Sunday School

[Reg the Fronkey Farmer]

Happy Holidays everyone or is it OK to say Merry Christmas again? I hope you had a Happy Solstice.

In 2017 the Earth dodged at least 6 apocalypses but don’t relax just yet! If we could only predict the future!

2017 was the year the religious right moved into the White House.

Once again the question of religious people being less intelligent gets asked. You would think not, given that theists have better breathing techniques than us. I wonder if an atheist or a theist will able to figure out what is wrong with this study. Thinking about Santa helps some people and looking at the science behind kids’ belief in Santa will help others. I will ask Siri what she has to say about it.

A book is great as a last minute present.

The Cuddly One wants Catholic women to remain strawberries.

The creep of Scientology in Ireland follows the same pattern as elsewhere.

This weeks’ Woo: Ketogenetic dieting aids.

Climate Change: It could trigger more volcanic eruptions.

It is a shame that intelligent writers do not understand what secularism is and that Science is not at war with religion.

The Philosophers toolkit. Reason and Reality in an era of conspiracy.

Another look at the CDC and that war on words.

Some festive Quantum fun for all the family!

Why we keep looking for Aliens.

Our conflicted feelings for R2-D2.

How Inequality kills. The starvation plan for Yemen.

The great nutrient collapse that nobody is talking about.

Ethical questions raised by brain-computer interfaces.

Top 10 junk science stories and Top 10 retractions of 2017. (More “Top 10’s next week you will be delighted to hear!)

Tying up the loose ends of M-Theory.

Some photographs taken last week. The World seen from Space in 2017.

Ten things we did not know last week.

While you are waiting for the kettle to boil…..

Coffee Break Video: Some quick rebuttals to common Christian claims. Sam Harris goes to church. Genome-editing and what you need to know about CRISPR.

[Reg the Fronkey Farmer]

Have a great week everyone!!

“The one thing women don’t want to find in their stockings on Christmas morning is their husband.” Joan Rivers.

[Strega]

Thanks Reg!  Have a good one, mate 🙂

[Reg the Fronkey Farmer]

Thanks Strega.  I will, you better christmas eve it! You too.

[Strega]

New Year’s Day it be a happy one for you

[Strega]

And for everyone, Heathens Greetings!

[_Robert_]

Thanks Reg and Strega….!!!

Ha, I finally got a twitter acct and boy that atheist republic is an atheist meme machine gun.

[Simon Paynton]

“It is a shame that intelligent writers do not understand what secularism is and that Science is not at war with religion.”

– I didn’t realise that only 3% of US citizens are atheists, I thought it was a lot higher.

If people don’t understand what secularism is, it’s because they haven’t found out or been told, that it means, basically, freedom of religion/freedom to practice no religion, and separation of church and state.

“If we look at those societies where religion remains vibrant, their key common features are less to do with science, and more to do with feelings of existential security and protection from some of the basic uncertainties of life in the form of public goods.”

– he neglects to mention that the reasons are also deeply cultural and historical, and in many places, culture and religion seem to be pretty much one and the same, which isn’t a surprising idea since they both spring from the need to cooperate within large groups.

I don’t think religion is a problem in itself, since when it is successful, it’s one of the very best things in the world.  The problem is “bad religion”, “religion gone wrong”, which happens for a number of reasons we may speculate about.  It seems to be the case that most of the time, the most fiercely staunch religious attitudes tend to fall into this category.  So, probably, extremism and “good religion” just don’t go together, and we can observe the same when it comes to politics.

“Atatürk believed that science was destined to displace religion.”

– that was probably a big mistake, both tactically, and genuinely.  He shouldn’t have tried to do that.  Apparently this is what comes of listening to stupid philosophers who have an “ist” on the end of their – whatever, and do things like this:

“he wanted to diminish the social influence of religion and replace it with a new science of society.”

– good for him.  Bad for everyone else.  Apparently it’s also a result of having too many fancy ideas generally, and everyone accepting them just because it’s the big thing of the time.  It’s just a spectacularly dumb idea in the first place.

It’s true that “bad religion” does tend to be anti-science, and one reason for that is its inevitable competitive, us-versus-them outlook.  So, it’s understandable that people would think that science needs to win out under these circumstances.

[Simon Paynton]

I think the lesson is that if people set out to change society in a certain major way – they had better think more carefully than these historical figures did.  Most of the time, the plans are just going to go completely wrong.

[.]

Thank you Reg!!!! Merry Christmas happy happy joy joy!!! and hugs!!!

[Simon Paynton]

“I wonder if an atheist or a theist will able to figure out what is wrong with this study.”

– I couldn’t get to see the original study.  But the article is pretty weird.

“Now, a study has linked a lack of belief in god to an increase in genetic mutations in the general population.  The study found that religious people tend to live healthier, longer lives than atheists. … The authors of the study say that as societies have progressed, the number of atheists has grown. … slowly as societies drifted, we became less religious, and with the rise of atheism came increased levels of mutations among humans, the researchers say.”

– I can see a number of questions about this central point: it’s saying that: 1) the human population has become less religious; 2) at the same time, the number of genetic mutations has increased; 3) religious people tend to be more healthy than non-religious.

They are assuming that genetic mutations lead to ill health.  However, in the article, this is not addressed directly.  Instead, it makes the plausible hypothesis that improved health care would allow weaklings to survive better.  That’s a very crappy argument.

“religious people tend to be more healthy than non-religious.”

– this is a separate issue, and the statement may well be true.  That’s why religion can be an excellent thing.

“If religion is an evolved theory,”

– this is silly and I don’t know what it is.

[Simon Paynton]

If it is true that overall, religious people are less intelligent than atheists, maybe it is a question of how people approach getting information about the world.  Intelligent people have enquiring minds, and if someone just sucks down a load of fairy tales without question, because they somehow need to – it’s likely that they aren’t so brainy.  We see similar behaviour among plenty of educated people, so I would guess that it’s just more common among the religious.

[Simon Paynton]

If you ask me, each philosopher would have their own “toolkit”, the same as every computer programmer or mathematician.

I would say, stick to the facts, identify all assumptions, identify all inconsistencies and weakness in knowledge, understand physical logic.  This could be seen as a “toolkit” for understanding the real world.  In other words, it’s pretty much the same as science.

[Simon Paynton]

“understand physical logic.”

– and the basics of “logic” logic – whether a conclusion follows from premises; whether a starting premise leads to contradictions.

[Reg the Fronkey Farmer]

RE the story on atheism and genetic mutation.  We are all born atheists. People are then indoctrinated into the religion of their culture or geographic location. Some shed their religious beliefs as they mature and return to their natural state of atheism. Some might change religion and become a Muslim for a few years and then finally become atheist again. Do they constantly undergo genetic mutations each time? If it was genetic then the author must acknowledge that we are being “unnatural” by becoming religious. Religion is “nurture not nature”.

The author seems to think mutations are a bad thing. All are genes are mutations. He seems to use the words as if talking about ninja turtles.

If anything we (humanity) are becoming more intelligent and therefore we tend to not engage in “magical thinking” which probably has a genetic underpinning. Religious resides in the arena of magical thinking. If we are becoming less religious it is due to less habitual magical thinking and more skillful critical thinking brought about by a secular education.

While not everyone may understand what Secularism is or what it implies for a society but a supposed academic like the author should. Again, like most of his ilk he is suffering from the cognitive dissonance caused by religious belief. I say this because he has just published a book on the subject of Secularism and yet he does not know what it is. He has also quoted some popular atheist writers out of context which is a common trait I see with religious apologists.

I link these stories whenever I can so we can improve our debating skills by being able to critique such articles.

The Atheist Ireland description of Secularism has 2 basic principles. The first is a strict and complete separation of the State from all religious institutions. The second is that people of different religions and beliefs are equal before the law.

After that, the State should only intervene as an independent referee to ensure all citizens have freedom of religion and freedom from religion if that is the case. We do not want to live in an atheist state and more than we would want to live in an Evangelical Christian State. We just want an impartial Sate that allows us the freedom to live without religious interference.

I find it strange that the majority religion in any country see their religious freedom as a religious privilege and has no problem discriminating against those not of that faith. I get annoyed when I hear people complain that atheists are just being silly if they protest when the State promotes (say) a Christmas nativity scene in the public arena. It is not just the Christian privilege we are peeved at, it is the abuse of power by the State in doing so, which is often illegal but overlooked because “it is only a Christmas scene”.

Anyway, this is how secularism can work.

[Author]

Posts