Does religion make you nice?

Avatar image for deactivated-5a79221380856
deactivated-5a79221380856

13125

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#1 deactivated-5a79221380856
Member since 2007 • 13125 Posts

Many Americans doubt the morality of atheists. According to a 2007 Gallup poll, a majority of Americans say that they would not vote for an otherwise qualified atheist as president, meaning a nonbeliever would have a harder time getting elected than a Muslim, a homosexual, or a Jew. Many would go further and agree with conservative commentator Laura Schlessinger that morality requires a belief in God—otherwise, all we have is our selfish desires. In The Ten Commandments, she approvingly quotes Dostoyevsky: "Where there is no God, all is permitted." The opposing view, held by a small minority of secularists, such as Richard Dawkins, Daniel Dennett, Sam Harris, and Christopher Hitchens, is that belief in God makes us worse. As Hitchens puts it, "Religion poisons everything."

Arguments about the merits of religions are often battled out with reference to history, by comparing the sins of theists and atheists. (I see your Crusades and raise you Stalin!) But a more promising approach is to look at empirical research that directly addresses the effects of religion on how people behave.

In a review published in Science last month, psychologists Ara Norenzayan and Azim Shariff discuss several experiments that lean pro-Schlessinger. In one of their own studies, they primed half the participants with a spirituality-themed word jumble (including the words divine and God) and gave the other half the same task with nonspiritual words. Then, they gave all the participants $10 each and told them that they could either keep it or share their cash reward with another (anonymous) subject. Ultimately, the spiritual-jumble group parted with more than twice as much money as the control. Norenzayan and Shariff suggest that this lopsided outcome is the result of an evolutionary imperative to care about one's reputation. If you think about God, you believe someone is watching. This argument is bolstered by other research that they review showing that people are more generous and less likely to cheat when others are around. More surprisingly, people also behave better when exposed to posters with eyes on them.

Maybe, then, religious people are nicer because they believe that they are never alone. If so, you would expect to find the positive influence of religion outside the laboratory. And, indeed, there is evidence within the United States for a correlation between religion and what might broadly be called "niceness." In Gross National Happiness, Arthur Brooks notes that atheists are less charitable than their God-fearing counterparts: They donate less blood, for example, and are less likely to offer change to homeless people on the street. Since giving to charity makes one happy, Brooks speculates that this could be one reason why atheists are so miserable. In a 2004 study, twice as many religious people say that they are very happy with their lives, while the secular are twice as likely to say that they feel like failures.

Since the United States is more religious than other Western countries, this research suggests that Fox talk-show host Sean Hannity was on to something when he asserted that the United States is "the greatest, best country God has ever given man on the face of the Earth." In general, you might expect people in less God-fearing countries to be a lot less kind to one another than Americans are.

It is at this point that the "We need God to be good" case falls apart. Countries worthy of consideration aren't those like North Korea and China, where religion is savagely repressed, but those in which people freely choose atheism. In his new book, Society Without God, Phil Zuckerman looks at the Danes and the Swedes—probably the most godless people on Earth. They don't go to church or pray in the privacy of their own homes; they don't believe in God or heaven or hell. But, by any reasonable standard, they're nice to one another. They have a famously expansive welfare and health care service. They have a strong commitment to social equality. And—even without belief in a God looming over them—they murder and rape one another significantly less frequently than Americans do.

Denmark and Sweden aren't exceptions. A 2005 study by Gregory Paul looking at 18 democracies found that the more atheist societies tended to have relatively low murder and suicide rates and relatively low incidence of abortion and teen pregnancy.

So, this is a puzzle. If you look within the United States, religion seems to make you a better person. Yet atheist societies do very well—better, in many ways, than devout ones.

The first step to solving this conundrum is to unpack the different components of religion. In my own work, I have argued that all humans, even young children, tacitly hold some supernatural beliefs, most notably the dualistic view that bodies and minds are distinct. (Most Americans who describe themselves as atheists, for instance, nonetheless believe that their souls will survive the death of their bodies.) Other aspects of religion vary across cultures and across individuals within cultures. There are factual beliefs, such as the idea that there exists a single god that performs miracles, and moral beliefs, like the conviction that abortion is murder. There are religious practices, such as the sacrament or the lighting of Sabbath candles. And there is the community that a religion brings with it—the people who are part of your church, synagogue, or mosque.

The positive effect of religion in the real world, to my mind, is tied to this last, community component—rather than a belief in constant surveillance by a higher power. Humans are social beings, and we are happier, and better, when connected to others. This is the moral of sociologist Robert Putnam's work on American life. In Bowling Alone, he argues that voluntary association with other people is integral to a fulfilled and productive existence—it makes us "smarter, healthier, safer, richer, and better able to govern a just and stable democracy."

The Danes and the Swedes, despite being godless, have strong communities. In fact, Zuckerman points out that most Danes and Swedes identify themselves as Christian. They get married in church, have their babies baptized, give some of their income to the church, and feel attached to their religious community—they just don't believe in God. Zuckerman suggests that Scandinavian Christians are a lot like American Jews, who are also highly secularized in belief and practice, have strong communal feelings, and tend to be well-behaved.

American atheists, by contrast, are often left out of community life. The studies that Brooks cites in Gross National Happiness, which find that the religious are happier and more generous then the secular, do not define religious and secular in terms of belief. They define it in terms of religious attendance. It is not hard to see how being left out of one of the dominant modes of American togetherness can have a corrosive effect on morality. As P.Z. Myers, the biologist and prominent atheist, puts it, "[S]cattered individuals who are excluded from communities do not receive the benefits of community, nor do they feel willing to contribute to the communities that exclude them."

The sorry state of American atheists, then, may have nothing to do with their lack of religious belief. It may instead be the result of their outsider status within a highly religious country where many of their fellow citizens, including very vocal ones like Schlessinger, find them immoral and unpatriotic. Religion may not poison everything, but it deserves part of the blame for this one.

---

http://www.slate.com/id/2203614/?GT1=38001

Avatar image for Rekunta
Rekunta

8275

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 21

User Lists: 0

#2 Rekunta
Member since 2002 • 8275 Posts

God is always, always given credit, never is man. If morality cannot exist without God, what does that say of man? I've heard christians tell me, "well, you don't see any atheists in africa helping out the hungry, do you?" Meaning what exactly? That the only reason they're there doing that is because they're christian? They wouldn't be otherwise?

/small rant.

Avatar image for 123625
123625

9035

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 6

User Lists: 0

#3 123625
Member since 2006 • 9035 Posts

Not reading the wall of text, sorry!*

But no religion did not make me a better person, but has rather changed my outlook on life. Before it was as if the world was in a grey television, now I see the colour of the new brand.

Avatar image for 7guns
7guns

1449

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#4 7guns
Member since 2006 • 1449 Posts

I totally agree with this. I would imagine that if an atheist could integrate well within a religious community that doesn't even consider that individual their equal, then that person is being moral and in no way less than those religious people. In fact that person would be behaving in a much better way than the religious people. I mean how can a religious people ask for morality from an atheist they do not even consider their equal and a part of the society? People need to care for each other first and then god. People need to realize that they depend on other people not god.

Religion can make people act nice but it would be a shame if we cannot be moral enough to others just for the sake of their well being. For someone to be concidered moral if it is necessary for the person to be good to others and be religious at the same time, then it is a standard athisets can never live up to.

Avatar image for deactivated-5a79221380856
deactivated-5a79221380856

13125

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#5 deactivated-5a79221380856
Member since 2007 • 13125 Posts

My thoughts:

I'm uncertain that Denmark and Sweden would be more peaceful because of the open freedom of atheism. Causuation or correlation? There could be other factors as well, although what they may be, I am unaware of.

"[S]cattered individuals who are excluded from communities do not receive the benefits of community, nor do they feel willing to contribute to the communities that exclude them."

So true, and I see this a lot where I go. I feel excluded in some social gatherings because they are Christ centric, so I ultimately decide not to go. As a result, I rarely feel there is no community. Now, I want to point out that I am the only one to blame on that feeling, and society shouldn't be turned left and right just so atheists feel as though they can be included.

Here's something interesting to point out:

"The Danes and the Swedes, despite being godless, have strong communities. In fact, Zuckerman points out that most Danes and Swedes identify themselves as Christian. They get married in church, have their babies baptized, give some of their income to the church, and feel attached to their religious community—they just don't believe in God."

I find this very unusual. In fact, I think it's very interesting.

Avatar image for Sitri_
Sitri_

731

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#6 Sitri_
Member since 2008 • 731 Posts

Laura S omitts the fact that Dostoevsky's lovable anti-hero Raskolnikov was a mentally and physically sick person who compulsively lied to others and himself.  He justifies all his actions as a theist and an atheist.

 

Religion causes and increase in a sort insincere nicety with strings.  As a whole I think the structure is nowadays more divisive than inclusive. 

Avatar image for 7guns
7guns

1449

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#7 7guns
Member since 2006 • 1449 Posts
So true, and I see this a lot where I go. I feel excluded in some social gatherings because they are Christ centric, so I ultimately decide not to go. As a result, I rarely feel there is no community. Now, I want to point out that I am the only one to blame on that feeling, and society shouldn't be turned left and right just so atheists feel as though they can be included.Genetic_Code

You are being very generous and I admire that but you cannot deny that you are a part of the society. It's just that you're not getting the same comfort like the rest. I am chosing to respectfully disagree with you untill proven otherwise.:)

I find this very unusual. In fact, I think it's very interesting.Genetic_Code

All I can say that it seems like a balanced and healthy community.

Avatar image for Lonelynight
Lonelynight

30051

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#8 Lonelynight
Member since 2006 • 30051 Posts
No, I have met a lot of fellow Christians that aren't nice at all.
Avatar image for deactivated-5a79221380856
deactivated-5a79221380856

13125

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#9 deactivated-5a79221380856
Member since 2007 • 13125 Posts

You are being very generous and I admire that but you cannot deny that you are a part of the society. It's just that you're not getting the same comfort like the rest. I am chosing to respectfully disagree with you untill proven otherwise.:)

7guns

What would you propose?

I saw a young girl today wearing a shirt "Believe It Or Not" and "It's In The Bible" in smaller letters. I couldn't read the rest because the font was so small. At first when I read the "Believe It Or Not", not having read the line below it, I thought to myself, "Oh, it's the typical girls are better than boys shirt" remembering the days in elementary school when I took the battle of the sexes seriously, but I was surprised that it was referring to the Bible. LOL, it sounded threatening until I realize it was about the Bible. I think that's how it was intended though, or at least it was intended to what they believe is the truth. I guess the truth can sound threatening.

Obviously, we don't have control over people, but I think as atheists we can constructively criticize theists perhaps, but I think it's senseless to suggest that they should make their gatherings inclusive. However, in return, we should at least make our gatherings inclusive, because we're atheists and we wouldn't be atheists if not for the existence of religion or people's belief in the supernatural. I don't advocate "atheistic evangelism". I think we should promote goodness and diversity and we should be tolerant of those who think we're hell bound especially considering that their beliefs are irrelevant if they're untruthful. So yes, promote religion and open disagreement. Avoid anti-theism or using ad hominen attacks against theists.

As _Stri quoted from Richard Dawkins in another thread, "Organizing atheists has been compared to herding cats, because they tend to think independently and will not conform to authority."

EDIT: I actually like this. I don't like "atheistic evangelism", but I do like this "atheistic awareness" as I like to describe it, despite how poorly grounded it is.

Avatar image for 7guns
7guns

1449

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#10 7guns
Member since 2006 • 1449 Posts
[QUOTE="7guns"]

You are being very generous and I admire that but you cannot deny that you are a part of the society. It's just that you're not getting the same comfort like the rest. I am chosing to respectfully disagree with you untill proven otherwise.:)

Genetic_Code

What would you propose?

I saw a young girl today wearing a shirt "Believe It Or Not" and "It's In The Bible" in smaller letters. I couldn't read the rest because the font was so small. At first when I read the "Believe It Or Not", not having read the line below it, I thought to myself, "Oh, it's the typical girls are better than boys shirt" remembering the days in elementary school when I took the battle of the sexes seriously, but I was surprised that it was referring to the Bible. LOL, it sounded threatening until I realize it was about the Bible. I think that's how it was intended though, or at least it was intended to what they believe is the truth. I guess the truth can sound threatening.

Obviously, we don't have control over people, but I think as atheists we can constructively criticize theists perhaps, but I think it's senseless to suggest that they should make their gatherings inclusive. However, in return, we should at least make our gatherings inclusive, because we're atheists and we wouldn't be atheists if not for the existence of religion or people's belief in the supernatural. I don't advocate "atheistic evangelism". I think we should promote goodness and diversity and we should be tolerant of those who think we're hell bound especially considering that their beliefs are irrelevant if they're untruthful. So yes, promote religion and open disagreement. Avoid anti-theism or using ad hominen attacks against theists.

As _Stri mentioned in another thread, "Organizing atheists has been compared to herding cats, because they tend to think independently and will not conform to authority."

EDIT: I actually like this. I don't like "atheistic evangelism", but I do like this "atheistic awareness" as I like to describe it, despite how poorly grounded it is.

Before we start running around in circles again:P I want to say that I agree with you. I don't think we should preach. It's not a religion and that's why Richard Dawkins or someone else once said that "Organizing atheists has been compared to herding cats, because they tend to think independently and will not conform to authority." We shouldn't act like we're in a religion. But if a group of atheist living in a society where atheism is suppressed, I can't actually hold it against them if they band together to support each other. But normally I think it's best to be friendly and welcoming to everyone even if they think differently about atheist.

I just wanted to say that may be you shouldn't think of yourself as an outsider but I wasn't insinuating that you revolt at once!

Avatar image for SimpJee
SimpJee

18309

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#11 SimpJee
Member since 2002 • 18309 Posts

Does anyone think a person with someone holding an axe over their head saying "be nice or else" equals having morals?  Because that's basically what Christians are, people with axes over their heads.  Don't behave?  You go to hellll!  They might say that you can be forgiven, but it's still boils down to threats of rotting in hell for eternity.   

Avatar image for deactivated-5a79221380856
deactivated-5a79221380856

13125

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#12 deactivated-5a79221380856
Member since 2007 • 13125 Posts

Does anyone think a person with someone holding an axe over their head saying "be nice or else" equals having morals?  Because that's basically what Christians are, people with axes over their heads.  Don't behave?  You go to hellll!  They might say that you can be forgiven, but it's still boils down to threats of rotting in hell for eternity.   

SimpJee

I always shudder at their rush to judgement. They are told not to judge. In their own religion, it is God, who determines morality, not they.

7guns, I don't think atheism is suppressed; just disliked and distrusted and honestly, I don't know why. Lack of understanding perhaps, even within their own religion?

Also, there are Christians who believe atheists just do not like them. This is a very poor generalization.

Avatar image for 123625
123625

9035

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 6

User Lists: 0

#13 123625
Member since 2006 • 9035 Posts

Does anyone think a person with someone holding an axe over their head saying "be nice or else" equals having morals? Because that's basically what Christians are, people with axes over their heads. Don't behave? You go to hellll! They might say that you can be forgiven, but it's still boils down to threats of rotting in hell for eternity.

SimpJee

Aha, well I dissagree with such a view, heres why: A christian should never be threatened by hell, because by beleiving and repenting in christ we are saved. There is no sin that tells us we will go to hell for committing it, Unless you take the verse about the holy spirit literally, in which case is for the non beleiver. I view it saying the people who commit that sin, are so far from God that they won't accept him, even if he bowed and begged for them to do so (God wouldn't do that).

Though God encourages us to do good and not sin, still. But it isn't because of fear we try to keep to them.

Avatar image for 7guns
7guns

1449

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#14 7guns
Member since 2006 • 1449 Posts

7guns, I don't think atheism is suppressed; just disliked and distrusted and honestly, I don't know why. Lack of understanding perhaps, even within their own religion?

Genetic_Code

I agree but in many cases there may not be a clear distinction between the effects of suppression and distrust, on people. For example If the person who distrusts you is your boss. you might have a hard time getting a promotion you badly need. In such case you might have to keep it a secret. Now, you can't claim that your boss is suppressing atheism but, unfortunately you had to suppress your standpoint. I have been through similar situations myself. The thing is no one can escape the society. Once again, I'm not trying to insinuating that we should revolt or anything! I'm just trying to clarify my idea.

Avatar image for Funky_Llama
Funky_Llama

18428

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#15 Funky_Llama
Member since 2006 • 18428 Posts
Nice post. Some very interesting points.
Avatar image for Sitri_
Sitri_

731

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#16 Sitri_
Member since 2008 • 731 Posts

I always shudder at their rush to judgement. They are told not to judge. In their own religion, it is God, who determines morality, not they.

7guns, I don't think atheism is suppressed; just disliked and distrusted and honestly, I don't know why. Lack of understanding perhaps, even within their own religion?

Also, there are Christians who believe atheists just do not like them. This is a very poor generalization.

Genetic_Code

 

If you are like me you have never actually heard anyone trying to justify their passing judgment on you.  I the candor of  this thread gave me a bit of a shock.  http://www.gamespot.com/pages/unions/forums/show_msgs.php?topic_id=26696116&union_id=16845

Avatar image for inoperativeRS
inoperativeRS

8844

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 10

User Lists: 0

#17 inoperativeRS
Member since 2004 • 8844 Posts

Here's something interesting to point out:

"The Danes and the Swedes, despite being godless, have strong communities. In fact, Zuckerman points out that most Danes and Swedes identify themselves as Christian. They get married in church, have their babies baptized, give some of their income to the church, and feel attached to their religious community—they just don't believe in God."

I find this very unusual. In fact, I think it's very interesting.

Genetic_Code

There are a lot of Scandnavians who actually are agnostics or atheists but still consider themselves Christians because they agree with the Christian moral values. Younger Scandinavians can be quite radically atheist (this is the blessed land of death metal after all :P) but as they grow up they often identify themselves more and more with the church which is much more liberal around here than anywhere else in the world AFAIK.

Just my theory as someone who grew up in Scandinavia.

Avatar image for tzar3
tzar3

12393

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#18 tzar3
Member since 2006 • 12393 Posts
[QUOTE="Genetic_Code"]

Here's something interesting to point out:

"The Danes and the Swedes, despite being godless, have strong communities. In fact, Zuckerman points out that most Danes and Swedes identify themselves as Christian. They get married in church, have their babies baptized, give some of their income to the church, and feel attached to their religious community—they just don't believe in God."

I find this very unusual. In fact, I think it's very interesting.

inoperativeRS

There are a lot of Scandnavians who actually are agnostics or atheists but still consider themselves Christians because they agree with the Christian moral values. Younger Scandinavians can be quite radically atheist (this is the blessed land of death metal after all :P) but as they grow up they often identify themselves more and more with the church which is much more liberal around here than anywhere else in the world AFAIK.

Just my theory as someone who grew up in Scandinavia.

Black Metal actually, the well known and notorious ones are from Norway, anyways I live in the U.S and I dont feel like an outsider of sorts, not because of the way I view faith, but because of the music I listen to at times. Regardless I tend to get along fine with all sorts of people, religious or not. Or perhaps its simply the people that I tend to talk to. I have never been berated because of not having any beliefs.

Avatar image for inoperativeRS
inoperativeRS

8844

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 10

User Lists: 0

#19 inoperativeRS
Member since 2004 • 8844 Posts
Fair enough, I've never been into the more extreme genres of metal so I wouldn't really know. It was more of a joke though. Fact is, at least where I lived bands like Slayer and At The Gates were completely mainstream. The 'outsiders' were the ones who listened to alt rock.
Avatar image for Lansdowne5
Lansdowne5

6015

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#20 Lansdowne5
Member since 2008 • 6015 Posts

If a Christian is filled with the Holy Spirit they will become a new Creation.

"He who believes in Me, as the Scripture has said, out of his heart will flow rivers of living water." - John 7:38-39

:) 

 

Avatar image for Strategist1117
Strategist1117

5954

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#21 Strategist1117
Member since 2006 • 5954 Posts

Since giving to charity makes one happy, Brooks speculates that this could be one reason why atheists are so miserable. In a 2004 study, twice as many religious people say that they are very happy with their lives, while the secular are twice as likely to say that they feel like failures.Genetic_Code
This is completely untrue. I barely ever donate or give to people or organizations, and I'm mostly happy and content. I don't need to give to others to feel good. I'd rather keep it all for myself. Why should they get the money that I worked so hard for? And why the hell would atheists feel like failures? I'm on the fast track to becoming a corporate lawyer and plan to one day involve myself in politics. I feel nothing of the sort.

I suppose the problem with most atheists is that they feel they have no reason to exist and therefore are a detriment to society. This is likely due to social programming, wherein they're instilled with the sense of having to contribute to society. What these people need to learn is to think without conforming to the way general society has taught them to think. They need to learn to think in ways in which they're content doing what they want, not doing what society expects of them.

Avatar image for Funky_Llama
Funky_Llama

18428

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#22 Funky_Llama
Member since 2006 • 18428 Posts

[QUOTE="Genetic_Code"]Since giving to charity makes one happy, Brooks speculates that this could be one reason why atheists are so miserable. In a 2004 study, twice as many religious people say that they are very happy with their lives, while the secular are twice as likely to say that they feel like failures.Strategist1117

This is completely untrue. I barely ever donate or give to people or organizations, and I'm mostly happy and content. I don't need to give to others to feel good. I'd rather keep it all for myself. Why should they get the money that I worked so hard for? And why the hell would atheists feel like failures? I'm on the fast track to becoming a corporate lawyer and plan to one day involve myself in politics. I feel nothing of the sort.

I suppose the problem with most atheists is that they feel they have no reason to exist and therefore are a detriment to society. This is likely due to social programming, wherein they're instilled with the sense of having to contribute to society. What these people need to learn is to think without conforming to the way general society has taught them to think. They need to learn to think in ways in which they're content doing what they want, not doing what society expects of them.

Your anecdotal evidence does not disprove in-depth studies like that.
Avatar image for Sitri_
Sitri_

731

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#23 Sitri_
Member since 2008 • 731 Posts

Maybe, then, religious people are nicer because they believe that they are never alone. If so, you would expect to find the positive influence of religion outside the laboratory. And, indeed, there is evidence within the United States for a correlation between religion and what might broadly be called "niceness." In Gross National Happiness, Arthur Brooks notes that atheists are less charitable than their God-fearing counterparts: They donate less blood, for example, and are less likely to offer change to homeless people on the street. Since giving to charity makes one happy, Brooks speculates that this could be one reason why atheists are so miserable. In a 2004 study, twice as many religious people say that they are very happy with their lives, while the secular are twice as likely to say that they feel like failures.

Genetic_Code

 

First of all:  The fact that a believer is happier than a skeptic is no more to the point than the fact that a drunken man is happier than a sober one. George Bernard Shaw

 

 

From the same book: "Who are the happiest Americans?  Surveys show that religious people think they are happier than secularists, and secularists think they are happier than religious people.  Liberals believe they are happier than conservatives, and conservatives disagree.  In fact, almost every group thinks it is happier than everyone else."

Just because the groups (one of which focuses on reality and the other on fantasy) assign a different point value their subjective happiness doesn't mean much.  At the hospital now they ask "what is your level of pain, ringing in the ears, etc on a scale of one to ten?"  I always tell them what nonsense that is, my 4 is not someone else's 4 and when I describe how loud my ears ring, 1 is really the only value that can be answered because I don't hear anything quieter.  I see this test much the same, to really test in relation to other's about something so subjective, the question must be framed in the confines of relation to others.

As to the charity bit.  Endorphins are released when you commit acts of altruism (evolutionary benefits exist.)  So those who give more are getting more of this feed.  Additionally they may give more because their brains are giving them bigger rewards.  A brain that gives out bigger rewards would also explain why they are more happy in general life also.  And these people are obviously in a position where they can give; those who are sick or poor are less likely to be as happy.

Brooks himself is a strong conservative, so one would expect his speculations about the meaning of his information to match his views.  Additionally, any deep work in statistics shows that the testing method can greatly effect the results of the test, was Brooks studies intentionally or subconsciously biased towards his preconceived notions?

 

 

Avatar image for Strategist1117
Strategist1117

5954

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#24 Strategist1117
Member since 2006 • 5954 Posts

Correct! That is, if he gave any hard evidence in his post. He just said that he read that they are more miserable and less happy because they don't give to charity. If that's the case, where is the data from the surveys they presumably took? The links just take you to the books' Amazon pages; a lot of help that'll do. Therefore, his statement is no more valid than my "anecdotal evidence."

Avatar image for THUMPTABLE
THUMPTABLE

2357

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 7

User Lists: 0

#25 THUMPTABLE
Member since 2003 • 2357 Posts
i think religion makes you judgemental and narrow minded.
Avatar image for Enosh88
Enosh88

1728

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#26 Enosh88
Member since 2008 • 1728 Posts

"The Danes and the Swedes, despite being godless, have strong communities. In fact, Zuckerman points out that most Danes and Swedes identify themselves as Christian. They get married in church, have their babies baptized, give some of their income to the church, and feel attached to their religious community—they just don't believe in God."Genetic_Code

that has a lot to do with society and the culture. You are expected in most of europe the baptise your child, send your child to sunday school, get the comunion thingy etc. If you belive in god or don't doesn't even matter. when I was going to the sunday school (and to church since we had to) more than 3/4 of the people there didn't belive in god and were seeing the whole thing as just something to "get over with it", after this the church attendace drops to once per year (christmas) at best

Avatar image for btaylor2404
btaylor2404

11353

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 35

User Lists: 0

#27 btaylor2404
Member since 2003 • 11353 Posts
No I do not believe religion makes you nice.  If anything I think the more "into" religion you get the less nice you become.  By that I mean the hardcore religious people I know take a 2000 year old book literally, which in turn causes them to discriminate against others: homosexuals, atheists, people of other faith.  So a conclusion they have drawn in their own mind has caused them, if they admit it or not, to look down upon or want to "fix" those with different views.  This in my opinion is a major character flaw in a human being.
Avatar image for danwallacefan
danwallacefan

2413

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#28 danwallacefan
Member since 2008 • 2413 Posts
"Does religion make you nice?" Well it certainly helps me when I'm trying to quantify and objectify "nice" and "moral". Good to know that I have something more to work with than my mere opinions on the matter. Sort of why Dostyevski (sp.) observed how everything within atheism is permitted.
Avatar image for Funky_Llama
Funky_Llama

18428

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#29 Funky_Llama
Member since 2006 • 18428 Posts
"Does religion make you nice?" Well it certainly helps me when I'm trying to quantify and objectify "nice" and "moral". Good to know that I have something more to work with than my mere opinions on the matter. Sort of why Dostyevski (sp.) observed how everything within atheism is permitted.danwallacefan
Only to the extent that within maths everything (morally) is permitted: atheism simply doesn't deal with morality. That doesn't mean that it is nihilistic, as you seem to be suggesting.