Infinite_Loser

Oh, please... Do explain to me this age of 'enlightenment and reasoning'? Being an atheist seems pretty easy to me; Just deny the existence of God because He can't be observed/proven and then cover the other side of the argument by stating that anything observable can't be-- And isn't-- God (As it would defy his very nature). Simple

__________________
I believe in equality; Everyone is equally inferior to me.

Willravel

General relativity is simple, too.

Baraka_Guru

I think Charlatan is referring to that period beginning in the 17th century and developing in the 18th and 19th centuries, when being able to openly question the existence of God became a bit more safe. It was a period that espoused reason, meaning that no longer should we take things purely on faith. We need evidence such as observation. It opened the world up to ideas such as David Hume's writings on miracles, in which he writes: With the age of reason came empiricism, which open us up to the scientific age. Faith is fine, so long as there's evidence to support the investment of our energies into such a thing. One example of this, perhaps, would be the realization that following Christ's teachings tends to make other people happy. I would put faith in that, even though I'm not a Christian.

Ultimately, the Age of Enlightenment was not opposed to religion per se, but it certainly was willing to critique it and put it up to the challenge of the reasoned mind. If you want to see an opposition to religion, we should discuss modernity.

So if you think atheism is easy, as you say, be sure you say so after having read all the major philosophies between the 17th and 20th centuries, and, to be certain, read some of the major literary works that sprung out of modernity. I recommend James Joyce, T. S. Eliot, Virginia Woolf, and Bertrand Russell's "Why I Am Not a Christian." Trust me, a lot of thought went into this.

__________________
Knowing that death is certain and that the time of death is uncertain, what's the most important thing?
—Bhikkhuni Pema Chödrön

Humankind cannot bear very much reality.
—From "Burnt Norton," Four Quartets (1936), T. S. Eliot

Infinite_Loser

Baraka_Guru, I've got to say I'm a little surprised. You took four paragraphs to state what I did in one sentence. In an atheist's world, God is either unprovable and non-existant or provable and no longer God.

(Would you contend with that one sentence summary? And if you do then, by all means, correct me where I'm wrong.)

See how easy that was? Short, sweet and to the point!

__________________
I believe in equality; Everyone is equally inferior to me.

Charlatan

Thank you Guru, that is exactly what I was referring to.

Prior to that era, the Catholic Church ruled with a relatively iron first. To suggest otherwise is to not know your history.

__________________
"My hands are on fire. Hands are on fire. Ain't got no more time for all you charlatans and liars."
- Old Man Luedecke

Infinite_Loser

Anything is easy, so long as you understand the basic concepts

__________________
I believe in equality; Everyone is equally inferior to me.

Charlatan

As for it being easy being an atheist... I would suggest life is just about as easy for a theist as it is an atheist. I just have more spare time on sunday. :P

__________________
"My hands are on fire. Hands are on fire. Ain't got no more time for all you charlatans and liars."
- Old Man Luedecke

Infinite_Loser

That and you don't have to abide by any written code of conduct (Seeing as how no one's taken the time to write a book on atheism).

__________________
I believe in equality; Everyone is equally inferior to me.

Cynthetiq

well for some theists that pray much more often from several times a day, you have lots more spare time.

__________________
I don't care if you are black, white, purple, green, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, hippie, cop, bum, admin, user, English, Irish, French, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim, indian, cowboy, tall, short, fat, skinny, emo, punk, mod, rocker, straight, gay, lesbian, jock, nerd, geek, Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Independent, driver, pedestrian, or bicyclist, either you're an asshole or you're not.

Charlatan

Which I take as a backhanded way of say that atheists are amoral. What malarkey!

So if theists didn't have the fear of god, retribution or hell, they would be out breaking all the commandments? That suggests to me that atheists, who generally don't break these "rules" any more than the average theist does is increasingly moral as they follow their moral code without coercion.

__________________
"My hands are on fire. Hands are on fire. Ain't got no more time for all you charlatans and liars."
- Old Man Luedecke

filtherton

I think you're ignoring laws. Also, you don't need to be a theist to have morals, nontheists just need to think about their morals (not that theism precludes thinking about one's morals).

Infinite_Loser

That ain't what I meant.

Christians, for example, are expected to abide by the Ten Commandments while Muslims are required to abide by the Five Pillars of Islam. I doubt we'll be seeing you remembering the Sabbath or taking a pilgrimage to Mecca any time soon. That's not to say that you're amoral (As some of your beliefs might inherently coincide with those contained within organized religion), but rather that you're not bound to a strict code as most theists are.

__________________
I believe in equality; Everyone is equally inferior to me.

Baraka_Guru

True. Dogma and rituals are not exclusive agents of moral virtue. This is why the closest I'll ever get to having a religion is through Buddhism. It looks at morality through a practical lens. Observation, meditation. As an applied philosophy, Buddhism is inherently atheist.

Abandoning rituals, the morality that informs Buddhism is learned. Without nonsense. It has been called a path that can be followed as easily as that of a bird's.

You must make your own path.

__________________
Knowing that death is certain and that the time of death is uncertain, what's the most important thing?
—Bhikkhuni Pema Chödrön

Humankind cannot bear very much reality.
—From "Burnt Norton," Four Quartets (1936), T. S. Eliot

tiger777

I skimmed through a lot of what was said here and i'd like to comment on some things.

The correlation between intelligence and atheism- It's a fact that the more intelligent or say... inquisitiveness a person is, the more likely they'll become an atheist, at least this is what logic and reason tell me so. Also if i'm not mistaken polls have been taken and african americans are something like 25% more likely to believe in God, +or- 7% in my estimation in terms of the accuracy of my recollection. This isn't a knock on black people, but the situation they grow up in generally doesn't allow for as much inquisitiveness due to the poverty and other factors.

WillTravel- You claim you're positive God doesn't exist. Well if you're refering to the God, that is attributed to the various religions on our planet than i'd be inclined to agree with you. If you think about it the most likely scenario is, people needed to come up with a control method to instill various philosophical and moral principles in people who otherwise would be very unruly. For example the extremely harsh punishments in the old testiment if you didn't abide by the rules, this struck fear into people. It's also a means of attempting to make people feel more secure in terms of the meaning of life and battling the fear of the unknown (death). However if you're also referring to a supernatural God, I would have to disagree with you simply because there's no way in the present state that can really be a certainty based on the current things we have to base it on, such as how the universe was created, etc.

Filthy- Your debate with Will about faith and science. I would have to side with Will on this one. I feel a lot of religious people throw logic and reason out of the window in respect to their faith and dealing with science. I think they often pick and choose which aspects of their religion to follow whereas when they're dealing with science it's almost all logic and reason. I feel a lot of people want to believe in something so badly they simply unplug the logic and reasoning part of their brain and use purely blind faith. Which is okay, as long as it makes them happy i'm all for it, all i'm trying to say is they're being a bit more illogical and unreasonable when dealing with religion in comparison to science.

Infinite_Loser

Ooo... Shame on you for making a backhanded remark (No matter how covertly) at black people as a whole . Generalizations are almost never true...

*Goes back to doing whatever he was prior*

Edit: Ehhh... I had a comment, but thought better on it.

__________________
I believe in equality; Everyone is equally inferior to me.

tiger777

respond to the content please. The statistics are what they are, if it were the other way around, I would have to rethink my opinion, but based on logic and statistics I feel this definately makes me more certian of my opinion.

I just really don't like the fact you don't respond to the content, you throw out some racial card, that's just 1 example of a situation where, a group of people in general are way more likely to be in poverty and I think that correlation defintaely has merit.

However, in case you're interested i'm a very moral guy and whether someone is fat, a minority or ugly i don't care, just as long as inside theyr'e good people.

Cynthetiq

care to cite your assertation of said statistics? I'm inclined to call bullshit on those.

__________________
I don't care if you are black, white, purple, green, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, hippie, cop, bum, admin, user, English, Irish, French, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim, indian, cowboy, tall, short, fat, skinny, emo, punk, mod, rocker, straight, gay, lesbian, jock, nerd, geek, Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Independent, driver, pedestrian, or bicyclist, either you're an asshole or you're not.

tiger777

Why would you call bullshit? Just google any poll about what % of Americans believe in God and i'm sure every single poll will show that a greater % of African Americans believe in God than caucasians. You will also most likely see a correlation between education and belief in God. Just think about it, the higher level of education you have the more likely you're thinking questioning things and trying to figure out the truth, and the more you think about things, if you're a logical and reasonable person, the more likely you will come to the conclusion, that religions are basically a hoax in terms of a higher power having directly influenced the writings and teachings. If you can justify sacrificing lambs or stoning a woman to death who has just been raped, and is actually an innocent victim, that's totally up to you, I cannot do that any longer. I respect all of your opinions, i'm not saying i'm right or you're wrong, Just we have different opinions. So basically I'm attempting to explain to you how I come to my conclusions as to what the most likely possibility is in my mind with this post.

I really am shocked people are like attacking my posts, it's just my opinion that I feel is the most likely scenario and the most important aspect in my work is to figure out what direction the odds deem to be the highest probability of truth. I respect everyone's beliefs, I care a lot about every human being, i'm not out to disrespect or hurt anyone's feelings sure i may make generalizations, such as African Americans havea higher propensity to believe in God, as well as people with a higher level of education. You must first analyze data to come up with the best possible answer to the question. So basically to break it down, in general African Americans, have less money and get less education than the rest of America. So my conclusion based not only on statistics but logic and reason as well is that they on average grow up with more hardships, less financial security and a smaller chance to advance in school, which really is what allows your intellectual capacity to grow, it's as simple as that. All of these are generalizations yes, you can't have statistics on different races or levels of education without generalizing the particular statistic you are highlighting. I'm looking forward to a response from you guys and I hope we've reached an understanding that i'm not trying to call any group of people out, simply trying to deduce how different povery levels, and levels of education affect people's beliefs in religion and God etc
=].

Just looked up this poll this was really the only one i could find tbh, let me know if there are other ones. I hope I've explained myself throughly here because I care about each individual person that I know, regardless of the mistakes they make or how they're born, I probabaly care too much.

http://www.harrisinteractive.com/har...ex.asp?PID=408
http://www.harrisinteractive.com/har...ex.asp?PID=359

Cynthetiq

You stated statistics. I'm not attacking anything, not even your posts. I'm just requesting that you back up your claims of "african americans are something like 25% more likely to believe in God, +or- 7%" because I don't believe it. You put the statistic, I didn't. I'll be more than willing to visit your link provided to find out more about where you are coming from, but for you to state something akin to "Well, go find it yourself, I'm sure you'll find it" doesn't lead me to where you are and how you formulated your opinion and how it frames your viewpoint.

If you can't, then, well, frankly *sniff* *sniff* it smells like bullshit to me.

__________________
I don't care if you are black, white, purple, green, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, hippie, cop, bum, admin, user, English, Irish, French, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim, indian, cowboy, tall, short, fat, skinny, emo, punk, mod, rocker, straight, gay, lesbian, jock, nerd, geek, Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Independent, driver, pedestrian, or bicyclist, either you're an asshole or you're not.

tiger777

I dunno I guess I just don't appreciate your rude attitude. So bluntly calling bs etc, when i'm simply trying to broaden my horizens and spark a good discussion on some of the things i've been thinking about. Btw I did look for links, I didn't find too many polls or research that invovled different races or levels of education, really only that one link i edited into my post because I forgot to enter it. Anyway yeah i'm not crying or anything, simply trying to fill you guys in on my position and beliefs and character because I take things like racism and predudice very seriously as I believe everyone is equal, whether they have 0 dolllars 1 million dollars, or their race or their looks etc.

Cynthetiq

I will also add:

Correlation does not imply causation.

from Loopy Links
I'm all for discussion. I'm happy to discuss just about anything under the sun. But to be quite frank, there is no reason to not call a spade a spade. I called bullshit on your statistics and you put the onus on us the reader to prove your claim. You then tried to back them up, and couldn't plain and simple. So that portion of your discussion claiming african americans are more likely to believe in God, and then insert education as a point of difference is a fallacy on it's face. There are many cultural indicators that you aren't taking into account. Many Europeans are highly educated, but still have a strong belief in God.

__________________
I don't care if you are black, white, purple, green, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, hippie, cop, bum, admin, user, English, Irish, French, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim, indian, cowboy, tall, short, fat, skinny, emo, punk, mod, rocker, straight, gay, lesbian, jock, nerd, geek, Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Independent, driver, pedestrian, or bicyclist, either you're an asshole or you're not.

tiger777

Cynethiq that's a good point that you make there. Also let me clarify another aspect of my thoughts on what I was getting at earlier. for about the past year i've been studying psychology, philosophy, religion, dreams, just tons of things, baiscally trying to better myself and come closer to my ultimate goal that being a good person and living a happy life and bettering myself etc, all that good stuff. Previous to this past year, I wasn't really thinking in depth and analyzing things, my potential intelligence was the same then as it is now so to speak. However due to personal journeys and a dedication to my work, to mastering that which I due, i Feel my mind right now is several times better. My IQ has increased simply out of expanding my thoughts and just thinking on whole different levels and different ways, I am a more intelligent person now. let's say I had taken a different path in life, and was simply happy with not really delving into the meaning of things and dissecting and studying things as best as I could. I feel i would be a less intelligent person. So basically what i'm trying to say is, in general I feel people who are busy working jobs such as manual labor jobs for exmaple, have less time on their hands to explore their mind and really think about things. I believe their IQ or the capability in which they can think about things will not reach their maximum potential. Basically what i'm trying to say is, this is why I feel educational levels and financial predicaments do matter, from personal experience even.

Thanks for pointing out the correlation might not be related to the cause that I think it is, because that definately has to be taken into consideration. Yeah I could be wrong, I'll do some more thinking about this specific correlation i'm making, because the statistics could very well be, because of a different reason than the suspected reason I have, based on an example from the above paragraph.

Cynthetiq

closest thing I can find, but doesn't break down the race or education of the polled.
Newsweek

__________________
I don't care if you are black, white, purple, green, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, hippie, cop, bum, admin, user, English, Irish, French, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim, indian, cowboy, tall, short, fat, skinny, emo, punk, mod, rocker, straight, gay, lesbian, jock, nerd, geek, Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Independent, driver, pedestrian, or bicyclist, either you're an asshole or you're not.

tiger777

Well simply telling me i'm wrong saying there's other cultural indicators that i'm not taking into account, then not expanding upon that doesn't spark any discussion. Feel free to bring up some points about something I might not be taking into consideration. I admit there's a possibility a different factor could be more prevalent than what I suspect, but saying i'm wrong and not stating your opinion doesn't really do much.

Cynthetiq

Wonderful that you are trying to broaden your mind. I caution that you stay away from stereotypes and overgeneralizations.

Priests, monks, brothers, and sisters, can be examples of how that is not the case. Gregor Johann Mendel is known as the father of modern day genetics, but he was a priest working in a garden.

Many Chinese Buddhists wrote of being one with nature and the universe by doing simple tasks in the fields.

Thomas Aquinas was quite a learned man, philosopher, and quite religious.

Quite honestly, God is where you decide you find it or don't find it.

__________________
I don't care if you are black, white, purple, green, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, hippie, cop, bum, admin, user, English, Irish, French, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim, indian, cowboy, tall, short, fat, skinny, emo, punk, mod, rocker, straight, gay, lesbian, jock, nerd, geek, Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Independent, driver, pedestrian, or bicyclist, either you're an asshole or you're not.

tiger777

The whole premise of the statement I made was based on generalizations, and i'm aware there are exceptions to every rule etc and so forth. Also I think you react way too strongly about generalizations in general, i'm not saying that 100% of the people who would qualify under the generalizations I made is the case or even close to that. I'm simply saying it could be as small as a 1% greater likelihood within those groups I was thinking about could be more likely to be an atheist or believe in God etc.

Psychology has always been a HUGE interest to me, so part of how i think relates to that. As someone who studies something in terms of cause and effect and things of that nature you have to be able to make generalizations in order to learn how people behave and the odds of all of the different results that are possible. For example, I don't know if you know anything about the Chris Benoit situation. Well a former WWE champion named the Ultimate Warrior went on to a news program and gave his opinion on the whole situation. At the end of the show The Ultimate Warrior said, "there's no excuse for what Chris Benoit did" and basically said trying to blame it on drugs or roid rage is bullshit, that the man was simply a monster. Okay yes if Benoit did commit these crimes I would agree he's a monster, but if you're trying to understand what went on you have to look for possible things that attributed to Benoit's actions such as those drugs he was taking so that in the future you can possibly avoid that situation by getting something done about it. So really Warrior's opinion that Benoit is a monster is fine and dandy, however when he doesn't have an opinion or give it on the possible influence the drugs had on this whole entire ordeal that simply ends all attempts to try to understand and learn from this situation in order to prevent such a horrendous accident as this in the future.

What i'm trying to get at here is, basically saying all generalizations are evil simply stunts the ability to gain more knowledge and a greater understanding of the topic at hand. I'm sorry if you're sensetive to generalations, honestly, but I think they have to be made, and considered in relation to a better understanding about things.

ShaniFaye

its the way of "tfp" that when you start spouting statistics you back it up. Your "go find it for yourself" is as bad as "google is your friend" IMO

and since Im to unintelligent because I believe in god and have faith...thats all I have to say about the ongoing discussion

__________________
I want the diabetic plan that comes with rollover carbs. I dont like the unused one expiring at midnite!!

tiger777

I'm not saying you're unintelligent. What I am saying is that you're illogical. This is a discussion board, it pains me to see people actually take offense to other opinions you could say i'm stupid right now, thats' fine with me, i'm just looking for some opinions and different thoughts and I haven't been getting many of those. For some reason people keep taking offense and really not offering any of their insights or anything really. Right now I really feel shorted, i'm putting a lot of thought into this and the only responses i'm getting are basically people taking offense to my opinion. I've explained what my goals are, to have a good thought provoking discussion, but apparently some of you guys can't look beyond your own ego's and respect someone else's opinion without feeling as if you're being called out or insulted. I mean you guys read the Bible, you guys know that ego, pride and negative things of that nature should be quelled. The Bible has a lot of positive things in it. read proverds, there are a lot of great paraboles in it, and you should know that you should be able to quell negative human emotions and characteristics and try to be the better man even if you feel you're being called out or whatever. Ask yourself, what would Jesus do?

ShaniFaye

If you read thru this thread you will see I have said many things on this subject, I see no reason to repeat the same things over again

__________________
I want the diabetic plan that comes with rollover carbs. I dont like the unused one expiring at midnite!!

Cynthetiq

Generalizations IMO are intellectually fraudulent especially in the face of the discussion you are trying to have.

I can't speak for Shani, but nowhere have I felt insulted nor attacking in this thread. I just can see that you have holes in your logic bridged with generalizations. I can also attest to the last statement WWJD is patronizing.

Someone's opinion is whatever shape it takes. Ultimate Warrior's opinion is how it is, nothing more and nothing less. Because it doesn't fit into what you decided an opinon should be is the crux of your own process of "spurring discussion."

__________________
I don't care if you are black, white, purple, green, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, hippie, cop, bum, admin, user, English, Irish, French, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim, indian, cowboy, tall, short, fat, skinny, emo, punk, mod, rocker, straight, gay, lesbian, jock, nerd, geek, Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Independent, driver, pedestrian, or bicyclist, either you're an asshole or you're not.

tiger777

Thanks for the discussion sir.

Willravel

Willravel. There's no "T".
The difference between being positive that god doesn't exist and believing it's very likely god doesn't exist is, in my mind, as big as the difference between theists and weak atheists. A complete lack of evidence does not mean certain non-existence. It suggests non-existence. That's why I am a weak atheist, or a person who believes that god almost certainly doesn't exist. By my reasoning, it's the safest assumption based on what we know. It's also entirely possible that the easter bunny is real.

As far as control, anything can be used as a tool for control, but religion is about faith in something that runs contrary to everything we know, which means that these people are susceptible to going against what they know to be true. I know this because at a very young age, I was convinced that if I had sex, I would go to hell. Pretty good control, eh? I knew that if I questioned god's existence, I was going to hell and I'd never see my grandpa again. It turns out that it stands to reason that the only way 'll see my grandpa again is in my memory, and all the threats of hell in the world can't take that away from me. Also, sex is magnificent.

filtherton

Well, aside from this being kind of presumptuously borderline racist, i would be interested in stats comparing intelligence and religiousness. Especially in light of the fact that the concept of intelligence is rather shoddily defined.

Even as far as education goes, a correlation between education level and atheism doesn't necessarily mean anything. There's a correlation between education and socio-economic status and therefore perhaps a correlation between socio-economic status and atheism, but i've never heard anyone try to claim that wealth causes atheism or vice versa.

Well, i agree that there are plenty of religious folk who lack credible reasoning skills when it comes to certain topics. I don't think that scientists necessarily have a monopoly on rationality - there are plenty of instances of scientific genius going hand in hand with complete insanity.

There are many noted scientists who were also pious - newton, descartes, leibniz mendel, einstein - anyone who claims theists are necessarily bad scientists is suffering from a bit of irrationality themselves.

I think an interesting dynamic is the one between scientists and their adherents. It is analogous to a pastor and congregation, sort of. On the one hand you have the scientists - the folks who have been to the mountaintop, know how to do actual science. On the other hand you have the people who put their faith in science and scientists. I think that most people who claim to carry the torch of science fall into the latter category, especially in light of how few of my fellow americans can be bothered to take math and science classes beyond those required for a liberal arts degree. These are people whose subscription to evolution or global warming isn't based on any sort of informed knowledge, but rather a sturdy faith in the actual practitioners of the scientific method. In other words, their embrace of science is based on faith rather than direct knowledge.

These folks are essentially theologists of a different sort - instead of putting christ on a pedestal they put einstein. Either way, most of them don't actually know shit about what their particular exalted one thought, or why their contributions were significant. How many people know what the "e", the "m", and the "c" mean in the e = mc^2? How many people understand the models used to predict the effects of global warming? How may people know what a decibel is? From my experience the answer to these questions is few.

It doesn't matter if what your selling is pure, uncut rationality if the people who buy it aren't themselves rational. That's why i think this whole atheism vs religion debate is dumb. The atheists are basically just deluding themselves into thinking that the broad acceptance of atheism will bring about some sort of golden age of reason, when in reality all it will mean is that more people are putting their faith in scientists than reverends. People will still be dumb animals, they'll just be dumb animals with loosely held beliefs based on what some guy in a white lab coat told them as opposed to dumb animals with loosely held beliefs based on what some guy in a white robe told them.

I don't know that a strictly rational model offers that much tangible benefit over a strictly theistic model as far as creating a comfortable, stable society. Neither seems ideal to me. Hobbes was one of the original atheistic social planners, and he advocated a democracy only to the extent that an iron-fisted despot could be elected.

Relying only on science and rationality as guides to the way things ought to be is just as likely to get a brave new world as relying on the bible as the way things ought to be is to get a fundamentalist theocracy. Most useful solutions to complex problems are a mixture of information and intuition, facts and faith (see economics).

I understand that this might be a tad bit tangential to what you were saying, but i wanted to say it.

Willravel

As far as I know, many people understand that energy is equal to mass times the speed of light squared. I think it may be a mistake to assume that atheists put their faith in scientists. I think a better way to put it is that atheists put their faith in reason and the scientific method. I'm not a physicist at all, but I can probably explain the general theory of relativity, and what it means to you and I. I'm not a biologist, but I understand the how of evolution pretty well. I'm not a geologist, but I understand carbon dating pretty well.

I think it's dangerous to suggest that the whole of humanity = sheep of one color or another. I wouldn't dare call all theists sheep, though the fact that Jesus is labeled a shepherd in the Bible is rather telling as to how those that wrote the Bible viewed a believer's role compared to a deity.

filtherton

Okay, well, e=mc^2 is just an example. It is an interesting one in this context, do you know how it's derived off the top of your head? Do you agree with the logic behind it? I have no idea about any of it, but i don't doubt that the people who do know these things have given it their approval. Whether it will stand the test of time is another thing altogether.

Science is complicated stuff. I'm sure you know this. It takes several years of mathematics(at least in the u.s. public school system) to get to the point where you can derive the quadratic formula, and that's just algebra. Apparently, the amount of math you have to learn from elementary arithmetic to get through 2 years of calculus is the same amount of math you have to learn to get from the end of your calculus sequence to the kind of math needed when working with string theory. That's several years of math beyond multivariable calculus and differential equations to understand something that in popular science literature is portrayed as a simple matter of rubber bands and exotic dimensions.

Based on really simple models i've worked with, i imagine that climate models are also incredibly complicated.

The point is that the scientific knowledge we take for granted today is actually incredibly nuanced and rich, so much so that it seems to me like it's practically impossible for many people to have a comprehensive and/or meaningful understanding of any large portion of it. This isn't to say that general knowledge doesn't often suffice, but sometimes the nuance is the most important part.

You might have a general knowledge of many different subjects, but having a general knowledge doesn't mean you understand something in any kind of useful way. I have a general knowledge of fracture mechanics, but you wouldn't want to trust my opinion on the likelihood a given real beam will fail. Not to flatter you, but i imagine you have a better knowledge than most people on things scientific, since you're going to school for sciencey stuff.

Why is it dangerous? If you're talking about people in general, the noble sheep is a great approximation. You might be surprised about how simple assumptions about the nature of human interaction can be used to create complex computer models that accurately predict observed human behavior in groups. I think sociology as a discipline is held together by the idea that people are essentially sheep of one color or another.

Do you think acceptance of atheism will coincide with some sort of golden age of rationality? I don't. I think that of all the different appealing aspects of atheism, the commitment to rationality is the most hollow and the least sexy.

Willravel

I don't want to get too off topic, but the reason I'm familiar with the works of Einstein goes back to curiosity in school. I loved how his playful nature gave birth to revolutionary ideas, and the scope of those ideas. As far as standing the test of time, it's all relative.
Yes, most of the delicious stuff in science requires years of study. That doesn't make it unattainable to the masses, though. Yes, a lot of people are more knowledgeable on subjects like Clay Ainkin's sexual orientation, but that doesn't necessarily mean they're not knowledgeable on how a skin cell works. The Discovery type channels have good viewership and cover a vast range of subjects. Even non-sciency shows like Good Eats feature lessons in organic and inorganic chemistry that are applied in front of your eyes to cooking a delicious meal.
Some people are sheep, of course, but many have shepherd skills that are applied with reason and scientific or social knowledge every day. I think that type of stereotype is disingenuous. I'd go as far as to say that for every 25 sheep there is a shepherd, which would translate to 280 million shepherds in the world. That's nearly the population of the US.
I think the only time we'll see a golden age in rationality will be when we're extinct and replaced by something that evolved a more rational nature.

Cynthetiq

IMO most people only know that E=MC^2 is the theory of relativity and maybe attribute it to Einstien.

People know more about Paris Hilton than of scientists and even politics.

__________________
I don't care if you are black, white, purple, green, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, hippie, cop, bum, admin, user, English, Irish, French, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim, indian, cowboy, tall, short, fat, skinny, emo, punk, mod, rocker, straight, gay, lesbian, jock, nerd, geek, Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Independent, driver, pedestrian, or bicyclist, either you're an asshole or you're not.

tiger777

Oh so saying black people are more physically gifted and that women are shorter than men is a racist and sexist statement? PLEASE lol. It's simply statistics, it's fact. As for sterotypes, they're natural and must be made in order for us to get a greater understanding of someone we don't know. Sure they can be completely off, but if you ever meet that person you'll obvoiusly readjust your opinion about them. If you see someone with gang tattoos on their arms, the sterotype that gang members are more often than not more dangerous than the average person walking in the streets will aid your survival and make life a whole lot easier if you avoid that person. Sure this person could be a good person but this is the image they're representing so the fact that people will be less inclined to interact with them is due to the choice they made to join a gang.

That could be a possibility that the more materials one is able to obtain makes the need for God a little less appealing, however I think that is a less likely scenario although i'm sure it has been a key factor in some people's beliefs. However, I certainly don't think it's as prominant as the level of education is.

Willravel explained it very well earlier at the start of the forum an said basically what I was trying to get at, only I used some generalizations. He said something about, accumulating knowledge allows for one to analyze something, question it in an attempt to determine whether it is fact or fiction many times over and then come up with the most reasonable conclusion.



I wouild say there are more irrational religious people, did you not see that poll taken, 51% of Americans don't believe in evolution? That says a lot about humans in general and is quite mind boggling. Those are the group of people i'm talking about when I say they simply ignore any threat to their comfortable belief system, they literally turn their brain off, and will not even consider the possibility of something that is threatening to their faith. Oh ye of little faith?


I don't see how bringing up 6 examples out hundreds of millions of people is relevant.

Yes but if someone asks a scientist the sun revovles around the earth he'll get an answer. If you ask God that question, you probabaly won't receive any answers anytime soon.

That is an interesting point though, about how a lot of people put faith in things without really thinking about them on their own regarding religion and science alike. I think that's telling about human beins in general.

Even if the debate is dumb it's still thought provoking and that's all I want. You've made some good points about various things I may have not thought about.

Yeah I don't know about this either. My faith in mankind has dwindled over the past few years, I realize how immoral so many people are, and without religion all these, "sheep" that you have mentioned, what then would they do? I mean I consider everyone on this board pretty intelligent and ration in general, no matter your views about religion etc. However, the everyday people who just go around doing what feels good or doing what they're told is right or wrong because they'll be punished if they don't, what happens if they find out there are no reprocutions awaiting their afterlife? However in the same token religion has been known to create more than a few wars in the past.

That's not to say there aren't risks if religion was removed, I think more people would be lost and depressed because all of a sudden there's no meaning of life, so i'm sure that would lead to some bad things as well.

Who knows, there are way too many variables and possible outcomes for me to speculate anyway heh.

wheelhomies

how interesting. i am an atheist myself, in love with the ideas of marx and sartre. to the post about atheism being easier because you are not held accountable for anything after death:

what???(!) where is the problem in carpe diem, madame? to say that you are not responsible for your deeds in the afterlife does not mean refusing to accept responsibility for your actions. one can accept responsibility for then during life! one can act honorably, not for the sake of religion or a fear of the afterlife - but because it is important to do so in and of itself.

i have seen an increase in agnostics, moreso than atheists. i have met some agnostics who definitely only do it because they are afraid to call themselves christian - out of fear of rejection among their peers. they believe in heaven and hell, and yet "question whether there is a god". that is something i don't understand, and i doubt these individuals do much questioning at all.

the atheists i know are very few...i find people have difficulty declaring, "there is no god!" (presumably out of fear). another thing, i know hardly any atheists who were raised as atheists...most of them are christians who have stopped believing. i have to say that i do not think it is a trend...although, it is definitely somewhat easier to say these days than it has been in the past. people's outlooks on it have changed, but not to the extent that being an atheist will generally get you accepted, or make your life easier...at least not from what i have seen.

oh crap - i just realized there are five pages to this thread. that's embarrassing. ah, well; you live and learn.

__________________

tiger777

Reponsibility- In general people are inherantly more selfish than not therefore the notion that you're held responsible in life after death definately is a means for people to hold themselves accountable. As humans we're all trying to survive be happy and things like that etc, so in an attempt to feel good and be happy we'll often overlook the feelings of others in order to further our own agenda. I"m guilty of this sometimes myself. For example a friend of mine sort of pissed me off and I was really pissed considering not being his friend, however this friend had a lot of value to me. Thus, I thought about how basically not being friends with him would effect me negatively. How it would effect me overrode the principle and also his feelings on the situation.

Agnostics- As you said I doubt they think about their beliefs in depth.

Atheists- Those who may not appear to be atheists, might be, but they don't want to be thought of differently or have to explain thier position so it's just left unsaid.