I just finished reading Everybody Is Wrong About God by James A. Lindsay. "With every argument for theism long since discredited, the result is that atheism has become little more than the noises reasonable people make in the presence of unjustified religious beliefs. Thus, engaging in interminable debate with religious believers about the existence of God has become exactly the wrong way for nonbelievers to try to deal with misguidedâ€"and often dangerousâ€"belief in a higher power. The key, author James Lindsay argues, is to stop that particular conversation. He demonstrates that whenever people say they believe in “God,†they are really telling us that they have certain psychological and social needs that they do not know how to meet. Lindsay then provides more productive avenues of discussion and action. Once nonbelievers understand this simple point, and drop the very label of atheist, will they be able to change the way we all think about, talk about, and act upon the troublesome notion called “God.â€"
I like how he frames religion and "God" as strategies to meet psychological and sociological needs. Anyone else read this book?
Quote from: GSOgymrat on December 01, 2016, 10:49:51 AMI like how he frames religion and "God" as strategies to meet psychological and sociological needs.
Probably true, and it points to how much of a farce these "rational" arguments for God are. They're simply after-the-fact justifications.
But let's say hypothetically that people flock to God belief out of some fear of death, finding the promise of eternal life psychologically palliative. What's the antidote? Tell them a truth they're clearly unwilling to accept? Our substitute one lie for another?
Once we acknowledge that religion is born from mankind's psychological and social frailties, how do we fix the problem?
While theists believe in a god, they reject the vast majority of other gods. In a way, theists have much in common with atheists. Both groups do not believe in gods. Atheists just believe in one less god.
Does Lindsay address this issue?
I have not read the book, but I will probably do so in the future. Thanks for the heads up.
I am beginning to understand that Lindsay may be right in dropping the label, 'atheist'. I don't really see myself as anti-theist. Most of the theists I have in my life are pretty good people at heart. So, to say that I am against them is not accurate. I am against their beliefs--so nonbeliever is more accurate. And using the label 'atheist' actually gives the believer a head start; we are telling them we acknowledge there is a god but we are simply against god. I am not against god--god is a fiction, a construct of man, so I am not against god (that is like being against Paul Bunyan or Moby Dick--they are not real and never were.), but against the beliefs of that particular person. So, nonbeliever is more accurate for me.
Quote from: SGOS on December 01, 2016, 11:14:13 AM
While theists believe in a god, they reject the vast majority of other gods. In a way, theists have much in common with atheists. Both groups do not believe in gods. Atheists just believe in one less god.
Does Lindsay address this issue?
Lindsay starts from the position that atheism won the war of ideas, that the God of monotheistic religions as defined by their own texts is intellectually bankrupt. We are still dealing with religion because wars of ideas are protracted affairs and he uses racism as an example. The idea in US society that racial discrimination is good is defeated but we are still dealing with it. His position is that it is time people put superstitions away and move towards a post-theist/atheist way of thinking.
Quote from: Hydra009 on December 01, 2016, 11:01:45 AM
Probably true, and it points to how much of a farce these "rational" arguments for God are. They're simply after-the-fact justifications.
But let's say hypothetically that people flock to God belief out of some fear of death, finding the promise of eternal life psychologically palliative. What's the antidote? Tell them a truth they're clearly unwilling to accept? Our substitute one lie for another?
Once we acknowledge that religion is born from mankind's psychological and social frailties, how do we fix the problem?
Lindsay's second half of the book offers suggestions but he acknowledges that the purpose of the book is a debate opener and not a manifesto. He states that "God" is real in the sense that it meets needs for people. He wants to help people abandon faith, mythology and superstition and help people come to terms with the psychological and social needs that keep them clinging to ancient stories-- as lone sources of ethical guidance, as coping mechanisms, as personal or cultural contextual narratives, and as a means of making sense of a confusing and difficult world. He believes if people can have their needs met without religion they often will and advocates for a secular society.
As far a death, I think Lindsay would recommend instead of addressing it as a typical atheist, arguing there is no life after death, heaven isn't real, you don't have a soul, etc., we as people should address death from a psychological and sociological perspective. Ignore the mythology (we will all be together in heaven, God has another angel) and get to the reality that death is frightening and inevitable. It takes people from us that we love and leaves a void. How do we accept that? How do we move through grief? What things can we do to honor and remember the ones we miss? The myth is just a coping mechanism, and often not a very good one.
Quote from: Mike Cl on December 01, 2016, 11:33:56 AM
I have not read the book, but I will probably do so in the future. Thanks for the heads up.
I am beginning to understand that Lindsay may be right in dropping the label, 'atheist'. I don't really see myself as anti-theist. Most of the theists I have in my life are pretty good people at heart. So, to say that I am against them is not accurate. I am against their beliefs--so nonbeliever is more accurate. And using the label 'atheist' actually gives the believer a head start; we are telling them we acknowledge there is a god but we are simply against god. I am not against god--god is a fiction, a construct of man, so I am not against god (that is like being against Paul Bunyan or Moby Dick--they are not real and never were.), but against the beliefs of that particular person. So, nonbeliever is more accurate for me.
"I wish to impress upon the reader that the forthcoming analysis rests firmly on two observations: (1) very many perfectly sane people, some very intelligent and some very educated, have believed in, still believe in, and
must mean something by whatever they call "God," and (2) whatever that something is, theism-- the belief that it is a deity that actually exists-- does not capture it.
The claim then is that "God" exists, and God doesn't exist. "God" is an idea, an abstraction, that people use in order to make sense of the world. The primary application to this abstract idea is to meet various psychological and social needs, to fulfill them by imaginary proxy, or to pretend those needs do not need to be met.
In broad summary, the psychosocial needs that people use "God" to satisfy or ignore fall into three categories: attribution (making sense of the world and what happens in it), control (overcoming a sense of powerlessness), and sociality (community building and finding context for self and others within that community). God, which does not exist, is a mythological construct representing the combination of ideas that get called "God."
Quote from: GSOgymrat on December 01, 2016, 12:28:42 PMLindsay starts from the position that atheism won the war of ideas, that the God of monotheistic religions as defined by their own texts is intellectually bankrupt. We are still dealing with religion because wars of ideas are protracted affairs and he uses racism as an example. The idea in US society that racial discrimination is good is defeated but we are still dealing with it. His position is that it is time people put superstitions away and move towards a post-theist/atheist way of thinking.
I broadly agree with that. But this progress is extremely uneven. In North America and Europe, theism is on the decline. But it's gaining in other parts of the world, particularly China.
Imo, it's less like racism (steadily decreasing) and more like authoritarianism (sometimes trending down, sometimes trending up).
So don't count our post-theistic eggs before they hatch.
QuoteAs far a death, I think Lindsay would recommend instead of addressing it as a typical atheist, arguing there is no life after death, heaven isn't real, you don't have a soul, etc., we as people should address death from a psychological and sociological perspective.
What does that mean, exactly? Break it down for me. I meet a religious person online. We have the typical back-and-forth. "I believe in Jesus yadda yadda yadda." "No, that's bullshit and you're lying to yourself. Yadda yadda yadda."
Let's say I take that advice to heart and come at it from a psychological and social perspective. What would I say differently?
QuoteIgnore the mythology (we will all be together in heaven, God has another angel) and get to the reality that death is frightening and inevitable. It takes people from us that we love and leaves a void. How do we accept that? How do we move through grief? What things can we do to honor and remember the ones we miss? The myth is just a coping mechanism, and often not a very good one.
I agree. And yeah, the hell stuff really shoots down the argument that this a psychologically healthy way of dealing with death.
But what can we do differently to combat this stuff? We already try to help people grieve and cope without having to use religion as a crutch. And clearly, lots of people refuse to abandon the crutch.
Quote from: Hydra009 on December 01, 2016, 05:22:10 PM
What does that mean, exactly? Break it down for me. I meet a religious person online. We have the typical back-and-forth. "I believe in Jesus yadda yadda yadda." "No, that's bullshit and you're lying to yourself. Yadda yadda yadda."
Let's say I take that advice to heart and come at it from a psychological and social perspective. What would I say differently?
I agree. And yeah, the hell stuff really shoots down the argument that this a psychologically healthy way of dealing with death.
But what can we do differently to combat this stuff? We already try to help people grieve and cope without having to use religion as a crutch. And clearly, lots of people refuse to abandon the crutch.
Lindsay has chapters titled "Okay, Now What?", "Uprooting Faith" and "Unthinking Atheism" that discuss "pulling philosophical weeds." He also references a book
A Manual for Creating Atheists by Peter Boghossian, which details a specific method for uprooting faith, which Lindsay refers to as "Peter Boghossian's Street Epistemology." It involves engaging in an honest, personal conversation with an individual. The purpose is to introduce doubt and foster open-mindedness, getting the person to explain in their own words how they know what they know, and undermining the process of dogma-based justification in favor of reason-based justification. It employs "Socratic questioning specifically to induce doubt for the purpose of intellectual honesty." Apparently some evangelists and religious apologists use this same technique to win converts but the difference with Boghossian's method is instead of replacing doubt with dogma the goal is to
embrace doubt when we don't actually know something.
Boghassian's book was already on my reading list but I've been reading so much politics and philosophy recently my next book will be fantasy/sci-fi.
And if you practice that, then the "Athenians" will execute you ;-(
Quote from: GSOgymrat on December 01, 2016, 06:43:25 PMIt involves engaging in an honest, personal conversation with an individual. The purpose is to introduce doubt and foster open-mindedness, getting the person to explain in their own words how they know what they know, and undermining the process of dogma-based justification in favor of reason-based justification. It employs "Socratic questioning specifically to induce doubt for the purpose of intellectual honesty."
So basically, the Sagan/Tyson method (indirectly undermining religious dogma by fostering an appreciation of science and rationality) instead of the Dawkins/Hitchens method (direct confrontation).
Quote from: SGOS on December 01, 2016, 11:14:13 AM
While theists believe in a god, they reject the vast majority of other gods. In a way, theists have much in common with atheists. Both groups do not believe in gods. Atheists just believe in one less god.
Does Lindsay address this issue?
Atheists and theists also accept that there is no need for design. They accept that something can exist without being designed (God itself), while us atheists accept that another something (the Universe) can exist without having been designed. Atheists and theists are pretty much the same when you think about it. Just one doen't want to accept that we are going to die someday.
Too many people (even some atheists) seem to believe that atheism is a "belief". I reject the motion entirely. I do not "believe" anything. I "think" many things, though.
I had a religious friend in my car once, and while approaching a traffic light, I expressed the hope it would stay green. My friend claimed that as proof I was praying. I explained to him that I was hoping the "random events of the universe" would be favorable. I would not have been surprised if the light had stayed green or turned red.
Is that what theists do; pray for green lights and such and credit a deity when random events work in their favor?
Quote from: Cavebear on December 02, 2016, 07:08:55 AM
Is that what theists do; pray for green lights and such and credit a deity when random events work in their favor?
Yes, at least many do.
Two actual quotes from theists I know:
"The car wouldn't start after three tries, so I went back in the house and prayed that it would start, and then it started."
"I couldn't get the copy machine to work, so I prayed for it to work. Then it worked."
Granted, they will admit that sometimes you don't get what you pray for, but they still believe that prayer is always heard by God, who at least gives each prayer thoughtful consideration.
Quote from: SGOS on December 02, 2016, 07:51:03 AM
Yes, at least many do.
Two actual quotes from theists I know:
"The car wouldn't start after three tries, so I went back in the house and prayed that it would start, and then it started."
"I couldn't get the copy machine to work, so I prayed for it to work. Then it worked."
Granted, they will admit that sometimes you don't get what you pray for, but they still believe that prayer is always heard by God, who at least gives each prayer thoughtful consideration.
We live in an insane world, don't we?
Quote from: Cavebear on December 02, 2016, 07:08:55 AM
I had a religious friend in my car once, and while approaching a traffic light, I expressed the hope it would stay green. My friend claimed that as proof I was praying. I explained to him that I was hoping the "random events of the universe" would be favorable. I would not have been surprised if the light had stayed green or turned red.
Is that what theists do; pray for green lights and such and credit a deity when random events work in their favor?
What you are describing is called in psychology magical thinking. Per Wiki, "magical thinking is the attribution of causal or synchronistic relationships between actions and events which seemingly cannot be justified by reason and observation." Magical thinking has neurological, psychological, social and maturational components and I find it a fascinating topic.
Quote from: GSOgymrat on December 02, 2016, 08:52:49 AM
What you are describing is called in psychology magical thinking. Per Wiki, "magical thinking is the attribution of causal or synchronistic relationships between actions and events which seemingly cannot be justified by reason and observation." Magical thinking has neurological, psychological, social and maturational components and I find it a fascinating topic.
Oh I am too well aware of "magical thinking". I see it all around me. It has been a frustration in society most of my life. I understand the fascination of the topic, almost like me dealing with my cats who cannot quite understand me, but I do not find it as pleasant. I once thought the world was progressing. Now, sometimes, I feel like it is the day before Hypatia was flayed alive and the library burned...
Quote from: Baruch on December 01, 2016, 08:20:40 PM
And if you practice that, then the "Athenians" will execute you ;-(
(http://static.boredpanda.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/funny-unexpected-ending-comics-mrlovenstein-58-58381652779e9__700.jpg)
Quote from: GSOgymrat on December 02, 2016, 10:16:42 AM
(http://static.boredpanda.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/funny-unexpected-ending-comics-mrlovenstein-58-58381652779e9__700.jpg)
The first justifiable reason to have killed Socrates I've ever seen...
Quote from: Cavebear on December 02, 2016, 07:08:55 AM
Is that what theists do; pray for green lights and such and credit a deity when random events work in their favor?
I expect that's exactly what they do. Everything that happens did so just for their benefit, because their deity loves them. They are so important that the infinite omnipotence that is their God makes sure they get exactly what they desire - if it's His will...
Quote from: SGOS on December 02, 2016, 07:51:03 AM
Yes, at least many do.
Two actual quotes from theists I know:
"The car wouldn't start after three tries, so I went back in the house and prayed that it would start, and then it started."
"I couldn't get the copy machine to work, so I prayed for it to work. Then it worked."
Granted, they will admit that sometimes you don't get what you pray for, but they still believe that prayer is always heard by God, who at least gives each prayer thoughtful consideration.
This is why in our society, technicians like auto mechanics and copier repairmen ... are treated like gods!
I haven't read this book. I will get one.
Quote from: ashwana on December 29, 2016, 04:41:11 AM
I haven't read this book. I will get one.
Every hotel room has one. I used to have to travel a lot. As fast as I threw the Bibles out of my room, new ones appeared. A MIRACLE!