Religion and Ethics Forum

Religion and Ethics Discussion => Theism and Atheism => Topic started by: Hope on September 03, 2015, 03:04:18 PM

Title: Religious and educated?
Post by: Hope on September 03, 2015, 03:04:18 PM
For a number of months now, there has been a drip-feed of threads and posts suggesting that the more educated one is, the less likely one is to be religious.

Now I haven't read the whole of this paper, so am not sure of every ramification, but it does suggest that this is no longer the case - though it seems to have been, prior to about the 1970s.

http://bit.ly/1sEcZ74

It should be noted that it is American research carried out in an American context - but then, of course, American ideas and practices tend to travel across the Atlantic  ;)

Has anyone carried out any research as to the correlation between educational achievement and atheism, in the way so much has been claimed to have been done into that between educational achievement and religious belief?

By the way, for many years, one of the real issues around the make up of the church - both conformist and non-conformist (though perhaps less so) - was that it was seen very much as middle-class/professional/well-educated in make-up. 
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Leonard James on September 03, 2015, 03:17:47 PM
I think it is fairly obvious that less educated people are more likely to believe god stories than vice versa, but I don't know of any recent studies on the subject.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Hope on September 03, 2015, 03:34:12 PM
I think it is fairly obvious that less educated people are more likely to believe god stories than vice versa, but I don't know of any recent studies on the subject.
Are they?  This study suggests otherwise.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Jack Knave on September 03, 2015, 06:11:32 PM
Common sense would suggest that less educated people are more gullible in practically all areas where they are uneducated but education itself would not necessarily infer that someone would be less prone to being religious. The religious phenomena is essentially a function of the psyche and is only partially influenced by the intellect.

However, the religious aspect of us does not necessarily attach itself to such things as monotheism and can manifest itself in more fluid forms. It can also attach itself to what ever we are subjected to in our early years.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Phyllis Tyne on September 03, 2015, 07:10:24 PM
I would say the collapse of mechanistic materialism makes certain atheisms look arbitrarily anti God and that may have an impact. The person not committing to or professing atheism must come to see certain atheists as weirdly,unhealthily and personally against God.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Jack Knave on September 03, 2015, 07:27:51 PM
I would say the collapse of mechanistic materialism makes certain atheisms look arbitrarily anti God and that may have an impact. The person not committing to or professing atheism must come to see certain atheists as weirdly,unhealthily and personally against God.
So many assumptions and prepositions in there, Vlad, it would be too much to disentangle it.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Hope on September 03, 2015, 08:04:36 PM
Common sense would suggest that less educated people are more gullible in practically all areas where they are uneducated ...
Having lived and worked among so-called 'uneducated' people in India and Nepal, I was surprised by the fact that, on the whole, the most gullible of the people I had dealings with were the educated westerners (including myself).  The common sense factor seems to get educated out of us, leaving us reliant on technology, complicated and expensive reports, etc.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: jeremyp on September 03, 2015, 09:17:42 PM
Mystery soved

Quote
Schwadel thinks there may be several explanations for the shift. One is that the 20th century saw a significant expansion in the percentage of Americans who go to college, so many groups -- some with strong religious identities -- came to be represented in higher education in ways that were not previously the case.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Leonard James on September 04, 2015, 06:26:15 AM
It's only a matter of time.

http://theweek.com/articles/474624/3-reasons-young-americans-are-giving-god
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: ProfessorDavey on September 04, 2015, 08:52:16 AM
It's only a matter of time.

http://theweek.com/articles/474624/3-reasons-young-americans-are-giving-god
Indeed, although the USA seems to be a little behind the curve in comparison to other developed countries we are now seem exactly the same trend of declining religiosity as younger generations are less religious than their parents' and grandparents' generations.

And this seems to be the case in every country which has the following key features. Firstly freedom of religion, such that people are able to chose their religion or chose not to be religious and the ability to change their religion. Secondly a requirement for children to be educated to a high level (e.g. standard 4-16 or 18, plus plenty going onto higher education. Thirdly a decent median income level.

So effectively if you provide freedom, education and prosperity people turn away from religion. The problem for religions is that there is innate desire amongst people to achieve these 'goods', freedom, education and prosperity and as more countries move into that category, I'd bet my bottom dollar that levels of religiosity will start to decline in those countries too - just as we are seeing, for example, in many Latin American countries as their levels of freedom, education and prosperity increase.

One caveat - you can only really assess this if freedom of religion it longstanding. So for example where there has been an oppressive regime that does not allow freedom of religion but has recently relaxed you cannot take sudden changes in claimed religion as 'real'. So if there is a shift toward christianity in china is this because more people are actually christian or because they always were but couldn't say so for fear of persecution. Likewise in Saudi - if they suddenly allowed complete freedom of religion, I suspect we'd see a massive rise in declared atheists, not because there were actually any more but because they could now declare their non belief without fear of persecution.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Hope on September 04, 2015, 09:37:12 AM
So effectively if you provide freedom, education and prosperity people turn away from religion.
I would agree with the first point, PD - but would suggest, as I have already done, that if the West's experience is anything to go by increased levels of income may well have nothing to do with the drop-off in religiosity (after all, the big gripe about the church in the West is that it is largely middle-class, professional in make up).  I would also suggest that education has a 'benefit' on both sides of the argument, thus suggesting that improved education isn't as great an influence as some would like us to believe.

Quote
The problem for religions is that there is innate desire amongst people to achieve these 'goods', freedom, education and prosperity ...
And as pointed out above, these don't necessarily seem to correlate with the changes in religious affiliation.  If anything, the decline in the Christian church in the UK is more down to the fact that it is no longer a prerequisite to call oneself a Christian to be a British citizen.  As a Christian, I applaud that development, as we then begin to get an honest idea of the numbers of believers in the country.  In the long run, we then get a more coherent group who can make more realistic impacts on British society.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: ProfessorDavey on September 04, 2015, 09:56:35 AM
So effectively if you provide freedom, education and prosperity people turn away from religion.
I would agree with the first point, PD - but would suggest, as I have already done, that if the West's experience is anything to go by increased levels of income may well have nothing to do with the drop-off in religiosity (after all, the big gripe about the church in the West is that it is largely middle-class, professional in make up).  I would also suggest that education has a 'benefit' on both sides of the argument, thus suggesting that improved education isn't as great an influence as some would like us to believe.
Firstly there is a very clear correlation between prosperity in countries and their levels of religiosity. That of course doesn't necessary imply causality but the relationship is clear. And secondly I'm talking about declines in religiosity rather than absolute levels. Sure the CofE is (even today) more middle class than average, but that isn't the only church available!! And the churches that have traditionally been 'establishment', more attractive to the middle classes and the elite are declining the most in the UK. The churches that are growing are those largely linked to less affluent communities and often supported in growth by immigration.

On education, sure if education is indoctrination it can support growth in religiosity (and don't the religions know this which is why they have always wanted to control schools and education). But the freedom and education parts need to be seen together, there is no real freedom of religion if kids are brought up to be of a particular religion. Freedom and education exist where the education is neutral in terms of religion, supporting therefore the freedom of the individual to make their own free choice in the matter.

The problem for religions is that there is innate desire amongst people to achieve these 'goods', freedom, education and prosperity ...
And as pointed out above, these don't necessarily seem to correlate with the changes in religious affiliation.  If anything, the decline in the Christian church in the UK is more down to the fact that it is no longer a prerequisite to call oneself a Christian to be a British citizen.  As a Christian, I applaud that development, as we then begin to get an honest idea of the numbers of believers in the country.  In the long run, we then get a more coherent group who can make more realistic impacts on British society.
If your comment about it no longer being 'a prerequisite to call oneself a Christian to be a British citizen' were true and the explanation for a decline in christianity in the UK then you'd expect to see a decline in 'nominal' christians (e.g. census christians with no meaningful involvement) but a much more robust maintenance of 'real' christians for whom their religion is important to them and who are active in that religion. But that isn't the case. Levels of religious activity (e.g. church attendance) and importance of religion to individuals are declining just as much as nominal affiliation.

Also of course it has to be said that there has never been an official requirement to to call oneself a Christian to be a British citizen even if there has historically been am establishment view that people should describe themselves as religious. Indeed just today we see this 'religious is better' prejudice alive and well in the establishment with the comments of Alex Salmond.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Hope on September 04, 2015, 10:18:28 AM
Firstly there is a very clear correlation between prosperity in countries and their levels of religiosity.
Is that claim uphel by the article I linked to i my OP?

Quote
Sure the CofE is (even today) more middle class than average, but that isn't the only church available!!
Which is why I referred to the Church, not the Church of England, PD.  If you look at figures collected by people like Peter Brierley for the Christian Research group, you will find that the the church in the UK is largely made up of middle-class, professional folk.  I'm not saying exclusively, nor am I saying that the CoE is actually any more so than other church bodies.

Quote
And the churches that have traditionally been 'establishment', more attractive to the middle classes and the elite are declining the most in the UK. The churches that are growing are those largely linked to less affluent communities and often supported in growth by immigration.
Actually, figures suggest that the churches that are growing most are those which are evangelical in outlook and those that are working to combat social inequalities, whether they are 'traditional'/established or not.

Quote
But the freedom and education parts need to be seen together, there is no real freedom of religion if kids are brought up to be of a particular religion.
A comment that applies equally to being brought up within a context totally devoid of religion.   

Quote
Freedom and education exist where the education is neutral in terms of religion, supporting therefore the freedom of the individual to make their own free choice in the matter.
I'd agree fully, which is why some well-educated peoiple opt to choose the 'non-religious' route and some the 'religious' route.

Quote
If your comment about it no longer being 'a prerequisite to call oneself a Christian to be a British citizen' were true and the explanation for a decline in christianity in the UK then you'd expect to see a decline in 'nominal' christians (e.g. census christians with no meaningful involvement) but a much more robust maintenance of 'real' christians for whom their religion is important to them and who are active in that religion. But that isn't the case. Levels of religious activity (e.g. church attendance) and importance of religion to individuals are declining just as much as nominal affiliation.
Except that the figures for the two are sourced in very different ways.  Can't remember the exact Census wording, but iirc it asks whether you attend church at certain times of year, such as Christmas or Easter - and therefore takes church attendance 2 or 3 times a year as the prime measure.  Peter Brierley uses 'regular - at least once a month' - as his base measure, which is why his figures are far closer to the figures reported in the British Attitudes Survey.

Quote
Also of course it has to be said that there has never been an official requirement to to call oneself a Christian to be a British citizen even if there has historically been am establishment view that people should describe themselves as religious. Indeed just today we see this 'religious is better' prejudice alive and well in the establishment with the comments of Alex Salmond.
And the context of these comments? 
Quote
The clergyman (Rev Stuart MacQuarrie) had been at Holyrood to deliver the first "time for reflection" of the new parliamentary year.
Mr Salm recalled that he was a champion for the chamber event, which features religious and humanist speakers.
Speaking during the three-minute video, he said: "I am biased, of course, because I am a Church of Scotland adherent and I prefer people of faith to people of no faith or people who have lost their faith.
"All denominations have a key role to play in society and we are very fortunate in Scotland because we have a tremendous ability, among religions and denominations, to come together and support good causes."
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: ProfessorDavey on September 04, 2015, 10:49:53 AM
Firstly there is a very clear correlation between prosperity in countries and their levels of religiosity.
Is that claim uphel by the article I linked to i my OP?
Check out the Gallup global index of religion and atheism which is just about the most definitive research on the subject as it is longitudinal (surveying in the same manner over years) and covers countries across the globe. There is a very clear inverse correlation between prosperity (measured in annual income per capita using PPP which takes account of differences in cost of living so is purchasing power parity) and religiosity.

Sure the CofE is (even today) more middle class than average, but that isn't the only church available!!
Which is why I referred to the Church, not the Church of England, PD.  If you look at figures collected by people like Peter Brierley for the Christian Research group, you will find that the the church in the UK is largely made up of middle-class, professional folk.  I'm not saying exclusively, nor am I saying that the CoE is actually any more so than other church bodies.
But I am talking about changes not absolute. So it may be the case that historically christianity in the UK was a middle class pursuit, but the changes are making it less so, as the more middle class churches decline more than the ones that are focussed more on lower income demographics.

And the churches that have traditionally been 'establishment', more attractive to the middle classes and the elite are declining the most in the UK. The churches that are growing are those largely linked to less affluent communities and often supported in growth by immigration.
Actually, figures suggest that the churches that are growing most are those which are evangelical in outlook and those that are working to combat social inequalities, whether they are 'traditional'/established or not.
If you salami slice perhaps you can get that view. But in demoninational terms the biggest declines are in the most established and traditionally middle class demoninations (CofE, RCC, Methodist etc), while 'black community' churches (for want of a better term) bucks the trend. And indeed deprived area of inner London also buck the trend, showing maintenance (or even slight growth) in religiosity while leafy middle class, middle England shows strong declining trends.

But the freedom and education parts need to be seen together, there is no real freedom of religion if kids are brought up to be of a particular religion.
A comment that applies equally to being brought up within a context totally devoid of religion.
In part I agree. But there is a difference between failing to cover something in education and covering it in a biased manner. If I fail to cover party politics in schools am I somehow biasing the kids in a particular political manner - I don't think I am although the educational offering might be less rich than I'd like. But that is entirely different to a situation where politics is covered and children are taught to be Tories (as an example) - they might be taught that other political parties exist, but the goal of that part of their education if for them to understands 'their' political parties, i.e. the Conservatives - that would clearly be biased (in the manner that RE in RCC schools is biased for example) and is far less supportive of religious freedom than failing to cover religion at all.

Freedom and education exist where the education is neutral in terms of religion, supporting therefore the freedom of the individual to make their own free choice in the matter.
I'd agree fully, which is why some well-educated peoiple opt to choose the 'non-religious' route and some the 'religious' route.
With, of course more people in the UK moving in the direction of the non religious than the religious.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: ProfessorDavey on September 04, 2015, 11:01:13 AM
If your comment about it no longer being 'a prerequisite to call oneself a Christian to be a British citizen' were true and the explanation for a decline in christianity in the UK then you'd expect to see a decline in 'nominal' christians (e.g. census christians with no meaningful involvement) but a much more robust maintenance of 'real' christians for whom their religion is important to them and who are active in that religion. But that isn't the case. Levels of religious activity (e.g. church attendance) and importance of religion to individuals are declining just as much as nominal affiliation.
Except that the figures for the two are sourced in very different ways.  Can't remember the exact Census wording, but iirc it asks whether you attend church at certain times of year, such as Christmas or Easter - and therefore takes church attendance 2 or 3 times a year as the prime measure.  Peter Brierley uses 'regular - at least once a month' - as his base measure, which is why his figures are far closer to the figures reported in the British Attitudes Survey.
The census doesn't ask anything other that 'What is your religion?' - which is, of course a totally leading question implying non equivalence between having a religion and not having a religion. Hence it has been criticised strongly as leading and probably the reason why the proportion that claim to have a religion in the census is higher than in other surveys that ask less leading questions, e.g. a yes/no on that basis of 'do you have a religious belief' (or other equivalent question) plus a supplementary on which religion if you answer yes to the first question. So the upshot is that different surveying methods may produce different absolute levels of religiosity, but if you use the same approach over a number of years you can see the trends. And the trends are clear whichever method you use - all aspects of religiosity (nominal affiliation, importance, activity, e.g. churchgoing) are declining int eh UK and declining at similar rates.

Also of course it has to be said that there has never been an official requirement to to call oneself a Christian to be a British citizen even if there has historically been am establishment view that people should describe themselves as religious. Indeed just today we see this 'religious is better' prejudice alive and well in the establishment with the comments of Alex Salmond.
And the context of these comments? 
Quote
The clergyman (Rev Stuart MacQuarrie) had been at Holyrood to deliver the first "time for reflection" of the new parliamentary year.
Mr Salm recalled that he was a champion for the chamber event, which features religious and humanist speakers.
Speaking during the three-minute video, he said: "I am biased, of course, because I am a Church of Scotland adherent and I prefer people of faith to people of no faith or people who have lost their faith.
"All denominations have a key role to play in society and we are very fortunate in Scotland because we have a tremendous ability, among religions and denominations, to come together and support good causes."
Yup that's the one - uber-establishment figure (current and former MP, party leader, first minister in Scotland) saying:

'I prefer people of faith to people of no faith or people who have lost their faith'

- an astonishing thing to say, which is a clear insult to about half the people in the UK. Can you image the outcry if the target of his 'non preference' was black people, or gay people, or even people of a different religion to his own, e.g. muslims, jews or even catholics. I'd think it would be a resigning matter, but it remains the case that casual and generalising insult toward non religious people remains acceptable in our establishment in a manner that any of the other examples wouldn't be.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Rhiannon on September 04, 2015, 01:44:41 PM
Am I following this right? Salmand is saying he prefers 'people of faith' to those without, and that 'people of faith' are what keep 'good causes' in Scotland going?
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: floo on September 04, 2015, 01:53:01 PM
I suspect whilst some intelligent people may have a faith, I doubt too many are fundies!
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: ProfessorDavey on September 04, 2015, 01:58:50 PM
Am I following this right? Salmand is saying he prefers 'people of faith' to those without, and that 'people of faith' are what keep 'good causes' in Scotland going?
Yup - spot on.

Not only has he made a generalised statement about preferring a group of people based on nothing more than their religion, without having any personal knowledge of them as individuals, he goes further by implying in a derogatory (and all to common manner) that somehow it is religious people who are involved in good work, and that non religious people aren't.

Clearly no one has shown him the research that demonstrates no difference whatsoever in the likelihood of religious and non religious people to be involved in good causes, specifically volunteering in a formal or informal manner.

Again, can you imagine the outcry if he made a similar comment about preferring white people and indicating them to be responsible for good work. He'd be out of a job before you could say 'independence referendum'.

But in a manner I'm kind of not surpassed. He is a nationalist, and the nationalist mind set is all about making sweeping generalisations about groups of people who are 'good'/'bad' purely based on their nationality, which is, lets face it, an accident of birth in most cases. With that kind of mindset it isn't surprising that he can turn that generalisation toward others based on arbitrary grouping.

What I'd like to know is how he squares the circle - is an English active christian preferable to a Scottish atheist - surely that kind of dilemma will make his head explode.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Rhiannon on September 04, 2015, 04:33:19 PM
Bloody hell. And I thought we were good at voting in wankers.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: ~TW~ on September 05, 2015, 07:38:27 AM
I think it is fairly obvious that less educated people are more likely to believe god stories than vice versa, but I don't know of any recent studies on the subject.

So LJ all educated people are atheist and all duffers are Christians.

 Another theory,of coarse we wait for you to explain with your great brain,Why people with greater brains then you have become Christians.

 I will look in later for your answer.

   ~TW~

 

 
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: jeremyp on September 05, 2015, 08:31:23 AM
I think it is fairly obvious that less educated people are more likely to believe god stories than vice versa, but I don't know of any recent studies on the subject.

So LJ all educated people are atheist and all duffers are Christians.


You are the first person on this thread to make that claim.  From the way you have totally misunderstood the words that Leonard wrote, I'd say you are a data point that confirms them.

Either that or a lying arsehole.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Maeght on September 05, 2015, 10:41:03 AM
I don't think education levels are related to fundamental belief but I do think it is a factor when it comes to some of the arguments used to support and beliefs or equally the lack of belief.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: ippy on September 05, 2015, 10:44:21 AM
I can't be saying quit while you're ahead, more like you're on another looser Hope.

Proff D's references to the church/religions always using education to their advantage and his reference to gallup polls with their world view, when put together these two alone bury your OP on their own.

ippy
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Phyllis Tyne on September 05, 2015, 10:53:38 AM
I confess to be being just a little worried at the fact that most posters are not young and yet display what I consider to be a failure of the rounded and liberal education I believed I received.

Teachers I know continually express frustration at what little seems to be assimilated of the amount of education provided.

Given the level of ignorance concerning religion, history, the role of mythology, psychology demonstrated  here and in the wider context of New atheism is worryingly high, I think it is the antitheists, new atheists and those atheists who see a bigger impact of atheism than the plain old ''atheism is the lack etc.'' who come across as the ones who should have paid more attention in class.

Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: ~TW~ on September 05, 2015, 11:51:42 AM
I think it is fairly obvious that less educated people are more likely to believe god stories than vice versa, but I don't know of any recent studies on the subject.

So LJ all educated people are atheist and all duffers are Christians.


You are the first person on this thread to make that claim.  From the way you have totally misunderstood the words that Leonard wrote, I'd say you are a data point that confirms them.

Either that or a lying arsehole.

 Say what you like,all I get from you brain dead clowns is evolution is a fact and proven.When I ask for the evidence,nothing is produced,

 you all seem to be desperate to disprove scripture,as each day  you pass out drivel non stop.

  ~TW~

 
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Maeght on September 05, 2015, 11:59:38 AM
TW - as has been said many times, that species have and do evolve is a fact and has been observed. The process by which is occurs - natural selection - is a theory, and a very well supported one. Scientific theories are never proven. People who accept this are not brain dead, whereas people who have this explained to them numerous times yet can't grasp it ......
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: ippy on September 05, 2015, 12:28:48 PM
I think it is fairly obvious that less educated people are more likely to believe god stories than vice versa, but I don't know of any recent studies on the subject.

So LJ all educated people are atheist and all duffers are Christians.


You are the first person on this thread to make that claim.  From the way you have totally misunderstood the words that Leonard wrote, I'd say you are a data point that confirms them.

Either that or a lying arsehole.

 Say what you like,all I get from you brain dead clowns is evolution is a fact and proven.When I ask for the evidence,nothing is produced,

 you all seem to be desperate to disprove scripture,as each day  you pass out drivel non stop.

  ~TW~

 

Tw, what would be the point describing the details of how evolution works to someone like yourself that wouldn't know if anything was a fact, even if it came up and poked you in the eye?

Oh and by the way when someone like yourself that's so into superstition, myth and magic, it's for you to prove that there is any substance in these ideas that you seem to be convinced are a part of reality.

Non-religious people don't hold any beliefs in superstition, myth and magic or anything like any of those things, so obviously to most people what do we need prove, the answer, Tw, is not much.

Do give yourself a bit of time if you decide to post back, a bit of time that is, to work out some really venomous insults before you spit them out. 

ippy
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Leonard James on September 05, 2015, 12:31:47 PM
I think it is fairly obvious that less educated people are more likely to believe god stories than vice versa, but I don't know of any recent studies on the subject.

So LJ all educated people are atheist and all duffers are Christians.

 Another theory,of coarse we wait for you to explain with your great brain,Why people with greater brains then you have become Christians.

 I will look in later for your answer.

   ~TW~

Jeremy's post #20 has fully answered your rather ignorant post, so I won't waste more time on you.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: floo on September 05, 2015, 01:52:19 PM
I think it is fairly obvious that less educated people are more likely to believe god stories than vice versa, but I don't know of any recent studies on the subject.

So LJ all educated people are atheist and all duffers are Christians.


You are the first person on this thread to make that claim.  From the way you have totally misunderstood the words that Leonard wrote, I'd say you are a data point that confirms them.

Either that or a lying arsehole.

 Say what you like,all I get from you brain dead clowns is evolution is a fact and proven.When I ask for the evidence,nothing is produced,

 you all seem to be desperate to disprove scripture,as each day  you pass out drivel non stop.

  ~TW~

 

Blimey you have the cheek to call someone brain dead, when most of your posts could be attributed to someone in that condition! ::)
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: ippy on September 05, 2015, 03:42:23 PM
I think it is fairly obvious that less educated people are more likely to believe god stories than vice versa, but I don't know of any recent studies on the subject.

So LJ all educated people are atheist and all duffers are Christians.


You are the first person on this thread to make that claim.  From the way you have totally misunderstood the words that Leonard wrote, I'd say you are a data point that confirms them.

Either that or a lying arsehole.

 Say what you like,all I get from you brain dead clowns is evolution is a fact and proven.When I ask for the evidence,nothing is produced,

 you all seem to be desperate to disprove scripture,as each day  you pass out drivel non stop.

  ~TW~

 

Blimey you have the cheek to call someone brain dead, when most of your posts could be attributed to someone in that condition! ::)

I agree with you Floo and you could add to that Tw's in denial as well.

ippy
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: jeremyp on September 05, 2015, 03:54:08 PM
the rounded and liberal education I believed I received.

Don't worry, it doesn't show.

Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Phyllis Tyne on September 05, 2015, 07:21:12 PM
the rounded and liberal education I believed I received.

Don't worry, it doesn't show.
No,,you're just too thick to see it.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Leonard James on September 05, 2015, 07:28:52 PM
the rounded and liberal education I believed I received.

Don't worry, it doesn't show.
No,,you're just too thick to see it.

Me too!  :)
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Phyllis Tyne on September 05, 2015, 07:31:33 PM
the rounded and liberal education I believed I received.

Don't worry, it doesn't show.
No,,you're just too thick to see it.

Me too!  :)
I'm glad you said it Len.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: jeremyp on September 05, 2015, 10:48:26 PM
the rounded and liberal education I believed I received.

Don't worry, it doesn't show.
No,,you're just too thick to see it.

Given only your postings on this forum as evidence, I think Albert Einstein would be too thick to see the effects of your rounded and liberal education on you.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Leonard James on September 06, 2015, 06:45:15 AM

I'm glad you said it Len.

Sadly, education is not always able to overcome the adverse effects of previously planted ideas.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Phyllis Tyne on September 06, 2015, 08:48:05 AM

I'm glad you said it Len.

Sadly, education is not always able to overcome the adverse effects of previously planted ideas.
Len, I don't think there is a text book that outlines the case for atheism in the core subjects, geography, history, music or art.
It may crop up in RE but let's not forget, lots of atheists are campaigning for atheism to get INTO the curriculum.

So i'm afraid your contention looks like trouser talk.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: jeremyp on September 06, 2015, 08:58:16 AM

Len, I don't think there is a text book that outlines the case for atheism in the core subjects, geography, history, music or art.


No, because it is assumed.  In geography, the processes they describe that shape the landscape are assumed to be naturalistic, in history the events are assumed to be caused by humans not gods.  Music is assumed to be written by humans and people are asked to practice their instruments rather than expect divine intervention.  Art is assumed to be created by humans and wherever inspirations comes from, art teachers don't tell us to pray until something pops into our heads.

Quote
It may crop up in RE but let's not forget, lots of atheists are campaigning for atheism to get INTO the curriculum.

It would be a short lesson

Teacher: Can anybody tell me what atheism is?

Johnny: A lack of belief in gods miss.

Teacher: Correct.  Class dismissed.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Phyllis Tyne on September 06, 2015, 09:02:48 AM

Len, I don't think there is a text book that outlines the case for atheism in the core subjects, geography, history, music or art.


No, because it is assumed.  In geography, the processes they describe that shape the landscape are assumed to be naturalistic, in history the events are assumed to be caused by humans not gods.  Music is assumed to be written by humans and people are asked to practice their instruments rather than expect divine intervention.  Art is assumed to be created by humans and wherever inspirations comes from, art teachers don't tell us to pray until something pops into our heads.

Quote
It may crop up in RE but let's not forget, lots of atheists are campaigning for atheism to get INTO the curriculum.

It would be a short lesson

Teacher: Can anybody tell me what atheism is?

Johnny: A lack of belief in gods miss.

Teacher: Correct.  Class dismissed.

The lesson would match the attention span of the average antitheist.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Maeght on September 06, 2015, 09:08:26 AM
....... let's not forget, lots of atheists are campaigning for atheism to get INTO the curriculum.

Who is campaigning for that and what is it they are actually wanting to happen?
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Phyllis Tyne on September 06, 2015, 09:09:47 AM

Len, I don't think there is a text book that outlines the case for atheism in the core subjects, geography, history, music or art.


No, because it is assumed.  In geography, the processes they describe that shape the landscape are assumed to be naturalistic, in history the events are assumed to be caused by humans not gods.  Music is assumed to be written by humans and people are asked to practice their instruments rather than expect divine intervention.  Art is assumed to be created by humans and wherever inspirations comes from, art teachers don't tell us to pray until something pops into our heads.




I agree atheism can be described in terms of THE BIG NON i.e atheism is the lack of belief in God/Gods.

But I disagree that THAT is implicit in textbooks or lessons.

For a curriculum to be atheist it would have to have religion filleted out of it. Particularly in terms of art, music and history
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Phyllis Tyne on September 06, 2015, 09:14:49 AM
....... let's not forget, lots of atheists are campaigning for atheism to get INTO the curriculum.

Who is campaigning for that and what is it they are actually wanting to happen?
Young atheists handbook for schools (YAH4schools).
Aloha Shaha the author.
British Humanist Association. 
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: ProfessorDavey on September 06, 2015, 09:25:56 AM

Len, I don't think there is a text book that outlines the case for atheism in the core subjects, geography, history, music or art.


No, because it is assumed.  In geography, the processes they describe that shape the landscape are assumed to be naturalistic, in history the events are assumed to be caused by humans not gods.  Music is assumed to be written by humans and people are asked to practice their instruments rather than expect divine intervention.  Art is assumed to be created by humans and wherever inspirations comes from, art teachers don't tell us to pray until something pops into our heads.




I agree atheism can be described in terms of THE BIG NON i.e atheism is the lack of belief in God/Gods.

But I disagree that THAT is implicit in textbooks or lessons.

For a curriculum to be atheist it would have to have religion filleted out of it. Particularly in terms of art, music and history
I'm not sure I understand what you mean by a curriculum to be atheist.

What I think is important is that the curriculum specifically recognises that lack of belief in god or gos is a view held by very many people - quite likely a majority of the kids in your average UK classroom. So to clearly indicate that being an atheist is both acceptable and normal. By its exclusion if RE lessons fail to every mention atheism then there is a default assumption that people should be religious, not necessarily any particular religion, but religious.

There is a further point. RE in curriculums is often linked to ethics, and if atheism fails to be mentioned then that helps to perpetuate the myth that ethics is something to do with religion only.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Maeght on September 06, 2015, 09:32:25 AM
....... let's not forget, lots of atheists are campaigning for atheism to get INTO the curriculum.

Who is campaigning for that and what is it they are actually wanting to happen?
Young atheists handbook for schools (YAH4schools).
Aloha Shaha the author.
British Humanist Association.

My understanding of 'Young atheists handbook for schools', written by Aloha Shaha, is that it is a support book for atheists and that the British Humanist Association are looking to ensure that this book is available in all schools. As far as I can see this is part of the NHA's campaign to introduce secularism to or society including schools i.e no privilege or discrimination on grounds of religion or belief. If this is what you were referring to then what is actually wrong with that? If its not, what were you referring to? There should be an awareness of atheism within the school curriculum just as there should be an awareness of religions.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Phyllis Tyne on September 06, 2015, 09:55:06 AM

Len, I don't think there is a text book that outlines the case for atheism in the core subjects, geography, history, music or art.


No, because it is assumed.  In geography, the processes they describe that shape the landscape are assumed to be naturalistic, in history the events are assumed to be caused by humans not gods.  Music is assumed to be written by humans and people are asked to practice their instruments rather than expect divine intervention.  Art is assumed to be created by humans and wherever inspirations comes from, art teachers don't tell us to pray until something pops into our heads.




I agree atheism can be described in terms of THE BIG NON i.e atheism is the lack of belief in God/Gods.

But I disagree that THAT is implicit in textbooks or lessons.

For a curriculum to be atheist it would have to have religion filleted out of it. Particularly in terms of art, music and history
I'm not sure I understand what you mean by a curriculum to be atheist.

What I think is important is that the curriculum specifically recognises that lack of belief in god or gos is a view held by very many people - quite likely a majority of the kids in your average UK classroom. So to clearly indicate that being an atheist is both acceptable and normal. By its exclusion if RE lessons fail to every mention atheism then there is a default assumption that people should be religious, not necessarily any particular religion, but religious.

There is a further point. RE in curriculums is often linked to ethics, and if atheism fails to be mentioned then that helps to perpetuate the myth that ethics is something to do with religion only.
I agree that atheism should be on the curriculum and it's impact on society should be evaluated.

I don't know that being an atheist is acceptable and normal ISN'T accepted in education. If your are saying that Children who have a belief are not accepted and are not normal then I believe you are on dodgy ground.

When you talk about atheism being involved in ethics you are going beyond atheism being merely the lack of belief in Gods which I believe is just a cover to retreat behind whenever nefarious antitheist subterfuge is exposed anyway.

Finally, are the majority of children dyed in the wool atheists...rather than agnostic?
I'm not sure but atheists will have to watch that they don't fall into patterns of indoctrination.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Phyllis Tyne on September 06, 2015, 09:59:00 AM
....... let's not forget, lots of atheists are campaigning for atheism to get INTO the curriculum.

Who is campaigning for that and what is it they are actually wanting to happen?
Young atheists handbook for schools (YAH4schools).
Aloha Shaha the author.
British Humanist Association.

My understanding of 'Young atheists handbook for schools', written by Aloha Shaha, is that it is a support book for atheists and that the British Humanist Association are looking to ensure that this book is available in all schools. As far as I can see this is part of the NHA's campaign to introduce secularism to or society including schools i.e no privilege or discrimination on grounds of religion or belief. If this is what you were referring to then what is actually wrong with that? If its not, what were you referring to? There should be an awareness of atheism within the school curriculum just as there should be an awareness of religions.
I am not against a wide curriculum. Serious Atheism is an increasing world view and therefore there is nothing wrong with books in school libraries from an atheist position.

Len, though believes that the school curriculum naturally leads to atheism....if that were so, why the need for ANY BHA CAMPAIGN?
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Shaker on September 06, 2015, 10:35:02 AM
Serious Atheism is an increasing world view
Yay  :D
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Nearly Sane on September 06, 2015, 10:39:58 AM
Serious Atheism is an increasing world view
Yay  :D

I have no idea what Serious Atheism is. I have no real idea how any such thing would count as a world view, though to be honest dressing up the vast majority of people's set of mixed up prejudices, desires and reactions as a world view is, in my far from humble opinion, like putting a hat on a WII and saying it is your best friend Charlie
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Outrider on September 06, 2015, 10:41:04 AM
When you talk about atheism being involved in ethics you are going beyond atheism being merely the lack of belief in Gods which I believe is just a cover to retreat behind whenever nefarious antitheist subterfuge is exposed anyway.

Atheism has an indirect impact on ethics, as you need to explain the source of your particular view on any given moral point - religious people fall back on 'because God' (not meaning that dismissively, I appreciate there are scriptural citations to support a given point) whereas as atheism becomes more prevalent a moral philosophy has to be supported that does not rely on supernatural agencies for its foundation.

Quote
Finally, are the majority of children dyed in the wool atheists...rather than agnostic?

They are 'default' atheists - they have no concept of a god, and therefore no belief in one.

Again, to note, atheism and agnosticism are not differing positions on the same axis, they are perfectly compatible with each other, and are positions on two fundamentally different questions.

Quote
I'm not sure but atheists will have to watch that they don't fall into patterns of indoctrination.

People remain atheists by not falling prey to patterns on indoctrination. I'm not sure how you'd 'indoctrinate' someone into a position they are born into by default - if we don't mention gods, so children don't consider the idea, are we indoctrinating them? As it is, the best option is to introduce all the various concepts of divinity - at worst you'll get some sort of vague pantheist, and at best an atheist, but the chances of getting someone who picks one particular myth out of the bunch to cling to as 'truth' is diminished.

O.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Maeght on September 06, 2015, 10:52:18 AM

I am not against a wide curriculum. Serious Atheism is an increasing world view and therefore there is nothing wrong with books in school libraries from an atheist position.

Len, though believes that the school curriculum naturally leads to atheism....if that were so, why the need for ANY BHA CAMPAIGN?

Okay so Len might believe that - so what? That would be his personal view - one I don't necessarily agree with.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Gonnagle on September 06, 2015, 10:55:32 AM
Dear Outrider,

We are all born atheist. :o

Gonnagle.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Maeght on September 06, 2015, 11:00:00 AM

Again, to note, atheism and agnosticism are not differing positions on the same axis, they are perfectly compatible with each other, and are positions on two fundamentally different questions.


Surprising how often that needs to be said.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Nearly Sane on September 06, 2015, 11:00:13 AM
If we were all default atheists and the concept of gods only came about through 'falling prey to patterns on indoctrination' then we could have no concepts of gods.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Shaker on September 06, 2015, 11:01:00 AM

Again, to note, atheism and agnosticism are not differing positions on the same axis, they are perfectly compatible with each other, and are positions on two fundamentally different questions.


Surprising how often that needs to be said.
Alas.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Gonnagle on September 06, 2015, 11:05:51 AM
Dear Outrider,

Should we stop calling humans, mean seeking animals.

Gonnagle.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Hope on September 06, 2015, 11:06:24 AM
Atheism has an indirect impact on ethics, as you need to explain the source of your particular view on any given moral point - religious people fall back on 'because God' (not meaning that dismissively, I appreciate there are scriptural citations to support a given point) whereas as atheism becomes more prevalent a moral philosophy has to be supported that does not rely on supernatural agencies for its foundation.
But moral philosophy still has to be supported by external agencies.  I, as an individual, can't decide what is OK and what is not in isolation.  The supporting structure becomes the social ethos of the day, which is ok for today, but with that ethos changing very rapidly, where does it put any of us tomorrow or in a year's time or whatever?  Isn't a moral philosophy meant to guide society, not be led by it?
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Hope on September 06, 2015, 11:07:31 AM

Again, to note, atheism and agnosticism are not differing positions on the same axis, they are perfectly compatible with each other, and are positions on two fundamentally different questions.

You mean like religion and science aren't "differing positions on the same axis, they are perfectly compatible with each other, and are positions on two fundamentally different questions."
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Leonard James on September 06, 2015, 11:11:03 AM

I'm glad you said it Len.

Sadly, education is not always able to overcome the adverse effects of previously planted ideas.
Len, I don't think there is a text book that outlines the case for atheism in the core subjects, geography, history, music or art.
It may crop up in RE but let's not forget, lots of atheists are campaigning for atheism to get INTO the curriculum.

So i'm afraid your contention looks like trouser talk.

If god ideas hadn't been invented by man to answer difficult questions, there would be no atheism to contest them.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Shaker on September 06, 2015, 11:11:20 AM
But moral philosophy still has to be supported by external agencies.  I, as an individual, can't decide what is OK and what is not in isolation.
Actually lots and lots of people do this all the time.
Quote
The supporting structure becomes the social ethos of the day, which is ok for today, but with that ethos changing very rapidly, where does it put any of us tomorrow or in a year's time or whatever?

In a different place. Welcome to the universe, where constant change is the order of the day. Get used to it, you'll have a better time

Quote
Isn't a moral philosophy meant to guide society, not be led by it?
Is it? Search me. This sounds incoherent anyway. If a moral philosophy is being led and not doing the guiding, it's being led by a different moral philosophy doing the guiding.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Hope on September 06, 2015, 11:14:48 AM
Is it? Search me. This sounds incoherent anyway. If a moral philosophy is being led and not doing the guiding, it's being led by a different moral philosophy.
Precisely; so what moral philosophy is the 'right' one?  By your argument, there is no reason why we, in the west, should be worrying about the moral philosophy of ISIS, or the people smugglers around the world.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Nearly Sane on September 06, 2015, 11:15:19 AM

Again, to note, atheism and agnosticism are not differing positions on the same axis, they are perfectly compatible with each other, and are positions on two fundamentally different questions.

You mean like religion and science aren't "differing positions on the same axis, they are perfectly compatible with each other, and are positions on two fundamentally different questions."
No, see YECs.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Hope on September 06, 2015, 11:15:51 AM
Actually lots and lots of people do this all the time.
And end up where?
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Gonnagle on September 06, 2015, 11:16:50 AM
Dear Leonard,

Where did these God ideas come from.

Gonnagle.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Shaker on September 06, 2015, 11:19:20 AM
Precisely; so what moral philosophy is the 'right' one?

Whichever one is held at the time, by definiton. People don't usually say "My moral philosophy is X but X is wrong" any more than they say "I believe X but I am wrong to believe X." Doesn't happen.
Quote
By your argument, there is no reason why we, in the west, should be worrying about the moral philosophy of ISIS, or the people smugglers around the world.
No, because the moral philosophy most people adhere to sees suffering as bad and the alleviation or at least mitigation of suffering as good. That's not likely to change any time soon.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Shaker on September 06, 2015, 11:22:20 AM
Actually lots and lots of people do this all the time.
And end up where?
Depends. At least some rapists and murderers, unless they're in the grip of overwhelming compulsions they reject but can't control, must decide that rape and murder are OK, with negative consequences for others. On the other hand someone might decide that despite its illegality it's OK to smoke cannabis in their own home, with no negative consequences to anyone.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Leonard James on September 06, 2015, 11:24:42 AM
Dear Leonard,

Where did these God ideas come from.

Gonnagle.

The human imagination.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Gonnagle on September 06, 2015, 11:29:03 AM
Dear Leonard,

Are we born with imagination.

Gonnagle.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Leonard James on September 06, 2015, 11:43:26 AM
Dear Leonard,

Are we born with imagination.

Gonnagle.

I doubt it. It is probably an emergent property of the brain which develops as our lives unfold,
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Phyllis Tyne on September 06, 2015, 11:46:05 AM
Serious Atheism is an increasing world view
Yay  :D

I have no idea what Serious Atheism is. I have no real idea how any such thing would count as a world view, though to be honest dressing up the vast majority of people's set of mixed up prejudices, desires and reactions as a world view is, in my far from humble opinion, like putting a hat on a WII and saying it is your best friend Charlie
I'm not since you have described the ''messe perditio''.

Perhaps instead of saying serious atheists were increasing you would have had me say they were a tiny group who were getting louder?
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Gonnagle on September 06, 2015, 11:52:52 AM
Dear Leonard,

We emerge into thoughts of God/gods, maybe Outrider is right, we are born atheist. :o

Gonnagle.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Leonard James on September 06, 2015, 12:03:41 PM
Dear Leonard,

We emerge into thoughts of God/gods, maybe Outrider is right, we are born atheist. :o

Gonnagle.

Did he say that? I don't think we are born either theist or atheist. At birth we have no knowledge of either.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Gonnagle on September 06, 2015, 01:02:20 PM
Dear Leonard,

Fascinating!

Being born, when we exit the womb, it is a bigger rush than sky diving, something to do with norepinephrine.

Gonnagle.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Shaker on September 06, 2015, 01:29:25 PM
Dear Leonard,

Fascinating!

Being born, when we exit the womb, it is a bigger rush than sky diving, something to do with norepinephrine.

Gonnagle.
Not if you were born by Caesarean, as I was.

Which probably explains why I always get out of the car through the sun roof.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Leonard James on September 06, 2015, 01:51:54 PM
Dear Leonard,

Fascinating!

Being born, when we exit the womb, it is a bigger rush than sky diving, something to do with norepinephrine.

Gonnagle.
Not if you were born by Caesarean, as I was.

Which probably explains why I always get out of the car through the sun roof.

 ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

And your Roman nose, of course!
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Leonard James on September 06, 2015, 01:54:00 PM
Dear Leonard,

Fascinating!

Being born, when we exit the womb, it is a bigger rush than sky diving, something to do with norepinephrine.

Gonnagle.

You obviously know more about it than I do, Gonners! I can't even pronounce that word.  :(
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Gonnagle on September 06, 2015, 02:13:16 PM
Dear Leonard,

No not really, just been reading about when a baby actually starts to think, seems the jury is out, lots of theories, nothing conclusive.

And I really will have to revisit my theory that atheists have no sense of humour, maybe Connolly, Izzard and Pratchett are exceptions to the rule. 8)

Gonnagle.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Leonard James on September 06, 2015, 02:29:33 PM

And I really will have to revisit my theory that atheists have no sense of humour, maybe Connolly, Izzard and Pratchett are exceptions to the rule. 8)

Gonnagle.

I don't believe for one moment that you ever entertained such a daft "theory". :)
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Outrider on September 06, 2015, 02:40:47 PM
But moral philosophy still has to be supported by external agencies.  I, as an individual, can't decide what is OK and what is not in isolation.  The supporting structure becomes the social ethos of the day, which is ok for today, but with that ethos changing very rapidly, where does it put any of us tomorrow or in a year's time or whatever?  Isn't a moral philosophy meant to guide society, not be led by it?

No, moral philosophy doesn't have to be led by outside agencies (presuming you mean outside of us individually), but it often is, otherwise we would have had no developments in moral philosophy in human history. We are each capable of deciding for ourselves which principles and precepts we consider to be important and structuring our own moral philosophy around those - they will, undoubtedly, be influenced by our societal upbringing, but not wholly limited to it.

O.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Outrider on September 06, 2015, 02:43:19 PM

Again, to note, atheism and agnosticism are not differing positions on the same axis, they are perfectly compatible with each other, and are positions on two fundamentally different questions.

You mean like religion and science aren't "differing positions on the same axis, they are perfectly compatible with each other, and are positions on two fundamentally different questions."

Religion and science aren't both answers to questions - religion can be considered a development of 'why are we here' (ignoring, for the moment, the question-begging inherent in that), whereas science is a methodology.

Naturalism, the precept upon which the methodology of science is founded, is inherently antithetical to religion, because it presupposes an absence of agencies not bound by cause and effect.

So no, because agnosticism and atheism are answers to different questions and can co-exist quite happily is not to say that religion and science are necessarily compatible.

O.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Phyllis Tyne on September 06, 2015, 02:43:54 PM
Dear Leonard,

No not really, just been reading about when a baby actually starts to think, seems the jury is out, lots of theories, nothing conclusive.

And I really will have to revisit my theory that atheists have no sense of humour, maybe Connolly, Izzard and Pratchett are exceptions to the rule. 8)

Gonnagle.
Apparently Eddie Izzard was about to make an appearance but couldn't go on stage because he ''felt a little funny''. His manager told him to get on stage quickly before it wore off..........
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Outrider on September 06, 2015, 02:49:27 PM
Is it? Search me. This sounds incoherent anyway. If a moral philosophy is being led and not doing the guiding, it's being led by a different moral philosophy.
Precisely; so what moral philosophy is the 'right' one?  By your argument, there is no reason why we, in the west, should be worrying about the moral philosophy of ISIS, or the people smugglers around the world.

So because we don't believe in your god all our moral philosophies are of equal merit? As applications of the 'you can't be good without a god' argument go that's particularly small-minded, specious claptrap.

If you are only moral because you are blindly following the instructions of your holy book, you aren't good at all, you're just a slave to someone else's morality.

O.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Outrider on September 06, 2015, 02:51:16 PM
Dear Leonard,

We emerge into thoughts of God/gods, maybe Outrider is right, we are born atheist. :o

Gonnagle.

Did he say that? I don't think we are born either theist or atheist. At birth we have no knowledge of either.

I think I did say that - at least I hope I said that :) It's the so called 'weak' agnostic atheism, merely the absence of belief rather than the (untenable) gnostic atheism of 'there is no god'.

O.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Gonnagle on September 06, 2015, 03:17:03 PM
Dear Outrider,

Absence of belief!

We have been worshipping gods since Paleolithic times, I don't think we ever have had a absence of belief, its in the genes.

Gonnagle.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Phyllis Tyne on September 06, 2015, 03:20:02 PM


Naturalism, the precept upon which the methodology of science is founded, is inherently antithetical to religion, because it presupposes an absence of agencies not bound by cause and effect.


Naturalism is partly the false extrapolation of material methodology and an arbitrary decision to put one's faith in an absence of agencies not bound by cause and effect.

Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Leonard James on September 06, 2015, 03:24:59 PM
Dear Outrider,

Absence of belief!

We have been worshipping gods since Paleolithic times, I don't think we ever have had a absence of belief, its in the genes.

Gonnagle.

Speak for yourself!  :)
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Outrider on September 06, 2015, 03:30:21 PM
Dear Outrider,

Absence of belief!

We have been worshipping gods since Paleolithic times, I don't think we ever have had a absence of belief, its in the genes.

Gonnagle.

We have worshipped many things - nature, the sun, disembodied conceptual personalities... We have attempted to pacify that which we could not control or which we did not understand, and ritual behaviour has been part of that. That's culture, but we are not born with a particular culture, we are shaped into it.

The tendency to see agency where there is none, it seems, does have an inherent basis - that tendency to recognise patterns is part of why we develop conceptual thinking and language, but as with any 'test' there is the possibility of false positives.

We are also social creatures, and so ideas are communicated, shared and multiplied not necessarily in proportion to the evidence, but in proportion to the cultural appropriateness: religion was appropriate in primitive societies, and becomes increasingly less so as we increasingly have evidence to support better explanations.

That we have a tendency to believe makes us human, it doesn't make gods true.

O.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Phyllis Tyne on September 06, 2015, 03:30:49 PM


Naturalism, the precept upon which the methodology of science is founded, is inherently antithetical to religion, because it presupposes an absence of agencies not bound by cause and effect.


Oh dear another numpty confusion of material methodology and philosophical naturalism.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Outrider on September 06, 2015, 03:32:06 PM


Naturalism, the precept upon which the methodology of science is founded, is inherently antithetical to religion, because it presupposes an absence of agencies not bound by cause and effect.


Oh dear another numpty confusion of material methodology and philosophical naturalism.

If it confuses you, dear, you'd probably best stop talking about it. Of course, that wouldn't leave you with very much... oh, win-win.

O.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: ippy on September 06, 2015, 03:40:42 PM
Dear Outrider,

Absence of belief!

We have been worshipping gods since Paleolithic times, I don't think we ever have had a absence of belief, its in the genes.

Gonnagle.

Gonners it comes from ignorance; "I don't understand therefore things like why the wind blows etc, so it must be another one of those godidit moments", primitive thinking that was the rout to the religions, it's as simple as that, all man made, or perhaps I should say person made.

ippy
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Gonnagle on September 06, 2015, 03:47:33 PM
Dear Outrider,

Good post, one which I don't think I have any argument, but ( always a but ) I am not arguing are gods true, just the belief we have had for millions of years.

Gonnagle.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Phyllis Tyne on September 06, 2015, 03:50:04 PM


Naturalism, the precept upon which the methodology of science is founded, is inherently antithetical to religion, because it presupposes an absence of agencies not bound by cause and effect.


Oh dear another numpty confusion of material methodology and philosophical naturalism.

If it confuses you, dear, you'd probably best stop talking about it. Of course, that wouldn't leave you with very much... oh, win-win.

O.
I'm not the one confusing methodological naturalism(whether there is such a thing) or perhaps more properly methodological materialism with philosophical naturalism.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Gonnagle on September 06, 2015, 03:50:51 PM
Dear ippy,

Godidit, why!

Gonnagle.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: ippy on September 06, 2015, 04:10:34 PM
Dear ippy,

Godidit, why!

Gonnagle.

Because the early primitive people thought anything they didn't understand, had been imposed on them from outside sources and it was their ignorance that made them think up ideas like, now you guess what ideas they may have thought up to explain things Gonners? It shouldn't be difficult for you.

I suppose it's the old story, if you don't want to believe something you wont.

ippy
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Phyllis Tyne on September 06, 2015, 04:21:03 PM
Dear ippy,

Godidit, why!

Gonnagle.

Because the early primitive people thought anything they didn't understand, had been imposed on them from outside sources and it was their ignorance that made them think up ideas like, now you guess what ideas they may have thought up to explain things Gonners? It shouldn't be difficult for you.

I suppose it's the old story, if you don't want to believe something you wont.

ippy
I'm not getting Plato, Buddha, Moses in any of that Ippy.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Gonnagle on September 06, 2015, 04:57:46 PM
Dear Vlad,

Before we start with the great thinkers, I would like ippy to explain where the godidit idea came from.

We have evidence that Paleolithic man worshipped gods, so the idea of gods has been around for well over two million years.

Gonnagle.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Hope on September 06, 2015, 05:14:54 PM
Because the early primitive people thought anything they didn't understand, had been imposed on them from outside sources and it was their ignorance that made them think up ideas like, now you guess what ideas they may have thought up to explain things Gonners? It shouldn't be difficult for you.
OK, ippy I'll take the bait: science, laws of nature, spontaneous healing, ...   ;)

Quote
I suppose it's the old story, if you don't want to believe something you wont.
Save for the spelling mistake, I could say exactly the same about you.  Every critical point you make about theists applies equally to atheists.  You have no certainty that what you believe or disbelieve is true.  Our beliefs are shaped by our experiences, as well as vice vera.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Jack Knave on September 06, 2015, 05:28:46 PM
Common sense would suggest that less educated people are more gullible in practically all areas where they are uneducated ...
Having lived and worked among so-called 'uneducated' people in India and Nepal, I was surprised by the fact that, on the whole, the most gullible of the people I had dealings with were the educated westerners (including myself).  The common sense factor seems to get educated out of us, leaving us reliant on technology, complicated and expensive reports, etc.
I would say that we are talking about areas that people feel a need in their lives. I would guess they were 'wise' because their basic needs wouldn't be satisfied by some 'plastic' western trinket. When someone has convinced themselves, or been convinced, that they have this need then how they tackle it will depend on their knowledge of the content of that need and its implications in their lives. For example a lot of third world rural people find it hard to understand the need for politics etc. as their lives styles have worked to date without it.

This is true of the EU. It is a contrived illusion that we really don't need.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: ippy on September 06, 2015, 05:42:19 PM
Dear Vlad,

Before we start with the great thinkers, I would like ippy to explain where the godidit idea came from.

We have evidence that Paleolithic man worshipped gods, so the idea of gods has been around for well over two million years.

Gonnagle.

Like I said if you don't want to get it you wont, but I'll give it one more go.

Early man was ignorant about all sorts of things, so for anything they didn't understand, "I cant understand the why of all sorts of natural phenomena", the man looks up and ding ding, "I know because I can't explain things  it must be some sort of outside force that is doing and controlling things, what'll we call it", ding ding, "yes that's it we'll call it a god".

That's the most likely the way the man made idea of this is where god idea came from, it's obvious to me, I don't know why there is any reason to think otherwise, especially when you accompany the total lack of evidence that would support the idea of or for anything like this he, she or it idea of something called a god.

Not what you want to hear? I suppose there'll be no surprises there.

ippy 
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: ippy on September 06, 2015, 06:09:44 PM
Common sense would suggest that less educated people are more gullible in practically all areas where they are uneducated ...
Having lived and worked among so-called 'uneducated' people in India and Nepal, I was surprised by the fact that, on the whole, the most gullible of the people I had dealings with were the educated westerners (including myself).  The common sense factor seems to get educated out of us, leaving us reliant on technology, complicated and expensive reports, etc.
I would say that we are talking about areas that people feel a need in their lives. I would guess they were 'wise' because their basic needs wouldn't be satisfied by some 'plastic' western trinket. When someone has convinced themselves, or been convinced, that they have this need then how they tackle it will depend on their knowledge of the content of that need and its implications in their lives. For example a lot of third world rural people find it hard to understand the need for politics etc. as their lives styles have worked to date without it.

This is true of the EU. It is a contrived illusion that we really don't need.

I was driving through Spain about 1963 thereabouts and I saw women still bashing out their washing on rocks by the river I can remember then thinking I suppose we'll, (the UK), will have to stall while they catch up, it put me off of the whole idea of the EEC then.

Of course that's not all and I've seen and heard of many more reasons since that have put me off of the whole idea and now the disunity about the refugees just one more good reason why we don't need them.

I voted against the EEC that won the day; who voted for a Federal Europe?   

Do you remember Brown creeping off and going out of his way to avoid being photographed in Lisbon and he signed something there probably some of our birthrights; it was the sheepish way he did it, do you know what it was he signed away; he was obviously not that proud of himself whatever it was.

ippy
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Phyllis Tyne on September 06, 2015, 06:11:19 PM


Early man was ignorant about all sorts of things, so for anything they didn't understand, "I cant understand the why of all sorts of natural phenomena", the man looks up and ding ding, "I know because I can't explain things  it must be some sort of outside force that is doing and controlling things, what'll we call it", ding ding, "yes that's it we'll call it a god".

 
That's great Ippy........If English was good enough for early man then it's good enough for me.

How did he come up with words like force and God if he couldn't see them?

So the Ippy hypothesis is that science and religion came about at the same time?
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Gonnagle on September 06, 2015, 06:32:30 PM
Dear ippy,

Earlyman was ignorant of so many things but I would hazard a guess that he was far more in tune with his environment than we can ever begin to imagine.

Why did earlyman cry over his fallen prey, why did earlyman empathize with his prey, did he know something we don't or was he just a big softy.

Gonnagle.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Phyllis Tyne on September 06, 2015, 06:35:30 PM


Early man was ignorant about all sorts of things, so for anything they didn't understand, "I cant understand the why of all sorts of natural phenomena", the man looks up and ding ding, "I know because I can't explain things  it must be some sort of outside force that is doing and controlling things, what'll we call it", ding ding, "yes that's it we'll call it a god".

So the man or woman had original thoughts and didn't blindly follow the crowd. Unlike yer modern British apatheist who blindly follows the majority view.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: ippy on September 06, 2015, 06:40:51 PM
Dear ippy,

Earlyman was ignorant of so many things but I would hazard a guess that he was far more in tune with his environment than we can ever begin to imagine.

Why did earlyman cry over his fallen prey, why did earlyman empathize with his prey, did he know something we don't or was he just a big softy.

Gonnagle.

Like I said, so what would be the point of me describing anything to you that you obviously don't want to hear or understand.

If you're so determined to think religions are anything more than man made, well that's your loss, not mine.

ippy 
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: ippy on September 06, 2015, 06:44:32 PM


Early man was ignorant about all sorts of things, so for anything they didn't understand, "I cant understand the why of all sorts of natural phenomena", the man looks up and ding ding, "I know because I can't explain things  it must be some sort of outside force that is doing and controlling things, what'll we call it", ding ding, "yes that's it we'll call it a god".

So the man or woman had original thoughts and didn't blindly follow the crowd. Unlike yer modern British apatheist who blindly follows the majority view.

We can all pick out parts of any post to make it look as though the original post said something other than that it did indeed say.

ippy
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: ProfessorDavey on September 06, 2015, 06:47:08 PM


Early man was ignorant about all sorts of things, so for anything they didn't understand, "I cant understand the why of all sorts of natural phenomena", the man looks up and ding ding, "I know because I can't explain things  it must be some sort of outside force that is doing and controlling things, what'll we call it", ding ding, "yes that's it we'll call it a god".

So the man or woman had original thoughts and didn't blindly follow the crowd. Unlike yer modern British apatheist who blindly follows the majority view.
On the contrary, because of course once the first early man came up with the concept of god to explain things he didn't understand he taught his kids to think the same etc etc. Generation after generation of early people merely accepting in an uncritical manner what they were told by their 'elders' and not thinking critically and demanding evidence.

Not surprising that we describe the point where people (in our western culture) began to challenge the orthodox, 'go with the majority accepted belief flow' as the enlightenment. At that point original thought became acceptable (rather than being seen as heretical) and people began to challenge the orthodox view, began to properly question, to ask for evidence, to be sceptical of views that must be accepted without challenge or evidence.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Shaker on September 06, 2015, 06:47:46 PM
So the man or woman had original thoughts and didn't blindly follow the crowd. Unlike yer modern British apatheist who blindly follows the majority view.
Does an apatheist actually follow anything? Sure about that Vlad?
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Gonnagle on September 06, 2015, 06:49:02 PM
Dear ippy,

Fair enough old son, looks like you have made up your mind on the subject, me, I will keep an open mind on the subject. ;)

Gonnagle.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Gonnagle on September 06, 2015, 06:53:11 PM
Dear Prof,

The concept of God, now where did that come from.

Gonnagle.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: ippy on September 06, 2015, 07:07:24 PM
Dear ippy,

Fair enough old son, looks like you have made up your mind on the subject, me, I will keep an open mind on the subject. ;)

Gonnagle.

Nothing like denial it'll see you through any rational logic those fools throw at you, mind your wheels don't come off of those rails you've so diligently set them on Gonners.

ippy
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: ippy on September 06, 2015, 07:08:57 PM
Dear Prof,

The concept of God, now where did that come from.

Gonnagle.

Have you tried Specsavers Gonners?

ippy
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Gonnagle on September 06, 2015, 07:14:43 PM
Dear ippy,

Is this one of those ad homs I hear talk of on here.

Gonnagle.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: ippy on September 06, 2015, 07:17:42 PM
Dear ippy,

Is this one of those ad homs I hear talk of on here.

Gonnagle.

Whatever, if you had read through the Proff's post properly there wouldn't be any reason to make the post that you did make, perhaps read it again?

ippy
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: ProfessorDavey on September 06, 2015, 07:30:27 PM
Dear Prof,

The concept of God, now where did that come from.

Gonnagle.
From the natural inquisitiveness of human kind (which is of course evolutionary) and therefore a need to try to explain things in the natural world around them. Couple that with a kind of inherent anthropomorphism (which again I think is evolutionarily driven) and humans, in the absence of other explanations, will invent a kind of super-human to be responsible for natural phenomena they can't explain.

Simple really.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Shaker on September 06, 2015, 07:41:18 PM
Dear Prof,

The concept of God, now where did that come from.

Gonnagle.
From the natural inquisitiveness of human kind (which is of course evolutionary) and therefore a need to try to explain things in the natural world around them. Couple that with a kind of inherent anthropomorphism (which again I think is evolutionarily driven) and humans, in the absence of other explanations, will invent a kind of super-human to be responsible for natural phenomena they can't explain.

Simple really.
Exactly. Justin Barrett coined the term hyperactive agency detection device for this faculty in the human brain.

http://theness.com/neurologicablog/index.php/hyperactive-agency-detection/
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Gonnagle on September 06, 2015, 07:47:52 PM
Dear ippy,

The Prof is basically saying the same thing as you, and it seems he accepts the same story as you.

Man just thought up the concept of God, earlyman thought godidit, a very convenient story.

Gonnagle.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Gonnagle on September 06, 2015, 08:00:50 PM
Dear Shaker,

Thanks for the link, and as I have been trying to say, your link points out it does not answer the basic concept of God, theory of the mind.

Gonnagle.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: ProfessorDavey on September 06, 2015, 08:03:25 PM
Dear ippy,

The Prof is basically saying the same thing as you, and it seems he accepts the same story as you.

Man just thought up the concept of God, earlyman thought godidit, a very convenient story.

Gonnagle.
I thought it is a little more nuanced that that, in that it requires inquisitiveness, plus things which early man couldn't explain. But basically yes, the concept of god invented by man as a godidit response.

What is perhaps more interesting is how that turns into religion and religion that perpetuates across generations. And here another evolutionary trait comes in. That of ritual and social cohesion in animals that are social and require transfer of information to young by learning. So to move from godidit (but nothing more) to godidit and must be appeased, worshiped, sucked up to (to ensure good or prevent bad) is fantastic at ensuring longevity because believers will think it incredibly important that their kids also learn to worship, appease etc for fear of horrific consequences.

So a god that is originally invented due to godidit but that invention goes further to require worship is likely to perpetuate more than one which is godidit but otherwise totally neutral.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Leonard James on September 06, 2015, 08:07:20 PM
Dear ippy,

The Prof is basically saying the same thing as you, and it seems he accepts the same story as you.

Man just thought up the concept of God, earlyman thought godidit, a very convenient story.

Gonnagle.

I don't think the concept of a creator god arose until long after primitive man began to believe in non-human spirits. I think he first used angry forces (spirits) to explain the natural misfortunes that he was beset with, and tried to find ways to appease their anger.

It was inevitable that such beliefs were expanded and worked on by tribes all over the world, and finally the major religions evolved.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Gonnagle on September 06, 2015, 08:17:44 PM
Dear Prof,

I am not arguing with your thinking, honestly! Just that concept of God!

Paleolithic man was not that bright ( or was he ) and I am only going with the evidence we have, but surely this concept was there way before him.
Dear Leonard,

A God, any God, where did this idea/concept come from.

Gonnagle.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: ippy on September 06, 2015, 08:33:26 PM
Dear Shaker,

Thanks for the link, and as I have been trying to say, your link points out it does not answer the basic concept of God, theory of the mind.

Gonnagle.

If I've got it wrong Gonners, where's the evidence that would in any way support your god idea?

Don't you think the gaping great gap and the very unlikely event of this gap is ever going to be closed, might be telling you something?

Just for a moment suppose there is no god and you have accepted this, I very much doubt anyone, least of all your good self would live in any noticable differing way than you do at present; asuming that's so why bother with this god idea that is so unlikely to have any substance in it in the first place.

Just the time saved saying prayers for starters, would be one pay off.

ippy

The god idea was something made up for convenience, to explain things not understood, that then went on and became elaberated and so on and so on etc etc.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Outrider on September 06, 2015, 08:43:16 PM
I'm not the one confusing methodological naturalism(whether there is such a thing) or perhaps more properly methodological materialism with philosophical naturalism.

You don't think? I'd disagree. But, of course, to delve into that you'd have to do something rash like define what you mean by the terms you use, or actually engage rather than just sniping from the sidelines.

O.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Outrider on September 06, 2015, 08:45:01 PM
Dear Outrider,

Good post, one which I don't think I have any argument, but ( always a but ) I am not arguing are gods true, just the belief we have had for millions of years.

Gonnagle.

And there is some evidence that the belief has been useful, in some ways, in the past. However, it's rapidly approaching the point where it's beyond doubt that it's unnecessary, and that the remnants of it are perhaps becoming a net burden on society.

Whether it's actually true or not is becoming an important concept.

O.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Gonnagle on September 06, 2015, 08:46:13 PM
Dear ippy,

Not evidence for God, concept of god, do try and keep up old chap.

Gonnagle.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Phyllis Tyne on September 06, 2015, 09:05:29 PM
Dear Outrider,

Good post, one which I don't think I have any argument, but ( always a but ) I am not arguing are gods true, just the belief we have had for millions of years.

Gonnagle.

And there is some evidence that the belief has been useful, in some ways, in the past. However, it's rapidly approaching the point where it's beyond doubt that it's unnecessary, and that the remnants of it are perhaps becoming a net burden on society.

Society Outslider? surely you mean ''Atheist Master Race''.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Gonnagle on September 06, 2015, 09:40:24 PM
Dear Outrider,

Unnecessary! As long as it is replaced with compassion, compassion becomes the new religion.

We eat, drink, live compassion, when you eat your cornflakes in the morning you are thinking compassion.

When the politicians enact a new law, they ask, is this the compassionate thing to do.

We breath compassion, every thought, every move.

Gonnagle.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Leonard James on September 07, 2015, 06:42:53 AM

Dear Leonard,

A God, any God, where did this idea/concept come from.

Gonnagle.

Nobody can know for certain. My belief is that it came from the imagination of one of the "spirit" believers, who saw all these spirit forces as a tribe with a leader, a natural human deduction. So he invented a chief spirit in charge of all the others ... a 'god'.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Nearly Sane on September 07, 2015, 06:54:16 AM
Serious Atheism is an increasing world view
Yay  :D

I have no idea what Serious Atheism is. I have no real idea how any such thing would count as a world view, though to be honest dressing up the vast majority of people's set of mixed up prejudices, desires and reactions as a world view is, in my far from humble opinion, like putting a hat on a WII and saying it is your best friend Charlie
I'm not since you have described the ''messe perditio''.

Perhaps instead of saying serious atheists were increasing you would have had me say they were a tiny group who were getting louder?

Given that I wrote that I have no idea what a serious atheist is, it is a complete non sequitur, to suggest that. Read what is written, rather than reply to stuff that you seem to make up.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Rhiannon on September 07, 2015, 09:24:26 AM
Dear Outrider,

Absence of belief!

We have been worshipping gods since Paleolithic times, I don't think we ever have had a absence of belief, its in the genes.

Gonnagle.

We have worshipped many things - nature, the sun, disembodied conceptual personalities... We have attempted to pacify that which we could not control or which we did not understand, and ritual behaviour has been part of that. That's culture, but we are not born with a particular culture, we are shaped into it.

The tendency to see agency where there is none, it seems, does have an inherent basis - that tendency to recognise patterns is part of why we develop conceptual thinking and language, but as with any 'test' there is the possibility of false positives.

We are also social creatures, and so ideas are communicated, shared and multiplied not necessarily in proportion to the evidence, but in proportion to the cultural appropriateness: religion was appropriate in primitive societies, and becomes increasingly less so as we increasingly have evidence to support better explanations.

That we have a tendency to believe makes us human, it doesn't make gods true.

O.

Your post doesn't mention relationship. For me as a pantheist/panentheist relationship is the crucial part. I don't worship and I know damn well I can't appease, but I can relate to, commune with, be a part of.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Outrider on September 07, 2015, 11:01:33 AM
Dear Outrider,

Good post, one which I don't think I have any argument, but ( always a but ) I am not arguing are gods true, just the belief we have had for millions of years.

Gonnagle.

And there is some evidence that the belief has been useful, in some ways, in the past. However, it's rapidly approaching the point where it's beyond doubt that it's unnecessary, and that the remnants of it are perhaps becoming a net burden on society.

Society Outslider? surely you mean ''Atheist Master Race''.

It says a lot about you, Vlad, that you think those two phrases equate - is that part of your well-established persecution complex, or is this a new addition?

O.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Outrider on September 07, 2015, 11:03:53 AM
Dear Outrider,

Unnecessary! As long as it is replaced with compassion, compassion becomes the new religion.

We eat, drink, live compassion, when you eat your cornflakes in the morning you are thinking compassion.

When the politicians enact a new law, they ask, is this the compassionate thing to do.

We breath compassion, every thought, every move.

Gonnagle.

Gonners, the principles that the majority of Christians - and Muslims and probably Hindus - suggest are the basis of their faith are fantastic, I'd advocate them every day of the week.

Unfortunately, the practical realities of religion are such that the principles get submerged under doctrine and catechism and organisational structure.

O.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Outrider on September 07, 2015, 11:05:21 AM
Your post doesn't mention relationship. For me as a pantheist/panentheist relationship is the crucial part. I don't worship and I know damn well I can't appease, but I can relate to, commune with, be a part of.

How do you commune with something that doesn't have thoughts and can't communicate?

O.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Rhiannon on September 07, 2015, 11:34:58 AM
Your post doesn't mention relationship. For me as a pantheist/panentheist relationship is the crucial part. I don't worship and I know damn well I can't appease, but I can relate to, commune with, be a part of.

How do you commune with something that doesn't have thoughts and can't communicate?

O.

Through feelings.

And yes, I know that is completely subjective and unreliable.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Outrider on September 07, 2015, 11:55:55 AM
Through feelings.

And yes, I know that is completely subjective and unreliable.

From what I've seen of your writing, Rhi, you've not claimed anything else, you certainly don't attempt to put your faith onto others, just out there for them to intersect with if they wish - I was (am!) genuinely curious.

How do you determine what's inspired by outside, though, and what's from inside? How do you - indeed, do you? - differentiate between what you do and, say, meditation to get insights into you?

O.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Gonnagle on September 07, 2015, 11:57:53 AM
Dear Outrider,

Post 129, I totally agree, as for my own religion, back to basics, a revisit of the Four Gospels, starting with the Two Greatest Commandments.

As for your reply to Rhiannon, I am sure you must have heard "communing with nature" something that our very early ancestors would have been very skilled at.

Gonnagle.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: jeremyp on September 07, 2015, 12:09:44 PM
Quote from: Methodology for philosophical naturalism,please
I agree atheism can be described in terms of THE BIG NON i.e atheism is the lack of belief in God/Gods.

But I disagree that THAT is implicit in textbooks or lessons.

Read any science text book.  You will find no mention of God at all, except maybe if there is a historical section.

Read a history or art text book and you will find God mentioned only in the context of the fact that people's religious beliefs were (and are) often motivations for their actions.  There will not be anything in there that requires the reader to believe that God exists.

Incidentally, the same was true for my RE lessons more than 30 years ago.  Our RE teacher was actually a fundamentalist Christian but, at no point were we required to actually believe in the Christian or any other god to do well in the lessons.

Quote
For a curriculum to be atheist it would have to have religion filleted out of it. Particularly in terms of art, music and history
I disagree.  I think it merely means that its explanations of events do not require a belief in gods on the part of the student.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Gonnagle on September 07, 2015, 12:15:36 PM
Dear Jeremyp,

Is A Brief History of Time a scientific text book.

Then we will know the mind of God. 8)

Gonnagle.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: jeremyp on September 07, 2015, 12:16:45 PM
Dear Jeremyp,

Is A Brief History of Time a scientific text book.

No.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Gonnagle on September 07, 2015, 12:19:28 PM
Dear Jeremyp,

Fair enough ;)

Gonnagle.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: jeremyp on September 07, 2015, 12:25:52 PM
Dear Jeremyp,

Fair enough ;)

Gonnagle.

Yes, it isn't a text book, it is a pop science book.  Even so, none of the explanations (or more accurately: descriptions) he gives require the reader to accept supernatural phenomena.  The last line, that you quoted also isn't really theistic, it's just a dramatic way to end the book by implying heavily that we won't need God at all. 
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Rhiannon on September 07, 2015, 12:40:56 PM
Through feelings.

And yes, I know that is completely subjective and unreliable.

From what I've seen of your writing, Rhi, you've not claimed anything else, you certainly don't attempt to put your faith onto others, just out there for them to intersect with if they wish - I was (am!) genuinely curious.

How do you determine what's inspired by outside, though, and what's from inside? How do you - indeed, do you? - differentiate between what you do and, say, meditation to get insights into you?

O.

As a pantheist I'm a part of the whole, so in a sense there is no 'inside' and 'outside'. Meditation is a big part of what I do, that and visualisation. In nature itself it is becoming still, listening with your feelings, which I know sounds woo but it is the best way I can put it. Intuition I guess.

I know when to discard something, and that is when I feel it has been an effort to sense, 'see' or 'hear' it. Inevitably that comes from my own conscious striving and doesn't give me anything. If it comes without effort then it has meaning, whether from another part of creation or within my own inner stillness.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Jack Knave on September 07, 2015, 06:09:43 PM
Common sense would suggest that less educated people are more gullible in practically all areas where they are uneducated ...
Having lived and worked among so-called 'uneducated' people in India and Nepal, I was surprised by the fact that, on the whole, the most gullible of the people I had dealings with were the educated westerners (including myself).  The common sense factor seems to get educated out of us, leaving us reliant on technology, complicated and expensive reports, etc.
I would say that we are talking about areas that people feel a need in their lives. I would guess they were 'wise' because their basic needs wouldn't be satisfied by some 'plastic' western trinket. When someone has convinced themselves, or been convinced, that they have this need then how they tackle it will depend on their knowledge of the content of that need and its implications in their lives. For example a lot of third world rural people find it hard to understand the need for politics etc. as their lives styles have worked to date without it.

This is true of the EU. It is a contrived illusion that we really don't need.

I was driving through Spain about 1963 thereabouts and I saw women still bashing out their washing on rocks by the river I can remember then thinking I suppose we'll, (the UK), will have to stall while they catch up, it put me off of the whole idea of the EEC then.

Of course that's not all and I've seen and heard of many more reasons since that have put me off of the whole idea and now the disunity about the refugees just one more good reason why we don't need them.

I voted against the EEC that won the day; who voted for a Federal Europe?   

Do you remember Brown creeping off and going out of his way to avoid being photographed in Lisbon and he signed something there probably some of our birthrights; it was the sheepish way he did it, do you know what it was he signed away; he was obviously not that proud of himself whatever it was.

ippy
I never understood why Brown did that. We all knew what he was doing. Anyone with half a brain knew he was a slimy scumbag.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Phyllis Tyne on September 07, 2015, 07:44:12 PM
Quote from: Methodology for philosophical naturalism,please
I agree atheism can be described in terms of THE BIG NON i.e atheism is the lack of belief in God/Gods.

But I disagree that THAT is implicit in textbooks or lessons.

Read any science text book.  You will find no mention of God at all,
Yes nor any mention of philosophical naturalism.
Stop using the word science as if you were in possession of the fucking Elder wand.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: jeremyp on September 07, 2015, 09:47:53 PM
Quote from: Methodology for philosophical naturalism,please
I agree atheism can be described in terms of THE BIG NON i.e atheism is the lack of belief in God/Gods.

But I disagree that THAT is implicit in textbooks or lessons.

Read any science text book.  You will find no mention of God at all,
Yes nor any mention of philosophical naturalism.
Stop using the word science as if you were in possession of the fucking Elder wand.

Your descent into crude stupidity tells me you concede the point.  Thank you.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Phyllis Tyne on September 07, 2015, 09:58:33 PM
Quote from: Methodology for philosophical naturalism,please
I agree atheism can be described in terms of THE BIG NON i.e atheism is the lack of belief in God/Gods.

But I disagree that THAT is implicit in textbooks or lessons.

Read any science text book.  You will find no mention of God at all,
Yes nor any mention of philosophical naturalism.
Stop using the word science as if you were in possession of the fucking Elder wand.

Your descent into crude stupidity tells me you concede the point.  Thank you.
JeremyP has declared himself right because he, er declares himself right.

Jeremy, science does not support any of your ideas about religion. Suck it up.

It is not antireligion, suck it up.

If it does not include God in any hypothesis God cannot fall out the other end in the conclusion, Suck it up.

just repeating the word science does not convert it into atheism, suck it up.

Science is not philosophically naturalistic. It is a methodology incapable of philosophising, suck it up.

What does my new hoover do to the dirt I bring in on my shoes.........You've guessed it.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Shaker on September 07, 2015, 10:09:24 PM
Jeremy, science does not support any of your ideas about religion. Suck it up.
Do you think science supports any of yours, Vladdypops? ;)
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Phyllis Tyne on September 07, 2015, 10:24:10 PM
Jeremy, science does not support any of your ideas about religion. Suck it up.
Do you think science supports any of yours, Vladdypops? ;)
science doesn't do God.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Shaker on September 07, 2015, 10:26:11 PM
Jeremy, science does not support any of your ideas about religion. Suck it up.
Do you think science supports any of yours, Vladdypops? ;)
science doesn't do God.
Yes Vlad, yes.

Some of us knew that already ;)
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Phyllis Tyne on September 07, 2015, 10:28:33 PM
Jeremy, science does not support any of your ideas about religion. Suck it up.
Do you think science supports any of yours, Vladdypops? ;)
science doesn't do God.
Yes Vlad, yes.

Some of us knew that already ;)
It doesn't do philosophical naturalism either.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: jeremyp on September 07, 2015, 10:31:41 PM
Jeremy, science does not support any of your ideas about religion. Suck it up.
Do you think science supports any of yours, Vladdypops? ;)
science doesn't do God.

Which is exactly what I said when I claimed science is atheistic.

Suck it up.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Phyllis Tyne on September 07, 2015, 10:46:08 PM
Jeremy, science does not support any of your ideas about religion. Suck it up.
Do you think science supports any of yours, Vladdypops? ;)
science doesn't do God.

Which is exactly what I said when I claimed science is atheistic.

Suck it up.
Science has a lack a belief in Gods so Jeremy calls it atheist.

But it lacks belief in anything because it is not capable of belief!

It has nothing to say about God or philosophical naturalism.

If it's atheist it's also aphilosophical naturalist.........Are you Jeremy?

It's atheist in the same way that the instructions on a bottle of Brobat toilet cleaner are.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: ippy on September 08, 2015, 08:48:10 AM
Dear ippy,

Not evidence for God, concept of god, do try and keep up old chap.

Gonnagle.

Making excuses for holding a pointless belief in an obviously man made idea and just calling it a concept doesn't really alter anything.

Accepting something like a belief a god whatever you wish to call it; if you've held this rather strange idea for a number of years I can see it would be difficult to admit  to yourself you've been into some pretty strange stuff, but if you were to dump it you really wouldn't be dumping your concept/idea of a god, because it'so unlikely it was there in the first place, so what would you be giving the elbow to?

ippy

Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Gonnagle on September 08, 2015, 09:15:34 AM
Dear ippy,

Yes Dear. :-*

Today I will be wearing mostly cabbages.

Gonnagle.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: ippy on September 08, 2015, 10:03:07 AM
Dear ippy,

Yes Dear. :-*

Today I will be wearing mostly cabbages.

Gonnagle.
[/quodte]

Well Goners wear your cabbages with pride, you're not on your own there's plenty of others that believe the equivilant of Elvis is still here.

ippy
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Outrider on September 08, 2015, 01:50:40 PM
Jeremy, science does not support any of your ideas about religion. Suck it up.
Do you think science supports any of yours, Vladdypops? ;)
science doesn't do God.
Nor fairies, unicorns, honey monsters, ogres or flying horses that carry the prophet away...

O.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Rhiannon on September 08, 2015, 03:07:55 PM
Fairies are more believable than a god of love who doesn't like people falling in live with each other if they have matching front bottoms.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: jeremyp on September 08, 2015, 03:49:42 PM

Science has a lack a belief in Gods so Jeremy calls it atheist.

Science does not have beliefs.  It is a process.  What the hell are you talking about?  Science is atheistic in the sense that the assumption of the existence of God has no place in it.  People who do science have to temporarily set aside any theistic beliefs they have.

Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: OH MY WORLD! on September 08, 2015, 04:57:54 PM
ippy,
The reality is that you hold the strange idea, more people in the world do believe in a god. A mere 1.8 of the world population go for your strange atheist idea and that number is in decline.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: ippy on September 08, 2015, 05:28:48 PM
ippy,
The reality is that you hold the strange idea, more people in the world do believe in a god. A mere 1.8 of the world population go for your strange atheist idea and that number is in decline.

You'quite right Woody, remember the same type of people thought thought the sun went around planet earth, the point being if an idea is wrong it doesn't matter how many believe it, it'still wrong.

ippy
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: ippy on September 08, 2015, 05:50:15 PM
Dear ippy,

The Prof is basically saying the same thing as you, and it seems he accepts the same story as you.

Man just thought up the concept of God, earlyman thought godidit, a very convenient story.

Gonnagle.

The Proff and I are saying more or less the same thing but it's not a story in the way your indoctrinated mind is telling you, your god idea/concept is only a man made story all based on how social animals methods of survival naturaly develop/evolve, but then again it'seems to me as though the Proff'and my idea is just that bit much too credible for you and you really don't want to reconise it and admit to yourself we've more than likely got it right.

Have a good day Gonners

ippy
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: OH MY WORLD! on September 08, 2015, 05:59:47 PM
Well Woody aka Chopper aka ippy, you claim it is wrong, big deal. That's just an opinion and a small minority one at that. Now get busy and convince us.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Phyllis Tyne on September 08, 2015, 07:00:16 PM
Jeremy, science does not support any of your ideas about religion. Suck it up.
Do you think science supports any of yours, Vladdypops? ;)
science doesn't do God.
Nor fairies, unicorns, honey monsters, ogres or flying horses that carry the prophet away...

O.
Well it does do unicorns, ogres, honey monsters, and flying horses since they are all falsifiable.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Phyllis Tyne on September 08, 2015, 07:01:54 PM
Fairies are more believable than a god of love who doesn't like people falling in live with each other if they have matching front bottoms.
LOL with a huge portion of ROFL
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Outrider on September 08, 2015, 07:32:15 PM
Jeremy, science does not support any of your ideas about religion. Suck it up.
Do you think science supports any of yours, Vladdypops? ;)
science doesn't do God.
Nor fairies, unicorns, honey monsters, ogres or flying horses that carry the prophet away...

O.
Well it does do unicorns, ogres, honey monsters, and flying horses since they are all falsifiable.

Please explain how I falsify the claim 'There were once unicorns'...

O.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Phyllis Tyne on September 08, 2015, 07:34:56 PM
Jeremy, science does not support any of your ideas about religion. Suck it up.
Do you think science supports any of yours, Vladdypops? ;)
science doesn't do God.
Nor fairies, unicorns, honey monsters, ogres or flying horses that carry the prophet away...

O.
Well it does do unicorns, ogres, honey monsters, and flying horses since they are all falsifiable.

Please explain how I falsify the claim 'There were once unicorns'...

O.
Paleontology dear boy.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Shaker on September 08, 2015, 07:37:38 PM
Paleontology dear boy.
You must consider the science of paleontology to be finished then, since the clear implication from your comment is that all the species which have ever lived have already been found in the fossil record, i.e. are already known as of September 2015.

Is that really what you meant to say, Vlad?
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Outrider on September 08, 2015, 07:39:39 PM
Jeremy, science does not support any of your ideas about religion. Suck it up.
Do you think science supports any of yours, Vladdypops? ;)
science doesn't do God.
Nor fairies, unicorns, honey monsters, ogres or flying horses that carry the prophet away...

O.
Well it does do unicorns, ogres, honey monsters, and flying horses since they are all falsifiable.

Please explain how I falsify the claim 'There were once unicorns'...

O.
Paleontology dear boy.
So because we've not found archaeological evidence we have disproven the theory of unicorns. Logically, then, the fact we've not found any evidence of gods means....

O.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: jeremyp on September 08, 2015, 08:49:12 PM

Paleontology dear boy.

A unicorn would never do anything so vulgar as to die and rot away. We wouldn't expect to see unicorn fossils.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Phyllis Tyne on September 08, 2015, 09:22:24 PM
Paleontology dear boy.
You must consider the science of paleontology to be finished then, since the clear implication from your comment is that all the species which have ever lived have already been found in the fossil record, i.e. are already known as of September 2015.

Is that really what you meant to say, Vlad?

No. What we mean is the past existence of unicorns can be verified or falsified by paleontology.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Phyllis Tyne on September 08, 2015, 09:25:11 PM
Jeremy, science does not support any of your ideas about religion. Suck it up.
Do you think science supports any of yours, Vladdypops? ;)
science doesn't do God.
Nor fairies, unicorns, honey monsters, ogres or flying horses that carry the prophet away...

O.
Well it does do unicorns, ogres, honey monsters, and flying horses since they are all falsifiable.

Please explain how I falsify the claim 'There were once unicorns'...

O.
Paleontology dear boy.
So because we've not found archaeological evidence we have disproven the theory of unicorns. Logically, then, the fact we've not found any evidence of gods means....

O.
No, what we mean is paleontology can verify or falsify unicorns.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Nearly Sane on September 08, 2015, 09:31:02 PM
Except it cannot, induction doesn't work that way as you nearly understand Vlad but you do not apply it consistently because you want to avoid the problem of the relativism that you inadvertently adore but fight punily against the implications like a gerbil being crushed by a tank.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Phyllis Tyne on September 08, 2015, 09:41:39 PM
Except it cannot, induction doesn't work that way as you nearly understand Vlad but you do not apply it consistently because you want to avoid the problem of the relativism that you inadvertently adore but fight punily against the implications like a gerbil being crushed by a tank.
What?
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Phyllis Tyne on September 08, 2015, 09:45:41 PM
Except it cannot, induction doesn't work that way as you nearly understand Vlad but you do not apply it consistently because you want to avoid the problem of the relativism that you inadvertently adore but fight punily against the implications like a gerbil being crushed by a tank.
Do you not understand that a unicorn is a horse with a horn.........or that the evolution of the horse is perhaps one of the most trumpeted triumphs of paleontology?......what is the matter with you?
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Phyllis Tyne on September 08, 2015, 09:53:32 PM

Paleontology dear boy.

A unicorn would never do anything so vulgar as to die and rot away. We wouldn't expect to see unicorn fossils.
So there we have it.............. verification by unicorn sense of decorum.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Shaker on September 08, 2015, 09:56:16 PM
No. What we
We?

Quote
mean is the past existence of unicorns can be verified or falsified by paleontology.
Correct, but then, with no fossil evidence as yet, there always remains the possibility that such evidence could be found tomorrow, yes?
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Nearly Sane on September 08, 2015, 10:03:05 PM
Except it cannot, induction doesn't work that way as you nearly understand Vlad but you do not apply it consistently because you want to avoid the problem of the relativism that you inadvertently adore but fight punily against the implications like a gerbil being crushed by a tank.
Do you not understand that a unicorn is a horse with a horn.........or that the evolution of the horse is perhaps one of the most trumpeted triumphs of paleontology?......what is the matter with you?

No, I have no idea that a unicorn is a horse with a horn. How did you get that?
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Phyllis Tyne on September 08, 2015, 10:06:19 PM
No. What we
We?

Me and them wot thinks like me.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Shaker on September 08, 2015, 10:11:35 PM
The cohort of those who think like you could fill a phone box with room to spare one hopes, Vlad.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Phyllis Tyne on September 08, 2015, 10:14:57 PM
The cohort of those who think like you could fill a phone box with room to spare one hopes, Vlad.
That's real genius for you.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Phyllis Tyne on September 08, 2015, 10:43:41 PM

Science has a lack a belief in Gods so Jeremy calls it atheist.

Science does not have beliefs.  It is a process.  What the hell are you talking about?  Science is atheistic in the sense that the assumption of the existence of God has no place in it.  People who do science have to temporarily set aside any theistic beliefs they have.
But only in the same sense as when they follow the instructions on a bottle of Brobat toilet cleaner.

In any case your claim that we have to temporarily set aside theistic beliefs is as sensible as saying that you have to temporarily set aside their love for their partners, family etc.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: jeremyp on September 08, 2015, 10:49:23 PM

But only in the same sense as when they follow the instructions on a bottle of Brobat toilet cleaner.

Have you been drinking the toilet cleaner?  You seem to be raving.

Quote
In any case your claim that we have to temporarily set aside theistic beliefs is as sensible as saying that you have to temporarily set aside their love for their partners, family etc.

Nevertheless, history shows that a number of scientists who are also theists have done it quite successfully.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Phyllis Tyne on September 08, 2015, 11:01:16 PM

But only in the same sense as when they follow the instructions on a bottle of Brobat toilet cleaner.

Have you been drinking the toilet cleaner?  You seem to be raving.

Quote
In any case your claim that we have to temporarily set aside theistic beliefs is as sensible as saying that you have to temporarily set aside their love for their partners, family etc.

Nevertheless, history shows that a number of scientists who are also theists have done it quite successfully.
Lol Bless you, you assume science versus religion with a view of science which confuses methodological naturalism with philosophical naturalism.

I suppose you believe there is a conflict between Brobat and Religion or love of relatives and science.

The idea that one finds one inner atheist when doing science is mystical shit Jezzer.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: jeremyp on September 08, 2015, 11:13:27 PM

Lol Bless you, you assume science versus religion with a view of science which confuses methodological naturalism with philosophical naturalism.


Nope.  Do you know what the term methodological naturalism means?

Quote
The idea that one finds one inner atheist when doing science is mystical shit Jezzer.

If I had said that, you might be right, but I didn't. 
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: ippy on September 08, 2015, 11:24:51 PM
Well Woody aka Chopper aka ippy, you claim it is wrong, big deal. That's just an opinion and a small minority one at that. Now get busy and convince us.

Now now Woody, Hope keeps on trying this one; it's for the likes of yourself as a believer to prove, that this magical mystery man you like and you ref as something you call god, if he she or it does in  fact exist.

No doubt like the rest of your fellow travellers you can't come up with any convinsing evidence to that effect; as opposed to the default position of the people you refer to as atheists, so as it's unlikely that there is anything like your idea of gods in existance, you might just as well dump the whole idea, or concept and do something more usefull with your time.

ippy
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Shaker on September 08, 2015, 11:35:05 PM
In any case your claim that we have to temporarily set aside theistic beliefs is as sensible as saying that you have to temporarily set aside their love for their partners, family etc.
A desperately misguided and mistaken comparison. Theism makes positive putative truth claims, opining about states of affairs which according to the theist are true. It also entails that wholly undefined entities can randomly and arbitrarily do inexplicable things by unknown means on a whim at any time, thus rendering the universe a chaotic, incoherent, random mess with absolutely no possibility of ever coming to understand how things work. That's why science is atheistic.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Outrider on September 09, 2015, 09:20:32 AM
No, what we mean is paleontology can verify or falsify unicorns.

That's what YOU mean - you're wrong. Paleontology can verify unicorns, but it can't falsify it, all it can do is confirm that we do not yet have evidence in support.

O.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Leonard James on September 09, 2015, 10:41:12 AM
No, what we mean is paleontology can verify or falsify unicorns.

That's what YOU mean - you're wrong. Paleontology can verify unicorns, but it can't falsify it, all it can do is confirm that we do not yet have evidence in support.

O.

Just like "God".
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Phyllis Tyne on September 09, 2015, 07:20:17 PM
In any case your claim that we have to temporarily set aside theistic beliefs is as sensible as saying that you have to temporarily set aside their love for their partners, family etc.
A desperately misguided and mistaken comparison. Theism makes positive putative truth claims, opining about states of affairs which according to the theist are true. It also entails that wholly undefined entities can randomly and arbitrarily do inexplicable things by unknown means on a whim at any time, thus rendering the universe a chaotic, incoherent, random mess with absolutely no possibility of ever coming to understand how things work. That's why science is atheistic.
Science is methodological materialism. Nothing more nothing less. It is incapable of speaking from the heart of any deeply held belief. Not even yours.

What a desperate sounding post.

Science doesn't help the likes of you making the likes of your ''case''.

There is at base no conflict between science and religion. That is just in your head.
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Sassy on September 11, 2015, 11:15:14 AM
For a number of months now, there has been a drip-feed of threads and posts suggesting that the more educated one is, the less likely one is to be religious.

Now I haven't read the whole of this paper, so am not sure of every ramification, but it does suggest that this is no longer the case - though it seems to have been, prior to about the 1970s.

http://bit.ly/1sEcZ74

It should be noted that it is American research carried out in an American context - but then, of course, American ideas and practices tend to travel across the Atlantic  ;)

Has anyone carried out any research as to the correlation between educational achievement and atheism, in the way so much has been claimed to have been done into that between educational achievement and religious belief?

By the way, for many years, one of the real issues around the make up of the church - both conformist and non-conformist (though perhaps less so) - was that it was seen very much as middle-class/professional/well-educated in make-up.

I think they confuse child-like faith with the other type of faith.

Education does not give you your faith...
Title: Re: Religious and educated?
Post by: Leonard James on September 17, 2015, 07:07:11 AM

Education does not give you your faith...

Conversely education can, if your are lucky, get you to see through your "faith".