This game discriminates against Atheists!

[Cu Chulainn]

If anything CIV treats religion as what it is: the opiate of the masses. Got religion? Your people are now that much easier to control! Give them buildings where they can congregate and share their fantasies and and they'll be even more docile. Treat all of the various superstitions equally and everyone happily believes their own BS while freeing up your society for greater progress free of arbitrarily imposed morality.

 

[Perfection]

Then what would you prefer? Read up on it.

Finding a means to a more represenate sample of the scientific community

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Academies_of_Science

"Election to membership is one of the highest honors that can be accorded to a scientist and recognizes scientists who have made distinguished and continuing achievements in original research. There are more than 170 members who have won a Nobel Prize."

It's a safe bet that scientists, and only scientists, are included in that study. Someone who has a Bachelor of science degree in journalism or advertising isn't exactly what I would call a scientist, certainly not the kind of person that would contribute a whole lot to the advancement of a nation (those little ).

Your sample isn't a represenate sample of scientists, though. It's only a cadre of a elite American scientists. To say that it represents scientists in general is falllacious.

Doctors tend to be much more religious than researchers, and they get tossed in with the biologists in polls. For the purposes of this discussion, that's a skew in the data because we're getting people who don't research mixed with people who do. If you can find a study of researchers and inventors with a broader representation, then feel free to bring it up.

The lack of better data is no excuse for poor data.

 

[Stolen Rutters]

So scientists were not imprisoned and/or tortued for saying the world was round or that the earth wasn't the centre of the universe? (exaderated but my point stands that religion holds back science)

The staff held by the Pope in the time of Charlemagne was topped by an ORB, representing the Earth. That the Earth was considered round was common knowledge even back to the time of Caesar. Flat Earthers my rear orb... Your points say more about religioius extremists than religion in general.

The Catholic Church in the Early middle ages was one of the few places where education wasn't completely lost. Monasteries kept books, recorded their time, and invested in learning institutions when no one else was concerned with that stuff. The church actually was instrumental in saving education and science in Europe during this time.

It's more complex than saying religious people hold back science, though we see alot of that nowadays, and from most religions too.

 

[Cheezy the Wiz]

I think you'll find that alot of the western worl is atheist these days.

Only seven percent of Americans identify themselves as being Atheist.

 

[Truronian]

Only seven percent of Americans identify themselves as being Atheist.

20,000,000 is still a lot.

 

[lateralis]

and, interesting enough, in most states "no-religion" is second only to catholicism (where it isn't #1 of course). at least according to this poll:

http://www.usatoday.com/graphics/news/gra/gnoreligion/flash.htm

*most notable exception in Utah

 

[Cu Chulainn]

Only seven percent of Americans identify themselves as being Atheist.

This doesn't account for closeted Atheists, Agnostics (most of whom are Atheists in everything but name) and those who identify with a religion to fit in but are philosophically atheist. I was all three at one time or another.

 

[Eran of Arcadia]

This doesn't account for closeted Atheists, Agnostics (most of whom are Atheists in everything but name) and those who identify with a religion to fit in but are philosophically atheist. I was all three at one time or another.

I would say that the prevelance of religion in our society accounts for the fact that there are so many closet atheists. (I would also dispute that all agnostics are really atheists.) Right or wrong, the United States still has a religious character.

 

[Elrohir]

So scientists were not imprisoned and/or tortued for saying the world was round or that the earth wasn't the centre of the universe? (exaderated but my point stands that religion holds back science)

Ignorant societies hold back science - not religion itself. I think you're confusing a society that is ignorant and afraid of change with the religion many members of it held. There is nothing inherent in Christianity against science - quite the contrary. Many of the greatest scientists in history have been Christians, or at least theists.

 

[Fox Mccloud]

IIRC, the game has Judaism in the game but no Hebrew civ. Isn't that discriminatory?

 

[Bad Player]

I like how when it changed forum sections the posters changed.

Remember folks It was called the dark ages for a reason. Religion has stifled scientific advancment before and still does today ie. Clones and stem cells.

Wikipedia:
"This concept of a "Dark Age" was created by Italian humanists and was originally intended as a sweeping criticism of the character of Late Latin literature. Later historians expanded the term to include not only the lack of Latin literature, but a lack of contemporary written history and material cultural achievements in general. Popular culture has further expanded on the term as a vehicle to depict the Middle Ages as a time of backwardness, extending its pejorative use and expanding its scope... Most modern historians dismiss the notion that the era was a "Dark Age" by pointing out that this idea was based on ignorance of the period combined with popular stereotypes: many previous authors would simply assume that the era was a dismal time of violence and stagnation and use this assumption to prove itself.
In Britain and the United States, the phrase "Dark Ages" has occasionally been used by professionals, with severe qualification, as a term of periodization. This usage is intended as non-judgmental and simply means the relative lack of written record, "silent" as much as "dark."
...
When the term "Dark Ages" is used by historians today, it is intended to be neutral, namely to express the idea that the events of the period often seem "dark" to us, due to the paucity of historical records compared with later times. The darkness is ours, not theirs.
...
Petrarch's ideological campaign to paint the Middle Ages in a negative light worked so well that "Dark Ages" is still in popular use nearly 700 years later. The humanists' goal of reviving and revering the classics of antiquity was institutionalized in the newly forming Universities at the time, and the schools over the centuries have remained true to their humanist roots."



So it sounds more like the atheists were trying to hide the truth and repress knowledge!

 

[nihilistic]

i think it does- every religion gives benefits while not having religion does not? Who invented that? I think not havign a religion should increas eur science twice- would be more acurate.

Can some mod check if this guy is a double login or whatever?

Why would atheists complain about not being included as a religion? Personally I'd be offended if they included atheism as a religion, as it would have been an insult.

That's in Civ 3 Conquests, actaully. It's called Fascism.

Fascism, as described by Mussolini, is wholly Catholic.

True. But we're talking about a university in the US. Odds are pretty good you're either a Christian or an atheist.

Which backwater pothole of an American university are you talkign about? Essentially every reputable university in the US has a sizeable number of foreign students. Your argument simply doesn't hold up.

 

[Dionysius]

Fascism, as described by Mussolini, is wholly Catholic.

isnt germany mostly protestant?

 

[Cheezy the Wiz]

Can some mod check if this guy is a double login or whatever?

I'm curious as to who you suspect.

Fascism, as described by Mussolini, is wholly Catholic.

That is true. Thanks for reminding me, I often forget that it was Italy who started that movement, not Germany. Italian Fascism, or the "benevolent state" was an interesting idea, given the choice between Mussolini's and Hitler's versions, I think I'd choose Mussolini's, although I don't remember where it stood on buisness and economical things, though.

 

[Cheezy the Wiz]

isnt germany mostly protestant?

Mussolini would be an Italian.

 

[skadistic]

And back to the other forum section.

 

[AfterShafter]

Actually, about 72.2% of scientists are atheists, and 20.8% are agnostics (leaving a scant 7% for believers), though that varies from field to field (more atheists in life sciences, fewer in mathematics). Numerous studies have found that intelligence and religiosity are inversely proportional, and that education and religiosity are also inversely proportional.

http://www.atheists.org/flash.line/atheism1.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religiosity_and_intelligence
http://library.thinkquest.org/29178/gallup.htm

I'm of the opinion that since most atheists are deconverts (I only have an informal forum poll for that, but out of 200 people, only about a third were raised atheists), it probably has more to do with the process that leads to atheism than atheism itself. The kind of person who is open to the possibility that they are wrong is the same kind of person who I would expect to be fairly intelligent. I think if 80% of the US population were atheists, then we'd see the opposite trend. Atheists who are open to the possibility that they're wrong would be more intelligent, but also more likely to convert if presented with sound reasoning.

"Scientists" are only a very small fraction of the intellectual community and "smart people" in general. I'm not in any way religious, but it seems rather silly to suggest a test like this as anything even remotely resembling an accurate sampling on the subject. Heck, if I'm not mistaken, there are even a lot of very well educated priests out there.

 

[Dionysius]

Mussolini would be an Italian.

i think nazi germany qualifies as fascist. am i alone in this theory?

 

[nihilistic]

isnt germany mostly protestant?

The Third Reich are Nazis. Though Nazism is an outgrowth of Fascism and is very similar in very many ways, they do have differences.

That is true. Thanks for reminding me, I often forget that it was Italy who started that movement, not Germany. Italian Fascism, or the "benevolent state" was an interesting idea, given the choice between Mussolini's and Hitler's versions, I think I'd choose Mussolini's, although I don't remember where it stood on buisness and economical things, though.

If you are not sure where they stood on business and economics, then you probably do not have a full understanding of who the Fascists and Nazis are, since their industrial and economic policies are one of the core pillars of their idealogies. One of the main ways Fascism and Nazism stand out from other schools of political thought is their unabashed and overt corporativism. In a corporativist government, major corporations held huge sway over political policies. One of the reasons they held so much sway is that these Fascist regimes themselves are funded by industrial giants on their way to power. Another reason would be that they needed these industries to carry out their military hardware demands.

 

[QwertyKey]

i think it does- every religion gives benefits while not having religion does not? Who invented that? I think not havign a religion should increas eur science twice- would be more acurate.

Well you're grammer and spelling aren't speaking highly for your oppnion.

Even if there was a scientific gain for countries with no religion as opposed to those religions, twice would be way too much, which for most would be obdivious, not you I guess.