The number of posts in here dunking on believers of religion are quite disrespectful tbh. It's completely acceptable to believe or not believe in God, but don't be an ass and ridicule people for it. It makes the whole lot of you seem childish.
Believers are the majority, they don't need to find a way to be oppressed because people ridicule and question their faith and beliefs.The number of posts in here dunking on believers of religion are quite disrespectful tbh. It's completely acceptable to believe or not believe in God, but don't be an ass and ridicule people for it. It makes the whole lot of you seem childish.
That's certainly a take. I never claimed that non-believers were exactly the same as believers. As far as your example is concerned, the two really aren't that different. You don't know that leprechauns don't exist. You think they don't exist. You've never seen one, or any proof for any to have ever existed, but the lack of proof isn't proof that they do not exist, which is still no different than claiming they do exist without any proof. You can say leprechauns do not exist all you like, and so what?
Does that make it a falsifiable hypothesis?
The number of posts in here dunking on believers of religion are quite disrespectful tbh. It's completely acceptable to believe or not believe in God, but don't be an ass and ridicule people for it. It makes the whole lot of you seem childish.
The number of posts in here dunking on believers of religion are quite disrespectful tbh. It's completely acceptable to believe or not believe in God, but don't be an ass and ridicule people for it. It makes the whole lot of you seem childish.
It's use as a mass control mechanism for manipulating people to conform to the selfish will of the powerful through the vehicle of a immaterial proxy is just a bit worrying. The obfuscating of material reality and fact does not help establish among the masses what the truly important existential issues humanity faces are and how to prioritize our collective effort to deal with them. Past figures who contributed much to science, math, engineering, philosophy, etc., I would argue, did it in spite of their religiosity rather then due to it. When the populace's default state is a high level of religiosity, of course scientists of the era will have been religious. Religion (and ideological/religious thinking in general) can take many other insidious forms, as well, including cult of personality, worshipping of material wealth and power/influence, etc., as you've already mentioned.
So do other things, such as philosophy, religion is not the only ideas for mass control. See cult of personality, or social medias fear of missing out. Conforming to something also comes from community and the desire to belong to tribes, thus see sports fans or look at the idea of the people who fight over being a fan of certain companies, only drink certain brands, etc. I would say, even if you remove religion, humans will just break off into tribes based on the people who become the most influential.
Most did science because of religion though. A number of them connected to the idea of trying to understand the will of what they believed in. I'd also point out that the likes of Newton were in their own religion and going for alchemy wasn't the study of science, but that of magics, which is a religion in and of itself.
And that's the thing, people will always want to connect to something higher. So they latch onto everything that they can, and in a lot of cases that manifest in materialization.
In principle, most of us can understand the flaws in the logic behind magical thinking. Even if we don't reject it, we can feel ourselves making the logical leaps, or at least the nagging intuition that we are not being totally consistent. If that is the case, then why do so many people fall into the trap of magical thinking?
Homeopathy, astrology, the law of attraction, fortune telling, and talking to the dead are all inherently attractive to the human mind and they each take advantage of some aspect of our how our brains work. In general, they offer comfort in exchange for unjustifiable belief, and many people are happy to take the deal.
Over time, the gradual release of one's rational faculties regarding specific practices or beliefs leads inevitably to a devaluation of relevant counter evidence and counter arguments. In this way, magical thinking sculpts parts of the brain into unquestioning, believing machines. This is to say that, just like any other belief humans have, people employ and then fortify certain cognitive biases to defend beliefs associated with magical thinking.
this thread feels like reddit circa 2011 🙄The number of posts in here dunking on believers of religion are quite disrespectful tbh. It's completely acceptable to believe or not believe in God, but don't be an ass and ridicule people for it. It makes the whole lot of you seem childish.
72% of Democrats believe in God.Seeing that religious people seem to skew quite heavily towards being Republican, I feel a bit less inclined to totally give them a free pass when that belief in a magic wish-granting being in the sky is so often used as a weapon to attack LGBT people or other minorities.
Like I said, the question was:
"Do you believe in God?"
That's it. What that question means was entirely left up to the respondent.
I mean, probably. But then again some people who don't believe in God probably said yes just because they, for whatever reason, didn't want to give voice to their actual beliefs.Well my question is that some people might have answered no because they might have understood this to be a specific god.
I think it's telling that only half the people who say they believe in God thinks it takes actions that impact our daily lives.Kinda surprised it's so high. I guess a combination of cultural inertia (people being raised Christian with or without any actual religious activity) and people having their own idiosyncratic spiritual beliefs ("there's gotta be something out there") may make up fairly large chunks of the god-believing population. Maybe I'm wrong and most people are actually still capital-R Religious. I think at least a majority of Americans probably are, judging from how there's never been an (admitted) atheist president.
Sorry, but no.I get that this thread, like all threads on religion here, is mostly just for people to dunk on faith and feel like they're smarter than other people. But this is like the third time in recent months I've seen this thrown around like a gotcha here but like this is accounted for and addressed in their religious texts, there are entire books about it in the bible. It's a bad argument that really wouldn't play like you this it would if actually used against the people you're imagining using it against. Just FYI.
To be fair, the CoE is only because Henry VIII wanted his marriage annulled so he could remarry and have a male heir, and stuck two fingers up at the pope over it. Whereas US religiosity is perhaps more down to it being founded by a highly religious group leaving the UK. So we ended up with the CoE being both pretty mild as Christian churches go, while also still having Bishops in the Lords as a relic of an ancient setup. While the US ended up having a lot of religious influence but also the sense to keep it out of the constitution.That is insanely high.
Depending on the country, those numbers are about double what they wrote be in Europe.
I wonder why Christianity the US had persisted much more. In the UK we don't have a separation of church and state, and religious schools are widespread, and funded by the state (free).
From what I'm seeing (and it could be wrong), it's 54% of people in Denmark have complete, moderate, or a little belief in the certainty of God, and 46% that have none.Pretty sure the numbers here in Denmark are a complete reversal of that. Around 20% that believe in God.
if god (as Christians conceive of him) exists I want somebody to explain the state of the world right now
lol I'm sorry what?
Faith in a god is so often weaponized and religion has caused so much death and suffering that to suggest that it's beyond reproach is ludicrous. Believe or not, that's your choice, but I'm not going to police my tone because those with seemingly unbreakable faith feel challenged by my lack of it. You have the majority and God on your side, why worry about us in our dark corners slagging off the big man upstairs?The number of posts in here dunking on believers of religion are quite disrespectful tbh. It's completely acceptable to believe or not believe in God, but don't be an ass and ridicule people for it. It makes the whole lot of you seem childish.
It's simple though, if God is all powerful, he can't be all good because he'd have the power to stop pain and suffering and he doesn't. If God is all knowing, he can't be all powerful and/or all good because he would stop disasters before they occur. If God is all good, he's not all powerful or knowing because he doesn't stop disasters from happening.I get that this thread, like all threads on religion here, is mostly just for people to dunk on faith and feel like they're smarter than other people. But this is like the third time in recent months I've seen this thrown around like a gotcha here but like this is accounted for and addressed in their religious texts, there are entire books about it in the bible. It's a bad argument that really wouldn't play like you this it would if actually used against the people you're imagining using it against. Just FYI.
From what I'm seeing (and it could be wrong), it's 54% of people in Denmark have complete, moderate, or a little belief in the certainty of God, and 46% that have none.
I think these numbers are going to be a bit higher than most people expect for most countries.
There's a difference between saying you're not religious and actively denying god's existence. People are weary to make that last leap.From what I'm seeing (and it could be wrong), it's 54% of people in Denmark have complete, moderate, or a little belief in the certainty of God, and 46% that have none.
I think these numbers are going to be a bit higher than most people expect for most countries.
A ton of the people who answered "yes" are not practicing or really religious in any way.I'll never understand these stats, I think I've known all of 5 people in my entire life who are religious and not all that many more that really believe in anything. It never makes any sense to me, it shouldn't be possible to live in that much of a bubble
I agree, that's true everywhere.There's a difference between saying you're not religious and actively denying god's existence. People are weary to make that last leap.
A ton of the people who answered "yes" are not practicing or really religious in any way.
A lot of people I know would put themselves down as believing in God despite saying they don't really when discussing it.I'll never understand these stats, I think I've known all of 5 people in my entire life who are religious and not all that many more that really believe in anything. It never makes any sense to me, it shouldn't be possible to live in that much of a bubble
Super disingenuous post. Atheism isn't a religion in any sense that people use the word. Atheists come in all stripes and have no dogma and no holy text or anything. Atheists are the most hated group in the US and there are nearly zero elected officials that are publicly atheists. Meanwhile every single president has kowtowed to Christianity as an unspoken rule.I'm not going to be able to come up with any new argument for why suffering exists that hasn't already been well established. That wasn't really what I was trying to say anyway. My point was that acting like there's no way for religious people to respond to this question isn't accurate at all because this is something they've had addressed since literally the beginning of the religion. Convincing YOU that their answers are correct isn't what I'm trying to do.
I'm just pointing out that your initial question of "if God exists explain the state of the world" isn't really a convincing argument for why people who believe in God shouldn't, because they have answers to this that satisfy them. They're all the answers you've seen already. "God created humans with free will and didn't want to directly intervene, instead hoping we'd make the right choices ourselves", "evil was then allowed to fester on Earth because humans sinned", "it's a test of faith", "mysterious ways", etc. They may not be satisfying answers to YOU but they are in fact explanations for the state of the world that are satisfying to THEM.
Also, if your reaction to someone saying the exact same thing you said to them is "you are wrong to say that", I feel like you don't understand this cycle of debate humanity has been stuck in for like all of it's history. "Atheists vs Theists" is just a new flavor of "my religion vs your religion".
Wait until you realize science is just humans attempting to understand Gods creation.
Umm, no?So a 10% reduction from 1944 to 2022. At this rate, it might even drop to below 50% in the next century or two.