Reply With Quote
So the one article, then?
Do you actually think Christians are the happiest people on Earth? You're aware that white protestants have the highest suicide rate for any group, correct?
You start a thread about belief and right away you refuse to discuss it. I pegged you right.
So the one article, then?
Do you actually think Christians are the happiest people on Earth? You're aware that white protestants have the highest suicide rate for any group, correct?
Clearly you've been paying attention to all that stuff they talk about in church. Jesus just loved to vindictively attack people with petty names.
This isn't about.....is there a God. We all know that's always a huge waste of time, have you ever een anyone say...."I was wrong, you're right"...and you never will.
This is about those who do belive being happier than those who don't. Now I'l ask again.......can you show me anything talking about how much better it is toi be an atheist?
Have you read any of those articles I posted at all? So they are wrong?
This isn't about that.... O!!!!!!...this is about studies proving that people with religion are better off than those without it.
Now.....can you show me any study/article talking about how much better life is for an atheist?
I challenge this board to show me one study/article talking about how much better off a person is if they are an atheist.
So it's moments before hitting the field for the big game, the coach says...ok men take a knee. What there stands our dumb atheist?
Billy Bob the star QB is hurt, it looks bad, his teamates are concerned, they want to kneel say a team prayer for Billy Bob, what there stands our dumb atheist?
It's Christmas, you get a card with the baby Jesus on the front, what, our dumb atheist dumps it? Do dumb atheists even have a Christmas, or is it a fake Christmas without any mention of what the day is about. I guess Easter is all about marshmellow chickies and bunnies, hahahaha!!!!!!!!!! Celerbrating an egg hunt, hahahaha!!!!!!!
Last edited by Avante; 07-25-2014 at 05:14 AM.
Religion expects us to believe in an infallible, almighty god that still chose to create you of all people.... hence, atheism is the way to go
Oh yes, nothing cooler than hanging out on a messageboard you never add to just to bug people and look stupid in doing it.Religion expects us to believe in an infallible, almighty god that still chose to create you of all people.... hence, atheism is the way to go
I keep waiting for one of you dumb atheists to show me anything talking about how it's better off to be stupid.
CN, don't you ever smile? You always look as if you're about to fart. Don't get invited to many parties do ya little man?
No, it's a lie, easily debunked.
You're unintelligent and indecent.
Nobody ever accused you of being cool
Plenty of studies show atheists are more intelligent than religious people.
I didn't disagree with you. I just expanded the field of your premise. Football players are more athletic and in better shape than the average person. But any professional athlete is. You're looking at one study focused one segment of the population and stating that ONLY football players are more athletic, to extend the comparison. The numbers are broader than that.
Psychologist Mark Holder and colleagues at the University of British Columbia in Canada discovered in their research with children that 6.5 to 16.5 per cent of children's happiness is attributable to spirituality. This research, published in 2008, was the first to establish the importance of spirituality to children. To put the importance of spirituality in context, this reseach showed that money only accounts for one per cent of children's happiness and whether children attended public or private schools had no effect. The researchers explained the reasons for their findings by emphasising the link between spirituality and meaning, hope, positive social norms and a social network. The research was undertaken with children aged 9-12.
http://www.centreforconfidence.co.uk...E3NCZpZD02ODU=
The Role of Religion and Spirituality in Mental and Physical Health
An increased interest in the effects of religion and spirituality on health is apparent in the psychological and medical literature. Although religion in particular was thought, in the past, to have a predominantly negative influence on health, recent research suggests this relationship is more complex. This article reviews the literature on the impact of religion and spirituality on physical and mental health, concluding that the influence is largely beneficial. Mechanisms for the positive effect of religion and spirituality are proposed.
http://cdp.sagepub.com/content/10/1/21.short
The role of spiritual and religious factors in health, viewed from a scientific perspective, has been yielding interesting if not intriguing results. In general, studies have reported fairly consistent positive relationships with physical health, mental health, and substance abuse outcomes, mostly using cross-sectional or prospective designs. Some spiritual or religious factors, however, have failed in some studies to demonstrate significant outcomes. Empirical relationships have been commonly based on only a few questionnaire items. Adequate controls for possible moderating or confounding factors that could explain health outcomes have often been missing. A healthy skepticism seems called for, given the need to clarify and refine concepts, such as spirituality; to develop comprehensive assessments; and to conduct experimentally designed studies. Although the overall evidence is promising enough to warrant careful and expanded study, the need for a methodological pluralism in research and for cultural sensitivity is recommended.
http://hpq.sagepub.com/content/4/3/291.short
Should I link you to more scholarly peer reviewed articles?
Probably why they're so unhappy.
I think the real problems begin when the FANATICS on both sides of the issue stick their noses into it.Probably why they're so unhappy.
We have those posting on this site for example.
We mistake them for trolls, or idiots, or we just say they are ignorant.
But it is probably closer to the truth that they are either fanatics or kids, because most discriminating intelligent reasonable adults do not subscribe to, or condone, this type of behavior, we get along just fine and allow our neighbors to believe what ever it is that floats their boats, we don't even laugh at them, we give people due respect even when we disagree.
The fanatics or kids, on both sides, laugh and ridicule IMHO.
To think that people are only unhappy because they're being trolled is just a tad silly.
I agree. Plus I've been unfairly accused of that very thing on this site on many occasions.
Maybe it was because my responses seemed too severe to them, or for whatever reason.
I do know I have mistaken others for being trolls on here many times, when the real truth may be entirely different and much more basic.
I may have been giving them more credit than what they were worth, or the opposite.
Epistemology isn't about god vs no god. It's a study of belief itself, about knowledge which leads to belief. What causes beliefs to form? Compelling evidence that becomes knowledge. Knowledge is just a strong belief, as things we seem to think we know are often debunked. You seem to think the beliefs are matters of choice, as if we can go down a list of suggestions and believe anything we like. I even see that quite often, where someone much like yourself will say "believe whatever you like", and it's akin to saying "your destiny is in your hands".
Many debates between atheists and theists revolve around fundamental issues which people don't recognize or never get around to discussing. Many of these are epistemological in nature: in disagreeing about whether it's reasonable to believe in the existence of god, to believe in miracles, to accept revelation and scriptures as authoritative, and so forth, atheists and theists are ultimately disagreeing about basic epistemological principles. Without understanding this and understanding the various epistemological positions, people will just end up talking past each other.
I agree totally with you. At least half the debates center around accusations that one or the other has made in connection with the original discussion, and usually is a result of a misunderstanding.
And as you say, they end up talking past each other, or arguing over a pointless point.
Atheists and theists differ in what they believe: theists believe in some god, atheists do not. Although their reasons for believing or not believing vary, it's common for atheists and theists to also differ in what they consider to be appropriate criteria for truth and, therefore, the proper criteria for a reasonable belief. Theists commonly rely upon criteria like tradition, custom, revelation, faith, and intuition. Atheists commonly reject these criteria in favor of correspondence, coherence, and consistency. Without discussing these different approaches, debates over what ones believes are unlikely to go very far.
Which would greatly explain why they rarely get very far on here.
I actually think this forum could be a great platform for discussions and debates of this nature, but it certainly isn't for everyone. Some prefer to ridicule and deride because the topic bores them or they have no knowledge to add to it.
For me, it is important to establish a clear and level playing field before going too deeply into the subject.
In order for me to do that I have to ask questions to get an idea of where the other person is coming from, or what he thinks he knows.
Otherwise it is like shooting in the dark, because these different "approaches" that you speak of never get a common ground to move from.
Atheists tend to be either exclusively or primarily empiricists: they insist that truth-claims be accompanied by clear and convincing evidence which can be studied and tested. Theists tend to be much more wiling to accept rationalism, believing that "truth" can be attained through revelations, mysticism, faith, etc. This is consistent with how atheists tend to place primacy on the existence of matter and argue that the universe is material in nature whereas theists tend to place primacy on the existence of mind (specifically: the mind of God) and argue that existence is more basically spiritual and supernatural in nature.
Science tends to support both IMHO, in certain respects. Such as repe ion and replication. And the idea that all matter is illusory in that in its basic form is energy.
Rationalism is not a uniform position. Some rationalists will simply argue that some truths about reality can be discovered through pure reason and thought (examples include truths of mathematics, geometry and sometimes morality) while other truths do require experience. Other rationalists will go further and argue that all truths about reality must in some way be acquired through reason, normally because our sense organs are unable to directly experience outside reality at all.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions