Poll: I accept the premise that we are born believers because of evolution.
Yes.
No.
[Show Results]
Note: This is a public poll, other users will be able to see what you voted for.
Feedback requested on a new hypothesis on the origin of atheism
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 1 Votes - 1 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
09-09-2016, 08:26 AM
RE: Feedback requested on a new hypothesis on the origin of atheism
Just out of curiosity, Randy, if theism is the default, then why do churchs have to hard sell Christianity to people? Why must children be programmed instead of just letting nature take its course? Can't they be trusted to just naturally fall into Christianity the same way that they'll just naturally go into puberty and crave romantic attention?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 8 users Like Aliza's post
09-09-2016, 08:32 AM
RE: Feedback requested on a new hypothesis on the origin of atheism
(09-09-2016 08:26 AM)Aliza Wrote:  Just out of curiosity, Randy, if theism is the default, then why do churchs have to hard sell Christianity to people? Why must children be programmed instead of just letting nature take its course? Can't they be trusted to just naturally fall into Christianity the same way that they'll just naturally go into puberty and crave romantic attention?

Well, because Christian parents have been programmed/brainwashed to believe that Christianity (and not only that, but their specific version of Christianity) is the "one true way" to salvation, and all other ways lead straight to Hell. What if their child just naturally falls into Judaism or Islam or some generic theism instead of Christianity? Oh, the horror!

Tongue
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Grasshopper's post
09-09-2016, 08:32 AM
RE: Feedback requested on a new hypothesis on the origin of atheism
(09-09-2016 08:05 AM)Grasshopper Wrote:  ...
Some human or group of humans at some point originated the idea of God. I am interested in how and why this happened. "They learned it from their parents" is way too simplistic.

From Agency to Animism to Anthropomorphism; from many to one; from tangible to ineffable.

Although not all tribes followed that direction...
Jains stayed with Animism (don't go offering them garlic and onions)
Greeks anthropomorphised human characteristics (love, hate, excess etc.)
Hindus stuck with many not one.
Catholics went for 3=1.
Islam did a copy/paste fan fiction thing.

Same Operating System; different apps.

Buddha bucked the trend by focusing on the human condition; that suffering is inherent in life and that one can be liberated from it by mental and moral self-purification... a self-improvement app. So we can thank Buddha for the self-help industry.

Dodgy

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 6 users Like DLJ's post
09-09-2016, 08:38 AM
RE: Feedback requested on a new hypothesis on the origin of atheism
(09-09-2016 07:03 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  No his research suggest children believe in a created order, that was not created by humans. Or in other words in creationism, by some non-human force, i.e a generic creationism of sorts.
I'm not getting that impression from reading his own words on his research. Here's another quote from an article in The Guardian: "Last week at Cambridge University's Faraday Institute, I summarised some scientific research that leads me and many of my colleagues to argue that from childhood humans have a number of predispositions that incline them to believe in gods generally and perhaps a super-knowing, creator god in particular."

(09-09-2016 07:03 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  They see nature as designed, but not a product of human design, but non-human design. Hence the meaning of teleology, ascribing intentionality and purpose to things, as there to serve an telos.

So no evolution does not fit that bill in this regard.
There are a number of people who ascribe purpose and agency to evolution as well. They think that it serves to improve life forms over many generations, that it designs them to become better and better over time.

(09-09-2016 07:03 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  Also you can be a polytheist, a pantheist, or any other form of theist, besides a monotheist, and be a creationist.
That's true, although the man appears to be a Christian himself. I suppose a short newspaper article serves as a poor basis for a discussion because the terms he used weren't properly defined there. I managed to find the source of one of his peer-reviewed articles ("Exploring the natural foundations of religion") after some digging, but it's locked behind a paywall so that's a dead end right there.

[Image: 7oDSbD4.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Vosur's post
09-09-2016, 08:42 AM
RE: Feedback requested on a new hypothesis on the origin of atheism
(09-09-2016 08:24 AM)Anjele Wrote:  So you are saying that humans have no curiosity?

I'm curious about wood floor installation, my wife isn't.

Bored housewives are curious about the chaos and ailments of other people's lives, video gamers about the next generation of gaming systems, etc...

Sure humans have their own unique sets of curiosities, as they do interest.

Of course these curiosities tend to serve other purpose, perhaps to occupy our boredom, or my desire to install wood flooring, to make my house look nicer for company.

"Tell me, muse, of the storyteller who has been thrust to the edge of the world, both an infant and an ancient, and through him reveal everyman." ---Homer the aged poet.

"In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men. The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-09-2016, 08:46 AM
RE: Feedback requested on a new hypothesis on the origin of atheism
(08-09-2016 09:19 PM)Randy Ruggles Wrote:  
(08-09-2016 12:22 AM)Deesse23 Wrote:  Addendum: being a christian theist, i hope you dont think that, even given the fact that theism is probably an innate favourable evolutionary trait, this does not even in the slightest has anything to say about the truth value of the proposition "gods exist".
Thinking one thing may or may not exist is irrelevant for the fact if said thing really exists.

Of course. Natural selection doesn't select for truth but for survival advantage. It's even caused some people to be atheists. Wink

You appear not to understand why infants are born atheists. You start of as a zygote(a single cell). By the same token of your warped logic, this cell has(or hasn't) a survival advantage because it is atheist.

In reality, this is patent nonsense. In spite of what we have been taught all our lives, there are such things as stupid questions and inquiries.

We have to remember that what we observe is not nature herself, but nature exposed to our method of questioning ~ Werner Heisenberg
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like tomilay's post
09-09-2016, 08:47 AM
RE: Feedback requested on a new hypothesis on the origin of atheism
(09-09-2016 08:42 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(09-09-2016 08:24 AM)Anjele Wrote:  So you are saying that humans have no curiosity?

I'm curious about wood floor installation, my wife isn't.

Bored housewives are curious about the chaos and ailments of other people's lives, video gamers about the next generation of gaming systems, etc...

Sure humans have their own unique sets of curiosities, as they do interest.

Of course these curiosities tend to serve other purpose, perhaps to occupy our boredom, or my desire to install wood flooring, to make my house look nicer for company.

Sounds fascinating.

See here they are the bruises some were self-inflicted and some showed up along the way. - JF

We're all mad here. The Cheshire Cat
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Anjele's post
09-09-2016, 08:48 AM
RE: Feedback requested on a new hypothesis on the origin of atheism
(09-09-2016 08:38 AM)Vosur Wrote:  There are a number of people who ascribe purpose and agency to evolution as well. They think that it serves to improve life forms over many generations, that it designs them to become better and better over time.

If there are people who ascribe actual purpose and agency to evolution, they'd be creationist as well, like theistic evolutionist.

I ascribe purpose and agency to evolution as well, making me a creationist in this regard, by these beliefs alone.

Quote:That's true, although the man appears to be a Christian himself. I suppose a short newspaper article serves as a poor basis for a discussion because the terms he used weren't properly defined there. I managed to find the source of one of his peer-reviewed articles ("Exploring the natural foundations of religion") after some digging, but it's locked behind a paywall so that's a dead end right there.

I think it's clear that he's not being exclusive to monotheism, but the same inclination and tendencies that govern non-monothestic creationist views as well.

"Tell me, muse, of the storyteller who has been thrust to the edge of the world, both an infant and an ancient, and through him reveal everyman." ---Homer the aged poet.

"In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men. The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-09-2016, 08:49 AM
RE: Feedback requested on a new hypothesis on the origin of atheism
(07-09-2016 10:12 PM)Randy Ruggles Wrote:  Hello. This is my first time posting and even visiting here.
I am also new here.
I have not read all the other replies here and I am sure that many of the things I mention is covered by other post on this tread.
Quote:Here is my hypothesis:

1. Our starting assumption is not that a god exists or doesn't exist but that its existence is outside of the purview of science. We will not consider supernatural or non-natural explanations.
I agree.
If it can not show any effect on the real world, then it can not be part of science.
So God itself is not science, but the belief can be a part of a science study.
Quote:2. Theism is the default position. We are all born believers. Evolution has caused us to be this way due to its survival advantage.
Since there are more believers in god/gods in USA compared to Europe (especially in the northern part of Europe). What evolutionary selection mechanism could do that?
I think we want to see patterns in what is around us, even when there is no real pattern to be found. Yes, that is probably part of the reason many people do believe in gods, but I do not think people do see patterns in nature because they believe in gods.
Quote:3. Atheopaths lack a belief in God. They are "born that way." Their "agency detector" is broken. Studies have, in fact, demonstrated that theists see patterns that don't exist and atheists miss patterns that do exist. Their "pattern recognition software," so to speak, has been corrupted.
This claim can be tested.
In order to do so you need to check if this is true for areas/countries where the belief in God is in a minority.
If you look at USA where a lot of the atheist are sceptics, this would be the result because they are sceptics not atheists.
Quote:4. One mechanism that we know of which tends to break things and corrupt information is genetic mutation.
Mutations do spread in a population, but they spread quite slow.
Quote:5. So, my testable, falsifiable prediction is that one or more genetic mutations are responsible for atheopathy.
Then it have been a mass mutation in Scandinavia in less than 100 years because the atheism here is quite high.
Quote:Incidentally, a connection has been made between atheism and autism in the peer-reviewed literature. Perhaps if we find the cause of autism, we will be closer to finding the cause of atheopathy. (Hint: I don't believe it is vaccines. Wink )
There might be that people with autism are more likely to become atheist, I have never seen that study.
Quote:Any feedback from members is sincerely appreciated. This is a serious hypothesis that I believe deserves careful consideration and study with the intent to understand why some people are born without a belief in God.
I think I once believed in Santa, but not anymore. My parents never tried to teach me about God and when I was starting to considering the possibility I was already aware that there have been so many other religions that people do not believe in anymore.
I think that was the reason why I never started to believe in gods.
Quote:Also, please do not take offense to anything I have said. You might choose to look at this hypothesis as humans evolving away from religion and, for atheopaths, any remnant of faith being vestigial.

Thank you for your time and attention.
No offence taken. Smile
I think it is good to question yourself in order to see if it is correct.
Sometimes it can be a good idea to get help from others in order to see the mistakes.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Rusle's post
09-09-2016, 09:01 AM
RE: Feedback requested on a new hypothesis on the origin of atheism
(08-09-2016 09:19 PM)Randy Ruggles Wrote:  
(08-09-2016 12:22 AM)Deesse23 Wrote:  Addendum: being a christian theist, i hope you dont think that, even given the fact that theism is probably an innate favourable evolutionary trait, this does not even in the slightest has anything to say about the truth value of the proposition "gods exist".
Thinking one thing may or may not exist is irrelevant for the fact if said thing really exists.

Of course. Natural selection doesn't select for truth but for survival advantage. It's even caused some people to be atheists. Wink

Are you not-trying-to-say that atheism isnt true?
Got a claim to make, then bring your evidence, else shut the fuck up, but dont bother me with these between the lines insinuations, coward.

Ceterum censeo, religionem delendam esse
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Deesse23's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: