Marcello I really think something's not quite right with you, you are completely obsessed with religion. Very awkward.
Religion, what's the point?
- Thread starter TheRedFlag
- Start date
Marcello I really think something's not quite right with you, you are completely obsessed with religion. Very awkward.
Nothing awkward about it. Marcello was inducted into religion by his parents and by his own thought and experience has come to reject its patent nonsense and influence on the world. Hence a certain amount of annoyance with the baa baas.
This is not just a certain amount of annoyance, it's more of an unhealthy obsessive behaviour. I thought once you're 'free' you'd be focusing on something completely different. But instead he seems to be bothering more than any average religious person.
Of course he is annoyed. I grew up in a religious family as well, and I was very angry when I realized I had been lied to my entire life. I'm not that angry anymore though, as in, I don't actively seek out arguments anymore.
Was watching some show narrated by Morgan Freeman last night and they were talking about religion and discussing whether or not it would exist on "alien worlds" or would "aliens" have religions. That part was not so interesting, what was interesting was part of the show where they discussed why we have religion and what the future of religion is. Obviously there was some talk about mans need to try to explain things he can't explain and therefore attributing it to some all powerful being(s), provide some meaning to life, etc.
There was one guy who talked about religion from an civilization evolutionary standpoint, he felt based on some studies he had done that religion may have (past tense) been necessary for humans to forum societies/civilizations in that it did (and for some still does) provide a basis for exercising some self control (which he deemed important in forming societies/civilizations). And yes I am well aware that this will probably be followed by lots of comments about all the bad things religion has done (they are well documented not just in this thread but elsewhere). He did not claim this was an on going need and the show followed it up with this applied mathmatician using historical and current data predicting that by 2050 the majority of the people in the world will not align themselves with a religious belief and it will just keep going down until, well religious belief does not exist anymore.
Obviously this was just the theories presented in the show, and I am not claiming they are correct, just it was interesting to hear them.
There was one guy who talked about religion from an civilization evolutionary standpoint, he felt based on some studies he had done that religion may have (past tense) been necessary for humans to forum societies/civilizations in that it did (and for some still does) provide a basis for exercising some self control (which he deemed important in forming societies/civilizations). And yes I am well aware that this will probably be followed by lots of comments about all the bad things religion has done (they are well documented not just in this thread but elsewhere). He did not claim this was an on going need and the show followed it up with this applied mathmatician using historical and current data predicting that by 2050 the majority of the people in the world will not align themselves with a religious belief and it will just keep going down until, well religious belief does not exist anymore.
Obviously this was just the theories presented in the show, and I am not claiming they are correct, just it was interesting to hear them.
Interesting.
Isn't it a fact that as the education level of a population rises, the incidence of religious beliefs diminishes? Except in America of course, where religious beliefs actually rose over the last 15 years. The only developed country to do so. Karl Marx said that religion was the opium of the masses and that it had no place in a modern society.
Intelligence researcher Helmuth Nyborg was involved in a series of tests to correlate religiosity and intelligence. One study of 7,000 people, found that Athiests scored, on average, 6.85 IQ points higher than non atheists. In fact of the 63 studies done on the relationship between religiosity and intelligence, 53 found a negative correlation between them. Meaning the more religious people were, the less intelligent (as measured by IQ) they were.
All interesting data.
Personally, none of that data surprises me because I think people are more likely to look for all encompassing solutions, the lesser their ability to think critically. However, much more importantly, I think people should be able to do and believe in whatever they choose, as long as they (a) don't hurt anyone else or (b) shove it down anyone else's throat. And that goes for both sides of the equation; the religious and the non-religious.
ill just leave this here (don't know where else to put it...) for anyone open minded...
I don't think that's too controversial, I'm pretty sure it's also been discussed in here before that at the time they were developed, religions were actually fairly progressive.
Agree with your last part. The showing down the throat, you will find if you stick around long enough, is performed mostly by the Cafs atheist brigade.
Probably because they're right though. I mean, in all likelihood.
'disputed' doesn't mean debunked.
The moon landings are disputed. The facts still point to both being true.
The moon landings are disputed. The facts still point to both being true.
IQ tests, you got to be kidding...
You gimps still arguing about religion?
Makes intuitive sense that atheists might, in general, be more intelligent as it tends to be a stance you end up at through critical thinking. If you're not capable or willing to think too deeply about something, you're more likely to default a position of un-questioning faith. Absolutely no idea if there's any robust data to support this link.
On a completely random yet vaguely related note, I loved Matthew McConnaughey's rant about faith in True Detective. The scene beside the hillbilly church tent. Quality telly.
Makes intuitive sense that atheists might, in general, be more intelligent as it tends to be a stance you end up at through critical thinking. If you're not capable or willing to think too deeply about something, you're more likely to default a position of un-questioning faith. Absolutely no idea if there's any robust data to support this link.
On a completely random yet vaguely related note, I loved Matthew McConnaughey's rant about faith in True Detective. The scene beside the hillbilly church tent. Quality telly.
That's just bollox, I'm afraid. I could show you 10 notes of monthly 1:1s I'm having with my team, displaying all their strengths and weaknesses, what they've achieved so far, where there's room for improvement, etc etc. You wouldn't have a clue who of them is religious and who isn't. It just doesn't come into equation. You also wouldn't be able to conclude who of them supports Man United and who doesn't care about football at all. These type of questions, what I believe, what I think of life after death, what I think of the origins of universe and life, they simply have no bearing when it comes down to the professional work arena. And this is frankly all that matters to me.
Agree, the True Detective bit was great, but so very dark.
There are a lot of studies on religion and intelligence, not just IQ - though there are several, even within the scientific profession - but also cognitive, education and general knowledge (even OF religion) and even emotional, and pretty much all of them point to less belief = more intelligence. In fact I don't think there's been a single peer reviewed study that's ever pointed the other way, only ones that are at best inconclusive. I'm happy to be corrected on this though.
This doesn't mean religious people are all incapable at their jobs or walking around barely able to function. Clearly a lot of religious people are bright and successful at what they do.
This doesn't mean religious people are all incapable at their jobs or walking around barely able to function. Clearly a lot of religious people are bright and successful at what they do.
Last edited:
When you're talking about an already well educated cohort (i.e. the people you work with) then there's probably not much difference.
When you look at the population at large, though, I think you're more likely to see trends. Not sure it tells us much though, even if there is a big difference. The poor and the ill-educated are more likely to throw their lot behind something that will mean a better life after death, than the comfortable and well-educated middle class who are quite happy in the here and now.
I won't mention True Detective again as I'm only half way through season 5 and terrified of spoilers!
That reminds me of that Louis Theroux episode here he goes to India to investigate some popular spiritual leader who claims to be able to produce precious stones from thin air. Louis meets an American who graduated from Harvard and has given up the life he grew up with to follow this absolute charlatan.
Being highly intelligent doesn't preclude you from being a fool.
Being highly intelligent doesn't preclude you from being a fool.
Yeah, the big variable in those kinds of study is money, which often correlates with education.
I wouldn't worry, you're 4 and half seasons ahead of everyone else.
IQ tests are a pretty pointless measurement for that.
Do we know where that study took place? In the UK, I'd expect that to level out somewhat in future generations since being atheist is seemingly becoming the default rather than a mindset that you would have to find for yourself.
I know that technically something like 60% of people in the UK claim to be Christian but only like 5% go to Church, right? Not that you have to attend Church to be a Christian of course - but it's clear that a lot of people consider themselves to be Christian merely by default association rather than actual beliefs. Since the kids aren't then attending Church, their parents ticking a 'Christian' box on a census doesn't really have any effect on whether they would consider themselves to be religious or not.
I dunno, even attending a Church of England school it felt like the natural mindset of a child/teenager wouldn't entertain the thought of a God. I don't think it's that they dismiss the thought through some critical reasoning but more that it's the easy position to hold and they mostly couldn't really give a shit either way.
Do we know where that study took place? In the UK, I'd expect that to level out somewhat in future generations since being atheist is seemingly becoming the default rather than a mindset that you would have to find for yourself.
I know that technically something like 60% of people in the UK claim to be Christian but only like 5% go to Church, right? Not that you have to attend Church to be a Christian of course - but it's clear that a lot of people consider themselves to be Christian merely by default association rather than actual beliefs. Since the kids aren't then attending Church, their parents ticking a 'Christian' box on a census doesn't really have any effect on whether they would consider themselves to be religious or not.
I dunno, even attending a Church of England school it felt like the natural mindset of a child/teenager wouldn't entertain the thought of a God. I don't think it's that they dismiss the thought through some critical reasoning but more that it's the easy position to hold and they mostly couldn't really give a shit either way.
It's the easier position to hold when you're not part of a society that's in mortal dread of the summer not happening, the crops not growing and lots of people dying.
Is a person that stands against discrimination obsessed?
Is a person that fights for human rights obsessed?
Is a person that desires the ending of women's suffrage obsessed?
Because how convenient that you feel I'm obsessed only because I destroy something you hold as a core belief. Religion can take a flying feck off a bridge. It's destructive, it's brainwashing, and it gives off a moral superiority complex to many.
Plenty of religious people and organisations are fighting for all the above mentioned causes. You're painting a simplistic, one sided picture and judge religion only by its abuse. Boring.
Ironic.
I only come in here intermittently but what's your story? You seem to be the most fanatical person in this thread. I'm guessing there's a reason why?
He probably has some free time at the moment, would be my guess.
The Church of Modern Day Atheism would have a lot more followers if they were to tone down the superiority complex.
Not sure what their holy leader(s) are thinking to be honest.
Someone just told me that we don't need vaccinations because people lived to be over 100 in the bible.
Just in for a nosey. I see nothings changed from my last visit - "throw them to the lions.."...... "you'll burn in hell for all eternity.." "Jesus weeps..." .... "Dawkins cringes" 
I'm just watching the Hillsborough memorial service at Anfield.
Why is there is a vicar using the tragedy to spew his cultist Jesus propaganda? What does any of it have to do with the tragedy? They just can't resist the chance to sink their claws in wherever they can...Whenever there's a death, a tragedy or a vulnerable person, they exploit this in order to indoctrinate.
Why is there is a vicar using the tragedy to spew his cultist Jesus propaganda? What does any of it have to do with the tragedy? They just can't resist the chance to sink their claws in wherever they can...Whenever there's a death, a tragedy or a vulnerable person, they exploit this in order to indoctrinate.
Alternatively, they are asked to help provide comfort to a largely Christian community and try to do so.
There are undoubtedly a number of families who are not part of the Christian 'community' and who object to it using the tragedy for religious propaganda. But of course when religion is concerned, majority rules. The minority will be expected to sit quietly while these cultists talk nonsense in the names of their deceased loved ones.
I would have no objection to a religious element of the service, if that's what comforts some of the families. But from what I've seen, the entire basis of the service is essentially a Christian worship ceremony. Even the minute silence they are currently observing as I type is being done in the name of 'thanks giving'. They have completely hijacked it.
Undoubtedly? I'd go with "probably none". You drastically overestimate the number of those genuinely adverse to Christianity, if you truly believe that.
Often times nev it's ocassions like these that can cause people to go looking for a god or a meaning in a tragedy.
The armed forces have taken to 'hijacking' showpiece footballing/sporting occasions, but I don't read many complaints about that.
Is "hijacking" the right word since I assume the religious guys were actually invited to give a sermon/prayer at the event and pretty much the ogranizers had to know what kind of talk they would give. Not that it makes it any easier to listen to.
True, but it'd be difficult to argue that the army doesn't exist.
Oh I dunno, mate, that camouflage can be pretty effective.
Hah! Very good.