The UPI reports that atheism is declining across the globe, according to “a growing consensus among philosophers, intellectuals, and scholars.”
According to the article, atheism is up against two big problems- it “appears to be losing its scientific underpinnings”, and the “historical experience of hundreds of millions of people worldwide that atheists are in no position to claim the moral high ground.”
The article notes that despite all the scorn and derision heaped on the Harvard and Duke studies a few years ago showing a correlation between prayer and recovery, there have now been 1200 studies around the world reaching similar conclusions.
In oh-so-enlightened Europe, atheists are an “infinitesimally small group,” and there aren’t even enough of them to allow for sociological research.
While atheism seems to be a dead dog, it doesn’t mean that Christianity has triumphed, necessarily. The dean of Vienna University’s divinity school says that what’s happening instead is a “re-paganization,” and unfortunately he’s right about that.
Sad isn’t it, so many who fail to use their minds.
If it makes you feel better and your happy doing it, pray away, I certainly don’t want to take away your right to believe. Just stay out of my bedroom, my house, my schools, and my government with your nonsense.
I think atheism is likely on the decline because it’s as “unproveable” as trying to prove the existance of any deity. It’s very difficult to prove something does not exist. It’s even more difficult to prove something doesn’t exits when that “something” is not clearly defined. In the end proving “god” does not exist will always fail because “god” can always be redefined. I think devote atheists are coming to this realisation.
OTOH agnostics simply say “I neither believe nor disbelieve” If someone can prove to me “god” exists I would believe. If someone proves to me “god” does not exist I would believe.
Since neither are likely to ever happen we go on our merry way.
I’m woozy. I can’t believe you didn’t read the link. Oooooh, my head. . .
No, the article didn’t mention agnosticism. That’s a whole different beast.
My guess, and it’s only a guess, is that agnosticism isn’t doing so well either, and that the rise of paganism is cutting into agnostic numbers as well.
“I’m woozy. I can’t believe you didn’t read the link. Oooooh, my head. . . ;)”
Remember I’m agnostic…don’t care either way. Actually just trying to save some time. But I read it and surprisingly there’s this “With time, turned out to have just as many frauds, psychopaths and careerists as religion does.” Makes sense as soon as one “dedicates” themselves to a “cause”, in this case proving “god” does not exist, you end up with zeolots.
The “Rise of paganism” does not surprise me either. I have often thought that many “atheist” were not “atheist” but anti-christians. As there “atheism” transformed into a religion, which it eventually has to because it’s a belief, many realized there “belief” was scientifically flawed. Those that eventually leave atheism generally aren’t going to admit they are wrong and switch to christianity. So the obvious choice is another belief.
Met some, read more, impressed by their thoughfulness, not their conclusions. I spent way too much time myself investigating philosophy of science and research methodology to put much stock in philosophers, intellectuals, and scholars. My problem is I don’t accept the ideas of philosophers, intellectuals, and scholars just becuase they are philosophers, intellectuals, and scholars. I’ll actually use my own brain.
Just stay out of my bedroom, my house, my schools, and my government with your nonsense.
Agreed. I’ll keep my religious non-sense out of your bedroom, house, school, and government, now you get to do the same.
People are generally taking less and less for face value. People no longer simply accept what they are told and generally try find out the facts.
As stated in my other post the “facts” neither support christianity or atheism. In fact the “facts” don’t strongly support any religion.
“agnosticism” to me means not only “I don’t know” but “I have an open mind and am willing to learn”
I think agnosticism also steps away from “creating a new religion” and allows the space for everyone to believe or not believe on the information that is presented them. IOW aganostics are not out to prove or disprove anything. We are out to learn something.
If we have a religion it is the religion of gaining knowledge.
The UPI reports that atheism is declining across the globe, according to “a growing consensus among philosophers, intellectuals, and scholars.”
Well if someone writes there is a growing concensus then it must be true. I took my own poll this morning and the philosophers I quized felt we were all going to hell. So I guess the poll must have been right in the first place…
“agnosticism” to me means not only “I don’t know” but “I have an open mind and am willing to learn”
No, it means that you’ve basically abandoned the search for knowledge, and effectively closed your mind. Agnostics rarely actually say, “I don’t know, but I’m trying to find out.” They say, “It’s unknowable.” There’s a big difference.
**If we have a religion it is the religion of gaining knowledge. **
Nonsense. The hardcore atheists have a better clain to that than any agnostic.
There is a little thing called “Faith” it is important to Christians. In fact, most of our ideas and beliefs is based on it.
What I do not understand is why people think it is so easy not believe in God or a god. Wouldn’t it take just as much faith? If so, why did they choose to believe that way?
No, it means that you’ve basically abandoned the search for knowledge, and effectively closed your mind.
But it is better to just accept on “faith” some explanation becuase it suits my life and gives my comfort? After searching for the answers for 20 years I realized I’m not going to come up with the answers, a lot of really smart people have spent their lives trying to, I don’t accept any of the answers out ther, so yeah, I moved on with the firm belief that I will get a great answer to the questions when I die, and I can live comfortably with the lack of knowledge, most can’t.
Now to quote Cartman “Screw you guys I’m going home! to get my bike, to go to Moab, and its supposed to be in the 70s!”
Every philisophical discussion should end with a Southpark quote because life is too damned short.
I can understand why this is so confusing to people. Christianity and other beliefs require faith. But the funny thing about my faith is Christ is that after I make that choice and begin to follow Christ, my whole thought process changed and I began to, I think, grow. When the Spirit move in you, it is a real afferamtion. It is hard to explain an dhard to understand.
A growing consensus suggests to me that a number of people independently are drawing the same conclusion. It doesn’t have to mean they’re doing so because it’s a “trend”. Also, I don’t think it necessarily follows that those who are in the consensus are right; it just means that there are a lot of people in agreement.
A growing consensus suggests to me that a number of people independently are drawing the same conclusion.
Yes.
For clarity, allow me to point out that the consensus talked about in the article referred to the opinion of atheism as a viable theoretical position among serious philosophers. The fact that the sheer number of atheists in the world is declining is a related but separate fact.
"If we have a religion it is the religion of gaining knowledge.
Nonsense. The hardcore atheists have a better clain to that than any agnostic."
I don’t think it’s nonsense at all. The hardcore atheist does not have a search for knowledge but search of proof that “god does not exist”. As shown in the article this “anti-X” mentality does no mean a search for knowledge but a crusade despite the knowledge. The same goes for the christianity crowd.
True “search for knowledge” is usually best done with out a forgone conclusion. In this manner the information that is presented is not tainted by ones opinion.
An agnostic can look for information that either supports atheism or supports christianity or “deism”. When presented with the information they have a better position to make a conclusion based on the information rather than their opinion.
I think this statement.
"Nonsense. The hardcore atheists have a better clain to that than any agnostic. "
Stems from the idea that most agnostics have already come to the conclusion that A) The pursuit of such knowledge, that which supports a religion, is likely very fruitless based not on the potential results but that the search criteria is faulty and worse yet fluid. B) That likely if by some stretch of the imgaination the information becomes available to make a definitive conclusion in any direction it likely won’t effect their lives and C) if the conclusion does occur that will effect their lives it’s as simple as accepting the facts, which is not a problem for an individual who has no preconcieved notions.
In a purely “religion” oriented sense, in search of “god” or non “god”, I would agree that agnostics are aloof. But that does not mean we do not search for knowledge. Simply not knowledge to prove or disprove the existance of “god”. We also aren’t searching for Santa Claus or the Easter Bunny.
there are thousands of religions on this planet and most of them claim to be the followers of the one true god. Monotheism has been very popular in the last couple of centuries.
So if there are billions of people out there all worshipping many different “true” gods, you have to assume that the majority of them are barking up the wrong tree.
Is it worse to bark up the wrong tree or just not bark at all. Is the real god going to be more pissed if you spend your Sunday mornings in some other god’s church or if you spend it on your bike or in front of the TV?
If I was god I’d be more pissed at the worshippers of false idols and cut the atheists some slack.
