The Psychology of Atheism
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
25-04-2016, 08:24 AM
RE: The Psychology of Atheism
(25-04-2016 08:21 AM)Fatbaldhobbit Wrote:  
(25-04-2016 08:05 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  Not really. I don't see how pointing out that the Reason Rally is an atheists gathering implies it's religious, anymore so that pointing out this is an atheists forum, implies it's religious.

Fine.

This is an atheist forum.
The Reason Rally is an atheist convention.

What is your fucking point?

That's it. If we can all agree on that, then for the time being I have nothing further to argue.

"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
25-04-2016, 08:28 AM
RE: The Psychology of Atheism
(25-04-2016 08:24 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(25-04-2016 08:21 AM)Fatbaldhobbit Wrote:  Fine.

This is an atheist forum.
The Reason Rally is an atheist convention.

What is your fucking point?

That's it. If we can all agree on that, then for the time being I have nothing further to argue.

See my Oxford dictionary quotes.

Reason and atheism are two different things.

Reason may and should lead one to atheism. However, it is not a rule.

NOTE: Member, Tomasia uses this site to slander other individuals. He then later proclaims it a joke, but not in public.
I will call him a liar and a dog here and now.
Banjo.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Banjo's post
25-04-2016, 09:18 AM
RE: The Psychology of Atheism
(25-04-2016 07:58 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(25-04-2016 07:50 AM)Chas Wrote:  But I am not wrong. You continue to ignore the inclusionary language.

Inclusive to those who don't believe in God, but feel more comfortable labeling themselves as skeptics as opposed to atheists.

Like I said the organizers of the Reason Rally themselves have explicitly identified their audience as representative of those who don't believe in God. I'm not sure how much more clearer you need this spelled out to you.

And out of curiosity, would you say this is an atheists forum?

No, I would say it is an atheist forum or an atheists' forum or an atheist's forum.
But I would not be so ignorant as to call it "an atheists forum". Drinking Beverage

It is "The Thinking Atheist" - that's kind of obvious. The Reason Rally is about reason.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
25-04-2016, 09:19 AM
RE: The Psychology of Atheism
(24-04-2016 06:24 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(23-04-2016 03:40 PM)Stevil Wrote:  Of course, I would tend to ask the question the other way around.
Why are women and non scientists more likely to believe in things without supporting evidence?

The answer for scientists is possibly because they are taught the importance of supporting evidence. They are taught how deductions can be false and due to personal assumptions, beliefs and wants. They are taught methods to overcome personal bias and to look for objectivity and conclusions based on objective evidence.

I'd wonder how man scientists who identify as atheists, only became atheists after choosing an education path, who would credit it with their particular education in their majors.

Folks like Dawkins indicate they were atheists at a very early age as I remember.

I think people inclined to be atheists are drawn to study the sciences. That there's perhaps some parallel here between why folks on the autistic spectrum are drawn to these fields, and atheists in general.

It's not about reason, science, of evidence per se, but one's chosen identify, how he wants to see himself, and be recognized by others as. And I think this makes it bit more complicated, than any overtly simplistic explanations.

"I think people inclined to be atheists are drawn to study the sciences. That there's perhaps some parallel here between why folks on the autistic spectrum are drawn to these fields, and atheists in general.

It's not about reason, science, of evidence per se, but one's chosen identify, how he wants to see himself, and be recognized by others as. And I think this makes it bit more complicated, than any overtly simplistic explanations."


Bull and shit. More assertion on your part, with absolutely no reason to believe it other than your desire to.

Why are more well educated people more likely to be atheist (or at the very least, non-religious or less religious)? The straightforward and obvious answer is that reality has a bias towards rational and logical conclusions, neither of which describes religion. But you assert that it has to do with "one's chosen identity," implying that scientists assign themselves the label of atheist so as to feel and be seen as included in the scientific community. Which is a complete load of bullshit. Why? Here, let me list the reasons:
1) it assumes that there is a religious test of some sort for scientists. There isn't. Not at the BA/BS level, or the MS/MA, or MD/PhD.
2) it assumes science cares about religion in the first place. This ignorance indicates you've never taken a science course taught by a scientist.
3) it implies that "atheism" and science are intrinsically linked such that being included as a scientist requires one be less religious or non-religious or an atheist/agnostic. Complete and utter bullshit. While it is true that a larger proportion of the population of scientists are atheist/non-religious than the general population, this does not indicate anything about the field of science as a whole with regard to why those people are atheist/non-religious. More educated tends to correlate with less religious, and scientists are among the most well educated. Fin



You keep injecting your personal bias into these asinine assumptions. You take simple observations and add in complex bullshit and conspiracy.

Being nice is something stupid people do to hedge their bets
-Rick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like TheBeardedDude's post
25-04-2016, 09:20 AM
RE: The Psychology of Atheism
(25-04-2016 08:28 AM)Banjo Wrote:  
(25-04-2016 08:24 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  That's it. If we can all agree on that, then for the time being I have nothing further to argue.

See my Oxford dictionary quotes.

Reason and atheism are two different things.

Reason may and should lead one to atheism. However, it is not a rule.

The Reason Rally, according to the organizers of said rally, is a gathering of those who don't believe in God, representative of the population of non-believers.

"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
25-04-2016, 09:23 AM
RE: The Psychology of Atheism
(25-04-2016 09:19 AM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  
(24-04-2016 06:24 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  I'd wonder how man scientists who identify as atheists, only became atheists after choosing an education path, who would credit it with their particular education in their majors.

Folks like Dawkins indicate they were atheists at a very early age as I remember.

I think people inclined to be atheists are drawn to study the sciences. That there's perhaps some parallel here between why folks on the autistic spectrum are drawn to these fields, and atheists in general.

It's not about reason, science, of evidence per se, but one's chosen identify, how he wants to see himself, and be recognized by others as. And I think this makes it bit more complicated, than any overtly simplistic explanations.

"I think people inclined to be atheists are drawn to study the sciences. That there's perhaps some parallel here between why folks on the autistic spectrum are drawn to these fields, and atheists in general.

It's not about reason, science, of evidence per se, but one's chosen identify, how he wants to see himself, and be recognized by others as. And I think this makes it bit more complicated, than any overtly simplistic explanations."


Bull and shit. More assertion on your part, with absolutely no reason to believe it other than your desire to.

Why are more well educated people more likely to be atheist (or at the very least, non-religious or less religious)? The straightforward and obvious answer is that reality has a bias towards rational and logical conclusions, neither of which describes religion. But you assert that it has to do with "one's chosen identity," implying that scientists assign themselves the label of atheist so as to feel and be seen as included in the scientific community. Which is a complete load of bullshit. Why? Here, let me list the reasons:
1) it assumes that there is a religious test of some sort for scientists. There isn't. Not at the BA/BS level, or the MS/MA, or MD/PhD.
2) it assumes science cares about religion in the first place. This ignorance indicates you've never taken a science course taught by a scientist.
3) it implies that "atheism" and science are intrinsically linked such that being included as a scientist requires one be less religious or non-religious or an atheist/agnostic. Complete and utter bullshit. While it is true that a larger proportion of the population of scientists are atheist/non-religious than the general population, this does not indicate anything about the field of science as a whole with regard to why those people are atheist/non-religious. More educated tends to correlate with less religious, and scientists are among the most well educated. Fin



You keep injecting your personal bias into these asinine assumptions. You take simple observations and add in complex bullshit and conspiracy.

Woah, that's shit of load of erronous assumptions about what I said, that I currently lack the stamina to devote myself to correcting.

"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
25-04-2016, 09:26 AM
RE: The Psychology of Atheism
(25-04-2016 09:19 AM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  
(24-04-2016 06:24 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  I'd wonder how man scientists who identify as atheists, only became atheists after choosing an education path, who would credit it with their particular education in their majors.

Folks like Dawkins indicate they were atheists at a very early age as I remember.

I think people inclined to be atheists are drawn to study the sciences. That there's perhaps some parallel here between why folks on the autistic spectrum are drawn to these fields, and atheists in general.

It's not about reason, science, of evidence per se, but one's chosen identify, how he wants to see himself, and be recognized by others as. And I think this makes it bit more complicated, than any overtly simplistic explanations.

"I think people inclined to be atheists are drawn to study the sciences. That there's perhaps some parallel here between why folks on the autistic spectrum are drawn to these fields, and atheists in general.

It's not about reason, science, of evidence per se, but one's chosen identify, how he wants to see himself, and be recognized by others as. And I think this makes it bit more complicated, than any overtly simplistic explanations."


Bull and shit. More assertion on your part, with absolutely no reason to believe it other than your desire to.

Why are more well educated people more likely to be atheist (or at the very least, non-religious or less religious)? The straightforward and obvious answer is that reality has a bias towards rational and logical conclusions, neither of which describes religion. But you assert that it has to do with "one's chosen identity," implying that scientists assign themselves the label of atheist so as to feel and be seen as included in the scientific community. Which is a complete load of bullshit. Why? Here, let me list the reasons:
1) it assumes that there is a religious test of some sort for scientists. There isn't. Not at the BA/BS level, or the MS/MA, or MD/PhD.
2) it assumes science cares about religion in the first place. This ignorance indicates you've never taken a science course taught by a scientist.
3) it implies that "atheism" and science are intrinsically linked such that being included as a scientist requires one be less religious or non-religious or an atheist/agnostic. Complete and utter bullshit. While it is true that a larger proportion of the population of scientists are atheist/non-religious than the general population, this does not indicate anything about the field of science as a whole with regard to why those people are atheist/non-religious. More educated tends to correlate with less religious, and scientists are among the most well educated. Fin



You keep injecting your personal bias into these asinine assumptions. You take simple observations and add in complex bullshit and conspiracy.
Bowing

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
25-04-2016, 09:26 AM
RE: The Psychology of Atheism
(25-04-2016 09:18 AM)Chas Wrote:  It is "The Thinking Atheist" - that's kind of obvious. The Reason Rally is about reason.

The Reason Rally is about atheists who support reason.

More quotes for you:

"Speaking to NPR prior to the rally, American Atheist president David Silverman stated that this is a coming-of-age event for atheists, "We'll look back at the Reason Rally as one of the game-changing events when people started to look at atheism and look at atheists in a different light."

"Organizers said the aim of the rally was twofold: to unite individuals with similar beliefs and to show the American public that the number of people who don’t believe in God is large and growing. “We have the numbers to be taken seriously,” said Paul Fidalgo, spokesman for the Center for Inquiry, which promotes the scientific method and reasoning and was one of the organizations sponsoring the rally. “We’re not just a tiny fringe group."


Hardly inclusive statements don't you think?

"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
25-04-2016, 09:26 AM
RE: The Psychology of Atheism
(25-04-2016 09:23 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(25-04-2016 09:19 AM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  "I think people inclined to be atheists are drawn to study the sciences. That there's perhaps some parallel here between why folks on the autistic spectrum are drawn to these fields, and atheists in general.

It's not about reason, science, of evidence per se, but one's chosen identify, how he wants to see himself, and be recognized by others as. And I think this makes it bit more complicated, than any overtly simplistic explanations."


Bull and shit. More assertion on your part, with absolutely no reason to believe it other than your desire to.

Why are more well educated people more likely to be atheist (or at the very least, non-religious or less religious)? The straightforward and obvious answer is that reality has a bias towards rational and logical conclusions, neither of which describes religion. But you assert that it has to do with "one's chosen identity," implying that scientists assign themselves the label of atheist so as to feel and be seen as included in the scientific community. Which is a complete load of bullshit. Why? Here, let me list the reasons:
1) it assumes that there is a religious test of some sort for scientists. There isn't. Not at the BA/BS level, or the MS/MA, or MD/PhD.
2) it assumes science cares about religion in the first place. This ignorance indicates you've never taken a science course taught by a scientist.
3) it implies that "atheism" and science are intrinsically linked such that being included as a scientist requires one be less religious or non-religious or an atheist/agnostic. Complete and utter bullshit. While it is true that a larger proportion of the population of scientists are atheist/non-religious than the general population, this does not indicate anything about the field of science as a whole with regard to why those people are atheist/non-religious. More educated tends to correlate with less religious, and scientists are among the most well educated. Fin



You keep injecting your personal bias into these asinine assumptions. You take simple observations and add in complex bullshit and conspiracy.

Woah, that's shit of load of erronous assumptions about what I said, that I currently lack the stamina to devote myself to correcting.

Aka "I lack the intellectual capacity to argue against what you wrote and I lack the moral integrity to admit you are correct."

Educate yourself

Being nice is something stupid people do to hedge their bets
-Rick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes TheBeardedDude's post
25-04-2016, 09:29 AM
RE: The Psychology of Atheism
(25-04-2016 09:26 AM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  
(25-04-2016 09:23 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  Woah, that's shit of load of erronous assumptions about what I said, that I currently lack the stamina to devote myself to correcting.

Aka "I lack the intellectual capacity to argue against what you wrote and I lack the moral integrity to admit you are correct."

Educate yourself

Yep that's it. ::CLAP, CLAP:::

"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
Post Reply
Forum Jump: