Y'all are a bunch of wankers!

Connection between religion and intolerance

http://www.psych.ubc.ca/~ara/Manuscripts/Hansen%20&%20Norenzayan_religion_chapter.pdf - Yang and Yin and Heaven and Hell: Untangling the Complex Relationship Between Religion and Intolerance

<quote>
We find that the aspect of religion that involves devotion to the supernatural or to a specific supernaturally-grounded faith and practice (devotional religiosity) indeed goes along with the aspect that involves adopting one religious community’s epistemic and moral vision as true, and treating all deviations from that moral vision as false, dangerous, alien or degenerate (coalitional religiosity).

As empirically related as these aspects of religion are, our research has found that they have opposite relationships to religious intolerance: coalitional religiosity independently predicts intolerance and scapegoating, and devotional religiosity independently predicts tolerance and rejection of scapegoating
...
devotional variables = {[(divine devotion + religious devotion)/2] – [(authoritarianism + fundamentalism + dogmatism + exclusivity)/4]}.
</quote>

It's interesting to type religion and see the different implications of the types.
Permalink son of parnas 
March 7th, 2007 10:27am
Or scary, if the wife you introduced to your best friend a decade ago has become a Jehovah's Witness.
Permalink Send private email JoC 
March 7th, 2007 10:31am
> and treating all deviations from that moral vision as false, dangerous, alien or degenerate

Why do the atheists call me deviant, degenerate, etc?
Permalink christian 
March 7th, 2007 10:37am
Many Atheists embrace atheism as a religion, and practice in a very similar way as any classic religion.

The groupings, advocacy, intolerance, feeling of being enlightened or special, etc, is all exactly the same as the worst of many other belief structures.

It's one thing to simply have a belief, but it's quite another to feel some perverse need to attack and denigrate those who feel otherwise, and to group into clusters of common perspectives for the purposes of doing the former.
Permalink DF 
March 7th, 2007 11:44am
I find this intolerance thing intolerable.
Permalink Send private email Aaron F Stanton 
March 7th, 2007 11:56am
Intolerance is unutterable and unthinkable. Maybe even imbattable if I knew what that meant.
Permalink Send private email strawberry snowflake 
March 7th, 2007 12:02pm
> and practice in a very similar way as any classic religion.

What are the explicit practices that are similar between the two groups? You can list a hundred practices for religionistas. Can't think of too many practices for atheists.
Permalink son of parnas 
March 7th, 2007 12:03pm
When they feel threatened they make members-only, secret-handshake-at-the-door, invite-only sanctuaries for themselves to congregate in.

Oh, wait. All humans do that.
Permalink anonymous hordes 
March 7th, 2007 12:07pm
Well, common practices...lots of Christians don't go to church, don't pray, take the Lord's name in vain...
Permalink Send private email Aaron F Stanton 
March 7th, 2007 12:07pm
"Lost in the hullabaloo over the neo-atheists is a quieter and potentially more illuminating debate. It is taking place not between science and religion but within science itself, specifically among the scientists studying the evolution of religion. These scholars tend to agree on one point: that religious belief is an outgrowth of brain architecture that evolved during early human history. What they disagree about is why a tendency to believe evolved, whether it was because belief itself was adaptive or because it was just an evolutionary byproduct, a mere consequence of some other adaptation in the evolution of the human brain."

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/04/magazine/04evolution.t.html

what think you? accident? or promoted because of benefit (at least at one point)?
Permalink Send private email strawberry snowflake 
March 7th, 2007 3:07pm
I think "superstition" is a natural outcome of having a large brain which can see connections between things, but also then has to deal with randomness.

Randomness exists in weather, raising crops, rain, heat, cold, storms, floods, the ability to find dry fire-wood, what animals are around to be hunted, how hard it is to hunt them, fertility, having kids, raising kids, how to deal with "other" tribes, making weapons, using weapons.  I probably could go on, but that's probably enough.

So, combine all that randomness with a brain that seems hard-wired to see connections between things, and it becomes a small leap of faith to conclude that all things, even random things, actually have a 'greater cause', a god or goddess in charge of those things we can't see a cause for.

A Christian might see in this situation that we are hard-wired to come to know God.  An Agnostic might see in this situation that we are hard-wired to WANT to believe in a Higher Power, but that belief may or may not be necessary. 

And our understanding of Who that God really is may continue to evolve over time.  As we can point to many human cultures whose images of God HAS evolved over time.

Sadly, this tendency to believe also seems tied to our "us and them" point of view, where "we" are better and defined by those who agree with what we believe, and "they" are worse and don't deserve to be treated as human beings because they believe differently.
Permalink SaveTheHubble 
March 7th, 2007 4:35pm
nice, STB.
Permalink Send private email strawberry snowflake 
March 7th, 2007 6:30pm
I mean STH.
Permalink Send private email strawberry snowflake 
March 7th, 2007 6:30pm
Or STD
Permalink Send private email Ward 
March 7th, 2007 6:53pm
SaveTheDog? 

Last time I looked, very few Dogs need that much saving...
Permalink SaveTheHubble 
March 7th, 2007 7:10pm
If STDs aren't proof of God's great wisdom in creating evolution, I don't know what is.
Permalink Send private email strawberry snowflake 
March 7th, 2007 7:14pm

This topic is archived. No further replies will be accepted.

Other topics: March, 2007 Other topics: March, 2007 Recent topics Recent topics