Religion may not survive the Internet

[Angrboda]

"Technological progress has merely provided us with more efficient means for going backwards."

— Aldous Huxley


I'd have to agree with John here. It's been observed that because of the sheer volume of material on the internet and in the media, you can go from sunrise to sunset without ever encountering a view which significantly challenges your own. Extreme conservatives can isolate themselves in bubbles of Fox News, WND, conservative blogs, religious and conservative forums, and other conservatively slanted information. Regardless of what narrow-minded group you belong to, you can find a plethora of information just perfect for reinforcing your prejudices. And the problem of media overload — having too many pleasures to choose from — means that many will skip from thing to thing, fix to fix, without ever really making a conscious rational choice. The internet and media might do just as much to bring about a dark age as to relieve us of one.

Beyond that, I'm rather skeptical of the notion that critical thinking, knowing how to know, can be effectively taught. I've been sampling the menu over the past year, but have yet to see any strong evidence that this can be effectively taught. I'm also of the opinion that people don't choose to believe on the basis of primarily rationally considered factors. I'm going to try to make this short. There's this "myth" among rationalists and atheists that the human mind is like a "truth detector" — that it samples and examines its environment, weighing the truth of things, collecting those things that are rationally supported, and discarding those things that are not. It is this sort of implicit model which I think underlies much of the intergroup contempt. If people who believe the things of Christianity have "truth detectors" for minds, then something must explain them not detecting the truth and abandoning their beliefs in favor of something rational. Thus you have rationalists impugning stupidity and delusion (in the sense of mental sickness) to people of religious faith; and probably vice versa. (I have been reminded recently of Drich, who, despite much malignment, is far from unintelligent, has mastered an enormous amount of material relevant to his faith, and is likely as "popular" among atheist debaters on this forum as he is because of his slipperiness in an argument; the extremity of his beliefs is not accompanied by extreme defects in ability to think or reason, at least not by any evidence from his ability to argue. So how does one explain that?) And it's not only religion, in politics, the progressives impugn the thinking ability of conservatives and also the reverse. Substituting a different model of human psychology, one that doesn't put rationality in the driver's seat, removes the paradox. If you replace the driving force which pushes people into beliefs and keeps them there with things that aren't concerned with rationality, the seeming irrationality of other people's beliefs is no longer such a puzzle; people with intelligence and reason can believe strange things because intelligence and reason isn't fundamentally what is guiding their behavior. Everybody, no matter what their beliefs, is convinced they know the truth; and they are all attached to their beliefs by irrational processes. (I think, in general, our minds are biased strongly towards conservatism, towards finding ways to retain what we currently believe, even in the face of contradictory information, and, that this is ultimately a good thing, in terms of the needs of the species.) When people think about human nature, they often marvel at capacities like reasoning and language. However, I think it's instructive to look at species that don't have these capacities if we really want to understand who we are. We are primarily a social species, not a thinking one. If you look at the way such species behave (chimpanzees, wolves, dogs, lions), you see the animal brain stripped of the behaviors that we ordinarily think make us special; don't look at language and rationality: those are the icing on the cake — the bulk of who we are, the cake itself, are these animal behaviors. Language and reason build on top of these kinds of behaviors, they don't replace them. And in that, they do so only incrementally.

[Surtr]

There's this "myth" among rationalists and atheists that the human mind is like a "truth detector" — that it samples and examines its environment, weighing the truth of things, collecting those things that are rationally supported, and discarding those things that are not.

Who thinks that?

[Minimalist]

Ah, yes. The internet's affect on religiosity. Hovik and I have had this conversation before. Many people take the internet for granted, but it's changed everything. Constant access to infinite knowledge allows us to focus on critical thinking rather than the memorization of fact.

Yet most people use it to fish for items that confirm what they want to believe.

In my experience, critical thinking on boards such as this has decreased tremendously in the past 10-12 years.

You're proof of that.

Go read your fucking bible some more. It won't help your brain power but it will give you something worthless to do.

[Polaris]

Religion will easily survive the internet, but if more atheists don't learn to separate opinion from academia, the secular movement may itself be set back...the internet has become the atheists' worst enemy.

The problem with the internet is most of what it has to offer is actually rather false.

[Surtr]

the internet has become the atheists' worst enemy.

The internet is and will always be the place religion comes to die. The number of atheist websites and forums is growing and places like r/atheism have around 1.5-2 million subscribers.

The problem with the internet is most of what it has to offer is actually rather false.

That depends on where you look and who did the research. You would say that most atheist websites are full opinion and not academia, but you really just disregard the evidence, claim it isn't true, and ignore that the website's creators have actually done their research. People don't want to see opinions that contradict theirs. I used to be guilty of that, but I've now realized that theistic arguments are almost always completely laughable.

[Polaris]

the internet has become the atheists' worst enemy.

The internet is and will always be the place religion comes to die. The number of atheist websites and forums is growing and places like r/atheism have around 1.5-2 million subscribers.

The problem with the internet is most of what it has to offer is actually rather false.

That depends on where you look and who did the research. You would say that most atheist websites are full opinion and not academia, but you really just disregard the evidence, claim it isn't true, and ignore that the website's creators have actually done their research. People don't want to see opinions that contradict theirs. I used to be guilty of that, but I've now realized that theistic arguments are almost always completely laughable.

The number of atheist sites that make nonacademic claims are increasing. They pose the greatest threat to the secular movement. Why should someone join a group that "stands" behind logic and faith when that group does not adhere to academic standards or actually do research.

The worst example being the Horus Myth debacle....they could have fooled me (frankly I just did not care) save for the fact they kept on trying to embellish it until they created a huge discrepancy between their story and the historic record.

[Surtr]

The worst example being the Horus Myth debacle....they could have fooled me (frankly I just did not care) save for the fact they kept on trying to embellish it until they created a huge discrepancy between their story and the historic record.

And Christians aren't guilty of this either? Your arguments are getting worse (What proof do you have that atheism is correct, Hitler was an atheist, etc.). A worldview is destined to have a few idiots with a few bad arguments. The Horus myth wasn't even that bad. Other pre-Christian deities were involved and Horus was really the only one who didn't influence Jesus' story.

[Brian37]

Religion will easily survive the internet, but if more atheists don't learn to separate opinion from academia, the secular movement may itself be set back...the internet has become the atheists' worst enemy.

The problem with the internet is most of what it has to offer is actually rather false.

No.

What will kill a future of progress is big money without regulation. Not labels. Monopolies need money.

Life is messy and the only way to counter bullying is not to expect 100% perfection all the time, but the continued open market.

You falsely assume that facts are what everyone wants. No, facts are what people far too often equate to personal predilections.

Life is not robotic so while we should all seek facts we are still not robots.

You can define entropy universally, that is true. But you cannot force people to accept it. You can however, use appeal without scaring the shit out of those who disagree with you to the point where they think you want to stick them in ovens.

"We are all entitled to our own opinions, but not our own facts. "

But you cannot name me one sane parent or family member outside the issue of politics or religion that would not react to either the harm or joy of a family member.

We are not different, we as a species simply argue. The internet allows more argument without violence. It allows us to bitch without killing. We can be right or wrong, but it is available to all of us.

Atheists cannot be harmed by the internet unless the powers with money who control any business seek to oppress ANYONE. I do not see a lack of opinion or access to facts on the internet, for any person of any label.

[CapnAwesome]

Even regarding information, the internet only helps if you actually use it - by Googling "middle east bears" for instance.

You looking for large hairy gay men from the middle east are you? Well whatever gets you off.

[John V]

Another example: just stumbled into the atheism section. Someone posted a video about some tribe which is supposedly atheist. A quick search finds that they believe in spirits that take earthly form and in beings who live above the clouds.

Some atheists like to think of themselves as skeptics. Most aren't. Sure, they're skeptical of religious claims, but they'll readily accept a claim without evidence if it supports their own views.