Director James Cameron rewrites religion!

[Beady]

Do you know what percentage of Americans believe the Genesis account? It's very high, I'll tell you now,...

Do you know what percentage of Americans believe a worldwide flood occured? It's very high,...

Do you know what percentage of Americans believe God performed miracles, even managing to stop the Sun? It's very high,...

Do you see a pattern here?

My emphasis.

Yes, I do. I see you using unsupported, generalized statements to attribute a single characteristic to an entire population. On the surface, that bears the appearance of unreasoning prejudice. How high is "high," and how much higher is "very high"? What are your sources? Are you taking into account the varying intensity of faith in the overall population (strong, moderate, weak), or do you believe that "Believers" form a monolithic bloc in all respects? If you don't believe that Believers form a single bloc, why are you attempting to group them within a single stereotype?

 

[Humphreys]

My emphasis.

Yes, I do. I see you using unsupported, generalized statements to attribute a single characteristic to an entire population. On the surface, that bears the appearance of unreasoning prejudice. How high is "high," and how much higher is "very high"? What are your sources? Are you taking into account the varying intensity of faith in the overall population (strong, moderate, weak), or do you believe that "Believers" form a monolithic bloc in all respects? If you don't believe that Believers form a single bloc, why are you attempting to group them within a single stereotype?

I'm using "High", and "Very high" based on what we should expect, from a population of fair, rational thinkers.

Take a look at these results and see if you think this is evidence of the general population being masters of denial when it comes to scientific evidence in regards to religion.

http://publicopinionpros.com/features/2006/aug/bishop.asp

We consistently see that considerably more than half of the American population believes in a literal account of the Bible and Genesis, with over 80% believing that God played a key, necessary part in the evolution of mankind. This is completely against the scientific evidence, and is strong evidence that these people are in denial when it comes to their religious beliefs.

Do you not agree? Do you think a fair assessment of the existing evidence points to these people being correct?

Do you know of any other fields where the beliefs of the majority deviate from the beliefs of the scientific experts so clearly, where religion is not involved?

 

[ImaginalDisc]

http://www.washtimes.com/national/20040216-113955-2061r.htm

An ABC News poll released Sunday found that 61 percent of Americans believe the account of creation in the Bible's book of Genesis is "literally true" rather than a story meant as a "lesson."
Sixty percent believe in the story of Noah's ark and a global flood, while 64 percent agree that Moses parted the Red Sea to save fleeing Jews from their Egyptian captors.
The poll, with a margin of error of 3 percentage points, was conducted Feb. 6 to 10 among 1,011 adults.
"These are surprising and reassuring figures — a positive sign in a postmodern world that seemed bent on erasing faith from the public square in recent years," said the Rev. Charles Nalls of Christ the King, a Catholic-Anglican church in the District.

http://www.secularhumanism.org/library/fi/bishop_19_3.html

Americans were among the most likely of peoples to believe that "The Bible is the actual word of God and it is to be taken literally word for word" - three times more likely than the Norwegians and nearly five times more likely than the British. They were also the least likely of any people surveyed to believe that "The Bible is an ancient book of fables, legends, history, and moral precepts recorded by man" (14.6% ) - a belief that was much more common in other nations, such as Israel, Hungary, Russia, and Great Britain. These beliefs, particularly biblical literalism, as we will see, turn out to be among the most useful predictors of the persistence of a "pre-scientific" worldview in American society.

Beady, never underestimate the power of religion to cloud reason.

ETA: The bit about Americans being vastly dumber than Norwegians and Brits in this regard is unsurprising, considering the conspicuous religiosity of Americans.

 

[Beady]

I'm using "High", and "Very high" based on what we should expect, from a population of fair, rational thinkers.

I didn't ask what you based them on, I asked what they mean. BTW: "If it can't be expressed as a number, it's an opinion" (A. C. Clarke?). And, to quote my son's sergeant, "Opinions are like rule8holes, everyone has one and they all stink."

Take a look at these results...

Maybe you should read the article that goes with the charts:

If nothing else, Gallup’s telling experiment of unintended consequences suggested that Americans’ beliefs about human origins were not quite as stable and psychologically structured as nearly everyone had been assuming for years...

In contrast, the same observer spotting the results of the Pew survey might well conclude that, while a definite plurality of Americans appeared to accept the conventional biblical position on human origins, this figure is somewhat lower than what the Gallup Organization has been reporting for the past couple of decades. More importantly, he or she would most likely notice from the Pew survey that the American public has evidently become much more receptive to the idea that human evolution has occurred through the Darwinian process of natural selection, with over a fourth of Americans now choosing that option...

My emphasis.

Do masters of denial change their opinions?

Do you know of any other fields where the beliefs of the majority deviate from the beliefs of the scientific experts so clearly, where religion is not involved?

Well, yes. Historically, just about every scientific truth was denied by the general population, as well as by many/most "scientists." It takes time to convince someone that something they've held to be beyond question is, in fact, false (see, for example, the Miasma theory of disease, or the "humor" theory pf medicine).

The sentient human race is approximately 2.5 million years old; presumably, some form of deity has "co-existed" with humans for virtually the entire time. The idea that maybe the gods don't exist, after all, has existed among the general population for at most 200 years; the theory of evolution has been around for, what?, 170 years. If you really expect the human race to just stop in its tracks after all that time, and slap its collective forhead and say "Eureka!" before going off in an entirely different direction without a second thought, I'd say you're being just a little bit unreasonable.

 

[ImaginalDisc]

I didn't ask what you based them on, I asked what they mean. BTW: "If it can't be expressed as a number, it's an opinion" (A. C. Clarke?). And, to quote my son's sergeant, "Opinions are like rule8holes, everyone has one and they all stink."



Maybe you should read the article that goes with the charts:



My emphasis.

Do masters of denial change their opinions?



Well, yes. Historically, just about every scientific truth was denied by the general population, as well as by many/most "scientists." It takes time to convince someone that something they've held to be beyond question is, in fact, false (see, for example, the Miasma theory of disease, or the "humor" theory pf medicine).

The sentient human race is approximately 2.5 million years old; presumably, some form of deity has "co-existed" with humans for virtually the entire time. The idea that maybe the gods don't exist, after all, has existed among the general population for at most 200 years; the theory of evolution has been around for, what?, 170 years. If you really expect the human race to just stop in its tracks after all that time, and slap its collective forhead and say "Eureka!" before going off in an entirely different direction without a second thought, I'd say you're being just a little bit unreasonable.

Beady, I don't think anyone is denying that Christians are capable of rational thought, even in regards to their own religion to some degree. However, surveys, such as those I previously quoted, show that Americans are, by and large, about as credulous of the claims of Christianity as any medieval peasant.

 

[Beady]

Beady, never underestimate the power of religion to cloud reason.

I don't. However, I note that, in the argument over whether the glass is half full or half empty, time was there wasn't even a glass. From that viewpoint, I'd say things are improving.

 

[Beady]

However, surveys, such as those I previously quoted, show that Americans are, by and large, about as credulous of the claims of Christianity as any medieval peasant.

In my reply to Humphreys, I noted that there are discrepancies with both the polls, and in their interpretation.

As for Americans being more religiously credulous than the rest of the West, well, what do you expect? I was cautioned about underestimating the power of religion; I caution you to remember the role religion has played in America's history, from the very first European colonists. It takes a certain amount of both time and effort to consign the teachings of your ancestors to the rubbish heap, and I don't think we've had enough of the first or expended enough of the second.

 

[Humphreys]

I didn't ask what you based them on, I asked what they mean. BTW: "If it can't be expressed as a number, it's an opinion" (A. C. Clarke?). And, to quote my son's sergeant, "Opinions are like rule8holes, everyone has one and they all stink."

Well, having a discussion without offering an opinion is close to impossible.

It's subjective, sure, but we all have a general idea of what's expected. The beliefs of a fair public should come close to mirroring the beliefs of the experts - the scientists. They do not where religion is concerned, in fact they deviate from it significantly.

If I told you 50% of the population believed in a flat earth, would I be justified in claiming that as high? According to you, no, because I'd just be expressing an opinion!

I clarified my position with statistics. Well over 50% percent of the American population believes in a literal Genesis being true. I consider this "very high", all things considered.

What more of an explanation do you want?

Maybe you should read the article that goes with the charts:

My emphasis.

Do masters of denial change their opinions?

I did read the article. Most of the changes of opinion seemed to be based on a different wording of the questions, rather than a change of beliefs. But to answer your question, yes, beliefs are modified all the time by masters of denial, as long as these beliefs still allow them to be Christians.

For example, the belief that Jesus's physical body ascended to Heaven would be modified to one where only his spirit ascended, if conclusive evidence of Jesus's body existing was found.

The sentient human race is approximately 2.5 million years old; presumably, some form of deity has "co-existed" with humans for virtually the entire time. The idea that maybe the gods don't exist, after all, has existed among the general population for at most 200 years; the theory of evolution has been around for, what?, 170 years. If you really expect the human race to just stop in its tracks after all that time, and slap its collective forhead and say "Eureka!" before going off in an entirely different direction without a second thought, I'd say you're being just a little bit unreasonable.

Yet Christianity has existed for a very long time, and is showing no signs of disappearing any time soon.

Evidence of a chunk of the population being in denial, me thinks.

 

[ImaginalDisc]

In my reply to Humphreys, I noted that there are discrepancies with both the polls, and in their interpretation.

As for Americans being more religiously credulous than the rest of the West, well, what do you expect? I was cautioned about underestimating the power of religion; I caution you to remember the role religion has played in America's history, from the very first European colonists. It takes a certain amount of both time and effort to consign the teachings of your ancestors to the rubbish heap, and I don't think we've had enough of the first or expended enough of the second.

What role are you talking about? Religion has been a much stronger component of the history of Great Britain than the United States, they even have an official state religion. Yet America is more religious than Great Britain. Italy, France, and Germany have had stronger religious involvement in historical affairs than any religion has had in American history. The majority of the signers of the Constitution were hardly any more religious than the members of this forum. Religion has been a far smaller player in American history than it has been in the history of the nations of Europe.

 

[Beady]

If I told you 50% of the population believed in a flat earth, would I be justified in claiming that as high? According to you, no, because I'd just be expressing an opinion!

Correct. You would be claiming that as much as 50% of the population believed in a flat earth; I would counter that as little as 50% of the population believed it. It's all a matter of adverbs.

I clarified my position with statistics. Well over 50% percent of the American population believes in a literal Genesis being true. I consider this "very high", all things considered.

Given what the polls would have showed a century ago, I consider it very low.

Yet Christianity has existed for a very long time, and is showing no signs of disappearing any time soon.

Precisely my point.

Try this: To change from a god-caused cosmology to a physics-caused cosmology would be an evolutionary step in the cognitive and emotional development of humanity. Evolutionary steps occur on an evolutionary time scale. 200 years is an inconsiderable period on such a scale. You might as well complain that a fruitfly, with its four(?)-hour lifespan doesn't appreciate the changing seasons.

 

[Humphreys]

Correct. You would be claiming that as much as 50% of the population believed in a flat earth; I would counter that as little as 50% of the population believed it. It's all a matter of adverbs.

That's completely ridiculous, though, and you know it.

Given what the polls would have showed a century ago, I consider it very low.

So the Christians modified their beliefs a bit, so what, they're still Christians?

Over 80% of America believes in something that evidence suggests is highly unlikely to be true, today, right now. My point stands.

Either way you look at it, these guys are still in denial, even if it is lessening, and that's a big if.

 

[ImaginalDisc]

Correct. You would be claiming that as much as 50% of the population believed in a flat earth; I would counter that as little as 50% of the population believed it. It's all a matter of adverbs.



Given what the polls would have showed a century ago, I consider it very low.

So the fact that the overwhelming majority of people in America believe in an invisible man who lives in the sky troubles you not a bit?

 

[Beady]

What role are you talking about?

Sorry, I'm going to stay focused on the point at hand. Suffice it to say that "religion" can be discerned as a common factor throughout most major events in American history.

 

[cj.23]

I just had a thought - people keep saying Cameron and co are in this for the money - if so they would choose a more profitable outlet than the Discovery Channel? I do think it is important to acknowledge that a DVD release, a book, or a cinema release would have been more profitable routes? I disagree with their conclusions, but I certainly don't think they are hucksters or conmen - I think they are entirely sincere, just I personally think the case is weak - its still worth putting forward though! So from this "dyed in the wool faith head" an unqualified three cheers for Cameron et al, and may it spark some debate!

My only fear is for people who lack the ability to understand the arguments both ways - but I guess they will just act on their beliefs, and not worry.

cj x

 

[Beady]

That's completely ridiculous, though, and you know it.

It's a completely ridiculous example.

Either way you look at it, these guys are still in denial, even if it is lessening, and that's a big if.

You know what you know, right?

 

[Beady]

So the fact that the overwhelming majority of people in America believe in an invisible man who lives in the sky troubles you not a bit?

Not enough to think the sky is falling. Fact is, I'm personally acquainted with many of these folks, and I find them to be rather decent sorts, by and large.

 

[Beady]

I just had a thought - people keep saying Cameron and co are in this for the money - if so they would choose a more profitable outlet than the Discovery Channel? I do think it is important to acknowledge that a DVD release, a book, or a cinema release would have been more profitable routes?

What makes you think these other events won't happen?

 

[Humphreys]

Not enough to think the sky is falling. Fact is, I'm personally acquainted with many of these folks, and I find them to be rather decent sorts, by and large.

Don't get me wrong, I'm sure there are many quite smashing Christian folks, they're just in denial when it comes to their religion.

Even you agree that, or you'd not see the lessening of religious beliefs as progress.

 

[ImaginalDisc]

Sorry, I'm going to stay focused on the point at hand. Suffice it to say that "religion" can be discerned as a common factor throughout most major events in American history.

Such as what? Religion didn't prompt the American Revolutionary War, religious fervor played no role in the War of 1812, the establishment of the Mason-Dixie line divided no schismatic sects, religion had nothing to do with bloody Kansas, religion was used in argument both for and against the overtly racist quota system of immigration used until the 20th Century, and frankly, I am hard pressed to find a single major event in American history that was significantly influenced by religion in any way. The only thing that springs to mind at all is the Church-centered Civil Rights movement, but that has more do with the particular church-centered activities in specific communities during the Civil Rights movement, and the movement rapidly went well beyond the influence of any individual religion or church. Again, religious arguments were on both sides of the issues.

America is distinctly unlike England, in that we've never had widespread pogroms targeting one sect, and then an equally bloody pogrom targeting a different sect less a decade later. We're unlike France in that our leader never burned an entire religious sect at the stake. We're unlike Italy in that we never had political and religious authority so thoroughly intermingled that it was scarcely possible to tell where one left off and the other began. We are also unlike those countries in that most of our population is religious. Religion has not been a significant factor in American history, and certainly far less significant than the influence of religion in the history of any European nation you might name. However, most of our population believes in fairy tales a sane eight year child would laugh at. Maybe Dawkins was right in The God Delusion in suggesting that somehow by enshrining religion as separate from the state, we've created a kind of religious preserve.

 

[Beady]

Even you agree that, or you'd not see the lessening of religious beliefs as progress.

There's a difference between being in denial and being wrong. As far as religion goes, the religous are guilty of cherrypicking the evidence and a whole lot of different kinds of "misinterpretation," but most of them do not deny the evidence exists. They just bend the evidence to fit their preconceived notions. No one on this board is ever guilty of such a thing, are they?