Believers Worry Less Than Non-Believers

So I take it you are an atheist ?

While I am not religious, as in church everday – I dont agree to the exisiting tendency that the universe – in all its complexity and order + our brain, minds and the cheer complexity of oof our body – just happened.

What it does to you is to awe you with a sense of superiority – from where your own complexity derives.

You cant participate if you dont try.

Most atheists don't claim to have “proof” of anything. All we're saying is that religionists don't have any either, and that we should just enjoy the lives we have, as they are precious enough even though (and perhaps because) they are so fragile and short-lived.

Alex, I was careful to use the word “most” when talking for atheists, which I know is shaky ground to be on. But I would say it is accurate that “most” don't claim to have any knowledge of what happened before the big bang, which is a position of agnosticism, and, ultimately, humility.

That was my point. I am aware that there are a ton of “strong atheists” out there who make forceful negative claims, but they are a small minority.

On your second point I think you're missing something when you use the word “equate”. I'm not “equating” a quiet, kind, moderate Christian person living in Oregon to a fundamentalist. What Sam Harris (he's the main guy making this argument) is saying is that once you allow fantasy into your life, and teach your children to respect it, you place a protective bubble around other more fundamentalist (and dangerous) belief systems that CAN cause us great harm.

In other words, it's a dangerous “foot in the door” for irrationality, which ultimately allows very strong, and vastly differing, belief systems to thrive in an otherwise logical society.

You are highly oversimplifying if you think I believe that the moderate and the Al Quaeda guy are the same because they both believe something “not true”. That's just not the case; it's a matter of the teaching of religion itself–especially in a liberal way–necessarily requiring the following accompanying lesson to children:

“People believe lots of different things about God, and you have to respect those things even if you don't believe them yourself. There are no “wrong” religions; it's up to you to decide for yourself, and you must respect the religions of others.”

BOOM. There you have it. In a world full of religious fundamentalists, THAT IS DOWNRIGHT DANGEROUS to teach children, and it's the foundation for “moderate religion”. This is Sam's Harris' main point on this issue, which I agree with.

On the third point, again, I have in fact known personally and read about MANY people who are religious and also have deep empathy for the suffering of the world. No doubt. Agreed. But that doesn't make my point any less true: those who think, quite literally, that everything will be ok in the end because God will make it all better in heaven, tend to be resistant to excessive worry about the world.

I have witnessed in far more cases that when I start fretting about this or that, my religious friends will say, “It's all part of God's plan”, or “It all rights itself in the end.” I'd argue that this is most people's approach to deep, worldly stress when they're strongly religious, and the data bear that out.

So, just as with your previous point–I'm not a stupid guy, Alex. I am not claiming, as you seem to want me to, that ALL of anything is a certain way. Just because there are many people who don't follow a given, observable trend doesn't mean that the trend doesn't exist.

“Most black people voted for Obama.”
“Most white Christians in the South voted for McCain”
“The white people in the South who voted for Obama were far less religious than average”

These are generalities. They are unsafe statements when seen through the eyes of someone willing to throw a hundred exceptions at them. But they're also true.

Surely you see that both the general statement and the exceptions can be true?

Also, I wanted to say thanks for the comment. I love discussing things with smart people. Even if we end up agreeing it helps me avoid misrepresenting myself through overstatement or imprecise wording.

And if you would be so kind as to register over at DISQUS that'd be awesome. It makes me happy to see avatars for people I know. Thanks!

Daniel,

That's why I feel more comfortable speaking my mind here (I hate discussing religion and politics with strangers).

I think you missed my point in a disappointingly predictable manner. I wasn't going into social benefit claims (Sam Harris) of religion or atheism, rather I was concentrating on a discussion of the concept(s) of heaven and weather the premise offered could be true across the board with the religious. Of course, in retrospect, I was assuming that you equating the concept of “there is a good place for me to be in eternally so I don't have to worry so much about the immediate” with a lack of stress. Maybe you were just hypothesizing the corollary (Atheists are more stressed because they are more grounded in reality).

Finally, of course I wouldn't think you stupid, nor assumed you were really saying “all”. But as someone with a very Bayesian world view, I just hate it when smart people talk in absolutes, especially those I consider to be friends :)

As a religious person I can say this applies to me. Even when life has felt pretty unbearable, knowing I have God to see me through has often been reason enough to just say, “You know, I'll work through this.” I always have worked through this, and through prayer with God I often find better solutions to my problems than the one's I come up with by myself.
The positive results I have had by listening to the Lord's commandments is proof enough for me of God's existence and tangible meaning it has for my life.

Subject: Your printer – a spoilt brat ! lol


http://www.geeksaresexy.net/2009/03/14/your-pri…

Sincerely,


'Dapo Osewa
—————————-

Subject: Your printer – a spoilt brat ! lol


http://www.geeksaresexy.net/2009/03/14/your-pri…