A reason why people remain religious

[psychoslice]

I do find there are atheists who do just that....that their lack of belief is somehow an identity. That's why I'm starting to like humanists more as I see them as emphasizing the value of their humanity over their lack of beliefs; then again, humanists can also be theists so maybe that's the reason why.

Why are you so concerned about what beliefs atheists lack?

Of course, in any society, a lack of conformity to age-old traditions is bound to create some sense of an individual and/or minority identity.

Well, atheist don't know everything that's for sure.

[Mudhammam]

Why are you so concerned about what beliefs atheists lack?

Of course, in any society, a lack of conformity to age-old traditions is bound to create some sense of an individual and/or minority identity.

Well, atheist don't know everything that's for sure.

That's a misnomer.

[Fidel_Castronaut]

Most people need something to cling to, be that religion or whatever, even an atheist can cling to their beliefs or lack of beliefs.

I do find there are atheists who do just that....that their lack of belief is somehow an identity. That's why I'm starting to like humanists more as I see them as emphasizing the value of their humanity over their lack of beliefs; then again, humanists can also be theists so maybe that's the reason why.

Maybe it's because a lot of atheists have been known and labeled entirely by their previous religion and that shedding it means they need something else to identify with?

You have to bear in mind here that we get a lot of atheists who life in oppressive states where lack of/non-belief is either banned of ostracised (including the US).

People tend to get angry when they can't be themselves, doubly so when their personal (lack of) beliefs harm nobody but are made out to be the most evil thing possible.

---

Basically, I'm self-centered and care about what atheists do to ruin the image of academia. If the Christians around me actually made Christianity look bad, I would do the exact same thing to them. I don't tend to see the Fundies use the internet and the majority don't live within 2,000 km of me.

As someone who is Involved in academia I can say that the discussions on the Internet on forums like this don't make one iota of impact on research programmes, research grants or even individual researchers. Most of the people who dismiss academic inquiry in conversations online tend not to care about academia or research anyway, or worse, accuse researchers of being in cahoots with the invisible forces that conspire against them all over the world (so many examples on here).

Nothing I do here impacts on my research, or my fiancé's (she's a microbiologist).

Bracketing out the debate about how one can even 'ruin the image of academia', research is not conducted for the purpose of one upmanship on the interwebz, though I understand that if one wants to increase the profile academia per se to we died audits who are ignorant to hostile to it it helps to use it in a format that can be readily and accurately assimilated.

I see fundies use the Internet all the time, very dangerously and to good effect:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-27912569

[downbeatplumb]

It really hurts the atheists when they come to me woefully unprepared, assuming I will just have the same answers that fit their idea of a stereotypical Christian

I'm intrigued by your suggestion that you aren't a stereotypical Christian.
Where did you come across that view?

[ignoramus]

Polaris is one of the smartest Christians on the forums who believes the same silly stories and the stereotypical Christians.
You'll need to give us a better reason for us to see you in a different light.

Michael, and Aractus, both very intelligent in general and in theology, already have our stamp of approval.
We may not believe what Michael believes, but his reasoning is valid, never fallacious and intelligent.
What does Aractus know? He's a convert! (therefore he was never a true Christian was he! ...)

[Bad Wolf]

Why is it that polaris talks all the time in generalities but can never give specific examples to things?

What scientific facts backs up your beliefs in the bible? Are you a literalist or a cherry-picker?

[Mozart Link]

Just in case anyone is confused as to the point I'm trying to make in my opening post, I am saying that people who think they are special and such apply that perception to life itself and conclude that life itself must also be something special and meant for them. For example, someone who thinks "I am a very helpful and caring special person" might then conclude that this life must then be something special as well and offers a special "higher" reward for who they are as a person (a God and an afterlife). They are not willing to either accept that this is not the case and no longer complain about it, or they still insist on believing that there is a God and an afterlife anyway. I feel that the reason such people believe in such things anyway despite much scientific evidence is because they are just too much of a human being (someone great and special) to, again, possibly stoop so low as to believe or accept otherwise.

[Simon Moon]

This brilliant lecture gives the real, evidence based, reasons why people are still religious.








Will this finally eliminate Mozart's incoherent rants?

Not a chance in hell.

[Mozart Link]

This brilliant lecture gives the real, evidence based, reasons why people are still religious.








Will this finally eliminate Mozart's incoherent rants?

Not a chance in hell.

I think the previous post I just made here was very coherent.

[Polaris]

Polaris, I can appreciate your attempt to challenge us, and by all means. But if anyone is contributing to the "ruin" of "the image of academia," it's your hoc and vulgar personal attacks; true, you're on the receiving end of it a lot (especially from Min) but you're not in any way trying to elevate the discussion. So let's maybe try and do that if your motives are as pure as you claim.

My motives are not pure...my motives are selfish as I stated earlier.

The actions of people make an impact on the perception others have about their academic integrity.

Someone can't be a true Biblical literalist as a Christian since the parables of Jesus were not meant to be taken literal. But take for example, the Flood, I assume it actually happened as numerous civilizations recounted a similar event, but I believe what was seen as the world was just the world that would have been known to those societies....aka the Black Sea deluge.

Down. I hold different views of Christianity than the views people have of Christians on this forum....on the flip side, most of the members on this forum fit the stereotypical definition of an atheist seen in America and England (different than all other atheists I have met, emphasis I have never met an atheist who acts anything like the people on this forum and I wager most of the people I have met have been nonbelievers to some extent or another based upon the conversations I had with them). Even when I go onto Christian forums, the Christians act less stereotypically Christian (per the atheist view of Christian) than people here act stereotypically atheist.