Atheists more likely to believe in superstition?

Previous page 1 2« Previous thread | Next thread »
- Cheetah
- Global Moderator
- offline
Re: Atheists more likely to believe in superstition?
Reply #30 - October 18, 2008, 04:04 PM

Quote
If you don't want stupid questions, choose your words more carefully. Loose talk might mislead atheists and we wouldn't want that, would we?

It wasn't loose talk, it was you playing semantics.

Quote
And, as far as I can see, S..'s explanation completely contradicts you.

Well, then one of us didn't understand his post, because I cannot see anything in there that contradicts my position.

Quote
Survival is a 'useful' goal, the tendency to believe in the supernatural can increase survival chances,

In some circumstances, only. In others it can decrease survival chances. The superstitions that form the basis for FGM for example, which increase maternal and infant mortality.

Also, you have overlooked the misfire part of the useful superstitions about ladders and whatnot. See this part of S's post...

Quote
an attempt to create order out of seeming randomness, which in itself can have some survival value in some circumstances

Its not the superstition itself that contains survival value, the superstition is a by product of our tendency to look for order, cause and effect, identifiable rules, etc.

Quote
you have no way to determine which supernatural beliefs might increase survival chances,

That's unnecessary in this day and age. We have more reasoned bases for safety rules now that we have stopped believing in witch doctors.

Quote
therefore you have no evidence for regarding any as 'weaknesses' or 'misfiring'.

There are actually evidential supports out there in the form of experiments on other species, and observations of our own species from psychology and anthropology. If you were really interested you would google around and find them easily enough.

"Befriend them not, Oh murtads, and give them neither parrot nor bunny." - happymurtad's advice on trolls.
- sparky
- Pub Regular
- offline
Re: Atheists more likely to believe in superstition?
Reply #31 - October 18, 2008, 04:26 PM

Quote from: Cheetah
It wasn't loose talk, it was you playing semantics.

Which one of these fits with your use of the word?

in·tend (n-tnd)
v. in·tend·ed, in·tend·ing, in·tends
v.tr.
1. To have in mind; plan: We intend to go. They intend going. You intended that she go.
2.
a. To design for a specific purpose.
b. To have in mind for a particular use.
3. To signify or mean.
v.intr.
To have a design or purpose in mind.

Quote from: Cheetah
In some circumstances, only. In others it can decrease survival chances. The superstitions that form the basis for FGM for example, which increase maternal and infant mortality.

And which also bind a society together and stop them killing each other so much. Societies with FGM have survived for millenia. I remember lots of rants about male circumcision too but it turns out to have quite a dramatic effect on HIV transmission. Until I see the evidence, I can't see how you can claim one way or the other about the overall effects of supernatural beliefs on survival.

Quote from: Cheetah
Its not the superstition itself that contains survival value, the superstition is a by product of our tendency to look for order, cause and effect, identifiable rules, etc.

No. Even in the case of the ladder, the superstition contains survival value.

Quote from: Cheetah
That's unnecessary in this day and age. We have more reasoned bases for safety rules now that we have stopped believing in witch doctors.

Clearly, a large number of people (including atheists) don't agree with you. And I would be careful with the 'we'.

Quote from: Cheetah
There are actually evidential supports out there in the form of experiments on other species, and observations of our own species from psychology and anthropology. If you were really interested you would google around and find them easily enough.

Other species have supernatural beliefs? I was hoping you would provide the evidence as it was your/Berb's claim, but I'll have a look around.

Cheers,
sparky
- sojournerlumus
- Pub Regular
- Belief beggars reason.
- offline
Re: Atheists more likely to believe in superstition?
Reply #32 - October 18, 2008, 04:49 PM

Erm, excuse me people, before we get our knickers in any more of a twist.
I think, reinterpreting Berb's original comment, she maybe meant that it's a weakness to expect any more than reality. I entirely agree with that since there is no evidence for anything more than reality.

Religion is ignorance giftwrapped in lyricism.
- sparky
- Pub Regular
- offline
Re: Atheists more likely to believe in superstition?
Reply #33 - October 19, 2008, 04:36 AM

Quote from: sojournerlumus on October 18, 2008, 04:49 PM
Erm, excuse me people, before we get our knickers in any more of a twist.
I think, reinterpreting Berb's original comment, she maybe meant that it's a weakness to expect any more than reality. I entirely agree with that since there is no evidence for anything more than reality.

It would indeed be foolish to expect any more than reality. Superstitions or supernatural beliefs don't expect that. They just believe that reality is more than just the 'natural'.

But even if there is no evidence for their beliefs, it does not necessarily follow from an atheist perspective that this is a weakness. For that to be so, you would also need to identify what the standard was against which you are judging it to be a weakness and then provide evidence that that standard was the 'true' one against which human traits could be judged.

So far, given the goal of 'survival' (leaving open the question of whether this is personal survival, gene survival or societal survival) I have not seen any evidence that the (rather widespread) tendency toward belief in the supernatural is a weakness. In fact, I suspect that given the persistence of such beliefs over time and throughout the population, that, as you have identified, they probably do tend to provide quite considerable survival value.

Of course as humans with choice, we are not bound by whatever goals or purposes we might see in nature (possibly suggesting that we, ourselves, are somehow 'supernatural'). As a result, you would also need to provide evidence that 'survival' is the 'true' goal for humans against which superstitious beliefs can be found to result in failure to achieve that goal and therefore a 'weakness'. If, for example, superstitious beliefs tended to provide greater happiness for those who so believed (by providing comfort or the semblence of order to chaos, for example) and 'happiness' was a better goal for humans, then you might have even less argument that this tendency was a weakness.

At the bottom of this, of course, is the philosophical dead-end inherent in atheism in providing any kind of meaningful classification of human behaviour or desires into 'better/worse', 'good/bad' or 'strong/weak'.

The fact that atheists themselves, are so reluctant to accept this as demonstrated in the responses so far, is yet another indication of the 'need' for the supernatural - even among those who claim that it is a weakness!
- sojournerlumus
- Pub Regular
- Belief beggars reason.
- offline
Re: Atheists more likely to believe in superstition?
Reply #34 - October 19, 2008, 05:49 PM

Philosophical dead end? what twaddle! You've fallen, or been unable, to extricate yourself from the religionist black versus white trap.
Atheists don't think in terms of good/bad (better/worse is the same thing) or strong/(versus) weak. Thats black and white thinking. The Universe isn't like that.
Think instead: 'Mmm, that looks interesting, lets take a closer look and seek/hope to understand it's nature'.
That's the way to get nearer to reality (in relation to Human life), not to make black v white presumptions or to set simplistic expectations.
As for your contention that superstition might confer a survival value on a subscribing population, that might very well be the case; but it may just as well do it in a reverse manner by lowering the survival of superstitious individuals, if unfounded, whilst freeing up resources for other, less superstitious, survivors. There are many possible explanations but they will not be made available by calling up notions of strength v weakness, only by objective examination.
So we need to resist the tendency (Berb's weakness) to look for amulets and simple strong solutions as a pre-conditional procedure.

Religion is ignorance giftwrapped in lyricism.
- ingenico10
- Member
- offline
Re: Atheists more likely to believe in superstition?
Reply #35 - October 20, 2008, 12:20 AM

Hi B

Yes, I saw that piece on another forum last week. Bill Maher and the Marx Bros. are the the only American comedians that come close to the 'gods' of comedy, the British. Maybe as an Australian I'm biased, but I wouldn't walk across the street to look at Seinfeld or any of those other sitcom 'stars'

As a long time atheist, about 42 years, I can say that believing in god does not make you irrational any more than being an atheist makes you rational.

I have this belief that all people compartmentalise to a greater or lesser degree. From my own perspective, if you don't believe in god, then it's a little silly to believe in the derivatives or offshoots. But then compared to most of the worlds population I have faulty wiring as I cannot accept the idea of imaginary superfriends of any description.

Take people like Francis Collins, head of the Human Genome Project, you would have to say an absolutely brilliant mind, but he believes that Moshe's staff turned into a snake as per the torah story, so as the American's say, go figure.

So people have no problem making these justifications or adding caveats and justifying them, to themselves.

So that Maher believing that does not surprise me one jot.
- sparky
- Pub Regular
- offline
Re: Atheists more likely to believe in superstition?
Reply #36 - November 10, 2008, 09:55 PM

Quote from: sojournerlumus on October 19, 2008, 05:49 PM
Philosophical dead end? what twaddle! You've fallen, or been unable, to extricate yourself from the religionist black versus white trap.
Atheists don't think in terms of good/bad (better/worse is the same thing) or strong/(versus) weak. Thats black and white thinking. The Universe isn't like that.
Think instead: 'Mmm, that looks interesting, lets take a closer look and seek/hope to understand it's nature'.
That's the way to get nearer to reality (in relation to Human life), not to make black v white presumptions or to set simplistic expectations.
As for your contention that superstition might confer a survival value on a subscribing population, that might very well be the case; but it may just as well do it in a reverse manner by lowering the survival of superstitious individuals, if unfounded, whilst freeing up resources for other, less superstitious, survivors. There are many possible explanations but they will not be made available by calling up notions of strength v weakness, only by objective examination.
So we need to resist the tendency (Berb's weakness) to look for amulets and simple strong solutions as a pre-conditional procedure.

Again, take it up with Berbs. You're contradicting her, not me. If you are happy to say that there is no right/wrong, strong/weak etc. for an atheist, then we don't disagree.

Similarly with the survival question. You're agreeing that there is no basis for making a claim to 'weakness' for superstitious beliefs which was my original question.

And we don't 'need' to do anything because you have no grounds for making any prescriptive claims about behaviour at all.

If amulets are your thing, go for it! May as well take a 'closer look'. A tendancy is just a tendancy.

Cheers,
sparky
- Pazuzu
- any% speedrunner
- Ex-Muslim
- Pazuzu bin Hanbi
- offline
Re: Atheists more likely to believe in superstition?
Reply #37 - November 11, 2008, 12:18 AM

Quote from: sparky on November 10, 2008, 09:55 PM
And we don't 'need' to do anything because you have no grounds for making any prescriptive claims about behaviour at all.

Of course there is. We’re all human and it’s in the best interests of us as members of society to stick to mutually agreed rules, or at least general parameters we can accept.

"At 8:47 I do a grenade jump off a ladder."
- sparky
- Pub Regular
- offline
Re: Atheists more likely to believe in superstition?
Reply #38 - November 11, 2008, 04:02 PM

Quote from: Pazuzu on November 11, 2008, 12:18 AM
Quote from: sparky on November 10, 2008, 09:55 PM
And we don't 'need' to do anything because you have no grounds for making any prescriptive claims about behaviour at all.

Of course there is. We’re all human and it’s in the best interests of us as members of society to stick to mutually agreed rules, or at least general parameters we can accept.

It might be in your 'best interests' but there is no reason that should be generalised. There will always be minority members of society who do not benefit from those rules and do not find them to be in their 'best interests'. If that is the case, then your prescriptive claims do not apply to them at all and, as I said, they don't 'need' to do anything.

I would also assume from your claim that you are quite happy for other societies to adopt a different set of 'mutually agreed' rules - such as the stoning of unmarried girls who associate with men?

Cheers,
sparky
- sojournerlumus
- Pub Regular
- Belief beggars reason.
- offline
Re: Atheists more likely to believe in superstition?
Reply #39 - November 11, 2008, 08:36 PM

Quote from: sparky on November 10, 2008, 09:55 PM
Quote from: sojournerlumus on October 19, 2008, 05:49 PM
Philosophical dead end? what twaddle! You've fallen, or been unable, to extricate yourself from the religionist black versus white trap.
Atheists don't think in terms of good/bad (better/worse is the same thing) or strong/(versus) weak. Thats black and white thinking. The Universe isn't like that.
Think instead: 'Mmm, that looks interesting, lets take a closer look and seek/hope to understand it's nature'.
That's the way to get nearer to reality (in relation to Human life), not to make black v white presumptions or to set simplistic expectations.
As for your contention that superstition might confer a survival value on a subscribing population, that might very well be the case; but it may just as well do it in a reverse manner by lowering the survival of superstitious individuals, if unfounded, whilst freeing up resources for other, less superstitious, survivors. There are many possible explanations but they will not be made available by calling up notions of strength v weakness, only by objective examination.
So we need to resist the tendency (Berb's weakness) to look for amulets and simple strong solutions as a pre-conditional procedure.

Again, take it up with Berbs. You're contradicting her, not me. If you are happy to say that there is no right/wrong, strong/weak etc. for an atheist, then we don't disagree.

Similarly with the survival question. You're agreeing that there is no basis for making a claim to 'weakness' for superstitious beliefs which was my original question.

And we don't 'need' to do anything because you have no grounds for making any prescriptive claims about behaviour at all.

If amulets are your thing, go for it! May as well take a 'closer look'. A tendancy is just a tendancy.

Cheers,
sparky

Thanks Sparky. A sloppy post I'm afraid, and you caught me with my tregs down. I meant to say Berbs "weakness"' or 'the weakness alluded to by Berbs'. I did not, in a squillion years, mean that there was any weakness in what Berbs said.

Religion is ignorance giftwrapped in lyricism.
- sparky
- Pub Regular
- offline
Re: Atheists more likely to believe in superstition?
Reply #40 - November 11, 2008, 11:20 PM

Quote from: sojournerlumus
Thanks Sparky. A sloppy post I'm afraid, and you caught me with my tregs down. I meant to say Berbs "weakness"' or 'the weakness alluded to by Berbs'. I did not, in a squillion years, mean that there was any weakness in what Berbs said.

I understood that. You didn't say that there was weakness in what she had said - but you did contradict her by claiming that 'weakness' doesn't exist. This just means that she was wrong - not weak.
Previous page 1 2« Previous thread | Next thread »