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
12-09-2016, 05:38 AM
RE: Feedback requested on a new hypothesis on the origin of atheism
To quote Gloucester:

Did you write that book, "Evolution: Fact or Fiction? - The Secret Truth Darwinists Don't Want You to Know" ?

Yes or No?

(11-09-2016 11:26 PM)Randy Ruggles Wrote:  I said theism is the default because that is what current research shows.

You are wrong. It does not. This has been refuted by multiple posters.

(11-09-2016 11:26 PM)Randy Ruggles Wrote:  And not just from Justin Barrett either. Here's another study. There are several:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/.....

Ahh. That scholarly publication, the Daily Mail. Where one can read about the Kardashians, Reality TV celebrities and where the links take you to clickbait rather than peer reviewed studies. I also note that the article itself has no links or references.

If you expect to be taken seriously, you should not use trash tabloids as citations to support your case.

(11-09-2016 11:26 PM)Randy Ruggles Wrote:  But we are talking about seeing teleology in nature which is different, although related, to religion.

Teleology is not inherently related to religion. Religion manipulates teleology to confuse and mislead.

Quote:Teleology (from Greek telos, meaning end or purpose) is the philosophical study of nature by attempting to describe things in terms of their apparent purpose, directive principle, or goal.

link

(11-09-2016 11:26 PM)Randy Ruggles Wrote:  This is admittedly getting a little tedious having to address the same concern over and over again.

You should have expected that since, by your own admission, you are dealing with a bunch of broken, corrupted mutants.

(11-09-2016 11:26 PM)Randy Ruggles Wrote:  I obviously can't give you all the evidence to support my position here. That's what the book is for.

If you are not willing to present your case then why are you here?

(11-09-2016 11:26 PM)Randy Ruggles Wrote:  But right now, the evidence appears to support my hypothesis.

The "evidence" you have provided is laughable.

(11-09-2016 11:26 PM)Randy Ruggles Wrote:  Lastly, you say you know theism is not the default position and that I know it too. I'd like to know how you know both of those things.

Speaking of tedious... You have been given citations and links (none of which lead to the dailymail...) which you apparently choose to ignore.

Help for the living. Hope for the dead. ~ R.G. Ingersoll

Freedom offers opportunity. Opportunity confers responsibility. Responsibility to use the freedom we enjoy wisely, honestly and humanely. ~ Noam Chomsky
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 10 users Like Fatbaldhobbit's post
12-09-2016, 05:43 AM
RE: Feedback requested on a new hypothesis on the origin of atheism
Ol' cuddly Randy is probably only here to get a few quotes to mine for his new book Rolleyes You know, the day someone answers him sarcastically and he can edit it into another lie for Jesus. Or he can say "I tried to get atheists to comment but I was just abused". Silly twat. You're gonna fleece your half-wit readers like a *proper* little Christian charlatan.

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 8 users Like morondog's post
12-09-2016, 06:05 AM
RE: Feedback requested on a new hypothesis on the origin of atheism
(12-09-2016 05:43 AM)morondog Wrote:  Ol' cuddly Randy is probably only here to get a few quotes to mine for his new book Rolleyes You know, the day someone answers him sarcastically and he can edit it into another lie for Jesus. Or he can say "I tried to get atheists to comment but I was just abused". Silly twat. You're gonna fleece your half-wit readers like a *proper* little Christian charlatan.

But he doesn't know any of our names. He doesn't even know if we're telling the truth about who we say we are. How can you quote someone without knowing their credentials? Huh

What if the "atheist" in question is really a trained Evangelical minister who majored in apologetic sciences at Biola University? You really can't be sure of anyone's integrity when you only know them from an online forum where people are known to troll.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Aliza's post
12-09-2016, 06:06 AM
RE: Feedback requested on a new hypothesis on the origin of atheism
(11-09-2016 11:02 PM)Randy Ruggles Wrote:  Think of it this way: If there really is no God, and if it's true, as the evidence seems to suggests, that most people are born with a predisposition to believe, and if it is further true that some people are not, how would you explain that scientifically? What makes the most sense? What conclusion would you come to? What causes us to be born without other things we no longer need?

That seems like s basic tenet of evolution by natural selection. There is always variation among members of a species. Being born with something useful gives a survival advantage and would be selected for. Being born without something necessary is a disadvantage and would be selected against. Being born with something different but essentially neutral would result in no net selection effect. There is no cause needed apart from normal variability.

If your conjecture is correct (and I consider that a HUGE 'if'), it would only mean that a HAAD used to be an advantage and no longer is. People with the tendency to claim agency where none exists no longer have a selection advantage.

(11-09-2016 11:26 PM)Randy Ruggles Wrote:  I said theism is the default because that is what current research shows.

Again, the most you can claim is that a predisposition for belief is present but that is not the same as being a theist. The way you continually conflate the two says that you either don't understand the difference or that you are being intentionally dishonest about it.

I'm still trying to figure out what it would mean if this turned out to be true. If would not be a justification for theism, only an explanation for it. It might help atheists be more tolerant of theists because it identifies a flaw in human perception that they are victims of.

Atheism: it's not just for communists any more!
America July 4 1776 - November 8 2016 RIP
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like unfogged's post
12-09-2016, 06:08 AM
RE: Feedback requested on a new hypothesis on the origin of atheism
(12-09-2016 06:05 AM)Aliza Wrote:  What if the "atheist" in question is really a trained Evangelical minister who majored in apologetic sciences at Biola University? You really can't be sure of anyone's integrity when you only know them from an online forum where people are known to troll.

And here I thought you were a cute Jewish girl Weeping

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like morondog's post
12-09-2016, 06:11 AM
RE: Feedback requested on a new hypothesis on the origin of atheism
(12-09-2016 06:08 AM)morondog Wrote:  
(12-09-2016 06:05 AM)Aliza Wrote:  What if the "atheist" in question is really a trained Evangelical minister who majored in apologetic sciences at Biola University? You really can't be sure of anyone's integrity when you only know them from an online forum where people are known to troll.

And here I thought you were a cute Jewish girl Weeping

Uhm.... actually one person from the forum can confirm that I'm a Jewish female, and he thinks I'm cute too. Blush
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Aliza's post
12-09-2016, 06:14 AM
RE: Feedback requested on a new hypothesis on the origin of atheism
(12-09-2016 06:11 AM)Aliza Wrote:  
(12-09-2016 06:08 AM)morondog Wrote:  And here I thought you were a cute Jewish girl Weeping

Uhm.... actually one person from the forum can confirm that I'm a Jewish female, and he thinks I'm cute too. Blush

Yaaabut! He thinks he's a cat.

Facepalm

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 7 users Like DLJ's post
12-09-2016, 06:21 AM
RE: Feedback requested on a new hypothesis on the origin of atheism
(12-09-2016 06:14 AM)DLJ Wrote:  
(12-09-2016 06:11 AM)Aliza Wrote:  Uhm.... actually one person from the forum can confirm that I'm a Jewish female, and he thinks I'm cute too. Blush

Yaaabut! He thinks he's a cat.

Facepalm

Laugh out load
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Aliza's post
12-09-2016, 08:51 AM
RE: Feedback requested on a new hypothesis on the origin of atheism
(11-09-2016 05:31 AM)Chas Wrote:  
(11-09-2016 04:36 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  That seems to be false too. The evidence shows our brains are predisposed to a negativity bias, not agency detection. Which just seems to be a bad interpretation of the data.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

What does that even mean? What is a 'negativity bias' and what has that to do with agency detection?

That there no such thing as "agency detection", though there is such as thing as "negativity bias", where finding supportive of negativity bias, are erroneously interpreted as supportive of "agency detection".

"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
12-09-2016, 08:53 AM
RE: Feedback requested on a new hypothesis on the origin of atheism
(11-09-2016 05:34 AM)Chas Wrote:  
(11-09-2016 04:27 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  Such individuals would be akin to the ten percent of atheists who also claim to believe in God, ...

Citation required. Drinking Beverage

Sorry 8%.

"Although the literal definition of “atheist” is “a person who believes that God does not exist,” according to the Merriam-Webster dictionary, 8% of those who call themselves atheists also say they believe in God or a universal spirit. Indeed, 2% say they are “absolutely certain” about the existence of God or a universal spirit. Alternatively, there are many people who fit the dictionary definition of “atheist” but do not call themselves atheists. About three times as many Americans say they do not believe in God or a universal spirit (9%) as say they are atheists (3%)."

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/201...-atheists/

"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
[+] 1 user Likes Tomasia's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: