The criticism and myths on why we departed from religion and lost our belief in god are too damaging if no one will attempt to correct the myths popularized by the religious bigots. These type of people do really believe and are willing to spread the lies about atheists, such us, Satan worshipers, criminals, close-minded people, and all negative attributions they can imagine that can be thrown to us since according to them atheists don’t have god therefore they are bad or immoral.

That is why we have to correct the misconceptions about us popularized by them for so long a time. Some of these myths have already been answered by some of us. Take for example the “20 Questions Atheists Struggle to Answer” and 16 the Common Myths about Atheists.

Anyway, the following are the most common myths about atheism:

It is a fact that atheists are among the least liked people in areas with religious majorities in most of the world because they believe the absence of belief is a public threat to cooperation and honesty. However, reminders of secular authority reduce believers’ distrust of atheists because when people feel less confident in their government, they’re more likely to seek out religion, whereas in countries where the government is more effective and stronger, atheists are both more common and more trusted. It only proves that atheism is not a product of hate and rebelliousness against authority contrary to what Sigmund Freud are saying.

I’ve heard that atheists are using the science to disprove the myths. That is not exactly true because philosophy can also be used to debunk the myths about atheism.

I’ve heard that atheists are criminals and killers. But based from several studies, those countries dominated by atheists are more peaceful than countries dominated by Christians or religious people. For instance, atheists don’t commit as much crime as the religious do.

I’ve heard that majority of believers do believe that we become atheist because we know nothing about bible. That is a lie. In fact, there are several research have shown that it’s a big fat lie.

I have heard that atheists are not compassionate. That is not true. In fact, highly religious people are less motivated by compassion than are non-believers. This finding disproves the myth about atheists don’t have compassion since only the believers can have it.

Anyway, this is not the issue that I’m concern of but is about the true nature and origin of being atheist.

There are several factors we should observe that majority of believers know nothing even a bit about us and the bigots refused to accept.

The psychologists who study the behavior of atheists offered various models on why we become atheists.

One of them is Dr. Paul Vitz who offers different theories why there are atheists.

One explanation of atheism is atheism as a result of scientific principles and rational philosophy and many scientists become atheists simply because they believe that God and science are incompatible. So in this case atheism is caused by knowledge and not directly by any personal frustration, hatred towards father or need for progress. This sort of atheist is the ‘intellectual atheist’ who purely needs evidence and believes that God and religion cannot be explained and thus should not form part of our discussion or understanding or suggests that the question of God is a delusion or that God does not or cannot exist. Many scientists and philosophers, sociologists and even artists are in favor of this sort of position.

To confirm the claims here are some of the peer-reviewed papers and articles from different science sites:

According to Flynn effect, the rise in IQ scores also corresponds to a rise in intelligence, or a rise in skills related to taking IQ tests. Study says,  “…examined the extent to which time-related gains in cognitive performance, so-called Flynn effects, generalize across sub-factors of episodic memory (recall and recognition) and semantic memory (knowledge and fluency). We conducted time-sequential analyses of data drawn from the Betula prospective cohort study, involving four age-matched samples (35-80 years; N=2996) tested on the same battery of memory tasks on either of four occasions (1989, 1995, 1999, and 2004). The results demonstrate substantial time-related improvements on recall and recognition as well as on fluency and knowledge, with a trend of larger gains on semantic as compared with episodic memory [Rönnlund, M., & Nilsson, L. -G. (2008). The magnitude, generality, and determinants of Flynn effects on forms of declarative memory: Time-sequential analyses of data from a Swedish cohort study. Intelligence], but highly similar gains across the sub-factors. Finally, the association with markers of environmental change was similar, with evidence that historical increases in quantity of schooling was a main driving force behind the gains, both on the episodic and semantic sub-factors. The results obtained are discussed in terms of brain regions involved.”

Analytic thinking promotes religious disbelief and religious belief drops when analytical thinking rises but not superstition and such. The reason is intuitive thinking leads to quick-and-dirty answers via mental shortcuts and gut feelings; the analytical thinking involves more deliberate, effortful thinking. Since intuitive thinking appears to support belief in the supernatural, psychologists reasoned that analytical thinking might be one source of religious disbelief – indeed, questionnaires gauging analytical thinking and religious belief found that people who were more likely to adopt an analytical stance tended to report they were less religious.

They say atheists are dumb by rejecting the existence of gods but intelligent people tend to be more religious is a myth. Instead, there is a correlation between atheism and IQ. If intelligence is not the cause of why we become atheist then why atheists are more intelligent than the religious, and why the atheists have higher IQs?

Therefore, these attributions (Flynn effectsAnalytic thinkingCritical thinkingACH thinking)  give rise to atheism.

I hope that I contribute to clarify the true nature of atheism.

Thank you.

Source: The Nature Of Atheism

Views: 77

Comment

You need to be a member of Atheist Nexus to add comments!

Join Atheist Nexus

Comment by Reyalist on August 28, 2012 at 1:44am

I don’t think so Reyalist.  Infants have none of those attributes, yet there they are, in all their innocence, newborn little atheists.

Strawman. Infants don't think like adult can do.

...lacking  faith in the existence of a supreme being.

How we come up to a conclusion that there is no god or the possibility of its existence is too slim to exist an infant cannot possibly do. 

There is nothing that “gives rise to atheism”.  Atheism is the default setting for humans.The question is “what gives rise to faith?”

Therefore, the capability of our brain helps us to decide what to accept not to accept.

Comment by Ruth Anthony-Gardner on August 16, 2012 at 9:39pm

I agree with Asa Watcher, “What gives rise to faith?” is a better question. It doesn't presume theism is the default.

Comment by James Stephenson on August 16, 2012 at 8:43pm

In response to Asa: Atheism might be the unconscious default for infants. However, In most places in the world. Faith, or one kind or the other, is the societal default. So therefore it is still a question worth researching in what makes certain individuals buck that societal default. The correlation between IQ and atheism is worth mentioning. However I think the most important correlation is between education level and atheism. The is already a known strong correlation between education and IQ. It is a misconception that IQ is some sort of fixed static number that one is born with. Of course all this goes back to the nature vs nurture question. The best way I have heard this question addressed is that 90% of what makes humans different from other animals is nature while 90% of what makes individual human different from each other is nurture (after all our genetic makeup is pretty much the same from person to person, if we share 97% of our DNA with chimps imagine how close our DNA is from person to person).

Comment by Asa Watcher on August 15, 2012 at 5:37pm

The "nature of atheism" takes more that 900 words?

Here is the nature of atheism:

lacking  faith in the existence of a supreme being.

Now, if you want to start a conversation about the nature of faith, that might be worthy of 900 words, but the nature of atheism itself is way simple.

way simple

so simple that even the most non-analytic mind can understand not having faith.

you write:

"Therefore, these attributions (Flynn effectsAnalytic thinkingCritical thinkingACH thinking)  give rise to atheism."

I don’t think so Reyalist.  Infants have none of those attributes, yet there they are, in all their innocence, newborn little atheists.

There is nothing that “gives rise to atheism”.  Atheism is the default setting for humans.

The question is “what gives rise to faith?”

"I hope that I contribute to clarify the true nature of atheism."

Well, maybe someday.

Support Atheist Nexus

Donate Today

Donate

 

Help Nexus When You Buy From Amazon

Amazon

 

Latest Activity

Dr. Allan H. Clark replied to Thomas Pietrocarli's discussion What if God revealed himself to you?
10 minutes ago
Joseph P replied to dudaboli yev's discussion David Silverman Debate Mormons on Religion, Morality and Science. in the group ORIGINS: UNIVERSE, LIFE, HUMANKIND, AND DARWIN
12 minutes ago
sk8eycat replied to Thomas Pietrocarli's discussion What if God revealed himself to you?
33 minutes ago
Dr. Allan H. Clark replied to Dr. Allan H. Clark's discussion Atheism and the Holocaust: Primo Levi and Os Guiness
42 minutes ago
Freethinker31 commented on Martin A. Moe, Jr's blog post Is Religion the Offspring of Evolution?
44 minutes ago
Dr. Allan H. Clark replied to Dr. Allan H. Clark's discussion Atheism and the Holocaust: Primo Levi and Os Guiness
46 minutes ago
Dr. Allan H. Clark replied to Dr. Allan H. Clark's discussion Atheism and the Holocaust: Primo Levi and Os Guiness
53 minutes ago
Michael Penn replied to Thomas Pietrocarli's discussion What if God revealed himself to you?
1 hour ago
Future replied to Thomas Pietrocarli's discussion What if God revealed himself to you?
1 hour ago
dudaboli yev liked dudaboli yev's discussion David Silverman Debate Mormons on Religion, Morality and Science.
1 hour ago
dudaboli yev added a discussion to the group ORIGINS: UNIVERSE, LIFE, HUMANKIND, AND DARWIN
1 hour ago
Michael Penn commented on Martin A. Moe, Jr's blog post Is Religion the Offspring of Evolution?
1 hour ago

© 2014   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service