor is it a solid fit with atheism either.
warpus
Sommerswerd asked me to change this
That's brilliant, except that atheism and religion are not mutually exclusive.
Similar threads
