Author Topic: Religions have succeeded  (Read 65261 times)

Walt Zingmatilder

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 33059
Re: Religions have succeeded
« Reply #950 on: January 28, 2023, 11:27:43 AM »
Blimey - now Sriram is being atheist is the equivalent of having a disability - FFS.
I don't think that the experiences of believers and atheists are fundamentally different - the difference comes from how believers and atheists interpret those experiences, which will be fundamentally different with believers attributing those experiences to god. And you are correct that the different interpretation is driven by upbringing, culture and society as religion/belief in god seems very clearly to be societally-driven learned behaviour.
It seems to me Davey that to be an atheist of your brand you need to pretend you are in and commenting on the UK as if it is the USA.
This is not and hasn't been for decades a christian society.
Religious people are not closer to Bonobos than academic atheists and it is more appropriate to use anthropology and sociological methods on them rather than some Dawkinsian animal ethology the use of which caricatures religious people as sheep or imprinted ducklings in some humourous academic wankfest.

ProfessorDavey

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17435
Re: Religions have succeeded
« Reply #951 on: January 28, 2023, 11:47:53 AM »
I think splitting interpretation of experiences into theists/atheists is incredibly simplistic.
In what way NS? Please explain yourself.

ProfessorDavey

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17435
Re: Religions have succeeded
« Reply #952 on: January 28, 2023, 11:51:01 AM »
religion as learned behaviour? How does that work then since it seems the easiest thing to stop behaving as religious.
Absolutely - research suggests that unless you are brought up to believe in the tenets of a particular religion then your likelihood of becoming an adherent of that religion is pretty well zero. That suggests what we are looking at is learned behaviour. Clearly it isn't very effective as plenty of people brought up to believe a particular religion reject that belief. But that doesn't mean it is not learned behaviour as the key point is that no-one simply comes to a particular belief unless they have been taught it, and usually they need to be taught it as a child for it to be believable.

Nearly Sane

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 63438
Re: Religions have succeeded
« Reply #953 on: January 28, 2023, 12:00:06 PM »
In what way NS? Please explain yourself.
It splits it into how atheists interpret experience abd how theists do as if they are both homogenous blocks. I've met many atheists who have very different from myself and each others interpretation of events, and theists whi have a similar interpretation of events to me and hugely different from other theists who also have multiple interpretations of events.

The Accountant, OBE, KC

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8952
Re: Religions have succeeded
« Reply #954 on: January 28, 2023, 12:08:24 PM »
Absolutely - research suggests that unless you are brought up to believe in the tenets of a particular religion then your likelihood of becoming an adherent of that religion is pretty well zero. That suggests what we are looking at is learned behaviour. Clearly it isn't very effective as plenty of people brought up to believe a particular religion reject that belief. But that doesn't mean it is not learned behaviour as the key point is that no-one simply comes to a particular belief unless they have been taught it, and usually they need to be taught it as a child for it to be believable.
What does a likelihood of 'pretty well zero' mean in actual numbers? Please can you link to the research.

I'm interested in this idea of learning belief. I thought you can't choose your beliefs so what do you mean by learning a belief?
I identify as a Sword because I have abstract social constructs e.g. honour and patriotism. My preferred pronouns are "kill/ maim/ dismember"

Quite handy with weapons - available for hire to defeat money laundering crooks around the world.

“Forget safety. Live where you fear to live.” Rumi

Walt Zingmatilder

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 33059
Re: Religions have succeeded
« Reply #955 on: January 28, 2023, 12:10:47 PM »
Absolutely - research suggests that unless you are brought up to believe in the tenets of a particular religion then your likelihood of becoming an adherent of that religion is pretty well zero. That suggests what we are looking at is learned behaviour. Clearly it isn't very effective as plenty of people brought up to believe a particular religion reject that belief. But that doesn't mean it is not learned behaviour as the key point is that no-one simply comes to a particular belief unless they have been taught it, and usually they need to be taught it as a child for it to be believable.
The trouble with this though is it does not explain how many world religions started from one person in the case of Buddhism, Christianity and Islam, presumably Abraham too through a handful of people and on to world religion status.
One might also track the spread of atheism as similar since New Atheism was identified by David Wilson as a stealth religion although it seems to have panned recently.

Aruntraveller

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10898
Re: Religions have succeeded
« Reply #956 on: January 28, 2023, 12:13:00 PM »
It is very clear that atheists lack a certain ability for subconsciously discerning patterns in their environment. It is like born blind people denying the existence of light.

Believers are able to discern these patterns and are able to even discern the presence of higher levels of consciousness within themselves. How they interpret or imagine these experiences is related to their culture and religious background.

I note it doesn't stop some believers from being patronising and cleaving to their own prejudices. 
Before we work on Artificial Intelligence shouldn't we address the problem of natural stupidity.

Walt Zingmatilder

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 33059
Re: Religions have succeeded
« Reply #957 on: January 28, 2023, 12:16:03 PM »
What does a likelihood of 'pretty well zero' mean in actual numbers? Please can you link to the research.

I'm interested in this idea of learning belief. I thought you can't choose your beliefs so what do you mean by learning a belief?
I think Davey is muddling the kind of programmable behaviour as described by animal ethology with some more sophisticated psychology to get the best of both worlds with something that is programmable in what he regards as the weak or lower minded but expendable in the more developed mind of the atheist.

ProfessorDavey

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17435
Re: Religions have succeeded
« Reply #958 on: January 28, 2023, 12:24:01 PM »
It splits it into how atheists interpret experience abd how theists do as if they are both homogenous blocks. I've met many atheists who have very different from myself and each others interpretation of events, and theists whi have a similar interpretation of events to me and hugely different from other theists who also have multiple interpretations of events.
OK - I understand and I never intended to imply that theists are a homogeneous block, nor that atheists are a homogeneous block. This would be nonsense.

And that's why I think I described this as a 'fundamental' difference, rather than the only difference etc. What I mean is that if you are a theist your interpretation of an experience allows for the possibility that you are experiencing god, in the presence of god, experiencing the actions of god etc. If you are atheist your interpretation of what may be the very same experience does not allow for the possibility that you are experiencing god, in the presence of god, experiencing the actions of god etc. That is the fundamental difference. That does not mean that atheists will all interpret things the same, nor that theists will always interpret an experience as relating to god. But a theist will allow for that possibility while an atheist will not allow for that possibility.

Hope that is clearer now.

Nearly Sane

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 63438
Re: Religions have succeeded
« Reply #959 on: January 28, 2023, 12:30:39 PM »
OK - I understand and I never intended to imply that theists are a homogeneous block, nor that atheists are a homogeneous block. This would be nonsense.

And that's why I think I described this as a 'fundamental' difference, rather than the only difference etc. What I mean is that if you are a theist your interpretation of an experience allows for the possibility that you are experiencing god, in the presence of god, experiencing the actions of god etc. If you are atheist your interpretation of what may be the very same experience does not allow for the possibility that you are experiencing god, in the presence of god, experiencing the actions of god etc. That is the fundamental difference. That does not mean that atheists will all interpret things the same, nor that theists will always interpret an experience as relating to god. But a theist will allow for that possibility while an atheist will not allow for that possibility.

Hope that is clearer now.
Partly but it doesn't seem to allow for any change so your position doesb't allow for an atheist to become a theist or vice versa. In addition, I know many theists who don't believe that they can experience god in that sense. I think your distinction is still flawed and tells us virtually nothing about people.

Nearly Sane

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 63438
Re: Religions have succeeded
« Reply #960 on: January 28, 2023, 12:32:15 PM »
I think Davey is muddling the kind of programmable behaviour as described by animal ethology with some more sophisticated psychology to get the best of both worlds with something that is programmable in what he regards as the weak or lower minded but expendable in the more developed mind of the atheist.
The only person who seems to have covered people being 'weak or lower minded' here is Sriram. I take it you disagree with him?

ProfessorDavey

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17435
Re: Religions have succeeded
« Reply #961 on: January 28, 2023, 12:34:19 PM »
What does a likelihood of 'pretty well zero' mean in actual numbers? Please can you link to the research.
I've posted this research many times - the key figure involved is David Voas, who is pretty well the most eminent academic researcher on religiosity in the UK. His research (and plenty of others) suggests that just 3% of children brought up in non religious households (note that is the household it doesn't take account of wider society, schooling etc) become religious as adults.

For completeness - for children brought up in a religious household where both parents are religious, 50% become religious as adults and 50% don't. And virtually all who retain a religiosity do so within the religion of their upbringing.

Where there is a 'mixed' household with one religious parent and one non religious parent the proportion that are religious as adults falls to 25% with three quarters being non religious as adults.

So VG, I think you represent a pretty rare demographic - in being someone brought up in one religion, but ending up an adherent of a different religion as an adult.

But the broad point remains - if a child isn't brought up in a religious household the likelihood of them becoming religious as an adult is pretty tiny - just 3%.

The other key finding is that, contrary to popular myth, people do not get more religious as they get older. In fact there is virtually no change in overall population-level religiosity as people get older, with overall religiosity pretty well set at early adulthood.

And this understanding of the almost perfect generational transmission of non-religiosity, and the 50:50 (at best) likelihood of transmission of religiosity is the reason why the numbers of religious people in the UK is falling and (barring the effects of immigration) will continue to fall for decades to come.

Sriram

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8243
    • Spirituality & Science
Re: Religions have succeeded
« Reply #962 on: January 28, 2023, 12:44:54 PM »
Not sure what you mean. We have instruments to detect and record what we call 'light' and can convert energy from light into electric currents to power something and can make predictions of how light will interact with other substances that can then be tested and verified, so you have objective evidence and don't have to take it on faith, even if you're blind. I assume the blind man is not deaf and can listen to an explanation of what light is made up of and what is recorded by instruments etc

Do you have an instrument to record the patterns sensed by your sub-conscious?

This is obvious VG...  Why would a stubborn born blind man accept the existence of light entirely on someones explanations? How can any  sound or vibration of any instrument (activated by light) convince him that light exists?  He has to accept all this on faith.  There is no way he can experience light by himself directly.

Walt Zingmatilder

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 33059
Re: Religions have succeeded
« Reply #963 on: January 28, 2023, 12:45:30 PM »
The only person who seems to have covered people being 'weak or lower minded' here is Sriram. I take it you disagree with him?
On the basis of changeability I would say yes I tend to disagree with them that and I believe God evasion is possible so we have people some of whom might know full well that God is there

However with some New atheists I detect a superior piss taking tone and of course the dead hand of Dawkins' ethological background.

Walt Zingmatilder

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 33059
Re: Religions have succeeded
« Reply #964 on: January 28, 2023, 12:47:29 PM »
This is obvious VG...  Why would a stubborn born blind man accept the existence of light entirely on someones explanations? How can any  sound or vibration of any instrument (activated by light) convince him that light exists?  He has to accept all this on faith.  There is no way he can experience light by himself directly.
What a blind man needs is someone to heal them of their blindness.

torridon

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10201
Re: Religions have succeeded
« Reply #965 on: January 28, 2023, 12:56:34 PM »
It is very clear that atheists lack a certain ability for subconsciously discerning patterns in their environment. It is like born blind people denying the existence of light.

Believers are able to discern these patterns and are able to even discern the presence of higher levels of consciousness within themselves. How they interpret or imagine these experiences is related to their culture and religious background.

All minds discern patterns subconsciously, this is not a special talent that theists alone have.  Almost all mind function is subconscious, remember ?

Nearly Sane

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 63438
Re: Religions have succeeded
« Reply #966 on: January 28, 2023, 12:58:00 PM »
What a blind man needs is someone to heal them of their blindness.
So having said that you disagree with Sriram about being 'weak or lower minded', you are now agreeing and portraying atheists as 'disabled'.

Walt Zingmatilder

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 33059
Re: Religions have succeeded
« Reply #967 on: January 28, 2023, 12:59:31 PM »
I've posted this research many times - the key figure involved is David Voas, who is pretty well the most eminent academic researcher on religiosity in the UK. His research (and plenty of others) suggests that just 3% of children brought up in non religious households (note that is the household it doesn't take account of wider society, schooling etc) become religious as adults.

For completeness - for children brought up in a religious household where both parents are religious, 50% become religious as adults and 50% don't. And virtually all who retain a religiosity do so within the religion of their upbringing.

Where there is a 'mixed' household with one religious parent and one non religious parent the proportion that are religious as adults falls to 25% with three quarters being non religious as adults.

So VG, I think you represent a pretty rare demographic - in being someone brought up in one religion, but ending up an adherent of a different religion as an adult.

But the broad point remains - if a child isn't brought up in a religious household the likelihood of them becoming religious as an adult is pretty tiny - just 3%.

The other key finding is that, contrary to popular myth, people do not get more religious as they get older. In fact there is virtually no change in overall population-level religiosity as people get older, with overall religiosity pretty well set at early adulthood.

And this understanding of the almost perfect generational transmission of non-religiosity, and the 50:50 (at best) likelihood of transmission of religiosity is the reason why the numbers of religious people in the UK is falling and (barring the effects of immigration) will continue to fall for decades to come.
''Pretty well zero'' is pretty well an unscientific declaration.
The research seems to contradict your assumption that Britain is societally Christian. and of course still doesn't explain religions which start from a handful of adherents to world religion status.

Walt Zingmatilder

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 33059
Re: Religions have succeeded
« Reply #968 on: January 28, 2023, 01:01:07 PM »
So having said that you disagree with Sriram about being 'weak or lower minded', you are now agreeing and portraying atheists as 'disabled'.
I'm saying we are or were all blind and need a healer.

Sriram

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8243
    • Spirituality & Science
Re: Religions have succeeded
« Reply #969 on: January 28, 2023, 01:02:59 PM »
Absolutely - research suggests that unless you are brought up to believe in the tenets of a particular religion then your likelihood of becoming an adherent of that religion is pretty well zero. That suggests what we are looking at is learned behaviour. Clearly it isn't very effective as plenty of people brought up to believe a particular religion reject that belief. But that doesn't mean it is not learned behaviour as the key point is that no-one simply comes to a particular belief unless they have been taught it, and usually they need to be taught it as a child for it to be believable.


Check Post 890. It is science. Ok....for you I will copy it here again.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2020/09/200909085942.htm

Excerpts..

***********

Individuals who can unconsciously predict complex patterns, an ability called implicit pattern learning, are likely to hold stronger beliefs that there is a god who creates patterns of events in the universe, according to neuroscientists at Georgetown University.

Our hypothesis is that people whose brains are good at subconsciously discerning patterns in their environment may ascribe those patterns to the hand of a higher power," he adds.

"A really interesting observation was what happened between childhood and adulthood," explains Green. The data suggest that if children are unconsciously picking up on patterns in the environment, their belief is more likely to increase as they grow up, even if they are in a nonreligious household. Likewise, if they are not unconsciously picking up on patterns around them, their belief is more likely to decrease as they grow up, even in a religious household.

"Afghans and Americans may be more alike than different, at least in certain cognitive processes involved in religious belief and making meaning of the world around us. Irrespective of one's faith, the findings suggest exciting insights into the nature of belief."

"A brain that is more predisposed to implicit pattern learning may be more inclined to believe in a god no matter where in the world that brain happens to find itself, or in which religious context," Green adds, though he cautions that further research is necessary.

"Optimistically," Green concludes, "this evidence might provide some neuro-cognitive common ground at a basic human level between believers of disparate faiths."

***********

It clearly states that children who have a subconscious awareness of hidden patterns grow up to believe in a God or superior being....regardless of their nonreligious upbringing. Similarly,  if they are not unconsciously picking up on patterns around them, their belief is more likely to decrease as they grow up, even in a religious household.

There are also thousands of instances of people who grow up under one religion but who later choose to shift to another religion. Many people choose religions that are very different from the earlier ones...such as Christians becoming Hindus or Buddhists.

Your point about children being taught religious beliefs, is therefore clearly wrong.

Nearly Sane

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 63438
Re: Religions have succeeded
« Reply #970 on: January 28, 2023, 01:03:35 PM »
I'm saying we are or were all blind and need a healer.
And that you have been healed so are portraying argeists as 'disabled'.

Walt Zingmatilder

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 33059
Re: Religions have succeeded
« Reply #971 on: January 28, 2023, 01:10:48 PM »
And that you have been healed so are portraying argeists as 'disabled'.
That is christ's offer to me and it is christ's offer to you.

Aruntraveller

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10898
Re: Religions have succeeded
« Reply #972 on: January 28, 2023, 01:14:43 PM »
What a blind man needs is someone to heal them of their blindness.

I suspect superior piss taking on your part, because I know you know God doesn't exist.
Before we work on Artificial Intelligence shouldn't we address the problem of natural stupidity.

Walt Zingmatilder

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 33059
Re: Religions have succeeded
« Reply #973 on: January 28, 2023, 01:16:53 PM »
I suspect superior piss taking on your part, because I know you know God doesn't exist.
You have me at a disadvantage sir, who are you?

Nearly Sane

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 63438
Re: Religions have succeeded
« Reply #974 on: January 28, 2023, 01:17:18 PM »
That is christ's offer to me and it is christ's offer to you.
But I'm 'blind', according to you so my inability to see ot cannot be 'dodging', and you still end up thinking that athiests are 'disabled'.