Pseudo-Atheism, this one is for you...

[LivingNumbers6.626]

First, your post is a bit on the long side. It took a few minted to go through.

But enough of that. You seem to be opposed to the intelligence/religiosity correlation. I'm not sure why, except that it possibly implies unpleasant things about belief. Not all religious people are stupid, and there are many religious people who are very intelligent. No one disputes this. However the correlation between intelligence and irreligiosity is real and is strong. Once again, taking this to mean all believers are idiots is fallacious and unfounded, but it is an interesting fact.

You also seem to be railing against those who oppose religion as harmful. I'm not sure I agree with this either. I am not an anti-theist, but I am an anti-dogmatist. While theism and religion might be helpful to some individual's devotion to a dogma is almost always harmful. This is why intend not to rail against the religion of my parents, who hold to an abstract semi deistic form of Catholicism, but will mock and disparage many of the myths and dogma associated with fundamentalist Christianity.

Nevertheless, thank you for reading it.

I'm a little confused in regards to your first refutation, but my assertion is not in regards to intelligence and irreligiosity, but only intelligence and religiosity. I apologize if I had mistakenly asserted the same, though. It was not my attention. Also, I don't mean to claim all or nothing on the resolution on this correlation but I do assert the importance of not over extending the correlation. Meaning, not making 30-40% correlation look like 60-80% correlation.

But oh yes, I agree with you, I'm anti-religion, and anti-dogmatic, but I do not favor the assertion that it is all good or all bad. I think that as a sort of evolutionary stand point, religion has served a significant purpose.

But again, please tell me more so I can understand your argument more fully.

---

Atheism should not be "I don't believe in God (gods)." Atheism is a schema and should always be "I don't believe in God (god's) because if-then." Atheism is not a product of its own, it is a product of skepticism, rational, and reason. Without these, what I would call, three pillars of atheism, atheism would cease to be.

A more generalized form would be "I don't believe in X because if-then". Gods don't get any more of pass than skepticism around an auto-loan, a job applicant or what a politician says.

I don't believe in *anything* without good reason and evidence. God claims are no more or less subject to that rule than anything else. Some of the most skeptical people I know are believers, except when it comes to their own pet God belief.

An odd quirk of humans that is.

I concur.

---

I was born an atheist and have been my entire life.

The only reason I am one is that everyone's claims on gods have fallen short of my (very, very low) expectation of evidence. I don't think atheism equates to skepticism, rational or reason, though they might be attributes that a lot of atheists have.

However I do agree somewhat with your point about the condemnation of people simply because they are religious. Sure their beliefs are generally quite silly but often they're just normal people who've probably been brought up in a religion.

I agree.