Reason Magazine
- reason.com
- reason.tv
- reason.org
- Donate
- Site Search:
Reason on Facebook
Reason on Twitter
Reason on YouTube
Reason RSSGet Reason E-mail Updates!
Manage your Reason e-mail list subscriptionsadvertisements
Freethinking for Your Child
Danny Postel at New Humanist frets over his kids, with their theistic mom, freethinking their way to possibly religious conclusions. I suppose it is the sort of thing that the more passionately atheist would worry about--which might have been a reason not to reproduce with a theist, from their perspective. He goes on to talk about some "humanism for kids" books that he seems justly ambivalent about, and does ultimately admit his kids can and will ultimately believe what they decide to believe.
But his article made me wonder. His kids are 6 and 10; how many educated adults have the same beliefs and attitudes about religion as they did at that age? My knee-jerk thought based on introspection and looking at my peer group says, not many. Not sure if there's any research on this specific topic that's thought to be bulletproof and authoritative, but I'm skeptical how much hand-wringing over your kids intellectual attitudes at age 6 and 10 is warranted.
Tertium Quid|7.22.09 @ 7:30PM|#
I can think of more than a few people who thought and read their way out of the most passionate beliefs of their parents. Good luck!
|7.22.09 @ 7:34PM|#
Most people tend to freethink their way away from theism, so I doubt he has much to worry about.
Mad Max|7.22.09 @ 7:39PM|#
Brian Doherty,
Is this the link you're referring to?
'I can think of more than a few people who thought and read their
way out of the most passionate beliefs of their parents.'
I did. My father (rest his soul) was a socialist agnostic (and I
only call him an agnostic because he declared the concept of God to
be meaningless, rather than false).
|7.22.09 @ 7:41PM|#
I was only ever indoctrinated by religous nuts(Church of Christ
and Catholics and government lovers in school), yet I turned out to
be a atheist, anarchist, conspiracy nut.
If those kids turn out religous it isn't because of their stupid
mom teaching them to be...it is just because they got lots of
stupid genes and drank plenty of fluoride and vaccine juice.
wingnutx|7.22.09 @ 7:47PM|#
I read my children Momma Voted For Obama nightly, so they can grow up in the one true faith.
|7.22.09 @ 8:03PM|#
I still tell my kids the Easter Bunny and Santa Claus are real and then when they find out it is fake I'm gonna say ..."see you shouldn't ever believe people when they tell you stuff that doesn't make sense...no matter who tells it to you and no matter how many serious grown ups and TV shows tell you the same crap, it is probably a lie if it doesn't make sense to your mind! You can't trust anyone to figure out the truth for you, you have to find it out for yourself" "I love you lots but even I lied about this stuff just so I could have this power trip of 'teaching you a good lesson'... now imagine the petty reasons someone could think up to lie to you if they didn't even care about you!"
|7.22.09 @ 8:10PM|#
i'm a non-militant atheist, so i don't understand what it's like to be offended by god and godstuff. sounds like he's wrapped up in his own religious insecurities and is projecting it on his kids.
EJM|7.22.09 @ 8:12PM|#
This reminds me of what David Bazan has said about his daughter (although I can't dig up the original source article right now).
Mad Max|7.22.09 @ 8:16PM|#
From the article:
'To be sure, I'd always been comfortable with our familial
arrangement: our boys have parents with very different views on
religion - their mother a Catholic, their father an agnostic
humanist. This is only one of the several ways in which our family
is "mixed": Nilsa is from Puerto Rico, I from the Midwestern US;
she grew up in a working-class family in the countryside, I in a
middle-class one in the suburbs; she speaks to the children in
Spanish, I in English.'
The author's wife sounds like a wise Latina woman (except for the
part about marrying him, of course, but love is blind).
Let me offer some stuff from my own experience to indicate what
kind of literature humanist parents should expose their kids
to:
As a kid, I read Bertrand Russel's *Why I am Not a Christian,*
which I got off the family bookshelf. I learned about the stupidity
and wickedness of Christianity (re-reading it recently, I found
that one of the counts in Russell's indictment against Christianity
was that the Pope *opposed socialism* - can you imagine!).
My Dad read to me from Gibbon's *Decline and Fall of the Roman
Empire,* including the famous Chapter 15 (on Christian origins).
Gibbon said that the number of people who were killed in
persecutions *by* Christians was greater than the number of
Christians killed in persecutions by anti-Christians. This argument
- even if it were true in the 18th century - is certainly out of
date today, as I have come to realize.
There were Isaac Asimov's fulminations against fundamentalism (he
was more of a Gaia theory guy, if his Foundations novels are
anything to go by).
Don't forget Mark Twain's Letters from the Earth.
That Guy|7.22.09 @ 8:28PM|#
As someone formerly involved with conservative evangelicals of a younger demographic (think 18-30), I can say that I've met plenty of theists who came from hyper atheist, secular upbringings. Not to say they made up the majority of believers I knew (maybe 20%?), but to say that people can't rationally conclude in a theistic vision of the world would be outright ridiculous.
K.T.|7.22.09 @ 8:29PM|#
I don't know. If the heart of the matter is theism vs. atheism,
I'd bet that most individials raised as theists remain so in later
life. I'd guess many people change their views on the "details" of
religion (e.g. the role of organized religion, the nature of a
"higher" power, etc.), but I'd bet those crossing the line between
theism and deism represent a significant minority of the
population. The percentage of the population that believes in some
deity has remained fairly constant over previous decades.
So, if Mr. Postel views theism as the sign of some sort of failed
upbringing, it's likely a pretty big deal for him. It's an odd
thing to be concerned about... I mean political liberalism is a
blind faith with little basis in reality. But if my kid grows up to
be a liberal, I can think of far worse things (like serial killer,
president of the United States, etc.). Like the religious nuts,
he'll just be living a life of delusion.
skr|7.22.09 @ 8:45PM|#
I agree with Bluebook. 12 years of Catholic school definitely sealed the deal for me.
Some Guy|7.22.09 @ 9:05PM|#
Scary as it may be, there seem to be a lot of people who still believe everything they did at 6, just with a bit more "God hates fags" thrown in.
Warty|7.22.09 @ 9:07PM|#
Is there any other kind of atheist?
I like to call myself an apatheist. God doesn't exist, and who
cares?
Mister DNA|7.22.09 @ 9:08PM|#
passionately atheist
Is there any other kind of atheist?
I'm pretty much nonchalant about my atheism. Ideally, the fact that
I don't believe in god(s) should matter about as much as the fact
that I don't believe in the Loch Ness Monster.
If someone wants to believe that a Magic Sky Daddy impregnated a
young Jewish girl so that she could give birth to Son of Magic Sky
Daddy, far be it from me to disagree. But when they think I should
believe it, too, I tend to get a little more passionate about my
atheism.
Plus, I can find common ground with Christians who recognize that
Scientology sucks ass.
|7.22.09 @ 9:18PM|#
I'm pretty much nonchalant about my atheism.
As am I. And I've been so since before I was 10.
|7.22.09 @ 9:34PM|#
If there is no God, then God help us.
I believe in God because of my own study, thought and prayer, but I
consider that the "religious indoctrination" I received from my
parents, who loved me very much and were intelligent educated
people, was a blessing.
And I don't have to mock the beliefs of agnostics and atheists or
anyone else to justify my faith.
hotsauce|7.22.09 @ 9:40PM|#
I haven't RTFA, but kids are impressionable, especially before, say, their teenage years. How much of what we're taught as kids is wrong or so severely underinformed as to be wrong for all intents and purposes? 50%? 70%? More? Hell, the only things of value were math and language classes. The rest I had to relearn as a teenager or adult.
|7.22.09 @ 9:45PM|#
a guy i knew in high school just recently friended me on
facebook and let me in on his newfound religious beliefs - born
again christian of one variety or another. what amazed me is that
he's the same guy who stood at the front of the class wearing a
marilyn manson 'beware of god' t-shirt during our class
picture.
just goes to show you that these things are never pre-determined or
predictable.
Hugh Akston|7.22.09 @ 9:47PM|#
Most theists I have encountered are fairly decent people who
only want to do the right thing. How they get to that conclusion
may be a little loopy, but we all walk a crooked road as far as
that goes.
I have also met, of both the theist and atheist persuasion,
argumentative jerks who will accept nothing less than total
conversion to their way of thinking. They are the people I find
myself avoiding.
|7.22.09 @ 9:56PM|#
Wait, this guy is an advocate of freethinking. However, when his
children seem to make their own conclusion about something he does
not agree with, he freaks. It sounds like he only support
freethinking as long as it is his kind of thinking too.
Jeez, if they really are freethinking, then they will probably
bounce back a forward between beliefs for a while.
Gabe\'s kid|7.22.09 @ 10:00PM|#
I still tell my kids the Easter Bunny and Santa Claus are
real and then when they find out it is fake I'm gonna say ..."see
you shouldn't ever believe people when they tell you stuff that
doesn't make sense...no matter who tells it to you and no matter
how many serious grown ups and TV shows tell you the same crap, it
is probably a lie if it doesn't make sense to your mind! You can't
trust anyone to figure out the truth for you, you have to find it
out for yourself"
That doesn't make sense to my mind, Dad, so sorry, but I don't
believe you.
|7.22.09 @ 10:06PM|#
We neither went to church ourselves nor made any big deal about
our agnosticism, but the children went sometimes with their
grandmothers, to different denominations. We sent the daughter to a
Catholic school in first and second grades. Home-schooled both kids
after that, encouraging them to find and follow their own
interests.
The daughter eventually converted to Orthodox Judaism and is
politically liberal. The son is an atheist and a libertarian.
I followed the example of my mother. She was a fundamentalist
Christian who took me to church every week when I was a boy, but
told me I should decide on a belief system for myself, not simply
adopt hers.
Mister DNA|7.22.09 @ 10:24PM|#
I have also met, of both the theist and atheist persuasion, argumentative jerks who will accept nothing less than total conversion to their way of thinking. They are the people I find myself avoiding.
A friend of mine recently became an atheist and in the process
became a major pain in the ass. For starters, he think that because
becoming an atheist was a rational decision, it only follows that
every decision he has made since then is rational - ergo, if you
disagree with him, it's because you're being irrational.
Because he recently experienced prejudice as an atheist (i.e., a
Christian disagreed with him) he suddenly identifies with the
downtrodden of the world. Everything - no matter how small - is a
fucking crusade to wipe out injustice.
He thinks no one likes him since he became an atheist, but he
hasn't yet learned that one can still be an atheist without having
to be an overbearing fuckhead.
|7.22.09 @ 10:24PM|#
I came to the conclusion just today that I have no concern one way or the other if there is a god. If there isn't one or it is simply an uninvolved universe creator, I obviously have nothing to worry about and if there is one that is supposedly loving and all powerful, he's a giant douche as evidenced by the fact a baby in Ohio had her toes eaten by a rat and the Almighty did nothing to stop it from happening.
Mad Max|7.22.09 @ 10:32PM|#
"what amazed me is that he's the same guy who stood at the front
of the class wearing a marilyn manson 'beware of god' t-shirt
during our class picture."
This probably made him a better candidate for conversion than (say)
me at his age, because he was obviously deeply engaged with the
subject of God.
When you're arguing with God, at least you're focusing on the
importance of the issue.
My own route to God was longer, because it took me longer to
realize the importance of the whole subject - as opposed to just
casually assuming that atheism/agnosticism was the default position
of all thinking people.
Mad Max|7.22.09 @ 10:35PM|#
I mean, no biggie, thinking people are atheists, pancakes taste good with syrup, what's the big deal? Agonizing over God or pancake syrup didn't seem like an important thing at that age. Your friend was one up on me because he was agonizing at least over the former. And who knows where reflection and soul-searching will lead you?
MNG|7.22.09 @ 10:40PM|#
What about those who want our kids to grow up knowing about the
Flying Spaghetti Monster? What should we have them read?
I had an experience similiar to Max's, I was neither pro nor anti
Flying Spaghetti Monster. Of course, what I did not realize was
that my friends who actively mocked Him were better positioned
because when you're arguing with the Flying Spaghetti Monster, at
least you're focusing on the importance of the issue.
MNG|7.22.09 @ 10:43PM|#
"he hasn't yet learned that one can still be an atheist without
having to be an overbearing fuckhead."
indeed. it has to do with realizing that while deciding on atheism
(or theism) is a profound personal decision, that this does not
entitle or justify you trying to foister that decision on
others.
Rhywun|7.22.09 @ 10:49PM|#
how many educated adults have the same beliefs and attitudes about religion as they did at that age?
Me. I didn't believe it when I was six and my mom's boyfriend
forced us all to attend Catholic church, and I don't now.
I think the journey from believer to non-believer is probably a lot
more common than the reverse.
|7.22.09 @ 11:14PM|#
I think that those parents who make a huge deal over the whole
thing may be more likely to raise a kid who goes the other way -
it's certainly one way to rebel against your parent and assert your
independence!
I was really interested in showing how smart I was to be an atheist
when I was in my teens. Now I could really care less, the whole
argument seems pretty pointless. As long as I have the freedom to
believe what I want to believe, what does it really matter what
anybody else believes? There are idiots of all persuasions out
there - and good people too.
My son (now 9) has been atheist for as long as I remember. My
daughter (now 7) believed for a while, and went to church with my
mother-in-law. My mother-in-law eventually got tired of "doing her
duty" by taking her all the time, and so my daughter has mostly
lost interest too I think.
I'd prefer my kids not become religious (of any stripe), but as
long as they are reasonably healthy and happy, it doesn't really
matter too much.
Mad Max|7.22.09 @ 11:26PM|#
Thank you, MNG, you inspired me to seize a great marketing opportunity - a bestseller called The Flying Spaghetti Monster Is Not Great. I'm sure it would sell very well indeed, since the issue is of equal importance to the God Issue which gets such disproportionate attention.
Mad Max|7.22.09 @ 11:27PM|#
'I didn't believe it when I was six and my mom's boyfriend
forced us all to attend Catholic church, and I don't now.'
Forgive my prying, but did that fact that it was your mother's
boyfriend taking you to church affect your receptivity to
Catholicism?
Rhywun|7.22.09 @ 11:37PM|#
Nah, it wasn't him specifically. I wasn't raised with any religion and to find it suddenly in my life was jarring to say the least. My mom found religion (for real, post-boyfriend) a few years later and I didn't want any part of it then, either. I just wanted to go back to reading Isaac Asimov and watching Cosmos.
Rhywun|7.22.09 @ 11:41PM|#
On the other hand, I think one's propensity to "spread the faith", or non-faith, as the case may be, is a personality trait that affects more than just religion. So I think this guy is probably pretty autocratic in everything. Not me. IF I had kids, I would like to think that I would let them make up their own minds.
Art-P.O.G.|7.23.09 @ 1:14AM|#
Postel's worries might be unwarranted but they seem pretty normal for a parent. He's probably gonna fret about his kids listening to "that awful rap music" and not "the good music I had when I was growing up" when his kids become teenagers.
|7.23.09 @ 1:48AM|#
i'm a non-militant atheist, so i don't understand what it's
like to be offended by god and godstuff.
From what i can tell, it tends to go along with having had to
extricate oneself from superstition, and getting a lot of shit
about it from one's family and former friends.
I was raised without religion myself, so I tend not to take it all
personally.
-jcr
|7.23.09 @ 1:52AM|#
one can still be an atheist without having to be an
overbearing fuckhead.
Surprisingly enough, it's also possible to be an environmentalist,
a vegetarian, or a hybrid vehicle owner without being an
overbearing fuckhead. Of course, it's the overbearing fuckheads
among any group that tend to get the most attention.
-jcr
|7.23.09 @ 1:54AM|#
For starters, he think that because becoming an atheist was
a rational decision, it only follows that every decision he has
made since then is rational - ergo, if you disagree with him, it's
because you're being irrational.
Becoming an atheist is not always a rational decision.
It's possible to come to the right answer for the wrong reasons,
such as "I'm going to be an atheist because it will really piss off
my parents."
-jcr
Jonas|7.23.09 @ 1:56AM|#
Interestingly, I consider myself a devout Catholic, but I became
that way through my own curiosity about various world religions and
"the meaning of life" and all that, not through any sort of
indoctrination. I converted as a teenager. (I did have sort of a
generically protestant upbringing, but nothing that suggested I HAD
to be religious or HAD to even believe in God.)
What's funny is that even I, as a very religious person, really
detest extreme indoctrination of kids into a religious mindset. For
example, I think the fact that most kids take their first communion
around 7 or 8 years of age is just utterly ridiculous.
How can a kid that age be expected to understand, appreciate, or
most importantly, ASSENT to the sort of worldview that embraces the
idea of communion and transubstantiation, etc.? I actually kind of
see where this yuppie humanist is coming from.
I think he seems to be losing a LITTLE too much sleep over what's
probably ultimately a non-issue (and I think there's a good deal of
personal handwringing about his 'agnosticism' that he's projecting
onto his kids), but I can see why he's concerned that his children
will get roped into taking sides on issues of life and the world in
a way that has the potential to create a lot of consternation for
them in the future.
It really is problematic, even from a religious perspective...
|7.23.09 @ 2:00AM|#
I don't have to mock the beliefs of agnostics and atheists
or anyone else to justify my faith.
Sounds like you're actually a believer. It tends to be the ones who
suspect that it's all bullshit but don't want to admit to
themselves that they have doubts who insist on shoving it down
other people's throats.
-jcr
Art-P.O.G.|7.23.09 @ 2:00AM|#
Of course, it's the overbearing fuckheads among any group that tend to get the most attention.
True.
Jonas|7.23.09 @ 2:01AM|#
Wow, I'm not entirely sure any of what I just said actually
makes sense (WAY too late at night), but basically it boils down
to:
Narrowly indoctrinating your kids is probably bad.
Exposing them to a variety of ideas is probably good.
I can see why, then, this father is concerned for his kids.
And I say all this as someone who will raise my children to be
Catholic like myself (hopefully not too forcefully, though).
Rich|7.23.09 @ 3:44AM|#
I don't see the issue in the quoted article. The guy thinks his view is right and 'best'. He does not want make his kids share his views, but in balance to their church going wants them to be aware of the alternative and the arguements for it.
|7.23.09 @ 4:03AM|#
Actually, there is a correlation between people's religious
beliefs and their parents' beliefs. And the more seriously parents
take their religious beliefs, the more likely their children will
too.
The idea that most children who grow up in religious families
outgrow religion doesn't make much sense when you consider most
people in the United State identify with some religious group. The
2008 American Religious Identification Survey found that just 1.6%
of Americans identify as atheist or agnostic.
I suspect Brian's peer group is an unrepresentative sample.
|7.23.09 @ 5:59AM|#
I actually got to know Danny a little bit in Chicago and he's
really a nice guy. Really liked him.
Not sure what that has to do with anything, but thought I'd mention
it.
Abdul|7.23.09 @ 7:26AM|#
Jonas,
I have had some of the same concerns myself. I'm a Catholic, and I
wonder about indoctrinating my 3 year old. I think it's good to
provide him with an example of faithful living (he should see me
praying, performing acts of charity, & come with the family to
church), but I'm more iffy on the idea of forcing him to parrot
words and rituals he can't understand.
Some of our friends teach their toddlers to repeat the Our Father
or Hail Mary. To me, this seems like a party trick at best, and
cheapens the meaning of the prayer and the meaning of faith. I was
a lapsed Catholic for a long time until I re-arrived at the
conclusions that I couldn't fully accept when they were
indoctrinated by rote repetition.
robc|7.23.09 @ 8:12AM|#
Voros,
Due to your research, I have a cheap Cueto in my keeper
league.
Not sure what that has to do with anything, but thought I'd mention
it.
|7.23.09 @ 9:15AM|#
I never understood how an atheist could ever hold a relationship (much less reproduce) with a theist. Can anyone please let me know how this happens? After all, no matter what christians say, they tend to have a really screwed up way of thinking and messed up philosophies.
Guy_Smiley|7.23.09 @ 9:25AM|#
Francis Bacon said,
"A little philosophy leads to atheism; more philosophy leads back
to religion."
That's what happened to me. When I was an atheist, I was
disbelieving in the Christianity of my youth, before finding the
mature version, that I wasn't ready for before.
kilroy|7.23.09 @ 9:27AM|#
"I just wanted to go back to reading Isaac Asimov and watching
Cosmos."
The best way to get someone to think honestly about God and form
their own reality based conclusion is a solid education in the hard
sciences. I'd recommend physics but I'm biased that way.
I'd estimate anyone who really follows the scientific thought
process will end up an atheist 85% of the time. Lot's of anecdotal
evidence that some people who definitely understand science choose
to believe in God, but I think it's 15% rare.
tom_sizemore|7.23.09 @ 9:36AM|#
After having been both an atheist and a Christian, the view that
I've never understood is agnosticism.
I mean, no matter how little evidence you think there is, to me, if
you think it leans toward there probably not being a God, then you
are an atheist. If you think that it leans toward there probably
being a God, then you are a theist.
It seems to me, to be an agnostic, you have to not care enough
about the most important possible question of existence to examine
the evidence and pick a side. That has always struck me as a
astronomically staggering amount of indifference.
|7.23.09 @ 10:59AM|#
I just realized that my comment was completely stupid. I will self-flagellate myself with several shots of Jagermeister.
|7.23.09 @ 11:06AM|#
Can't we all just get along and band together against the real
enemy?
The Judean People's front!
Zeb|7.23.09 @ 11:21AM|#
tom/Guy, agnosticism makes a lot more sense than you give it credit for (more sense than atheism, I think). Basically, the idea is that the only proper subjects of knowledge are the things we can observe in the universe. God is not such a thing and therefore a god is not the sort of thing you can know anything about.
Guy_Smiley|7.23.09 @ 11:42AM|#
"the idea is that the only proper subjects of knowledge are
the things we can observe in the universe."
That's just Logical Positivism. It was refuted when it was realized
that the statement, "the only proper subjects of knowledge are the
things we can observe in the universe," is not itself describing
knowledge of anything in the universe.
So I say that we are justified in believing in what we perceive but
also in whatever else is implied by what we perceive, according to
our best explanations of what we perceive.
So our best explanations, either, on balance, point toward God, or
point away from him. Which is why I say agnosticism is just a
refusal to judge the evidence.
|7.23.09 @ 11:48AM|#
All this puts me in mind of one of the Iron Laws:
You aren't free unless you are free to be
wrong.
That's the problem with free-thinkers; they may not agree with
you.
|7.23.09 @ 11:49AM|#
Guy, I disagree, but maybe you'll convince me. I am an agnostic who believes there probably isn't a god, but since I am not willing to rule it out since I can't really know it, I will not commit to atheism even if I think it is the most logical answer. The creation of the universe is unknown. I understand the Big Bang Theory but it does not explain where the matter came from. I am curious, but do not expect to find out. What I am confident in enough to be agnostic is that none of the existing religions on Earth make any sense.
Guy_Smiley|7.23.09 @ 12:33PM|#
Nick,
What I'm saying is, for anything that you believe at this moment to
exist or not exist, there exists logically-possible evidence that
you could receive tomorrow that would make you change your
mind.
X demonstrates its existence to me, if it plays a necessary role in
my current best explanations about the world.
X demonstrates its non-existence by not playing a necessary role in
my current best explanations about the world.
That's true of God, the existence of the external world, other
minds, everything.
There is no such thing as an entity whose existence or
non-existence is impervious to the possibility of disproof in the
future.
So agnostics are creating an epistemological category for God that
would obviously make no sense if applied to any other question of
existence.
Guy_Smiley|7.23.09 @ 12:41PM|#
So, given what I said above, it seems to me that the only
possible meaning of "agnostic" is,
I don't feel like deciding what my best explanation is.
dhex|7.23.09 @ 12:42PM|#
well, god (and gods) stand outside of normal existence and
normal time. it's their, like, thing and all.
also, you forget apathy. some of us don't care what runs the
universe, if anything. if it cares that much it can get my cell #
and let me know what the dealie is. or just text me.
stuartl|7.23.09 @ 1:26PM|#
So, given what I said above, it seems to me that the only
possible meaning of "agnostic" is,...
... "without enlightenment." Thomas Huxley (Darwin's bulldog)
coined the term to describe himself. He did not say it wasn't
possible to be enlightened, just that he was not and could not find
a way to prove or disprove the existence of god.
One could argue that this was the safe way of being an atheist in
that time and place, but his writing is pretty convincing that he
did not believe it is a scientific question.
Mad Max|7.23.09 @ 2:53PM|#
'I'd estimate anyone who really follows the scientific thought
process will end up an atheist 85% of the time.'
I do not have access to accurate statistics any more than you do,
but I have the impression that scientists are sometimes vulnerable
to silly ideas which use a 'scientific' label.
Prominent Western scientists like J.B.S. Haldane and J.D. Bernal
have puffed enthusiastically at the crack pipe of Communism. After
all, doesn't Marxism provide a scientific, non-theistic explanation
of the world? To say nothing of scientists who, while falling short
of full-on communism, embrace some form of socialism (like my
dad).
To a scientist, the appeal of socialism is a lot like the appeal of
atheism. Both philosophies proclaim their opposition to religious
superstition. Both are (or were) fashionable among the
intelligentsia. Both suggest a prominent role for scientific and
technical workers - socialism promises them government jobs where
they're paid to follow their research interests for the good of the
community, while atheism makes man (and his apogee, scientific man)
the top of the heap in the entire universe.
'I never understood how an atheist could ever hold a relationship
(much less reproduce) with a theist. Can anyone please let me know
how this happens?'
See what happens when you cut funding for sex education in the
schools!
Oh, well, if you missed out on sex ed, watch a Hollywood romantic
comedy of the 'opposites attract' variety. Better than nothing.
Mad Max|7.23.09 @ 3:01PM|#
Oh, and I almost forgot to cheer on the atheist v. agnostic
battle.
ATHEISTS: Grow a pair, you cowardly fence-sitters!
AGNOSTICS: Stuff it, you are no better than the
fundamentalists!
|7.23.09 @ 4:24PM|#
...but I have the impression that scientists humans are sometimes vulnerable to silly
ideas which use a 'scientific' any old
label.
FTFY
After all, doesn't Marxism provide a scientific, non-theistic
explanation of the world?
I missed the part where Marxism explains evolution. Didn't the
proponents of Marxism give us the gift of of Lysenkoism?
To a scientist, the appeal of socialism is a lot like the
appeal of atheism.
To the straw scientist in your mind, perhaps.
There are plenty of
polling results that indicate the wide gulf between the percent
of scientists with religious beliefs versus non-scientists. As
well, plenty of polling results
indicating that overall religious belief is falling. Kind of like
the belief in Marxism. ;-)
Mad Max|7.24.09 @ 1:02PM|#
jasa,
'To the straw scientist in your mind, perhaps.'
That's funny, the socialist and atheist/agnostic scientists shom I
came across in real life or through studying history seemed real
enough - I suppose they were cleverly concealing the fact that they
were merely stereotypes invented by the Religious Right Noise
Machine.
'I solidified my religious and political beliefs as a
teenager.'
Undoubtedly as a result of your scientific training.
Thank you for the link to the famous scientific journal, USA Today.
From the article you linked to:
'While 95% of the public said they believe in God or a higher
power, 41% of scientists don't believe in either. Nearly half of
scientists say they're atheist, agnostic or believe "nothing in
particular" but only 17% of the general public is
unaffiliated.'
So, to put it another way, a *majority* of scientists surveyed were
*not* atheists or agnostics. Thus proving that atheism and
agnosticism are the scientific positions.
|7.24.09 @ 4:26PM|#
That's funny, the socialist and atheist/agnostic scientists
shom I came across in real life or through studying history seemed
real enough - I suppose they were cleverly concealing the fact that
they were merely stereotypes invented by the Religious Right Noise
Machine.
So you admit you are a proxy for the RRNM? Interesting. Not what I
would have thought.
While we are sharing anecdotes, all the socialists I have met have
been crunchy granola types or scientist "groupies". I've yet to
meet an actual scientist or engineer that is a socialist. I've only
been in the biz 30 years though, so there's time.
'I solidified my religious and political beliefs as a
teenager.'
Not my verbage. Do try to be careful in your attributions.
Thank you for the link to the famous scientific journal, USA
Today.
Jezus, Max, there's plenty of choices. Google for them yourself, ya
lazy bastard. :-)
So, to put it another way, a *majority* of scientists surveyed
were *not* atheists or agnostics.
But a far higher percentage of scientists were atheist or agnostic,
as compared to the great unwashed, Thus proving that atheism and
agnosticism are the scientific positions. :-)
If you want hard science links, I could have linked
this, but I really wasn't feeling that rude
yesterday.
Mad Max|7.24.09 @ 6:08PM|#
'I've yet to meet an actual scientist or engineer that is a
socialist.'
I cite several socialist scientists, and you reply that you've
never met any.
Reminds me of that joke where the guy is charged with rape, and the
prosecutor says he can find fve witnesses who saw the defendant
commit the crime, and the defendant replies by saying that he can
find fifty witnesses who *didn't* see him do it.
Mad Max|7.24.09 @ 6:09PM|#
Overt socialism is not in fashion nowadays, so the lack of socialists in the modern scientists you met speaks to changes of fashion. When it was in fashion, many scientists fell for it. I have little doubt that researchers of a socialist disposition could have found a positive correlation between I.Q. and socialist beliefs, had they done a study in the first half of the twentiety century, or even later.
|7.24.09 @ 6:50PM|#
I cite several socialist scientists, and you reply that
you've never met any.
If your point was that some scientists are socialist, I
wouldn't dream of arguing otherwise. Was that your point? ;-)
Overt socialism is not in fashion nowadays, so the lack of
socialists in the modern scientists you met speaks to changes of
fashion.
Sort of like the decrease in religiosity speaks to changes in
fashion?
I have little doubt that researchers of a socialist disposition
could have found a positive correlation between I.Q. and socialist
beliefs...
So, we've established that you don't like my common man (USA Today)
links, and you don't like my hard science links. Why am I not
surprised?
Reminds me of an argument about AIDS with a socialist that I had.
He was convinced it was a CIA plot. All the hard science evidence I
showed him was ignored. When I finally found a lefty magazine
article that discredited the idea, he found that to be compelling
evidence. :-)
|10.6.09 @ 2:35AM|#
I grew up in the Ethical Society which included members of many faiths. Some had switched to the "freethinking" mode, some were in mixed faith marriages and some just wanted to enhance their life on Earth before they died and "went to Heaven." My parents were Polish Jews who left their religious heritage in Europe and did not reveal it until my adulthood. On a daily basis, I think like an atheist. But...when the going gets tough, I sometimes pretend to myself that there may be a Supreme Being and to be on the safe side, I just might say a prayer. I am not committed to any rituals or dogma, but I feel I have the best of both the religious and non-religious worlds. I have a nonreligious theory that energy does not die. It takes various forms and transcends time and space. So, when a person, animal or plant dies, the energy is released and finds a new host in another person, animal or plant.Reincarnation. I do believe in that!
Site comments/questions:
Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:
(310) 367-6109
Editorial & Production Offices:
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245