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
18-09-2016, 11:25 AM
RE: Feedback requested on a new hypothesis on the origin of atheism
(18-09-2016 11:21 AM)houseofcantor Wrote:  Wow. Aliza is lit. I don't remember her being so hostile. You guys are a bad influence on the poor girl. Angel

Too much peanut butter.

There is only one really serious philosophical question, and that is suicide. -Camus
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like GirlyMan's post
18-09-2016, 11:28 AM
RE: Feedback requested on a new hypothesis on the origin of atheism
(18-09-2016 11:21 AM)houseofcantor Wrote:  Wow. Aliza is lit. I don't remember her being so hostile. You guys are a bad influence on the poor girl. Angel

Some shit went down and I've started sitting with the goth kids at lunch.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 9 users Like Aliza's post
18-09-2016, 11:35 AM
RE: Feedback requested on a new hypothesis on the origin of atheism
I asked my 9 month old daughter if she believes in god. She shit her diaper. Results: Inconclusive.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 15 users Like Dark Wanderer's post
18-09-2016, 12:42 PM
RE: Feedback requested on a new hypothesis on the origin of atheism
(18-09-2016 11:35 AM)Dark Wanderer Wrote:  I asked my 9 month old daughter if she believes in god. She shit her diaper. Results: Inconclusive.

On the contrary. This is clearly evidence that she has an innate predisposition to crapping in her pants. Obviously she believes that a higher power will be along to change them shortly. Laughat

---
Flesh and blood of a dead star, slain in the apocalypse of supernova, resurrected by four billion years of continuous autocatalytic reaction and crowned with the emergent property of sentience in the dream that the universe might one day understand itself.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like Paleophyte's post
18-09-2016, 12:46 PM
RE: Feedback requested on a new hypothesis on the origin of atheism
(18-09-2016 03:50 AM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  You are a shining example of the Dunning-Kruger effect at work.

Bowing So few people truly put any effort into crafting their insults.

---
Flesh and blood of a dead star, slain in the apocalypse of supernova, resurrected by four billion years of continuous autocatalytic reaction and crowned with the emergent property of sentience in the dream that the universe might one day understand itself.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like Paleophyte's post
18-09-2016, 12:57 PM
RE: Feedback requested on a new hypothesis on the origin of atheism
(18-09-2016 12:46 PM)Paleophyte Wrote:  
(18-09-2016 03:50 AM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  You are a shining example of the Dunning-Kruger effect at work.

Bowing So few people truly put any effort into crafting their insults.
I had to look it up but having done do can only second P-phyte's proposition!
Bowing

Tomorrow is precious, don't ruin it by fouling up today.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Gloucester's post
18-09-2016, 01:10 PM (This post was last modified: 18-09-2016 01:15 PM by Randy Ruggles.)
RE: Feedback requested on a new hypothesis on the origin of atheism
Last night, I emailed three experts, Paul Bloom, Deb Kellemen, and Justin Barrett and asked them two questions:

1. Can you confirm that your research seems to indicate that most of us are born with a propensity to believe in a God or gods? (ie. see teleology in nature.)

2. How can we account for those people who are born without this innate belief?

Atheist Paul Bloom has responded. He confirmed Number 1 but clarified that seeing teleology in nature did not necessarily equate with belief in a god. He believes the first is innate and the second is not.

He also sent me a paper which he said addressed my second question. Although the paper was marked, "Do not distribute," I found it elsewhere online. Here it is:

http://willgervais.com/journal-articles/...-disbelief

The paper outlines 4 types of atheist:

1. Mind-blind
2. Apatheist
3. InCREDulous
4. Analytic

The paper states:

"We have identified four such pathways, although
there could be others that future research may discover.
Whereas mind-blind atheism does not ‘get’ religion,
apatheism and inCREDulous atheism are indifferent to-
wards religion, and analytic atheism is skeptical of and
rejects religion. These four paths to atheism are theoreti-
cally distinct, but are often intertwined in the real world."

The mind-blind atheist would roughly correspond with my term "atheopath" and because this has some history in the literature, I think I will, in future, switch my term for theirs.

So my question to all of you is this:

Which type of atheist are you: 1, 2, 3 or 4?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-09-2016, 01:20 PM
RE: Feedback requested on a new hypothesis on the origin of atheism
To you, Randy, we are whichever kind fits best with your pre-conceived and immutable opinions.

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
[+] 5 users Like morondog's post
18-09-2016, 01:21 PM (This post was last modified: 18-09-2016 01:25 PM by Gloucester.)
RE: Feedback requested on a new hypothesis on the origin of atheism
(18-09-2016 01:10 PM)Randy Ruggles Wrote:  Last night, I emailed three experts, Paul Bloom, Deb Kellemen, and Justin Barrett and asked them two questions:

1. Can you confirm that your research seems to indicate that most of us are born with a propensity to believe in a God or gods? (ie. see teleology in nature.)

2. How can we account for those people who are born without this innate belief?

Atheist Paul Bloom has responded. He confirmed Number 1 but clarified that seeing teleology in nature did not necessarily equate with belief in a god. He believes the first is innate and the second is not.

He also sent me a paper which he said addressed my second question. Although the paper was marked, "Do not distribute," I found it elsewhere online. Here it is:

http://willgervais.com/journal-articles/...-disbelief

The paper outlines 4 types of atheist:

1. Mind-blind
2. Apatheist
3. InCREDulous
4. Analytic

The paper states:

"We have identified four such pathways, although
there could be others that future research may discover.
Whereas mind-blind atheism does not ‘get’ religion,
apatheism and inCREDulous atheism are indifferent to-
wards religion, and analytic atheism is skeptical of and
rejects religion. These four paths to atheism are theoreti-
cally distinct, but are often intertwined in the real world."

The mind-blind atheist would roughly correspond with my term "atheopath" and because this has some history in the literature, I think I will, in future, switch my term for theirs.

So my question to all of you is this:

Which type of atheist are you: 1,2, 3 or 4?
OK, I'll go,with this hypothesis and claim both 1 and 4.

1. I have simply never intuitively understood religion other than as some kind of psychological "security blanket" to make up for something lacking in the user.

4. Later study, discussion and consideration confirmed this for me.

I do, however, think that "blind" here could be used by some, biased, unscrupulous, word twisting types as a perjorative to support their own distorted motives.

Tomorrow is precious, don't ruin it by fouling up today.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like Gloucester's post
18-09-2016, 01:24 PM
RE: Feedback requested on a new hypothesis on the origin of atheism
(18-09-2016 01:10 PM)Randy Ruggles Wrote:  Last night, I emailed three experts, Paul Bloom, Deb Kellemen, and Justin Barrett and asked them two questions:

1. Can you confirm that your research seems to indicate that most of us are born with a propensity to believe in a God or gods? (ie. see teleology in nature.)

2. How can we account for those people who are born without this innate belief?

Atheist Paul Bloom has responded. He confirmed Number 1 but clarified that seeing teleology in nature did not necessarily equate with belief in a god. He believes the first is innate and the second is not.

He also sent me a paper which he said addressed my second question. Although the paper was marked, "Do not distribute," I found it elsewhere online. Here it is:

http://willgervais.com/journal-articles/...-disbelief

The paper outlines 4 types of atheist:

1. Mind-blind
2. Apatheist
3. InCREDulous
4. Analytic

The paper states:

"We have identified four such pathways, although
there could be others that future research may discover.
Whereas mind-blind atheism does not ‘get’ religion,
apatheism and inCREDulous atheism are indifferent to-
wards religion, and analytic atheism is skeptical of and
rejects religion. These four paths to atheism are theoreti-
cally distinct, but are often intertwined in the real world."

The mind-blind atheist would roughly correspond with my term "atheopath" and because this has some history in the literature, I think I will, in future, switch my term for theirs.

So my question to all of you is this:

Which type of atheist are you: 1, 2, 3 or 4?

The link you sent doesn't work. I don't mean to sound skeptical of your quotes... but sorry, I am actually skeptical of the authenticity of your quotes given your performance on this forum.

The biographies of your researchers pass my sniff test, though. Even Justin Barrett got his degree from a proper university and not some place like Biola.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Aliza's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: