everyone (else) seems to be hating on atheists

[Epimethean]

"But if we were to lump together all religious, we would find they hold absolutely no beliefs all in common, whereas atheism holds that disbelief in common (or it should, though I don't want to bring back up that Pew Forum poll)."

Lions and tigers and polls, oh my!


http://m.today.duke.edu/2008/03/pew_oped.html

http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_poll2.htm

Comments here are entertaining-and point at the problem:

http://freethoughtblogs.com/camelswithha...-atheists/

[Aiza]

I fail to see how the Big 5 is a solid piece of evidence, lol, it's a personality quiz, nothing more.

Also, I have issue with the phrasing of the statement, "better self-control"... Wouldn't participation in risk-taking behaviors be a little less emotionally charged?

The Big 5 personality factors are the standard for any sort of research on personality in psychology , backed up by a lot of empirical data. Its not really even under any serious debate other than the fact that it only gives a rough sketch of personality (with many subfactors which give a more complete picture).

So no, not just a "personality quiz".

If you want general studies on risk-taking behavior I can post those as well. I don't want to "throw" studies at people, but I can post many more showing that religious folk smoke less, exercise more, eat healthier, wear a seatbelt more, less likely to carry a weapon, more likely to drink in moderation (and less likely to drink and drive), etc. Religiosity association with self-control is one of the better established correlations when it comes to research on religion.

And yes, like Mister Agenda notes, religious vs. irreligious isn't an exact matchup to theist vs. atheist, since some atheists are religious (Unitarian Universalism being one religion with many atheist followers), and some theists are irreligious (such as Deists).

[Epimethean]

Uh, no. Atheists are not religious. The reason atheists tend to hang out with Unitarian Universalists is because that group tends to be low on dogma, high on dialogue.

[Annik]

The Big 5 personality factors are the standard for any sort of research on personality in psychology , backed up by a lot of empirical data. Its not really even under any serious debate other than the fact that it only gives a rough sketch of personality (with many subfactors which give a more complete picture).

So no, not just a "personality quiz".

The Big 5 is a personality quiz. You're asked to answer a bunch of questions and then they spit out the percentile in which your answers put you in each of the 5 categories. At best, it will give you a rough idea of what a person is like, however, you're missing something quite fundamental. We can't trust these tests are scientific fact. Why? People lie, even if they don't mean to or think they do.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-serving_bias
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Actor%E2%80...t_concepts (particularly what is mentioned about why people think they do things)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_bias

You can't trust what people say about themselves.

[Mister Agenda]

And yes, like Mister Agenda notes, religious vs. irreligious isn't an exact matchup to theist vs. atheist, since some atheists are religious (Unitarian Universalism being one religion with many atheist followers), and some theists are irreligious (such as Deists).

I would say the matchup is not even close, that the atheists are only a fraction of the total of irreligious.

[Aiza]

Uh, no. Atheists are not religious. The reason atheists tend to hang out with Unitarian Universalists is because that group tends to be low on dogma, high on dialogue.

Some atheists can be religious. Not all religions are theistic.
Religion is a collection of cultural systems, belief systems, and worldviews that relate humanity to spirituality and, sometimes, to moral values. Many religions have narratives, symbols, traditions and sacred histories that are intended to give meaning to life or to explain the origin of life or the universe

The Big 5 is a personality quiz. You're asked to answer a bunch of questions and then they spit out the percentile in which your answers put you in each of the 5 categories. At best, it will give you a rough idea of what a person is like, however, you're missing something quite fundamental. We can't trust these tests are scientific fact. Why? People lie, even if they don't mean to or think they do.

Scientists certainly do "trust" this test, as it is extremely well-established and reliable method of measuring personality. That's why you see it in so many peer-reviewed scientific journals. The fact that you tried to dismiss it as "just" a personality test is rather suspect in this sense. Given your selection of wikipedia articles, I don't think you are very familiar with the big 5 method of measuring personality.

[Annik]

Scientists certainly do "trust" this test, as it is extremely well-established and reliable method of measuring personality. That's why you see it in so many peer-reviewed scientific journals. The fact that you tried to dismiss it as "just" a personality test is rather suspect in this sense. Given your selection of wikipedia articles, I don't think you are very familiar with the big 5 method of measuring personality.

You'd be wrong.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Five_pe...Criticisms
You'll refer to the second section of the link to get a better idea of what I am talking about.
You'll also note that that I do not dog the test itself, but the biases of the people taking it. The Big 5 is the best test of personality we have, but that says nothing about the people who answer untruthfully. Additionally, personality is hardly a hard science. Anyone who has been through a Theory of Personality course is aware of the highly subjective nature of studying personality. You'll note the Big 5 is based off of one of them: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personality_psychology
I do believe the Big 5 is a more objective test, but the bias lies in the person taking the test, not the test itself.
Also it's a test and measures personality. Hence, it is a personality test.

[Aiza]

You'll refer to the second section of the link to get a better idea of what I am talking about.

The sentence right before "citation needed"?

Also it's a test and measures personality. Hence, it is a personality test.

Yes, but you said it was a "personality quiz" which has connotations of the "what M+M character are you?" things people put on their myspace back in the day. Even without those connotations, quiz refers to tests of knowledge, not any sort of psych evaluation.

Also "just" when it is the gold standard for the scientific measurement of personality. But maybe at this point its just semantics anyway, I get the feeling that I misunderstood what you were getting at, and I apologize for that.

[Epimethean]

"Some atheists can be religious. Not all religions are theistic.
Religion is a collection of cultural systems, belief systems, and worldviews that relate humanity to spirituality and, sometimes, to moral values. Many religions have narratives, symbols, traditions and sacred histories that are intended to give meaning to life or to explain the origin of life or the universe."

You just can't conceive of being wrong, because you have your imaginary friend on your side. I do not consider Buddhism when it has been divorced from gods to be a religion. Rather, it is a philosophy. Atheists are not deists, either, and your runaway train last line there is, as is usual for you by now, just another red herring express. Fucking dogmatic douchebaggery.

"You'll refer to the second section of the link to get a better idea of what I am talking about."

'The sentence right before "citation needed"?'