I don't
think that problem is a matter of 'religion' at all! There are some
individuals, yes, who DO use religion as a substitute for making their
own choices based on their own thought.
But then there are people
who will NEVER go against their political party's most idiotic 'talking
points'. And people who insist on defining absolutely EVERY situation
according to their political rubric. - LeahOne
Some
believers, and believers come in many varieties, religious, political,
ethnic, even local sport team fanatics, have no ability to evaluate
their beliefs. This is attributed by scientists studying the phenomenon
to an imbalance in risk of countering belief and accepting it
unquestioning. As a result information contrary to the belief system is
not even registered in the brain of the believer. See The Believing Brain by
Michael Shermer for an accessable discussion of this science. It is
well documented for those wishing to check his conclusions.
Simply,
the cost of losing ones major social support group due to shunning as a
heretic is so high, relative to the value of intellectual integrity,
that the brain rejects without recognition any challenge to the beliefs
of the social support group.
Or one might ask 'Does a true atheist put
so much effort into attacking religion, as opposed to simply explaining
- and defending - atheism?' - LeahOne
The
question for atheists is not as unrelated as it might seem. There is
no belief system or social support group associated with "True atheism"
that conditions the brain to trigger either confirmation bias or
self-justification bias. While there are some atheist groups that
resemble religions, typically the group conformity imperative is very
weak. Atheists even argue about and with their "Four Horsemen"
anti-theists.
Even on a
board like this which attracts atheists who like to discuss religion,
"attacks" are not on religion in general, but on specific religious or
politico-religious beliefs that strongly affect atheists. There are a
few exceptions to add a bit of spice to the board, but you will notice
that most of the atheists here attack specific beliefs brought up by
theists rather than the religion of the theist promoting those beliefs.
Even for those way out there on the belief irrationality scale are
challenged on specific beliefs rather than their religion itself. I find
it amusing that a specific religion is challenged here more by the
theists participating than the atheists.
One
of the problems for atheists in challenging specific strongly held
tenets of belief systems is that the challenge is interpreted by the
believing brain as a general challenge to the belief system rather than a
challenge to a small and perhaps unimportant part of the belief
system. And the believing brain overreacts to protect the belief system
as a whole rather than just the specific challenge. This is a
necessary reaction of the believing brain, as any crack in the belief
monolith can have disastrous consequences.
We have on occasion on beliefnet seen the disastrous effects of an "insignificant crack" in a belief system, and may be seeing it in a creationist who has admitted just recently that God's real world creation may be another source of information to supplement the biblical account. It will bear watching. She is quite old, but may still have time to let her intrinsic reason and intelligence take over to reject Creationism for a more reasonable version of Christianity. She seems to be relatively isolated, so the social support group may not be significant.
Major cracks in the belief system especially life style choices incompatible with the belief system are obvious and traumatic breaks with family and friends in a tight belief circle, but as these frequently take place in a diverse school setting with other social support groups to replace the church family they are normally successful.
Beliefnet
Evolutionary science of social animals indicate that
for survival most members of the social group, whether it is a herd, a
tribe, a pod, a pack, or whatever, are genetically programmed to follow
the leader, without question, even over the cliff. Secularists are not
immune to this programming, see the Secular Humanist Manifesto, Modern
Paganism, The Human Potential movement, Western Buddhism, sundry woo-woo
gurus, etc.
There is
also strong survival programming for those separated from the social
group for whatever reason, including refusal to jump the cliff, to find
others of their species to start a new social group to continue the
species. The new social group will create new leaders to provide
coherence and stability, and not incidentally protect the social group
from predation frequently from others of the same species.
I
just spent a weekend at a popular convention where people gathered to
find Dungeon Masters to lead them into battle and adventure. The
attendees were by and large well educated, secular, comfortable
financially, but in need of a group adventure temporary and fantasy but
nonetheless a group experience. See also any sport fanatic.
Beliefnet
I have considered the various fables of
after death existence, reincarnation, physical or emotional
resurrection, and find them all manipulative to distract the individual
from paying attention to a personal contribution to society. I choose,
in the words of Forrest Church, "To live a life worth dying for."
Beliefnet
I see life after death every time I
read a favorite book by a dead person, when I think about the lessons in
self reliance taught by a special uncle on a pack trip into the high
Sierra when I was 10, when I remember the importance of giving pleasure
to strangers when my sister played an impromptu concert in a department
store lobby on the display piano, and standing up to authority when she
said to the guard "The rope is to save it for me."
I
could go on endlessly and do in quiet moments of reflection. I think I
have Paid it Forward by doing my part for others, by teaching the
lessons I have learned and creating some of my own. I am content with
my legacy,
which is, not incidentally, a gift from a deceased person.
Beliefnet
What awareness has you come to you through happiness? What awareness has come through suffering? - Seefan
Happiness,
both for those important to me and for myself brings awareness that my
behavior especially my social behavior is correct and moral.
Technically it means that dopamine and serotinin are stimulating the
social awareness compliance centers in the brain to produce the feeling
of pleasure in complying with social rules for good behavior.
Suffering,
both for those important to me and for myself means that something is
seriously awry in my social system and I must do whatever is necessary
to repair the damage. As an example I hear a baby crying in a burning
building indicating that it is suffering. Since a universal
evolutionary imperative for social animals is to protect the next
generation at any cost including a serious threat of survival for the
adult, I am compelled to enter the probably fatal environment to attempt
to get the baby out. If I can get the baby out of a window safely, the
dopamine and serotinin will activate the social compliance centers to
mitigate the pain and suffering I feel from the fire. If I can get out
the window myself great, if not I have done the socially necessary thing
and will die happy as the building collapses around me.
Please
note that death is the other bookend to my life and nothing follows.
My social group may remember me as a hero, but I won't be aware of that
except momentarily as the building collapses. But no matter. I have
done other beneficial things for my society, and when death comes the
dopamine and serotinin will flood the social compliance centers so at
death I will be happy and I will indeed rest in peace.
No God. Just evolutionary success that allows the baby to live to enjoy my legacy.
