Theists and BS assumptions about science
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
26-04-2016, 02:50 PM
RE: Theists and BS assumptions about science
(26-04-2016 02:08 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(26-04-2016 01:19 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  Here, let's make it real simple for you.

Why do you believe that education level among scientists, correlates with less/non-religiousness/atheism?

Option 1) Scientists become less religious to "fit in"

No I don't believe this.


Quote:Option 2) Scientists become increasingly more skeptical of super-nature as they study nature in greater detail.

I don't think this is true either. Anecdotal histories of scientists like Einsteins, Dawkins indicate they became atheists at young age, long before they started studying nature in greater detail.

But I don't know of any actual comprehensive survey of scientist, indicating the average age they abandon their theism. But there doesn't seem to be any reason to assume that it correlates with the period in which they devoted themselves to studying nature in greater detail. It doesn't seem that in any of the biographies particularly of any higher level scientist that this was the case, either.

Quote:Option 3) There is no trend because I both acknowledge and don't acknowledge the existence of the correlation (my agreement with the correlation is dependent upon when I think it does or doesn't support a claim I am making)

There is a correlation. Clearly there's disparity between the percentage of scientist who are atheists and the general population, as well between scientists and other professions like medical doctors. Surprisingly it's among American professors, it's not professors of biology, or physics who are the least religious, but psychologists.

It's the narratives in which they became atheists as a result of studying nature in greater detail, that doesn't seem to hold up.

Quote:You contradict yourself in even simple assertions. For instance:
This:
"No, I don't believe there is any intrinsic link between atheism and science."
is directly contradicted by this:
"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."

There you go taking a statement about self-identifying atheists (a small fraction of which are probably even scientist), making a variety of erroneous assumptions about it. In your convoluted reading that latter statement, explicitly stated that there is an "intrinsic line between atheism and science". When it did no such thing.

I'm not sure how a statement that claims that atheism has little to do with science, can be read as a statement that there's an "intrinsic link between atheism and science". Only in your fantastical mind.

"No I don't believe this. "

Really?

"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 don't think this is true either. Anecdotal histories of scientists like Einsteins, Dawkins indicate they became atheists at young age, long before they started studying nature in greater detail. "

And anecdotal histories also indicate that many scientists DO reject supernatural explanations as they come to better understand nature. For instance, I am a scientist who, upon studying nature, rejected supernatural bullshit (aka, religion).

You don't want to believe it is true or plausible, so you turn to anecdotes to find examples that you think don't agree with this option. This has no bearing on reality.

"But I don't know of any actual comprehensive survey of scientist, indicating the average age they abandon their theism."

Yet, you keep looking for anecdotes of scientists abandoning religion before they become scientists.

The observations are straightforward:
The more highly educated among scientists, are the least religious and are more likely than the general population to be atheist/agnostic/non-religious.

"But there doesn't seem to be any reason to assume that it correlates with the period in which they devoted themselves to studying nature in greater detail."

Except that as they advance in degree earned, the proportion of believers among scientists continues to decrease. (see the pew poll I referenced).

You have two options:
Option 1) Scientists become less religious because they study science
Option 2) Less religious people are attracted to science (you favor this one)

Option 1 is straightforward and supported by the data where increasing level of education correlates with decreased religiousness. Option 2 asserts that science attracts atheists, but this is not supported by the data as religious individuals are equally as attracted to science.

"It doesn't seem that in any of the biographies particularly of any higher level scientist that this was the case, either."

What exactly is your sample size here? How many scientists have you interviewed to determine this? I'll give you an example of a scientist who left behind religion and supernature as they studied science in greater detail...me.

"There is a correlation. Clearly there's disparity between the percentage of scientist who are atheists and the general population, as well between scientists and other professions like medical doctors. Surprisingly it's among American professors, it's not professors of biology, or physics who are the least religious, but psychologists."

Funny how those that explicitly study the human mind are the least religious, huh? Drinking Beverage

"It's the narratives in which they became atheists as a result of studying nature in greater detail, that doesn't seem to hold up. "

It's the narrative you don't want to be plausible. That doesn't mean it doesn't "hold up."

"There you go taking a statement about self-identifying atheists (a small fraction of which are probably even scientist), making a variety of erroneous assumptions about it. In your convoluted reading that latter statement, explicitly stated that there is an "intrinsic line between atheism and science". When it did no such thing.

I'm not sure how a statement that claims that atheism has little to do with science, can be read as a statement that there's an "intrinsic link between atheism and science". Only in your fantastical mind."


I read your bullshit as you type it. For instance, this is the full quote from you:
"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."


You are talking about scientists studying science and then explicitly talk about how they "...wants to see himself, and be recognized by others as." But then you assert that:
"No, I don't believe there is any intrinsic link between atheism and science."
Which directly contradicts statements like:
"I think people inclined to be atheists are drawn to study the sciences. "

You are speaking out of both sides of your mouth.

You claim to not believe there is a link, but then you start explicitly talking about a link using specific examples of scientists and fields in general:
"There is a correlation. Clearly there's disparity between the percentage of scientist who are atheists and the general population, as well between scientists and other professions like medical doctors. Surprisingly it's among American professors, it's not professors of biology, or physics who are the least religious, but psychologists."



I am simply using your OWN WORDS against you. You don't even see the bullshit. Facepalm

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
27-04-2016, 06:09 AM
RE: Theists and BS assumptions about science
(26-04-2016 01:28 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  You do realize that these are YOUR words, right?
"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."

And you do realize that no where in that quoted statement of mine does it claim that there is an intrinsic link between atheism and science, if fact it says the exact opposite when it says it's "not about science".

Do you don't realize you own claim of contradiction:

Quote:TBD: ""No, I don't believe there is any intrinsic link between atheism and science."
is directly contradicted by this:
"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."
Are you that deluded, that you think these two statements contradict each other? Are you suffering from hallucinations? I mean like WTF.

"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
27-04-2016, 06:32 AM
RE: Theists and BS assumptions about science
Tommyboy
"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."


No, I don't believe there is any intrinsic link between atheism and science."

Contradictory statements by TTA's Waffler-in-Chief-running-for-Slime-Ball-in-Chief.
So which is it ? Either there IS a fucking link, or there isn't.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Bucky Ball's post
27-04-2016, 06:38 AM
RE: Theists and BS assumptions about science
(26-04-2016 02:50 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  Except that as they advance in degree earned, the proportion of believers among scientists continues to decrease. (see the pew poll I referenced).

You have two options:
Option 1) Scientists become less religious because they study science
Option 2) Less religious people are attracted to science (you favor this one)

Option 1 is straightforward and supported by the data where increasing level of education correlates with decreased religiousness. Option 2 asserts that science attracts atheists, but this is not supported by the data as religious individuals are equally as attracted to science.

The first one is not supported by the data, unless you assume that correlation equals causation. There’s also no good evidence to suggest that these scientists only became atheists in the process of studying in their respective fields. Nor is there any real reason to believe that those that went on to advanced degrees primarily abandoned religion in the process of doing so. It just may be that type of individuals who are drawn to invest themselves so heavily in STEM fields, are more inclined to be non-religious, and not that their non-religiousness was an outcome of their advanced learning.

Let’s say another possible option 3, people drawn to systemizing are drawn to Science, Technology, Engineering and mathematic fields, in fact according to the cognitive neuroscientist Baron-Cohen this is better predicator of those who choose STEM fields, than even gender. And in fact studies also show that those prone to systemizing, particularly those on the autistic spectrum, are more likely to be atheists and less likely to belong to an organized religion. This at least offers a better explanatory scope than your option 2, accounting for gender differences, etc…

This conclusion may not be true, but as I see can be better supported, and far more plausible than your option 2, which is purely just a conflation of cause with correlation.

"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
27-04-2016, 06:59 AM (This post was last modified: 27-04-2016 07:09 AM by Tomasia.)
RE: Theists and BS assumptions about science
(27-04-2016 06:32 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  Tommyboy
"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."


No, I don't believe there is any intrinsic link between atheism and science."

Contradictory statements by TTA's Waffler-in-Chief-running-for-Slime-Ball-in-Chief.
So which is it ? Either there IS a fucking link, or there isn't.

Let's see the first statement is about why atheists are over represented in the science fields compared to the general population, why at least half of all scientist are inclined to not believe in GOD. It should also be recognized that half of all scientist believe in a God or Higher power, which would be problem in suggesting that there's an intrinsic link between science in general and atheism.

The second statement is about self-identifying as an atheist, (a small fraction of whom would even be considered scientists). In fact there's a variety of scientist who don't believe in God, but avoid identifying themselves as atheists, like Neil Tyson.

Self-Idenitying atheist want to be recognized, acknowledged, represented, freely be able to come out about it, were A pins, etc.... It's important part of some people's identities.

"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
27-04-2016, 07:34 AM
RE: Theists and BS assumptions about science
(27-04-2016 06:59 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(27-04-2016 06:32 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  Tommyboy
"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."


No, I don't believe there is any intrinsic link between atheism and science."

Contradictory statements by TTA's Waffler-in-Chief-running-for-Slime-Ball-in-Chief.
So which is it ? Either there IS a fucking link, or there isn't.

Let's see the first statement is about why atheists are over represented in the science fields compared to the general population, why at least half of all scientist are inclined to not believe in GOD. It should also be recognized that half of all scientist believe in a God or Higher power, which would be problem in suggesting that there's an intrinsic link between science in general and atheism.

The second statement is about self-identifying as an atheist, (a small fraction of whom would even be considered scientists). In fact there's a variety of scientist who don't believe in God, but avoid identifying themselves as atheists, like Neil Tyson.

Self-Idenitying atheist want to be recognized, acknowledged, represented, freely be able to come out about it, were A pins, etc.... It's important part of some people's identities.

Let's highlight one OBVIOUS AND GLARING contradiction from you (I continue to point out the others and you continue to bullshit. Including taking the word "correlation" in my statements and turning it into "causation.")

You:
"No, I don't believe there is any intrinsic link between atheism and science."

You again:
"It should also be recognized that half of all scientist believe in a God or Higher power, which would be problem in suggesting that there's an intrinsic link between science in general and atheism. "

TommyBoy = full of shit

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
27-04-2016, 07:39 AM (This post was last modified: 27-04-2016 07:43 AM by Tomasia.)
RE: Theists and BS assumptions about science
(27-04-2016 07:34 AM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  Let's highlight one OBVIOUS AND GLARING contradiction from you (I continue to point out the others and you continue to bullshit. Including taking the word "correlation" in my statements and turning it into "causation.")

You:
"No, I don't believe there is any intrinsic link between atheism and science."

You again:
"It should also be recognized that half of all scientist believe in a God or Higher power, which would be problem in suggesting that there's an intrinsic link between science in general and atheism. "

TommyBoy = full of shit

Uhm, that's not even worthy of a real response.

But it would be interesting to hear you outline how your convoluted mind drew this connection, how you derived a contradiction in those two statements.

"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
27-04-2016, 07:45 AM
RE: Theists and BS assumptions about science
"Are you that deluded, that you think these two statements contradict each other? Are you suffering from hallucinations? I mean like WTF."

I can't highlight your stupidity any better than I already have. The fact that others can easily see your self-contradiction, but you cannot, is a testament to the level of self-delusion you suffer from.

"Self-Idenitying atheist want to be recognized, acknowledged, represented, freely be able to come out about it, were A pins, etc.... It's important part of some people's identities."

This is so badly written, it is hard to follow.

But it is the same bullshit you keep saying by implying that scientists (you fucking use scientists as examples and are talking within the context of science and scientists) choose to identify as atheist in order to be "recognized, acknowledged, represented," etc. Once again, this is BULL and SHIT. Scientists identify as atheist for the same reason non-scientists do, because they DON'T BELIEVE IN A GOD. It is the term that best describes their religious views. You continue to assert that it is for another reason entirely, a desire to "fit in" when it comes to the scientific community.


This may be hard for you to believe (in fact, I'd say it is impossible), but scientists don't believe or disbelieve for the reasons you keep asserting. They do or don't believe for their own personal reasons. The interesting part is the correlation between education and religiousness. More well educated = less religious. This correlation suggests that more and more diverse study of the natural world, results in less religious belief (a loss or reduction of a belief in super-nature). Why is this the most straightforward interpretation? Because when it comes to the balance of beliefs in super-nature vs nature, only one of those is supported by science. So as scientists learn more about nature and learn that super-nature has no support for its existence, natural explanations become more well supported.

You don't want to admit this obvious correlation because it suggests that the most logical and rational beliefs are NOT religious or supernatural. Instead, you continue to assert that the label "atheist" is self-applied by some scientists because they want to "fit in," which is complete bullshit.

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
27-04-2016, 07:48 AM
RE: Theists and BS assumptions about science
(27-04-2016 07:39 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(27-04-2016 07:34 AM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  Let's highlight one OBVIOUS AND GLARING contradiction from you (I continue to point out the others and you continue to bullshit. Including taking the word "correlation" in my statements and turning it into "causation.")

You:
"No, I don't believe there is any intrinsic link between atheism and science."

You again:
"It should also be recognized that half of all scientist believe in a God or Higher power, which would be problem in suggesting that there's an intrinsic link between science in general and atheism. "

TommyBoy = full of shit

Uhm, that's not even worthy of a real response.

But it would be interesting to hear you outline how your convoluted mind drew this connection, how you derived a contradiction in those two statements.

And yet, you respond.

I don't want you to simply respond with your generic theistic bullshit. You need to answer and address things being said in reply to you instead of continuing to double-down on your bullshit and contradictions.

I strongly suspect that not only will you not do so, but that you can't. Why? Because (despite what you say) you're not here for actual discussion, you're just here to preach generic theistic bullshit. Why do I suspect this (and I am not the only one to make this observation)? Because of the stuff you actually write.

You can lie and try and manipulate what you say about your reasons and motivations for being on an atheist forum, but your "discussions" and your "replies" betray you. Drinking Beverage

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
27-04-2016, 07:56 AM
RE: Theists and BS assumptions about science
(27-04-2016 07:45 AM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  But it is the same bullshit you keep saying by implying that scientists (you fucking use scientists as examples and are talking within the context of science and scientists) choose to identify as atheist in order to be "recognized, acknowledged, represented," etc. Once again, this is BULL and SHIT. Scientists identify as atheist for the same reason non-scientists do, because they DON'T BELIEVE IN A GOD. It is the term that best describes their religious views. You continue to assert that it is for another reason entirely, a desire to "fit in" when it comes to the scientific community.


There are people who don't really believe in God, who do not identify themselves as Atheist, such a Neil Tyson, Carl Sagan, Einstein, or even Bernie Sanders. Some people avoid the label, others want to wear it boldly and proudly.

Self-Identifying atheists not only don't believe in God, but also want to be recognized by the fact that they don't believe in God. For some identifying as an atheists is important to them as identifying as a theist, or a christian, etc.. might be to a believer, or being black, or gay, etc... It's an integral part of their identity. Something to be encouraged to come out about, be open about, be proud about, a means to identify with a particular group, etc...

It's a part of how some individuals construct their identities.

"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: