• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Atheists thought immoral, even by fellow atheists: study

Regardless, even if we grant the premise of the OP, it doesn't mean that atheists are immoral, only that people think that atheists are immoral.

We all know atheists have a PR problem. This is nothing new.
 
arthwollipot said:
Regardless, even if we grant the premise of the OP, it doesn't mean that atheists are immoral, only that people think that atheists are immoral.

We all know atheists have a PR problem. This is nothing new.
Click to expand...

And if that is a prevalent view in a society someone who is brought up in that society may share that perception even if they are an atheist.

A good example is how many women were against universal suffrage for women before it happened (and in countries where it is still to happen are against it).
 
arthwollipot said:
Regardless, even if we grant the premise of the OP, it doesn't mean that atheists are immoral, only that people think that atheists are immoral.

We all know atheists have a PR problem. This is nothing new.
Click to expand...

actually, the paper goes into some detail regarding the evolutionary advantage of religiosity as having a significant impact on the results of the study.

I of course find that their speculation regarding prejudice/bias as a cause to be unfounded.

Smoke/fire and all.
 
The Big Dog said:
No they did not, for reasons that become clear if one were to read the actual paper that I linked.
Click to expand...

No, they split that question into two separate questions and asked one to half of the participants and the other to the other half...

Doesn't affect anything SG said.
 
I worked with a biblical literalist and he once asked me in all seriousness, if I don't believe in the word of God, why don't I just go around killing, stealing, and raping? He also told me he used to be like that before he found God. He found his morality and ethics through the process of being born again. Perhaps this stuff about atheists being immoral is simply projection on the part of frustrated religious folks that have these secret urges to do bad things? Why is it so hard to understand that we can create a moral and ethical framework that we believe to be right, and then follow it willingly (not with a threat of Hell over our heads, and the knowledge that we are born full of sin)?
 
Porpoise of Life said:
No, they split that question into two separate questions and asked one to half of the participants and the other to the other half...

Doesn't affect anything SG said.
Click to expand...

Of course it does, her statement regarding the methodology was not accurate.
 
It's best to discuss things in tiny little digestible chunks, rather than an in depth exchange. We wouldn't want to be able to keep track of who's actually wrong about anything... /s
 
Beerina said:
.........We are morally depraved and dangerous..........
Click to expand...

Probably in roughly the same sort of proportion as religious people are........but that wouldn't float the OP's boat.
 
Imhotep said:
It's best to discuss things in tiny little digestible chunks, rather than an in depth exchange. We wouldn't want to be able to keep track of who's actually wrong about anything... /s
Click to expand...

I have found that it makes sense to nip wrong statements in the bud just as soon as possible.

The paper's explanation of its methodology and their reasoning for it is set forth therein, love to see some "in depth" exchange about the actual methodology.
 
The Big Dog said:
Here is a summary of an interesting new study that reveals that Atheists thought immoral, even by fellow atheists.

And it revealed that "atheists are broadly perceived as potentially morally depraved and dangerous."

The study measured the attitudes of more than 3,000 people in 13 countries on five continents.

They ranged from "very secular" countries such as China and the Netherlands, to countries with high numbers of believers such as the United Arab Emirates, United States, and India.
Click to expand...

Fine. At first glance the study clearly suggests that people are more likely to believe that a serial klller is an atheist than a person of religion; however, the actual methodology makes it clear that people unable to detect and avoid the conjunction fallacy are more likely to believe that a serial klller is an atheist than a person of religion. We can therefore note initially that the study is self-selecting of people who are not inclined to question their own reasoning; therefore, it's rather directly targeted at bias rather than rational analysis.

The Big Dog said:
Although not terribly surprising, the conclusion that it was due to "bias" seems like wishful thinking
Click to expand...

And this is where the OP departs from evidence and strays into personal bias itself. One strong point in favour of the conclusion of bias is that mentioned above; everyone who has given other than a null response has already committed a logical fallacy in doing so. The methodology of the study ensures this, and therefore explicitly excludes the possibility that the respondent has carefully considered the question and its implications.

To determine whether the result arises from bias or from rational analysis of the facts, one might look at data that points to an objectively quantifiable difference between atheists and religious people; if one found that atheists were more moral than, or equally moral to, religious people, then the result would clearly arise from bias. The only result that would overturn a supposition of bias would be one that shows that atheists are globally and significantly less moral than the religious, and I'm unaware of any such result having been rigorously derived; on the contrary, many studies find very little difference between the morality of atheists and religious people. Given that, a general perception that atheists are less moral can only be due to prejudicial bias.

Dave
 
Dave Rogers said:
I'm unaware of any such result having been rigorously derived; on the contrary, many studies find very little difference between the morality of atheists and religious people. Given that, a general perception that atheists are less moral can only be due to prejudicial bias.

Dave
Click to expand...

False dichotomy.

In fact, an alternative is suggested in the first line of the paper!

Mounting evidence supports long-standing claims that religions can extend cooperative networks 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9 .
Click to expand...

Thus one can easily see that we are hard wired by evolution to understand that atheism is immoral.
 
Last edited:
The Big Dog said:
False dichotomy.
Click to expand...

Knee-jerk denialism. If the majority of people believe A and data shows A is not true, then by definition people are biased in favour of believing A.

The Big Dog said:
In fact, an alternative is suggested in the first line of the paper!
Click to expand...

And qualified almost immediately, though I'm sure it's the cherry you found it most attractive to pick.

The Big Dog said:
Thus one can easily see that we are hard wired by evolution to understand that atheism is immoral.
Click to expand...

Weasel words; "understand" implies a finding of fact. "Believe" would be an appropriate substitution given that no evidence of this finding is on offer.

I find it bizarre, though not surprising, that you are adamant that nobody should misrepresent the findings of this paper except for your blatant attempts to misrepresent it as proving that atheists are, in fact, less moral. It's a level of hypocrisy that my personal bias suggests to me is most prevalent among the religious; that, of course, is by no means proof that it actually is.

Dave
 
Dave Rogers said:
And qualified almost immediately, though I'm sure it's the cherry you found it most attractive to pick.

Weasel words; "understand" implies a finding of fact. "Believe" would be an appropriate substitution given that no evidence of this finding is on offer.

SNIP

Dave
Click to expand...

Qualified? You mean hand waved away, don't you? Because the studies that were presented were not qualified nor did the paper make an effort to do so.

What we see is a myriad of reasons why atheists are perceived as less moral, including the most obvious that atheists are less moral, and the fact that people are hard wired by evolution to understand that atheists are less moral.

By the way, I snipped the personal attacks, if that is all that you intend to bring to the table from here on in, don't bother.
 
Dave Rogers said:
Fine. At first glance the study clearly suggests that people are more likely to believe that a serial klller is an atheist than a person of religion; however, the actual methodology makes it clear that people unable to detect and avoid the conjunction fallacy are more likely to believe that a serial klller is an atheist than a person of religion.
Dave
Click to expand...

Not even that. It could be that they are more likely to believe that a teacher is an atheist than a person of religion.
 
The Big Dog said:
Thus one can easily see that we are hard wired by evolution to understand that atheism is immoral.
Click to expand...

I understand the countless priests who have been molesting children over several years (and then not being punished but merely "moved" to somewhere else) as highly immoral.

What do you think about the fact that religious people, even those who swore to serve "god", can be highly immoral?
 
StackOverflow said:
I understand the countless priests who have been molesting children over several years (and then not being punished but merely "moved" to somewhere else) as highly immoral.

What do you think about the fact that religious people, even those who swore to serve "god", can be highly immoral?
Click to expand...

That is addressed in the study as well, did you not see that?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom