I heard that psychedelics not only can cause an atheist to become more religious, but vice versa, too. Without a professional overseeing you, the results of a session tend to be more unpredictable, though.
Can you a make a video about why people who weren't raised religious or practising start become religious? I think this would be also very interesting!
I was raised Anglican in Ghana but turned atheist in my late teens. I used to think so too, that critical thinking and reasoning turned me atheist, but as I got older my mind has changed on it somewhat. I know lots of theists who continue to believe despite being exposed to the same info that I got and even agreeing with some of it. I think it's because they genuinely love the religious communities that they're in and they love the lives they have as spiritual people, and frankly, good for them. Sadly, I grew up in a country where religious institutions are overly powerful and use that power to bully, persecute and oppress. When I tell people that I left because of the hypocrisy and self-righteousness, I get told that I only left because I want to sin. That's not a community that will ever welcome me and I'm not eager to be a part of it.
I was raised atheist by my family, because of a negative interaction my grandma had with their church. About a month after my grandfather left my grandma, right after WW2, and left her with their 5 kids, no support. The church leader told her she wasn’t being a good member of the church because she wouldn’t donate for a new parking lot for the church. My grandma was a kind woman, always happy and kind and understanding and empathetic. But when she told us that story, the amount of anger dripping from her voice even 40 years later was palpable. I was never tempted to look to religion my entire life because the gods never seem to follow through with the things they are supposed to care about.
I remember a story I found on reddit, of a woman whose church kicked her and her family out after her husband (and the family's sole earner) committed suicide, leaving her ultimately broke, homeless, without support and trying to raise multiple kids in a small town. Kicked her out because her husband "sinned." I can empathize both with that redditor's plight, and your grandmother's deep and abiding rage- there's nothing worse than the people who told you to trust them with your immortal soul turning on you in your time of greatest need for the absolute *shittiest* of reasons, and ones outside your control at that.
One of my favorite jokes inspired my view of atheism: A famed atheist has finished giving a lecture about non-belief in Dublin, when two men walk up to them. “We want to know whether you’re a Catholic or a Protestant?” The atheist says “I’m an atheist, so I don’t think God exis-“ “Yeah, yeah, we know that. But is it the Catholic God or the Protestant God you don’t believe in?”
As a German this makes total sense to me. The 30-year war between Catholicism and Protestantism happened in and around what is Germany today. So we also have our own little jokes about this topic. Like the Bavarian (deeply catholic state) joke where a dialect-speaking country boy confesses he has a crush on someone. His father guesses some possible options (each very typical Bavarian girls names) and the boy then says his crushes name which is a non-Bavarian sounding boys name. So ofc his fathers reaction is the outraged: "But he is Protestant!". The deeply Bavarian Catholics just care so much about their child marrying another local that they even forget to be homophobic.
I heard another story from the same area: somone asks a group of young men if they believe in God, they say "of course we don't believe in God, we're protestants!"
@@trevordillon1921 Just looked it up, apparently the conflict is officially called "The Thirty Years' War" (it was from 1618 to 1648, primarily in Central Europe). Of course that is not the only war between Catholics and Protestants. But the one that strongly influences German attitutes until today.
The idea of apathetic atheism kind of reminds me of that Karl Marx quote that's always taken out of context. "Religion is the opiate of the masses." People often misinterpret that as him being critical of religious people. When in fact it was him expressing sympathy for the religious and being harshly critical of the upper class for making life so utterly miserable for the masses that they needed to turn to religion just to make the emotional pain stop. I wonder what he would have thought of the apathetic atheism theory.
Yes, but Marx was also heavily critical of idealist worldviews. His work was primarily focused on demystifying the world and our social relations, away from the belief in platonic ideals and towards an understanding of material causes and the dialectic which emerges from the effect.
@@Rocky-ur9mn I don't think Nietzsche said Christianity created resentment between classes, he thought it was a product of that resentment. I don't even think the Marx quote is incompatible with a Nietzschean view. In the Genealogy of Morals, he talks about how the idea of Hell enables Christians to fulfill their violent desires while remaining passive. This notion of religion providing a cathartic release to people denied what they really desire sounds pretty close to the opiate of the masses.
@@wergthy6392 no Nietzsche argued that the Christian idea of last will become first or that the upper class has a responsibility to help the poor etc, leads the lower class to growing resentments against them when they do not fulfill these expectations
Yes! Having actually read Marx (unlike many people who quote him) his point was that opiates reduce pain, *not* that they are addictive. People in pain need religion, which some parts of this video seem to back up
As a young person surrounded by religious people, I remember realizing: "If I was born elsewhere I'd have a different religion". That simple thought eventually lead me to the obvious conclusion that all religion is made up.
@@WhaleManMan it's just like realising that if you were born elsewhere, you'd use a different currency. This should be enough to conclude the "money" Is a man made concept
it basically means you can not prove anything with your Bible, quoran, or any other religious faith It would always be bias and cannot be reason, you can only acept or reject it.
@@AgnesBooth-zu7tw Aren't most peoples ideologies based on ideas they were raised in? And even if someone were biased in favor of them, how does this make those ideas less likely?
Many people in this comment section are young and thus still have plenty to learn, myself included. But I can't agree to what you said, because your point seems to be more targetted towards two ideas: 1. That human biases/determinism shape faith more so than a higher power, and 2. The common fundamentalist idea that only one religion is right, the others are dammed. For the second point, assuming you have faced that idea, I'd recommend just ignoring it because while it is widespread, both of us can agree any divine element would be wise enough to discern nature and nurture. But the first point is far more interesting because, if you think about it, faiths have lived Millenia with that idea being well established. Portions of the Old Testament were written on a time in which Israel had already been conquered, and the authors were in exile. Back then, being conquered means your gods become inferior to the conqueror's. Not only that but even back then it was known of the "Far East", which already had Vedanism, Brahmas and Buddhism, the list goes on. While this latter contact is still hypothetical, the idea of different religions coexisting (even if not peacefully), and that your birth would determine your faith, was well accepted (to the point where the Old Testament will constantly use terms like "The god(s) of X people"). Our world got bigger information wise, but we'd be underestimating our ancestors for assuming they would never have thought "oh, maybe if I was born in Babylon, I wouldn't be worshipping Yahweh". Yes, all that we have regarding spirituality is based on human experiences and minds. That is only natural, you can't expect us to witness an angel and NOT be biased on our interpretations. But as a counterpoint to the idea that thus, the divine would not exist: how are you sure anything in this world that we study is not subject to our interpretative bias? One of the biggest challenges of scientific thinking is adequately doing a study while trying to remove all bias (I recommend reading Popper's philosophy and its influence on statistics). Even so, we fail, and we are always going to objectively fail: we will never visit all planets in the universe in our lifetime to determine if alien life does or doesn't exist, the same way any natural study will determine a sample with limited elements (unless you'd want to study the trillions of cells that exist on the planet, it's better to select a reasonable amount). The point is, this distance to the absolute truth is well accounted for, and it hasn't prevented our scientific knowledge to go far and wide. Even so, this limit to our capabilities does prevent us from studying any hypothetical spiritual phenomena, assuming it lies beyond our senses and instruments. So right off the bat, we admit if spirituality exists, it can't be currently accessed by our science (biased by our own limits). That leaves us to other methods and lines of thinking that don't necessarily point towards materialistic experimentation: philosophy, personal experiences, etc. And this is the point: for Millenia, there have been wise people who debated religion, who had faith in the non-material, and who even allegedly experienced it. Don't you think we'd be too arrogant and biased to assume they were obviously wrong because they were in the past and didn't have the resources we have today? If you read the Vedas and many Buddhist texts, you'll find wisdom that was written ~700 years before Christ, and that perfectly describes many of the biggest problems the current western civilization faces. Not only that, but how many people across the centuries have said to have witnessed the paranormal/spiritual? Don't you think we'd be arrogant and biased to assume for them they were hallucinating, even if they were more accustomed to their own environments than both of us? Some people go as far as using notions such as "mass hallucinations", which sounds scientific but is just a junk term that gets overused as an easy solution to a not so simple issue. In conclusion, if I were you, I'd instead search what COMMON wisdom lies across the different views. Search the similar points talked about in the Bible, in the Vedas, by Buddhism, by native american religions. If what we believe is so determined by our environment, then what rose in common, even in completely distant cultures, and that was preached and respected from the common to the wise, then that right there is true wisdom. I could go on and say this wisdom might change your views, but only your future self will determine so. As long as you do your research and try undermining your own biases, that is.
So many of the former believers I've met were driven out of their faith by empathy; they couldn't square the idea of being loving with the teachings of their congregations. Former minister Dan Barker recounts his mother, shortly after leaving her Christian faith saying, "I don't need to hate anymore!" These folks saw their fellow congregants acting contrary to what they understood their faith to require.
@@foodchewer OP didn’t say that’s atheism. They just explained which path ultimately led some people to atheism. Most people don’t leave their beliefs, they just leave the hate fueling church and join one that is open and caring.
@@pansepot1490Christianity fundamentally believes that people deserve to be tortured for eternity if they believe anything but the dogma. There is no church that doesn't teach the Bible. You can't whitewash Hell. And you shouldn't expect people to ignore it. I can't fathom how someone coul believe in Hell and still function on a day to day basis.
I became an atheist because I started to doubt the things that used to convince of my religion's truth. This wasn't as much of a cold logical process as much as it was a slow creep of doubt that eventually became stronger than the belief. Now I'm unconvinced of my old beliefs.
I tried to hold onto my faith but the doubt kept increasing. After a few years I realized I was holding onto the faith for the sake of holding onto it. I was ignoring doubt. But when faced with the doubt head-on, it was too much for religion to overcome.
@@JM1993951 In the end I was holding on to it for the sake of holding on, too. I didn't know who I was without it, because right up to the day I left I was very active and devoted.
I never had a slow influx of doubt so much as I could never bring myself to actually believe, even a little bit, as much as I tried. At eight years old, I told my mother that I didn't believe in god which shocked her. It kinda shocked me too that I would say it out loud but when I thought about it later I realised I'd said it because it was absolutely true.
Speaking for myself, on my own behalf; I realised I was an atheist when, as a child, I learned that there was more than one religion and that religion was different in different countries. It made me realise that religion is a cultural phenomenon, and it was a short few steps from there before I was fully atheist. That was when I was a child, and I've become more stable in my position the older I have gotten and the more about religion and the world I have learned.
You're not alone in that experience. In my case, it was product of moving around to a few different countries while young -a formative experience that few have. If your youth is more static, and you have direct imprinting from one religious community, that experience shapes you far more than any argument I may have.
@@seanmurphy7011 Their realization came after they had already been raised believing a religion. Of course they considered their position might be wrong, they didn't hold that position up until they had reason to hold it.
here in Indonesia, people are more open to „agnostic“ as I am observing. although it’s mandatory to „label“ our religion, but many people in the social media are not shy anymore to declare that they are agnostic“ rather than „atheist“.
@@Marta1Buck fair point. but the fact people are getting aware of exiting the religion is normal. it’s somewhat surprising, especially for the nation who happens legalized 7 major religions on their law. the polarization is getting wider and details.
it's considered normal to leave a religion but def not to not believe in a god. Like it does not compute for most ppl since they assume it's a basic fact that a higher power exists.
As someone that has a family that are super religious and the church is cult-ish, a HUGE reason I went down the athiest route was being in public school with kids that different religions and seeing how they rebelled. Once i became a Teenager, unironically metal music helped me question a lot of spirituality- especially Death's Spiritual Healing album- in which they criticize Televangelists and greedy people who use Jesus and religion as a means to fool and scam people. Which reminded me SO MUCH of what the church my family goes to was doing at the time. (They're like an MLM scam but with Jesus instead of business). For a time I was a cringe edgy athiest until a close friend of mine became a Buddhist and I saw how it genuinely helped him, which opened up my mind to "hey not all religious people are stupid or too lost in the sauce". I'm still atheist but very respectful to other people's spirituality and believes, the only thing I won't respect is the "pastors" and churches that scam uneducated/desperate people for money. And athiests that belittle or mock religious people, look it doesn't hurt to be kind 😂
@@jmgonzales7701 what are you talking about have you seen any hard proof of any god yourself because i doubt you have or are you just some really young kid saying some nonsense not knowing what they're talking about
@@xxGreenRoblox Thanks for telling me i look young, I'm 48. There are no hard proof for God no good arguments for its existence. Its mainly Cope for us humans and a product of education and superstition rather than rationality. Our belief in God is also based on our parents and geography.
I suffer from the mental illness of thinking that if I present people with strong arguments and data that they will change their opinions accordingly, but "You cannot reason a person out of a position he did not reason himself into in the first place.” - Jonathan Swift
I genuinely feel like I'm too neurodivergent to ever be truly religious. Curious about spirituality? Yes. Interested in the lore, mythology, and history of various religions? Definitely. Drawn to the aesthetics and symbolism of faith and worship? Absolutely. But i feel like my brain is wired in such a way that i don't think i could ever truly believe in any faith. I would ask too many questions, or think about things a little too hard for it to make sense to me. I'm not even saying this as an "I'm smarter than everyone" ego thing. I just genuinely don't think i have the capacity to be religious in the traditional sense of the word
@@grimtheghastly8878 I read somewhere people one the autistic spectrum tend to be more likely believing in some form of impersonal deity (like Higher Mind or something) that a tradional idea of a person god with whom you have a personal relationship. There's also some wild ideas about ancient people having DID (dissotiative identity disorder) more often on average and treating it as a disorder, but rather a normal thing, with alters being essentially treated more like external gods, but that's too far out and likely impossible to prove. Google it up, I'm not best at explaning things. So, one form of neurodivergence or another can definitely have an influence on religiosity, its distinct flavour or even the likelihood of being receptive to it. P.S. I love the mythology. ☺️
ADHD here and I love to research, theorize, and pick a part ALL religions, and yea also not religious. Closest I get nowadays is agnostic deism. Maybe a supreme being set the universe into motion and is letting play out to see what happens (like a super-sim in madden lol)… but yea no personal god or anything. I also think it’s kinda conceited to think I’d be a special being to something so unknowable/powerful; furthermore, it’d solve the whole “problem of evil” by the being either neutral or completely hands off… as you can tell I’ve hyper-fixated on these topics a little too much.
I became an atheist later in life because I got tired of the hypocrisy of religious people and got tired of being let down by empty promises. I had doubts many years before I actually left Christianity.
Perhaps if the people who tried to bring me up baptist hadn't insisted on a completely literal interpretation of the bible I wouldn't have become an Atheist.
I grew up in religious extremism. A bad experience in the religion led me to start thinking rationally for the first time in my life and I lost my faith in a few months.
I also was raised by a religious extremist(my mother). My father was religious but not in the same way. I did have a phase where I thought I was becoming an Atheist but ultimately landed on Agnosticism. Truth is, I don’t know the answer, so I won’t pretend that I do.
@@TaLeng2023 That’s fair, For me I don’t like to make an assumption but rather utilize evidence as the basis for any of my personal beliefs. The truth is, our terms may not even suffice. You could easily replace the terms God and Holy spirit with Energy and Manifestation and it would describe the same idea. We just don’t have the capacity to put all of existence under our scope. However we have been working to understand it and that’s enough for me. I just cannot answer this question everyone has, let alone determine if it is actually even the correct line of questioning. I have my own opinions, everyone does. I have had people try to “bring me closer to God” but in reality they just want me to fuel their ego, the same with the Atheists that wanted me to “choose logic instead of religion”. Of course, not all of either group is as arrogant to think they’re correct and everyone else has to be wrong. But the ones who were, only drove me further into my decision to become a proud Agnostic. Whatever someone chooses is fine by me! Just respect my choice as well.
One thing about the study that said rationality isn't tied to athiesm, especially in the UK. In the UK religion is such a mild version that it doesn't have any sway over public life. So people don't need to be athiest. It's not an option they even need to think about. Whereas in the US where religion is such a force, people will be forced to make a choice and engage critical thinking.
Exactly this, only after I came to the US where I see religion being pitted directly against rationality and/or science (e.g., either God isn't real or evolution is fake). I imagine in culture where religion are not interpreted literally (like my country), there isn't this dilemma where you have to pick one over the other.
Europe as a whole has been slowly losing faith since the religious wars of the16th and 17th centuries, when people could see directly the toxic effects of giving too much credence and power to the overtly religious. The American immigrants, however, needed religion to justify and absolve them for genocide and slavery. Meanwhile, Europeans were doing all that stuff across the seas and out of sight. Postscript: I wrote this in response to a different thread, however RUclips has placed it here,
Anglicanism has long been the state religion of the UK. Traditionally it has had power and it has made great efforts to oppress those of differing denominations, particularly Catholics. So I present an alternative hypothesis: Most Christians in the UK are Anglican (and its offshoots) or Catholic. Calvinist demographics are low. Both of these have a long tradition of embracing reason and critical thinking. Most US Christians are offshoots of Calvinism, and Calvin not only rejected reason but called it a wh0r3. Might have more to do with which religion than whether a particular one wields power.
I recall what killed my faith in catholicism. I was in a cathechism meet where they handed us a little slip of folded up, flower shaper piece of paper and told us to put into water. Now, I knew this trick, it was paper that was sensitive to temperature and moisture, as soon as I'd put it into water, it'd unfold. When exactly that happened, the cathechists then told us that this was God giving life to the flower-shaped paper and making it bloom. So, I'd guess my nonbelief would be that I realized the church was lying to me about something and wondered what more they were lying to me about. This has changed absolutely nothing about my life.
I grew up without any specific religion. My dad was private about any faith he had, and made sure my mom didnt indoctrinate us with anything she herself had been forced into in childhood. He always told me: "believe whatever you want to; just make sure you can explain it". I have since found that very very few people share that perspective when it comes to beliefs. That basic rule kept me from so much delusion. It's kept me sane in any religious conversations or endeavors, and free from anger with politics. It's helped me realize there's really nothing to these faiths. Not to mention a large part of the morality they all trumpet is just re-purposed from philosophy with gods demanding morality intead of rationality fostering it
I was raised without any religious instruction from my parents. They weren't atheists, just vaguely agnostic and very busy. This was in the American south in the 1950s and 60s, so the culture around me was certainly very theistic and very Christian. I assumed I was supposed to Christian, so I was, at least nominally. But the religion that our neighbors espoused seemed to be about buying new clothes at Easter and giving gifts at Christmas. And, although I was told that God is love, the most fervent Christians seemed to be the ones who were most eager to see other people burn in hell for eternity. And, by the way, we still said the Lord's prayer and had Bible verses read out every morning for years after such practices were held to be unconstitutional in public schools. So now I don't pretend to know if there is a God, just like I don't pretend to understand string theory. Could be, don't know, so I'll just tend my garden, like Candide.
Fantastic video. I grew up in a baptist-christian household for most of my life and was constantly told not to question god because his authority is 'absolute' therefore me questioning him is the same as my faith wavering and thus becoming lukewarm rather than 'steadfast'. As a child, I never thought anything of it, but when I was 19 I began to truly question everything. Human nature is to question, to be curious, and to seek logic and reasoning. It made no sense that I was supposed to blindly accept these ancient words as facts and not question them, as that goes against my very human nature. Restricting me from approaching my own religion with basic analytics is what drew me away from it. To outsiders, it just seemed like I became atheist because I wanted to 'avoid accountability for my sins' and many still see me as 'lost' til this day, but ultimately I feel more human than ever, and there's no changing that fact. I wanted freedom to think. There's no 'thinking' when I'm fed what to think.
I definitely agree that "rationality" is overemphasized in explaining the process of secularization and the rise of atheism, and I myself can say that the main reason I'm an atheist is because my grandparents, despite being theists, almost never went to church, used religious figures or even talked about religion, which in turn made my parents make the switch very easily. However, I am surprised that there is no mention of how violence from religious groups or institutions can cause people to become atheist. I've heard many stories in the LGBT community about how homophobia or transphobia pushed them away from their religious families, or how almost all personal tales of people living in cults end with them becoming atheist. I feel like this is am extremely important factor, especially as many of the "new atheists" come from places with a lot religious extremism which is why they are so much more vocal about atheism and nonreligion than someone like me who has been atheist their whole life.
I think that the aspect you refer to gets classified under “leaving religion because of critical thinking”. Afaik, there’s people who leave cults and/or have experienced abuse in their church and still they remain believers. There’s lgbtq Christians and lgbtq churches.
Well that seems to be addressed in credibility, if you see people not respecting their own beliefs or doing immoral things that is a factor of disbelief
@@RandPersonnthey are heretics as harsh as it sounds, homosexual behaviour is formally condemned in the new testament but that doesn't mean hatred for homosexual people, in fact most Christians view LGBT as victims of life who were presented a sort of challenge that lead them to sin
@@Nicolas_II (I am quoting another comment) The bible says a lot of things. Not all of it coherent or internally consistent. It would be impossible to believe everything as the bible teaches, as you would need to believe some things that other parts of the bible condemn. As this is a clearly demonstrable fact, easily discovered with minimal research, the bible is clearly not infallible.
As an ex-mormon who now considers myself agnostic, I can tell you that I saw big doctrine issues with the God I was being taught about and the requirements to get into the best kingdom of heaven. I left. But technically, I was just an "inactive member." Years later, I ended up doing more research on Mormon history. I officially resigned from the LDS church when I learned more and decided I didn't want to be affiliated with Mormonism in any way. I went to a few different Christian churches with friends, but I feel I have a distrust for organized religion. I have a fascination with religion and philosophy as a whole. This semester, I'm taking an online intro to world religion class at my community college. The textbook is Religion Matters by Stephen Prothero. I'm super excited to learn about religion academically. I really enjoy this channel, too.
I had the same experience with the church. After my first year at BYU I became an agnostic tending towards atheism because of the church leaders’ terrible, unrighteous and unethical behavior and too much emphasis on things that aren’t even remotely Christlike or follow his teachings in the NT. Three years later I was in a weather related accident where I was thrown through the windshield and declared dead by the EMTs. Let’s just say that I had an experience that changed my mind about the existence of God and Jesus. However, my beliefs about them are very different from what I learned at home and in the church. I’m glad that I had this experience because it taught me that the church doctrines aren’t healthy and actually go against what is found in the NT. In recent years it’s only gotten worse, and I am thankful to be out.
@@monicacall7532 I'm also really thankful to be out. I find it outrageous how the LDS church behaves, and then the leaders don't think apostates have any good reason for leaving. I feel like no longer being in agreement with who God is and who they say God is makes the most sense to leave any religion. But of course, we "just wanted to sin." Although I will say I do enjoy ice tea on a hot summer day now. 😄
I grew up LDS and took years to deconstruct my belief until there was nothing left. The cognitive dissonance that left me when I finally accepted atheism was an incredibly freeing. I was black listed from callings in the church for a few years now because I would teach transparently in classes (things about church history, old and new testament contradictions) and I would do so with an open mind, asking how people come to terms with the history, but it upset people too much. People just want to believe a fairy tale because it makes them feel good. Continued study made it so I just couldn't believe anymore.
I always enjoy hearing about others' experiences in the church, out of the church, entering and leaving too, because these are such real experiences. I too love the study of religion, philosophy, sociology, cognitive/neuroscience, and the church through books like candy. I also really enjoy this channel because it makes me think. Meanwhile, I have had many times thinking deeply about my beliefs and questioning. While I've gone through times where my testimony seemed to be teetering on the edge, I have experiences that remind me why I believe what I believe. Once I strip away Mormon culture, I love the doctrine and have yet to find anything that brings me more hope and peace in my life. As a scientist and professor in a top-5 university department, I'm very aware of the many reasons why people struggle to believe (naturalistic, cultural, historical, etc.), but I'm also deeply aware of how much "faith" I put in the science that I rely upon in every experiment done in my lab. While the epistemology of science and religion is different, I have found the tools used to obtain truth in the different fields are equally different, so I find no conflict in my faith and my science... just religious culture and science culture... or when people use faith tools to put bounds on science or use scientific tools to put bounds on faith and reality. However, I acknowledge and accept that not everyone else feels the same since their life experiences have not been the same as mine. Thus, I appreciate people sharing their experiences, like you have, since it gives me a glimpse into the journey of someone else. I regularly think about what is different about my two brothers who left the church in their 30s while I've only grown in my love for the gospel (this past year, I had an "oh-crap" moment when I was called to teach Sunday school, and knew I'd have to face a number of open questions I had, ranging from deutero Isaiah to 1800s discussions aligned with Alma 32. Oddly enough, this was a blessing having to study these as it has strengthened my faith (even if a bit more nuanced than your typical member), as long as I peel away the cultural contamination and make sure that I focus on the two great commandments by strengthening my connection to God and also serve and lift others, wherever I am and whomever they may be and whatever their beliefs are. Anyway, thanks for sharing your experience, and I wish you the best.
@@NLs-su2ig For me I feel like our stories are opposites in a couple of ways. I'm currently a younger member of the church and love my good friends and community but hate how evil the church is some times. You should know as a sociology major that personal experiences especially in high control groups shouldn't be the reason you believe. As for the reasons why you think people "struggle" (naturalistic, cultural, historical) You forgot to mention doctrinal issues. This is the main issue that I have with the LDS church and I think one of the main reasons others do too. Also what scientist has ever put a bound on faith? Or on reality? Its always been the other way around. I would recommend instead of thinking about your 2 brothers, you should call them and ask them why they left (also people just need to call their families more often). As a humanist I like the second great commandment. My favorite book of mormon verse is: "when you are in the service of your fellow beings ye are only in the service of your god" (or something like that). What is your favorite BoM Verse?
Something that was hinted at was most important for me becoming an atheist - anti-creds, if you will. Seeing respected people in positions of authority behaving in ways contrary to their teaching is a glass breaking moment, even more so when you try to raise the issue to someone else and they dismiss it. I can process people being hypocrites as an atheist, because that’s just an inherent flaw in our coding. But I couldn’t handle or understand it within the premise that certain people are being guided by the divine, and are actually using the whole front to steal and horde wealth.
With this kind of question there has to be a distinct difference made between "Why does a group of people become less religious?" and "Why does a religious person choose to become an atheist later on in life?" Equating trends of a population with the choices of individuals just becomes messy.
A population consists of many individuals, many of whom think they are making up their own minds. However, an important aspect of religion is that it often says "We believe .... x, y or z." There's both strength and weakness in sharing belief. It can be very hard to break out of a shared belief, especially if there are "credibility enhancing displays." Do you stop crossing yourself, reciting shibboleths, giving rice to the Brahmins?
Religion affected my childhood to a great extent. I lived in a multigenerational family, and, despite not attending a place of worship, my Grandma strongly influenced our morality because of her own Welsh Chapel upbringing. Believing in God was just as natural as breathing. As I grew up, I was not a churchgoer, but I have been described by several people as the best Christian that they knew because my life revolves around Christian morality. I live a life strongly influenced by religious ethical beliefs.. I also know a lot about religion. I trained to be a teacher at a Protestant college and did my degree at a Catholic college. When I got a job teaching, I was asked to teach some Religious Studies because it was assumed that I must have a strong religious background. Yet I did not, I was actually somewhat apathetic about religious practice. However, I enjoyed studying religion even though I had no interest in participating. Despite my religious apathy, I still believed in God. Throughout my life, I have questioned this belief. I've tried to be rational about such beliefs. I've even tried to be an athiest, coming up with rational reasons why there is no God. I am 70 years old. Despite my efforts to become an athiest, my belief is as strong today as it was when I was a child. I do not have an unquestioning belief in God. I question God's role all of the time. However, no matter how hard I try to not believe, however much I criticise ir rationalise, I am unable to accept that God does not exist. I am quite happy not to have this belief dominate my life. I am equally happy that my life has been positively influenced by the morality of people whose belief in God is strong. Despite all of my attempts, theism comes naturally to me, and atheism is out of my mindset. I've come to accept that I am just not a natural athiest, even though several of my relatives, with the same upbringing, have been athiests for years.
As long as you're aware of how it affects your decision making, I'd say it is healthy to believe in something. If believing in God makes you a more empathetic and caring person, then there is no reason to stop.
It seems to me you have a really healthy relationship with religion. There is no reason to try to become atheist. I grew up culturally religious (going to church on Sundays as a child and attending the kids service there) but just never really believed even though I really enjoyed the year I spent attending church and preparing for my conformation for almost one year. The youth group at my church was really great, fun and open-minded so I feel like I also learnt a lot. But my parents on the other hand are really different. They still believe in God, but in no way that would influence their ability to be rational and scientific. Because to them religion is about belief, emotion, philosophy and has nothing at all to do with science. And I think as long as you don't use religion to harm anyone or deny scientific realities there is really no reason to stop.
Ok, but the devil is in the details - does you god tell you what to do? does your god tell you what others can do? does your god have a plan for us that you have to enact? do you talk to your god, and does it talk back? If not, then you are an atheist as far as the rest of us are concerned, though you can call yourself whatever makes you comfortable and believe whatever you see fit. If yes, then I don't think you know what it means to be atheist, despite your claims at "trying" to be one.
Having been rised an atheist, I can't possibly genuinely believe in a god. I understand why people do it and all the rational arguments for it, yet I have 0 units of faith. I can see why it may even be beneficial to believe. I have a couple of very religious friends. I've been to church with them a few times and it all just sounds like complete made up stuff to me. Genuine faith is extremely difficult to build and to loose. It takes childhood education or an extreme experience to get it or to loose it.
@@ericb9804 This seems like a weird definition of atheism. There are many believers out there whose religion barely shows at all to other people. For many it is a very private matter that you don't talk about in your daily life unless someone specifically asks. I grew up Christian, going to church as a child. My parents both believe in God but I find it hard to think of anything concrete where their belief actually influenced what they did or said at all. Pretty much everything they say or do, their opinions that could be argued to be influences by being Christian could very well also stem from something else. That is quite normal in many countries, thinking all religious people are loud about their beliefs and push them onto others is quite ignorant
I agree with you on your premise but not on the death part. Religion is such a wide group of extremely complex, interconnected systems of beliefs, cosmologies, mythological, philosophical and moral systems, sociology, morality, traditions and now that you cannot over simply them like that. It's like saying: atheists are death cultists and nihilists. It's obviously isn't true. Neither is your statement applied to the followers of a single religion let alone the insanely varied religions. I also do believe religion is part of the human condition, like speech, music and tool use, and others. There is no humanity without religion. (Note, I didn't say there is no human without. But it is a key part of the species as a whole.)
yes it is dying. I dont know how old are you or where you are. I have seen in Mexico and USA, people are becoming more and more able to say that God is not the ultimate creator. It seems as if Gods powers are shrinking, and this is why organized religion is putting up all sorts of "marketing" about how teh world is trying to end religion. This is not the case, people are growing tired of a "God" that does not answer expert when it is convenient to the particular church hierarchy theya re a part of. It takes humanity a long time, but we get there. How long ago was it, that we used to worship everything ? Eventually we ahve borrowed it down to 5 or 6 religions, most of them with one God. We will eventually get to teh point where we realize, that there is no one running the circus, it is up to us. We will understand that consciousness is not what WE SAY it is. This is my thought and my hope in short. I thought Id share it
I was raised without religion for my first 8 years, although I did have books of Greek and Egyptian myths and even bible stories, I knew they were just stories. When I was introduced to religion (Christianity), I initially thought it was just a weird story time hour where we focused on the most boring of my storybooks. When I realized they believed it was all true, I felt a deep revulsion for them and began to misbehave in church until I was banned. I said ‘I don’t believe in those stories or any gods’, and was asked if I was an atheist. Being about 10 or 11 by then, I didn’t know what that was. They said ‘it means you’re a devil worshipper’, and I replied with a laugh, ‘How can I worship a devil when I don’t believe in that either?’ No one ever seems to study the people who were raised with love and without religion… I can’t be the only one? To me it just never computed, always seemed ridiculous, and like a waste of time, energy, resources, and life. Imagine I came to you and said ‘Alice is the one true god, she created the universe, and the Queen of Hearts is the devil.’ You would just think I was silly and maybe a little nuts. That is how religion has always seemed to me.
When I was 11 or 12-ish, it slowly dawned on me that yes, in fact, religion *_is_* still around, and *_not_* just a thing you learn about in Medieval Europe history class. And yes, the students who are taking the Religion subject *_are_* practicing the Christian doctrine, *_not_* treating it as a historical object of study. To me, it's always seemed similar to geocentrism, miasma theory and the like; a thing of the past from when humanity didn't know any better.
I was an adult by the time I realized that people actually believed in Christianity. Sure, I had been to churches and stuff like that, but I always saw that as some sort of hobby that those people just liked, and they agreed on the philosophy. And the crazy people in the US you heard about was obviously crazy first, and then organized themselves through a religion as an excuse for legitimacy. To me, the Bible was obviously no more true that the Red Riding Hood, or other such fairy tales. It came as a bit of shock when I found out that people actually believed in that "truly believing" way.
I eased into atheism, but there was certainly a straw that broke the camel’s back. We had moved about 2 years ago, and never really entered another church (bad experience with some megachurch leaders), but still watched services on Easter and such. I kept seeing things like how Christians were against the lgbtq+ community, among a bunch of other things don’t remember at the moment. One day, I brought up evolution in front of my friend who was IN A SCIENCE CLASS WITH ME while we were waiting for pickup. He said he didn’t believe in evolution, and then his older brother came over, made fun of me for believing in evolution, then mocked my favorite shirt. As I got into the car, I said “mom, I think I’m atheist.” Because I refused to be part of a group who were so cruel, and who would make fun of someone who understands fundamental facts of reality.
That's a valuable data point. Appreciate your candor. It shows that dumping religion, like joining relating isn't entirely based on rationality. (Though in your case the rational theory of evolution was the starting point). Sometimes, its caused by mockery. By the way, I commend your reaction to mockery. It is certainly more mature than the reaction to mockery found in the bible (2 Kings 2:23-24)
@@exoplanet11Honestly while the Christian “reject the truth with unrighteousness in their heart” canard is stupid, I suspect the reasons a lot of people become atheist are more emotional than they like to think. For me, the religion was top to bottom completely unappealing to me. Church was sickly saccharine, the concept of heaven was completely unappealing and a lot of the rules made no sense (ie being against homosexuality, lust being bad, no remarriage after divorce). Basically I had to follow rules I didn’t like in order to go somewhere I didn’t want to go to avoid being tortured forever. Combine that with having never felt any spiritual presence (and now seriously wondering if I’m neurologically incapable of it) and I was already kinda eyeing the exits by the time I started learning about atheism. To be clear I revisited the subject later wanting to believe during a low point in my life and I still found the actual religion too unappealing and frankly man made for me to seriously consider.
For me, growing up Muslim, I saw my coreligionists doing hard tasks, which made them seem credible. Yet, I soon saw Christians who were just as committed to their faith. This quickly led to an erosion in my belief that Islam was special or unique.
@@EspeonMistress00Considering the five pillars of faith and all the other various Hadith, which inevitably are used as a gap filler for anything the Quran missed, Islam is fairly ritualized and rigid compared to most Protestant flavors of Christianity. Also, a lot of the Islam you see today in MENA is effectively that part of the world having their own little revival over the last two centuries as a backlash against colonialism and Western ideology. Islam a thousand years ago, at least at the top levels of society, was heavily influenced by Neoplatonism. I'm not qualified to dive much deeper, but there was a fair more leeway in 1024 than in 2024, though that probably also had to do with Islam being barely three centuries old at that point.
@@EbonySaints I think being against colonialism is reasonable, but I don't think embracing religious fundamentalism, lowering the age of marriage from 15 to 9, discriminating against LGBT people and killing/punishing adult women simply for not wearing hijab are good, rational ways to fight against imperialism. Cuba is one of the most anti-American and anti-Western countries on earth, yet it has very liberal LGBT rights. Cuba is officialy an atheist state.
Dear Brother/Sister, I encourage you to come back to Islam. Belief in Islam is not special or unique because of the actions of the Muslims, rather it is because our religion is the only one in which a Hujjat-Allah (proof of God) is still alive and on Earth today, that being the Twelfth Imam, al-Mahdi (AS). I encourage you to read into Surah al-Nahl, and the story of Imam Mahdi AS. Barakallahu feek 💚🍇
I'm from the Czech Republic, one of the most Atheistic countries in the world. The reason why some many people here are Atheists might be historical. A combination of forced conversion from Protestantism to Catholicism, which was connected with oppression by German speaking Habsburgs until 1918 and rule of Communist regime in 2nd half of the 20th century might have lead to loss of interest in faith. Interestingly enough, neighbouring Poland, which was also a part of Communist block, is heavily religious, so Communism is not as much of a factor. What is typical for Czech people is belief in Luck or rise of modern alternative spirituality. A lot of people are seeing alternative healers or tarot card readers in order to get better or find out what their fortune is.
My dad was first generation Czech/American. He basically told me what you have related. Lots of anti-Habsburg sentiment over the ages. In fact, when Czechs immigrated to the US, over 75% of them gave up the Catholic religion. I remember growing up, that my dad said he was an athiest. I was shocked. My mom (first generation Slovenian) was brought up in the Catholic faith and raised my brother and myself as Catholics. Looking back, I can now relate to my dad's idea. I have been an atheist for 20 years and know exactly what he meant. He would tell the story about two women who couldn't stand each other but were religious. When they died, they both went to heaven and continued bickering. He said, who in the hell would want to put up with that. I agree. Thanks for your insight.
Thanks for that account. I had previously thought of Ireland as the country most messed up by Protestant/Catholic conflicts. But I forgot about Czechia. ...and you didn't even mention the Defenestrations of Prague.
@@paulkoza8652 but isnt this just confirmation bias? you are relying on anecdotal reasoning for your atheism, you look for evidence that supports you existing belief in atheism you mentioned your dads atheism and agree with his perspective without critically engaging with any alternative viewpoints, why so? genuinely, why?
@@paulkoza8652 first of all this is ad hominem and second of all this is begging the question, how is your dad right? because you said so? thats your evidence?
Rationality is detrimental to religious belief, BUT... That is only applicable, if you actually use your rationality on your faith. (and the religious tend to be good at avoiding that, and to compartmentalize their faith) Also, the more intelligent you are, the better you are at rationalizing your faith, which you are deeply invested in, and deeply want to believe, and you deeply want to avoid disbelieving. Hence why there is no clear societal correlation.
For me it was not being able to square the concept of a loving God with the existence of Hell. My mom was Christian and my dad was Atheist, though he never tried to push it on me and I was raised Christian. When people at my church told me that Atheists go to hell I knew they were talking (not specifically) about my dad. When they described that Hell was a place where people are punished for eternity then I had to question what kind of person heaps infinite punishment on another for guessing the wrong religion. Eventually I questioned *why* it was that I believed in God and I realized it was simply because I had been raised in a Christian church and family. If I had been raised Buddhist I would be equally sure of Buddha, if I were raised Hindu I would be equally sure of Vishnu and Shiva, etc. Finally I realized that while dooming someone to infinite punishment was not something a loving god would do, its a potent way for humans to control other humans with the threat of violence in the afterlife.
It seems a lot of folks in the comments including you associate God solely with Christianity and do not see Him as a concept in many religions.. this is quite sad
@ahmadjuwayni6256 he IS a concept in many religions. A contradicting concept, that can be loving, wrathful, have complete control over your life, or none at all. It can send you to hell for not believing, or for being a woman who shows a bit of skin. It can forgive a murderer, but not a woman who has a child out of wedlock. So yes, God is a concept in many religions. Which to follow, if all of them contradict each other? If following one damns you in another? The answer is don't follow any at all.
@@ahmadjuwayni6256 I understand that God as a concept exists in other religions. I was raised in Christianity though and when I realized that I didn't believe in the Christian God I didn't see a reason to go seeking God elsewhere. The only reason I had beleived in the Christian God was because I had been raised Christian. There was no other reason for me to believe in a god other than that I had been told of one as a child. Now I have studied lots of other religions and I haven't been presented with any evidence that any other gods exist either, though they are still fascinating to learn about.
@@ahmadjuwayni6256 did you even read the comment? they absolutely saw the same concept. Hence why they rejected all religion and not just converted to another
The version of Hell in the Torah is more likely what the Bible meant, where it's a temporary punishment to purify your soul. You'll note that the Bible itself doesn't give much info on it
Excellent video. As a young atheist I would disagree, but now as an older atheist I subscribe to the idea that we are what our peers want us to be, mostly. We humans aren't half as rational as we think we are, but we are a hyper-social species.
Also, what our parents want us to be. Catholic children generally grow up to be Catholics; Protestant children, proteastants; Muslim children, Muslims; etc. Childhood indoctrination is very powerful.
Some of us paid an enormous social price for losing our religion. It would have been infinitely easier socially just to continue to pretend to believe.
Critical thinking got me a lot of the way there, but I was sitting on the train one day, thinking that I believed in God but couldn't really articulate what the word "God" meant. In an effort to pin that down, I asked myself if I could imagine a universe without god, and what would I expect that universe to look like, and I realised that I didn't have to imagine, it was right here, in front of me, and around me, a universe without a god would look exactly like this universe here, that I live in. This realisation came in a flash, and had an intensity that I can only describe in religious metaphors - the scales fell from eyes and I could see things as they were for the first time, an albatross of doubt and confusion slipped from neck. I could see my fellow train passengers, and superimposed upon them, their parents, and their grandparents, and their ancestors stretching back to first single celled organisms. I could see their eyes with their electrical connections to the meat-computer brains that control their bodies, the cells they were made of, their nuclei and twisted strands of DNA with their heritage stretching back through their ancestors, and beneath that the clouds of quantum electrons in their energy levels. It probably only lasted seconds but felt like a lifetime and I returned to normal consciousness utterly convinced that there was no god.
This makes a lot of sense. I was always confused why Christians, despite what their religion says, continuously force their religion on others and harm other religions that weren't theirs. Like, didn't the bible tell them to love everyone and to respect other people's beliefs? They're basically going against their own religion-
That's why both extremes (zealots as well as non practicing) are considered wrong in both Christianity and Islam. The fact that it happens is less on the religion and more on the people themselves.
@@saajiddaya2152 I agree, If people really are educated about their scriptures their would not even be a fight between people their faith/ideology in judiasm, islam or christianity.. It becomes so ridicouless that people even go believe atheist ideology even if they believe aliens exist or think they came from apes millions of years ago...
I feel like a big factor in going specifically for atheism, and not general agnosticism is trauma. At least where atheism isn't more widespread. Many people who actually push for atheism or have a distaste for religion usually grow up religious and are quick to point out injustices in beliefs, whereas the more culturally indifferent atheists arent actually cemented in any one belief and are just as likely to identify as agnostic. Atheism specifically, at least coming from the US, is usually in kahoots with people who grew up in a religious population where many injustices were overlooked, on top of very irrational thinking being common, all in the name of god. When this is a factor in your life, when those systems failed you when you needed them, or are the cause of many factors of your problems, its easy and validating to say atheism is the better way.
Some religions are just more reasonable than others which is why reasonable people leaving their religion is not a universal phenomenon across all cultures.
This is why history is so interesting. Some religions fit a time and a place so much better and thus last whilst others function as little more than a cult. (I use cult to mean a minority religion/viewpoint)4
I think this rather depends on the which version of religion one is leaving. For example, theistic evolution is much more rational than young earth creationism.
Rationality was what solidified my atheism, but ultimately the reason I am an atheist is because I grew up simply not believing in a god, both my parents are atheists and so I grew up atheist. It's entirely possible to reason yourself into or out of religion when you become old enough to start making decision for yourself, but especially as you're growing up your environment is the single strongest influence on your beliefs, one way or the other
I think the perfect anecdotal argument that atheism doesn’t equate to rationality was how quick a lot of adherents of “New Atheism”, including some of the four horsemen themselves, adopted conspiratorial, irrational, bigoted, dogmatic and pseudoscientific views in spite of their atheism. Richard Dawkins in particular has views that these days are indistinguishable from those of American evangelical Christians.
@@lukelee7967 I remember Harris making a comment about where was heaven located, implying it was somewhere up in space. That alone just made him lose a lot of credibility whenever he discusses religion.
They underestimated how much of their worldview is shaped by religion. They thought that ditching just the God-belief is enough to free their minds. They forgot to question other beliefs that come with Christianity
Also, Dawkins's campaign on buses "There's probably no God. Now stop worrying and enjoy your life." The god he doesn't believe in seems to make people worry. The idea that a god could make people glad didn't occur to him. But that's what a lot of people experience, no matter which religion.
If the question is how does someone become an atheist then where I live the answer is “you’re born…” The question how a theist becomes an atheist is completely different…
Which means atheism is just irrational, or at the least arational. It's also impossible for atheism to be "true" since it's not a result of rational thinking about what one beliefs, but a meaningless descriptor of a psychological state. Thanks for making all the non-believers irrational/arational people.
@@MBEG89 Because by the time an individual can articulate a position (about 4 or 5, being both able to speak language, and to have some grasp on the basic concept of religion and faith), one has already been taught what their community believes and expects them to believe. Let alone by the time one has the information and faculties to even begin forming their own opinions and questioning what their community has taught them. Babies aren't born religious, but they aren't born atheist either - to call them atheist (or any similar position) is to imply they've made a decision, have any understanding of that decision, or can articulate it. The default position is Null, Blank, Mu, Data Not Found. The 'default' position in the sense "the position most people hold by the time everyone around them can be told what their position is," is whatever their community believes, barring some precocious folks who started questioning things much earlier than others. Often that's theistic, but certainly not always.
@@MBEG89 Because across human society theism was and still is the norm. You cannot find any atheist civilizations appearing before the 1900s. Religion, mythology and science were deeply interconnected to the point that not believing in religious ideas would be like not believing in a proven scientific concept today.
I was a Pentecostal pastor who felt inferior when I would go to clergy prayer gatherings in my city because I was the only one without a seminary degree. So I went to seminary. That was the beginning of the end of my faith. First nail in the coffin: Hermeneutics class: learning about genre and interpretation and context, and realizing there were many ways of interpreting the Bible other than my own. Second nail in the coffin: Patristics class. and reading folks like Bart Ehrman and Elaine Pagels and others. Realizing that "orthodoxy" was really just the folks who won the theological war, and that there were many versions of Christianity in the early church. It wasn't just "the faith once delivered to the saints" (Jude 1:3) that I believed and had been taught. Third nail in the coffin: Christology class, and "historical Jesus" studies. Realizing that the canonical gospels were not actually historically reliable documents, but retro-fitted theological tracts, and that everybody's version of Jesus ends up looking a lot like themselves (I think Albert Schweitzer famously came to a similar conclusion in his historical Jesus studies). By the time I got my masters, I was no longer a Christian. I went on for a PhD in history and became a history professor. When I first left the faith, I read guys like Dawkins and Hitchens, and called myself an atheist. I no longer wear the label for many reasons, but I'm still not a theist. I guess where I'm at is that while it's still interesting to me (hence my watching and commenting on this content), I just don't care anymore. The question of God's existence has become irrelevant to me. Perhaps I'm an "ignostic," I dunno.
There weren’t many versions of Christianity in the beginning. I believe in the Catholic Church which means I surrender to the collective wisdom of the thousands of Bishops in history.
What kind of seminary did you go to? I don't think that Pentecostalists would have seminaries that teach that stuff. Are there just not any seminaries where they don't teach these things, because they're the only things that are vaguely academic about studying to become a minister or priest? That is, there's just no point to any seminary where they don't do a deep dive into these issues, because there's nothing left to teach people beyond what they learn as children otherwise?
@@stevenglowacki8576 I actually ended up going to a Catholic seminary, believe it or not (there's a whole long story there). Pentecostals (at least of the variety that I was), generally send their minsters and ministerial hopefuls to "Bible Colleges," not seminaries. And no, they don't teach this stuff in Bible Colleges, that's for sure.
The reason someone becomes an athiest is not necessarily the reason they stay one. I know that rationality was a reason I became an athiest, (along with community, and teenaged bravdo) but it plays a bigger role in why I continue my athiesum. As my learning and research continues I become more welcoming to people of faith, more able to see how they use there rationality to maintain there faith. But I do not become more convinced of there claims.
Maybe you're just a nice person, meeting people as they come, judging only their behavior? It's a generally good way to be. Where my difficulty lies is in indirect behaviors that influence law and directly affect my life. Legislating based on religious teachings that have been proven illogical, impractical, incorrect in the time since they were written down. That is to say, upholding prejudices against women voting(see "Repeal the 19th), for example or any of the Project 2025 nonsense.
@@InternetCrusader-rb7ls The "argument from motion" takes as an unquestioned given the premises that 1: there must be an emotionally satisfactory explanation for the existence of the universe, and 2: the "prime mover" that set it in motion must be God. It's circular reasoning motivated by faith, and it begs more questions than it purports to answer. It's logical nonsense.
@@bartolomeothesatyr The argument doesn’t mention emotion once. It never claims that the unmoved mover is God, other arguments prove that based on this one’s conclusion, and you can’t show that the reasoning is circular because you don’t even know what the premises of the argument are. You have no idea what you’re talking about.
@@InternetCrusader-rb7ls The Argument from Motion according to Aquinas: 1. Evident to our senses is motion-the movement from potentiality to actuality. Things are acted on. 2. Whatever is moved is moved by something else. Potentiality is only moved by actuality. 3. Unless there is a First Mover, there can be no motions. 4. Thus, a First Mover exists. Aquinas never even seriously entertained the possibility that effects could be their own cause, or that things could happen without cause, or that the universe itself is an infinite causal loop. It's a circular argument because it takes the necessity of a First Mover as a given premise even while it argues for the existence of a First Mover. What this line of argument boils down to is that Aquinas would rather engage in rhetorical sophistry than seriously engage with the idea that things happen for no discernible reason. It's motivated reasoning to justify the dismissal of emotionally-discomforting lines of argument.
I was raised within a very Catholic household and family. Several of my family members are priest, nuns, and even bishops. So, I was very religious myself to the point where I performed every Sacrament up to marriage. My path to atheism began with two questions to my late grandfather (the most pious man I've ever known): "Why can't women be priests?" and "There are many religions in the world and all of them believe as strongly as we do, what makes us right?" I don't quite remember why I asked him those questions, but I do remember not receiving satisfactory answers. So, I suppose my pathway was rationality.
Why do you want women to be priest? Gender Equality? "What make Christianity true" is often asked. Perhaps, better start with: do objective truth exist?
@@ianbuick8946 I asked that particular question because I knew many women in my Church and family that were as pious as anyone else. Their only option to express that piety as a member of the Church was being a nun or a Minister of the Eucharist. Men, on the other hand, can be priests, deacons, ministers of the Eucharist, monks, etc. As far as the question on truth, it was more of a discussion on faith than a search for truth. Why am I faithful to this religion? Why is my faith the one I should follow? Why are people faithful to other religions? Etc. Edit: Also, keep in mind, I was 16 at the time. The concept of "objective truth" hadn't been introduced to me yet. I'm 34.
@@ianbuick8946 Objective truth exists. We just have trouble knowing what it is at times. That’s why we’ve developed things like the scientific method and historical methods to help us get closer to understanding objective truth. Based on the data that I have observed, I do not consider Catholicism to be objectively true.
@@ianbuick8946 Why do people *not* want women to be priests? There doesn't seem to be any reason with much legitimacy that I can find. Usually it boils down to 'tradition,' with a sprinkling of 'one of the early christians really didn't like women and his opinions still hold weight.'
For me, it was researching the history of my own religion, and the ways it was influenced and changed throughout time. Freedom ! Now I can examine the texts with less bias and pull out the wisdom that is universal.
Reading the Bible was my first step toward atheism. The process took many years. The final straw was that a friend in my D&D group became a fundamentalist Christian and I watched her change from a sweet and accepting, non-judgemental person (though a bit naive) into a hate-filled, science-denying paranoid, and I realised I didn't want to be associated with a cult that would do that to a person. That also awakened an interest in science for me, so, yay! It certainly had nothing to do with existential threats. I was a victim of brutal domestic violence at the time, and was (and still am) being stalked by by violently malignant narcissistic sister - who, by the way, was a Christian last time I spoke with her (but wasn't when I deconverted). In short, my own increasing analytical thinking made me not a fundamentalist anymore, but the lack of analytical thinking in religious people I knew pushed me the last step into atheism. BTW It took a good 20 years after that for me to become a true sceptic. I tried a lot of beliefs along the way which - looking back - were pretty irrational
I'd think that what predicts atheism isn't a rational analytical mind, but being able to analyze one's religious beliefs neutrally and objectively. Even if one is generally rational and analytical, that doesn't mean they can't make rational and analytical mistakes due to bias.
Some Christians think atheism implies a hate for God, I tried explaining that I've never experienced anything otherworldly or divine in any sense so I'm not inclined to believe in any religion that demans blind faith. personally, as a terror management response and someone with terrible anxiety, im expectedly inclined to believe in religion because of how terrifying the concept of death is, but I can't because of how illogically convenient religion is, exacerbated the stark lack of evidence of divinity.
Exactly. Humans are not Spockian logic machines. We're emotional too. And that emotion is what drives us to do anything. Wants always preceed needs. If you don't want money then you don't need to work. If you don't want shelter then you don't need a home. If you don't want to live then you don't need to eat, drink, sleep, stay healthy, etc. So on and so forth. It was only after I became an Agnostic-Atheist that I started to find rational arguments for my new set of beliefs to be appealing. But that was only a post hoc rationalization sorta thing I did after losing my faith and before I declared it publicly so as to prepare myself for the expected attacks I was going to receive from my religious surroundings. Rationality was just like a shiny new sword, sheild, and suit of armor. The old emotional ones worked just fine; and I could still use them for my new cause (e.g. anti-theism), but they had lost some of their potency.
@@Mai-Gninwod actually no! I had a kinda shitty childhood in a dangerous part of Mexico. In hindsight I think that the idea that there’s no one out there looking out for us made more sense and made me value the people that actually are there for me. Everyone is different I guess.
@@I-am-Hrut Even if you have enough money to stay alive, you might still have a need to work; labor is not only a source of money but also kills boredom and boosts your self estimate (incl. confidence & experience).
@@Apollorion Alternatively, if you don't believe in free will, then axiomatically all of your wants are necessary preceeded by unconscious processes outside of your control.
@@tariq_sharif For me the idea of a place or a form of existence or plane of being, where people are suffering for infinite amount of time at some point became completely ridiculous. Not even unethical, not scary, just completely devoid of meaning. Like, somebody has to answer the questions, what "eternal suffering for all eternity" means, how it works and how it doesn't, somebody has to make sure people don't become bored, don't break down completely, somebody has to "pay the bills" so to speak, they had to figure out the rules of it, the logistics, everything. According to Christian theism, everything that exists was created by Abrahamic god, so it would have to be that dude. But, like... It's so pointless. The idea of hell doesn't make any sense and you have to avoid thinking about it entirely to accept it, as a premise. There's more if you'd start digging, but it was the first doubt for me. Later I learn, that smart people are not automatically free from religion, I've heard plenty of smart people talk religion and it always feels to me, like mind games of some sort. Arguments that make perfect sense to them and which weren't designed to convinced anybody who already doesn't believe it.
@@donatodiniccolodibettobardi842 the meaning is explained in the parable of the rich man and Lazarus. Because the rich man wanted to drag Lazarus through the mud both before and after death but didn't want to admit he shouldn't do things like that, he was permitted to sink himself lower, and pain himself as much as he wanted.
@@Makaneek5060 That doesn't make much sense to me, either, sorry. You missed the point of my comment, as well, I think. Abrahamic religions also tends to be so hopelessly anthropocentric, it's hard to take their claims seriously sometimes. Such a big cosmos around us and we think there are so many elaborate rules, invented just for us...
@@donatodiniccolodibettobardi842 well the elaborate rules are the most culturally dependant aspect of them certainly. Different continents or hypothetically different planets would have different collections of them. The core rules (love God and your neighbor for Christians, remember your God who delivered you from Egypt for Jews, Good thoughts words and deeds for Zoroastrians) are really distillations of what makes life not so much better in all ways, but tolerable in the face of persecution, and I would say for these three, that's where their ideas of equity come from.
specifically for me it is the idea that the reason you are compelled to do good in the world as a christian (specifically in my case) isnt out of simply a love for mankind and goodwill towards your neighbor but fear you might be tortured for all eternity. all the "love thy neighbor as yourself" falls flat when its really "love thy neighbor as yourself, or else"
I was raised a Catholic and went to Catholic schools (Sisters of Mercy, Christian Brothers, Jesuits). I was devout, was an altar boy, and at one time even wanted to be a priest. I was never abused by a priest or a member of a religious order. What changed me was the question of the need of a messiah, or savior: if there was no original sin, then there was no need for a savior. Jesus Christ was then reduced to a human religious figure, not a god. So I suppose you could say it was a rational decision. I stopped going to church one day, to see how I felt, and I didn't feel guilty. Is that a rational response? I've never been a Catholic since then. However, I did get married in the Catholic Church, not because I thought I had to, but because the country I live in is mainly a catholic country and that was the expected route towards marriage. I saw it as a cultural matter and treated the ceremony with respect; after all, marriage is basically a public declaration of union of two people among friends and family, in a public ceremony, so that was fine with me. I'm now 74 and am not a believer in any god that I've heard of, and know that death is not too far away. I feel I have lived a good life and have been largely ethical in my behavior. I respect other people's beliefs and do not argue religion with anyone. I don't believe in an afterlife and that's fine with me--the idea of lasting forever is scary! Very interesting topic from a very interesting channel. Religion is a fascinating topic, even for unbelievers.
I cannot understand how the Abrahamic religions can sit and look at their texts and think this is from God. The sources are so dubious and biased I can't fathom a God who will send you to hell on the basis of believing would choose to communicate his existence in such a way. It is turly baffling to me. I think tradition and culture is the biggest reason people believe
0:40 - Well I did become an atheist when I was about 20 years old, but certainly not because of some book written by some racist like Harris or some narcissist like Dawkins.
I think there is a difference between "capacity for rational thinking," which seems to be the definition of "rationality" here and in research, and "adherence to principles of skepticism," which is what I normally think of myself when I hear "rationality" in the context of religion. People usually need to be trained in skeptical thinking and also willing to apply it to their own religious beliefs. I don't think either of these traits are captured in the rationality tests put forward by researchers. I also think there is something to be said about cognitive dissonance. Some religions have truth claims that are far more obviously out of line with evidentiary support than other religions. Some religions are also more brittle than others. It would be interesting to see difference between fundamentalist/high-participation religions and others, because I think "rationality" is going to produce more atheists in fundamentalist environments where CREDs are high (e.g. Mormonism). CREDs are also likely pretty highly correlated with a lurking variable of personal commitment to the religion, or "sunk cost fallacy" for lack of a better word. The more sacrifices one makes for their own religion, the more painful it becomes to even consider leaving that religion. If someone is in an environment where they're seeing a lot of CREDs, they're likely also making personal sacrifices to engage in the CREDs themselves.
I like what you wrote, but I'm missing the definition of CRED. Please expound. Also, this one left Mormonism via applying the principles of skepticism form of rationality. EDIT: nvm. It came up later in the video.
4:51 Growing up, I didn't have any form of "I saw Jesus" in my entire life, where some of my classmates did have them. My parents didn't go to church, though they did sent me and my younger sister to a Chirstian School. Fast foward to my adult years: I discovered that this whole time I've been aphantasic. I can't visualize what I imagine, at all, and that I think is a big reason for my atheism. I couldn't "see Jesus" anymore I could "see" an apple, no matter how hard I tried. Plus, I had some teachers at school that made me question the creation mith, and the whole thing fell apart. By 15yo I was already calling myself an atheist.
Aphantasia's an interesting thing. I think I'm... partially aphantasic? I can visualise things in my head, but only in brief flashes. I can't "hold" images for longer than like a second at most. I think I can do it longer if I really practice or I'm emotionally invested, but outside that no luck. It's not because of my aphantasia, but I'm convinced I have neurological reasons for my lack of spirituality. I've tried engaging in those practices, like praying, meditation, fasting, reading holy books, none of them give me any sort of spiritual or non-materialistic feeling.
@@Colddirector Pretty sure that Aphantasia is something neurological. I've been like this for as long as I can remember. I can reproduce music in my ears but not images in my eyes. I've read about people that can reproduce smells or touch-sensations and that's crazy for me.
@@daniel_rossy_explica Here's a fun one, I've had a scent reach me from 100ft away and I could see the plant and color of the flowers vividly in my head. Brain pretty much went "YELLOW FLOWER". So, if you don't mind the question: If you don't see images in your head are memories like bullet points?
@@ElGreco15 I may have the feeling of reliving a scene from my youth, or a memory like a story I told several times, but with no images at all. I know where people were, relative to me, for instance, but I don't see them in my head.
This is some good food for thought for churches who are losing members. I was active in Unitarian Universalism for about 10 years, and my main critique was their lack of outreach as institutions. Individual members might be active in various causes, but not always representing themselves as UU. And the congregation was more about cultivating everyone's inner life. I think this is because UUism doesn't wanna be "evangelical" and proselytize, but there is a happy medium between meditating privately and standing on corners telling people to convert or perish. Find a way to be out in the world practicing your faith as a visible member of your faith, but doing good without shaming others. You won't get the atheists to convert, but you might pique the interest of seekers who are still open to institutionalized religion.
Another thought, faith without works leads to an atmosphere ripe for atheism. Sola Fide when taken to the extreme that it is a internalized, invisible expression of faith alone that saves actually can lead to the damnation of others.
Creds. People gave them creds that there are no gods. I'm speaking from experience - my parents never outright told me that no gods exist, but that's how they acted.
Pretty much me. I wasn't raised atheist, per se, but I was raised in a more or less secular household. I was allowed to pursue whatever knowledge or belief that made sense to me as long as I didn't bother or hurt anyone else. I naturally gravitated towards skepticism and nonbelief.
@@timmccarthy9917 idk if there's a term for this but I think negative creds are a big factor too. If your experience with religious people and religious institutions is more negative than positive (something I think is pretty common these days), you're less likely to become religious
Credibility/cultural learners. Translation: children inheriting cultural traditions from their parents or immediate community (read: indoctrinated into supernatural beliefs). There's a reason why an Afghan born in Afghanistan to Afghan parents is more likely than not going to grow up practicing and affiliating with Islam. Same goes with a Protestant Christian in America, or a Hindu in India. This video is straw manning Dawkins because he acknowledges that. He knows intellect and scrutiny aren't a direct dismantling force for theism.
I can't tell you the actual reason I became an atheist, but it wasn't some quick decision. It took literal years to "admit it". There are plenty of post-hoc rationalizations as to why, but truth is I just believe some percentage just doesn't accept religion as their culture norm. Personally, I just don't know if I have ever or would ever fully accept it. You really should at least cover Ernest Becker and "The Denial of Death" since it deal so much with culture and religion. I know it is only tangentially related but it's an interesting look at the subject of religion either way.
The reason I am an Atheist isn't because of some huge revelation, or any personal experience with religion (which growing up as a Baptist was very moderate and mostly positive). When I became a teenager I just realized that I couldn't believe in it just like I can't make myself believe in Santa Claus. I have never seen evidence of supernatural phenomenon or magic. I lived many years as a secular 'cultural Christian'. But as an adult I chose to actually read the bible page for page, and it not only drove home my non-belief out of 'rationality', but also I realized that the Bible (and the morality of mainstream Christianity in general) is something I just cannot morally align myself with and so I dropped all pretense of religiosity. I do believe that Jesus was a real person though, and I actually believe there is more truth to his story than most mainstream Atheists give credit too. I have no issue with Jesus, just his followers lol.
@davidmorgan5581 there is A LOT of literature for this. Read C S Lewis Mere Christianity or G K Chesterton orthodoxy. Look into the resurrection argument
Instead of a cause of atheism, rationality might be more usefully seen as a set of linguistic tools and concepts to articulate pre-existing doubts. These doubts are more likely to arise from religious apathy and a lack of CrEDs. Rationality doesn’t directly lead a person to atheism, but it can be used to articulate, explore, and justify an absence of any emotional or social need for religiosity.
this makes a lot of sense, and i’m glad i saw your comment. for my own changes in belief, i had my problems with my old faith before i really allowed myself to think at all. the reasoning HAD to come later. but i never really knew how to explain that order of events, because it doesn’t seem to make sense.
First time watching this channel, and I'm excited to watch more. I did find it odd that the arguments are framed as if having a religious belief is the default and you then need to "become" or "convert" to atheism. I think the better question is why humans invented religion, and why people continue to practice it.
I wish you'd mentioned how surveys of scientists show them being dramatically less religious. Plus the most accredited scientists seem to be even less religious than scientists generally. The explanations given here do a good job explaining apatheists, but not the extreme differences between scientists and the general public.
and globalisation and cross cultural exposure was the catalyst, they see no more of in-group/ out group, they realise, alternatives, not just as an alternative, but sometimes better
I wasn't raised religious but as a child I vaguely believed in God. I didn't really understand why, I think I did just because most others around me did. In my rebellious teens I was a staunch atheist, but as I matured and began to experiment with psychedelics (especially DMT) I began to broaden my pondering on reality. Science tells us that we are made from pieces of the universe (physical matter) which has evolved into forms that allow it to experience itself subjectively. The universe could exist without conscious life, and yet here we are. Whether that is the result of a higher power, some form of universal consciousness, a simulated reality, pure random chance, etc. I don't know, but I take solace in not knowing.
Being conscious is a way for the universe to know itself. The conscious mind may not be random necessarily. I feel agnostic, as I feel some sort of higher power source may exist, but not in any religious way, more that physical things will always change but will always exist in some form. Once created, you imprint into time and space.
Although seemingly contradictory, the first two studies don't actually clash. It's completely possible that thinking critically about your religious convictions leads to atheism, AND that there's no correlation between critical thinking ability and atheism. Because being good at critical thinking is not the same thing as applying that critical thinking to your religious convictions. It seems plausible to me that lack of CREDs (or some other cause) leads you to examine your religion critically and, whether you're particularly good or bad at that sort of thinking, doing that increases rates of atheism. That is, social changes tricker introspection, but its the act of rational introspection which leads to atheism. But I'm not read up on the literature, so I don't know if this two-step line of thought has been considered / studied / accepted / refuted.
Interesting observation. I dove into the first study, however, when it came out and was surprised by how weak the statistical significance was, yet still getting published in Science. I'm not surprised to seeing others having difficulty replicating it. Regardless, the second study was interesting.
Yeah in order to critically think about your religious beliefs and potentially identify as an atheist you first need to be willing to do so and see atheism as an equally valid perspective. If you have strong prejudiced against atheists you're never even going to consider it in the first place.
I hate to get political but I think the reason you'd find people in the UK being more religious if they're analytical is because atheism and christianity kind of switched places on what is socially acceptable there, and now a lot of people kind of just fall in line and become athiests, whereas before it was you fell in line and became a christian.
Genuine question from a Yank: do you think that the artificial class system so ingrained in the British psyche tipped people into those slots, or do you really think atheism is a written dogma with a list of do's and don't's that are punishable by law? Like religion was.
because Muslims here want to be separated from the violence in the middle east; many muslims are very liturgical and intelligent; even if they may not be the brightest student in class. so now, if you want philosophical and even discussions regarding things; it's honestly better to have a Muslim or a Christian, since so many have true faith; since those of the "born christian" have mostly left churches. but in devoutly religious areas, the Atheist/Agnostic/Secularist often is the most analytical.
That's exactly what I was thinking. Going against the mainstream belief seems to give a unique selection bias towards those who are more analytical. Or put another way: if you're going to be something other than the default in your area you're going to end up doing a lot more research to analyze and justify your belief (or lack there of)
@@TheThrivingTherapsid If it's a CRED, then what's the cost associated with it? How do you even show your rational mindedness? It's not exactly a quality being broadcast publicly like wearing unique clothes or even (eg) being vegetarian/vegan.
That was certainly true in my case. I stopped being a Christian when I realized that the story of salvation in the Bible was so completely improbable as to be essentially impossible. There was literally almost no chance of that being a true story. And since the basic requirement of Christianity is believing that story, I just left.
You can’t reason someone out of what they had not reasoned themselves into. Also I’m curious what you would think about the large majority of scientists being atheist means?
Having gone through both the extreme atheist and religious pipelines, I now drop labels. Enjoying discussing and exploring philosophy and spirituality is what I love to do and that's all that matters. There is no difference between science and religion - they complement each other, and can never be separated.
@@baonemogomotsi7138 It's a common stance to take, and a belief that I held myself for many years. Then as I began to research, read, and (most importantly) discuss this with people from different backgrounds, faiths and professions, I realised that this separation only exists as itself another form of 'unsubstantiated belief'. What I mean is that we're taught that these two concepts are opposites and therefore must be separated, but this is actually immensely reductive and mostly western-hemisphere humanistic atheistic secularism which has reached this conclusion as an extension of the (largely successful) separation of church and state. But it is a fallacy to truly divide the two, or to attempt to define one of them as empiricist and the other as rationalist. Do you have faith that scientists' published papers are real? That they are properly vetted and that this benefits humanity as a whole?
@@AxeBearingVoyagerHow is believing that a scientist went to the proper scientific procedures when publishing their work in any way comparable to believing a guy can turn water into wine and resurrect from the dead? One of the things is a plausibility, the other is pure fantasy.
I'd say that in theory you are wrong, as someone else pointed out above science is based on observable evidence that's measurable and testable, while religion and spirituality are rather rooted in subjectivity and personal experience. But in practice? I totally agree with you. Unless you study each and all fields of science (lol) and can run the tests and collect the data yourself, you really don't have much choice other than to have faith in the scientific community's members' methodology and integrity. And that in itself is subjective, and often not entirely rational... And as someone who considers themselves "spiritual but not religious" as well, this blindspot makes people hella irritating a lot of times. Being closed-minded isn't exactly rational, is it.
@darkcreatureinadarkroom1617 I can see where you're coming from, but I still disagree because the scientific claims are more educated analysis of the environment than the "God did it" nature of theological beliefs so I lean more on siding with these educated men and women than the theological teachings.
I realized that religion was the only area of my life where I put logic and reasoning aside. Then I realized I had no way of demonstrating my god or any other gods. So I became an atheist.
Thales, Socrates, Aristotle, Pyyrho, Copernicus, Bruno, Galileo, did the reverse . . . *Joshua 10.12-13; 20* “On the day the Lord gave the Amorites over to Israel, Joshua said to the Lord: 'Sun, *STAND STILL* over Gibeon, and you, moon, over the Valley of Aijalon.' So the *Sun* _STOOD STILL,_ and the moon stopped, till the nation avenged itself on its enemies . . . So Joshua and the Israelites *defeated* them completely, but a few _survivors_ managed to reach their fortified cities.” *Qur'an 31:29* “Do you not see that Allah has subjected the sun and the moon, _each_ ORBITING for an appointed term, and that Allah is All-Aware of what you do?” *Qur’an 36.38* “The _sun_ TRAVELS for its fixed term. That is the design of the Almighty, All-Knowing.” *Qur'an 13:3* “It is He who spread the Earth…” *Qur'an 15:19* “The Earth, we have spread it…” *Qur'an 20:53* “Who has made for you the Earth as a bed...” *Qur'an 43:10* “made the earth as a bed . . .” *Qur'an 50:7* “The Earth, we spread it out . . .” *Qur'an 51:48* “And we have spread out the Earth...” *Qur'an 78:6* “Have we not made the Earth a bed?” *Qur'an 79:30* “After that, He Spread the Earth.” *Qur'an 3:151* “We will cast t____r into the hearts of those who deny the Truth”
@@Based_Stuhlinger I can only speak for myself. Whats meaningful to me is believing in things that can be demonstrated as true or reasonable. As far as I can tell, God and other supernatural claims don't fall into that category.
@@Xzyrra666By that metric all stories should be disregarded because none of it is ''true.'' The point of religion is the allegorical nature of it's stories/concepts and shared values within a population of people. Religion binds people with something deeper than materialism, which Atheism actively promotes and has no answer to.
@@Based_Stuhlinger _By that metric all stories should be disregarded because none of it is ''true.''_ No. I'm talking about beliefs. I care if my beliefs are actually true.. I can read any work of fiction and still find enjoyment or meaning in it. _"The point of religion is the allegorical nature of it's stories and a shared culture within a people. Religion binds people with something deeper than materialism which Atheism actively promotes and has no answer to."_ People find meaning in religion and structure their lives/communities around it. Cool. Not me. The truth of something isn't impacted by the number of people that believe it or how strongly they believe it. Also, there's nothing religion does that can't be done through secular means. Morality, culture, social cohesion, etc., are not dependent on religious dogma. Atheism doesn't promote anything and cannot be an answer to anything other than "Are you convinced that a god exists?" Atheism isn't a packaged world view like Christianity or Islam.
I'm an atheist because my dog was hit by a truck and now I hate God for letting it happen. I know it's God's fault because the truck belongs to a local church.
@tokeivo It’s poking at the widespread myth that “atheists didn’t come to their conclusion rationally, they’re just looking for an excuse to defy/blame god for all their problems”. Most famously illustrated in the “gods not dead” film, where the main antagonist (a college philosophy professor 🤦♂️) became an “atheist” bc his mom died, and the heroic Christian protagonist deduces that “you actually just hate god!” using his god-powered facts & logic. The fact that this is taken completely seriously both within the film & by viewers, tells you a lot about the way the target audience thinks.
In economics there's the concept of REVEALED PREFERENCES. Simply put, don't listen to what people say, watch what they do. I _caught myself_ talking to God a few months ago. The Revelation that all of my atheism was the product of apathy and pride in my own intellect has been the greatest, most painful, and most healing gift I've ever received.
@@Roescoe Maybe because they think it's a bunch of nonsence that should have stayed in the Bronze Age? But I would love the hear from any Christian or Muslim why they don't belive in Zeus, Ra, Enki, or Krishna.
I was basically born into being an atheist because I suffered some pretty violent abuse as a child and decided that there's no way a god could exist and allow such things to happen without being fundamentally evil. From there I went through an "Angry Atheist" phase, I debated plenty, I did all sorts of dumb stuff, and then I got into learning about the histories of religion and finding channels like this. My "Modern" brand of Atheism is basically just a belief that it's impossible for any religion to be correct. We have no proof at all of any of it, and yet we do have plenty of reproducible proof for more logical scientific answers, and that's aside from all the constant editing that all religions have gone through over time, and aside from the fact that a lot more than one religion exists. It just makes more sense to be an atheist, it's the more logical option of the two. Some will say "Well you can't rule it out, that's unscientific" and I'd ask them if they're willing to say Goblins might exist since we can't prove they don't exist. I can make an evidence based decision and say that they don't, and the same applies to any deities or magic. And honestly, this might be the angry teenager in me still talking, but even if there *were* proof and there *were* a god or gods, I'd reject them. I don't want my life to be part of some great plan, I don't want my existence to be in service to someone else's will, I'm me and no one else. The fact that nothing matters means that everything matters as much as you want it to, And to me, it all matters quite a bit. The bad stuff may be harder to bear, but the good stuff is even sweeter.
Such a sad story. So many have suffered this. I'm sorry man. Anyhow I'd say read and follow the teachings of Jesus and ignore all the other stuff people say He said.
I’m sorry you had to suffer that. Your life and experience is yours alone and I mean no disrespect or insensitivity, but God, as personal as he may be portrayed to be, is a lot bigger than any one person’s individual circumstances
@@thethrowbackguy4319 "God was too busy with more important stuff to be bothered stopping a child from being beaten half to death." Is not the argument you think it is buddy.
@@ClaireSunshine Wouldn’t the atheistic view agree that the universe void of a loving creator is much bigger than a single suffering child (you) on Earth? So yeah, maybe you didn’t/don’t matter. Or maybe he really was busy. Allowing the many children who also (unfortunately) suffered terrible things to stay alive. To not only later live to tell the tale and complain that he wasn’t there for them, but also make something with their lives that they were too helpless to save by themselves
For me, my military service changed my entire world view. I felt like I bought into lies and then questioned everything. I relied on my faith to feel comfortable with death should the occasion come. The deconversion (apparently not a real word but I’m using it) from faith in so many things in my life was a world shattering thing to get through. If someone has faith in a religion, it is not for me to interfere. I’m not trying to make an atheist out of anyone because we all get to choose what we believe and if it fits well in their life, good for them. Everyone has their own journey in life and we all leave it alone.
I never actually became an atheist, but at some point I realized that it's all mythology...Including the religion I was raised in. Mythology is cool, I do enjoy reading it...But it shouldn't be evangelized, control lives/governments, etc. It's just stories.
Exact same thing here. I've been forced to go to church and attend religious lectures at school throughout my childhood and up to my teens. Even though I attended all that stuff I never got truly engaged in it, all it was for me was people telling some fantastic stories and the idea of god and all of that just didn't make much sense. And when in History and Polish class we started discussing greek and roman mythologies for n-th time, it all just kinda clicked, "Huh, aren't mythologies just religions that fell out of fashion? With enough time won't that be the case with every single current religion?"
I didn't become an atheist, I was born one! Are we born with religion? I was never exposed to religion and when I was I didn't need it to make sense of the world. I certainly don't need it to have morals or values.
I was raised an atheist, but in the most stressful part of my short life so far, I found God. I think you might be right with stress changing neuroplasticity.
Genuine question: How much does it personally matter to you that your god beliefs are founded on an accurate representation of reality? In other words...if you were fairly certain that your specific god beliefs did not describing something real in the universe, would that lower certainty decrease your confidence in those beliefs?
@@maxwellli7057 people be like "God is mean and scary!" and i be like "puts me to sleep every night wishing I were clean as I thought I was, but I empathize" 😂
I truly rely on this channel for serious information on corners of religiosity (and areligiosity) that I have not had time to delve into before. Thank you for all of your fine work.
I'm not surprised the studies about mentalising didn't hold up. They were seeing being imaginative and emotional intelligent as synonymous. Just because someone is good at attributing certain emotions and intentions to another doesn't mean they're good at correctly doing that. I have met many Christians who happily attribute malign intentions to non Christians as if that is definitely the case. They have the capacity to try to imagine what another is feeling but they do it very badly
I am technically not athiest, I'm agnostic. Wouldn't be surprising if god existed, wouldn't be surprising if god didn't exist. I'm still just gonna be me, after all.
Rational analysis for me! And I was a quite convinced believer before! Also, analyzing my feelings, I found what I thought a "need for god" (or whatever, it is hard to put these things into words) was "just my feelings", nothing supernatural required! And that was the decisive blow for my faith that pushed me over to atheism! And I never really looked back ever after, though in the beginning, there were some moments of doubt.
One of the questions that really got me thinking about it was asking "How do you tell the difference between something in your mind being from a divine source, and just your brain feeling something or seeking confirmation bias?" And I realized I didn't really have a good answer to that. Sure, I could say "Well, I look to the Bible to see if it fits with it" but that just as likely would be the confirmation bias part, cause I already believed the Bible
@@sammysamlovescats This is why eastern spirituality (and some western, the closest resonance you'll find is in the magical traditions, rather than organized religions) prioritizes meditation so strenuously. Step one has to be learning how your mind operates. and that only happens with regular, long-term observation, just like a naturalist tracking the behavior of a species of bird, you have to watch the specimen daily over the course of potentially years to get a complete understanding of how they move through various seasonal changes. If you watch your thoughts with a critical eye, you learn which ones are internally sourced, which ones come from your intellect, vs a story spun to justify an emotion reaction, vs reactions to something basal in the physical body, or alternatively, whether those thoughts are not sourced from within yourself. This comes in many forms, whether it's from some kind of divine source, or it's subliminal messaging from that McDonald's ad, or you picked something up from the second-hand store with a bad energy, or other spirits with their own agendas to push. Again, though, to become a wine sommelier, you need to take time studying the nuances of all the different vintages. If you've never made a concentrated effort to distinguish the tastes, then all wine is just going to taste like wine. All your thoughts are just going to feel like thoughts, no matter how many layers of subconscious patterning built up that thought structure. You're left with a shallow understanding of the thought because you only know how to study it skin-deep. Jungian active imagination is a technique to talk directly to the patterns in your subconscious, to speak with the spirits bouncing around your skull, and if the field of psychotherapy has anything to say about it, taking time to learn how your mind operates is incredibly beneficial, even in a mundane life!
I started becoming an atheist at age 9 when i first heard my grandma use the whole "god helps those who help themselves" nonsense to my questions on why god didn't prevent bad things from happening. It just sounded a little too convenient.
Would you be willing to read The Reasons for God by Timothy Keller with an open mind, or a closed one? I found it spoke many things which seems very neat, which I associate with convenience, which I am interpreting you are suspicious of given your last sentence.
Religion can only survive if people believe there is no alternative. When different cultures communicate and we see how different people live, and young people are exposed to the fact that people lead productive, happy lives without religion, religion tends to die out.
I'm to the point where I believe some people are genetically predisposed to believe in fantastical theories and some aren't. I was raised in a Southern Baptist church, but never did I believe what they were teaching for one minute. Others believed without question. And some believed "just in case".
What's funny is if you look at many religions, not just christianity. They are describing these different personality traits even in those people. The people who are more rational and more into matter are usually denoted as the "dark" force. Check out zoroastrianism, gnostic christians, pagans, aborigines, and voodun. They all believe that same thing.
very astute point, there is some scientific evidence of this individual and heritable difference too. i think there are and will always be some for whom pattern finding, deference to authority, metaphysical belief or sensations come much more naturally and strongly than with others
We know it is possible to chemically alter the brain to induce a feeling of "divine connection". Psychedelics are famous for it. The idea that atheists might just be lacking in whatever chemical process induces that feeling in other people has always made sense to me. I kind of fear the day when something like that is discovered, though. Seems like the kind of thing that will lead to lack of faith being filed under "mental illness" alongside depression and ADHD, at least in the USA. Queue Bible Belt states mandating JesusMeds for school-age children.
Register for our online class "Messianic Impulses: A Psychedelic Model of Revolutionary Consciousness" religionforbreakfast.eventbrite.com/
I heard that psychedelics not only can cause an atheist to become more religious, but vice versa, too.
Without a professional overseeing you, the results of a session tend to be more unpredictable, though.
The biggest cause for atheism is probably that there is no god
Can you a make a video about why people who weren't raised religious or practising start become religious? I think this would be also very interesting!
Do you have a sources page for this video somewhere? I'd like to read the studies
forget jesus, make money.
I was raised Anglican in Ghana but turned atheist in my late teens. I used to think so too, that critical thinking and reasoning turned me atheist, but as I got older my mind has changed on it somewhat. I know lots of theists who continue to believe despite being exposed to the same info that I got and even agreeing with some of it. I think it's because they genuinely love the religious communities that they're in and they love the lives they have as spiritual people, and frankly, good for them. Sadly, I grew up in a country where religious institutions are overly powerful and use that power to bully, persecute and oppress. When I tell people that I left because of the hypocrisy and self-righteousness, I get told that I only left because I want to sin. That's not a community that will ever welcome me and I'm not eager to be a part of it.
Do you find a community that you like?
right so
I was raised Christian and left, and I feel very similar.
IMHO the people who say "you just want to sin" are just trying to make up an excuse to ignore the problems you brought up.
@@AlverantIt takes a lot of hypocracy and self righteousness to give that answer.
Completely wrong. I, like all other Atheists, became so after Atheia came down from the sky and revealed Her word to me.
lol
😂😂😂😂😂
😂😂😂😂
A shame you didn't have you smartphone with you.
Atheism is for teenagers.
For me it was because I heard some heavy metal on the radio one day, which caused me to be immediately hypnotised by Satan's evil mind control rays.
crazy
Same but I was also playing DnD
Lol
You just know there's going to be some religious people who are going to take this seriously xD
For me it was anime lol XD
I was raised atheist by my family, because of a negative interaction my grandma had with their church. About a month after my grandfather left my grandma, right after WW2, and left her with their 5 kids, no support. The church leader told her she wasn’t being a good member of the church because she wouldn’t donate for a new parking lot for the church. My grandma was a kind woman, always happy and kind and understanding and empathetic. But when she told us that story, the amount of anger dripping from her voice even 40 years later was palpable.
I was never tempted to look to religion my entire life because the gods never seem to follow through with the things they are supposed to care about.
I remember a story I found on reddit, of a woman whose church kicked her and her family out after her husband (and the family's sole earner) committed suicide, leaving her ultimately broke, homeless, without support and trying to raise multiple kids in a small town. Kicked her out because her husband "sinned." I can empathize both with that redditor's plight, and your grandmother's deep and abiding rage- there's nothing worse than the people who told you to trust them with your immortal soul turning on you in your time of greatest need for the absolute *shittiest* of reasons, and ones outside your control at that.
"That which is presented without evidence can be dismissed without evidence".
-Christopher Hitchens-
@@BeefT-Sq How is that relevant?
Agreed.
Stuff like this happens all the time.
Your grandmother's faith mustn't have been very strong then if she let something like that bother her.
One of my favorite jokes inspired my view of atheism: A famed atheist has finished giving a lecture about non-belief in Dublin, when two men walk up to them. “We want to know whether you’re a Catholic or a Protestant?”
The atheist says “I’m an atheist, so I don’t think God exis-“
“Yeah, yeah, we know that. But is it the Catholic God or the Protestant God you don’t believe in?”
As a German this makes total sense to me. The 30-year war between Catholicism and Protestantism happened in and around what is Germany today.
So we also have our own little jokes about this topic.
Like the Bavarian (deeply catholic state) joke where a dialect-speaking country boy confesses he has a crush on someone. His father guesses some possible options (each very typical Bavarian girls names) and the boy then says his crushes name which is a non-Bavarian sounding boys name. So ofc his fathers reaction is the outraged: "But he is Protestant!".
The deeply Bavarian Catholics just care so much about their child marrying another local that they even forget to be homophobic.
@@Tessa_GrI think the Irish may contest your time frame here.
I heard another story from the same area: somone asks a group of young men if they believe in God, they say "of course we don't believe in God, we're protestants!"
@@trevordillon1921 Just looked it up, apparently the conflict is officially called "The Thirty Years' War" (it was from 1618 to 1648, primarily in Central Europe). Of course that is not the only war between Catholics and Protestants.
But the one that strongly influences German attitutes until today.
Lol, that's really more of a Belfast thing. No one in Dublin gives a toss. XD
The idea of apathetic atheism kind of reminds me of that Karl Marx quote that's always taken out of context. "Religion is the opiate of the masses." People often misinterpret that as him being critical of religious people. When in fact it was him expressing sympathy for the religious and being harshly critical of the upper class for making life so utterly miserable for the masses that they needed to turn to religion just to make the emotional pain stop. I wonder what he would have thought of the apathetic atheism theory.
Yes, but Marx was also heavily critical of idealist worldviews. His work was primarily focused on demystifying the world and our social relations, away from the belief in platonic ideals and towards an understanding of material causes and the dialectic which emerges from the effect.
I find this very funny because other thinkers like Nietzsche argued thar Christianity was responsible for creating resentments between social classes.
@@Rocky-ur9mn I don't think Nietzsche said Christianity created resentment between classes, he thought it was a product of that resentment. I don't even think the Marx quote is incompatible with a Nietzschean view. In the Genealogy of Morals, he talks about how the idea of Hell enables Christians to fulfill their violent desires while remaining passive. This notion of religion providing a cathartic release to people denied what they really desire sounds pretty close to the opiate of the masses.
@@wergthy6392 no Nietzsche argued that the Christian idea of last will become first or that the upper class has a responsibility to help the poor etc, leads the lower class to growing resentments against them when they do not fulfill these expectations
Yes! Having actually read Marx (unlike many people who quote him) his point was that opiates reduce pain, *not* that they are addictive. People in pain need religion, which some parts of this video seem to back up
As a young person surrounded by religious people, I remember realizing: "If I was born elsewhere I'd have a different religion". That simple thought eventually lead me to the obvious conclusion that all religion is made up.
How so
@@WhaleManMan it's just like realising that if you were born elsewhere, you'd use a different currency. This should be enough to conclude the "money" Is a man made concept
it basically means you can not prove anything with your Bible, quoran, or any other religious faith
It would always be bias and cannot be reason, you can only acept or reject it.
@@AgnesBooth-zu7tw
Aren't most peoples ideologies based on ideas they were raised in? And even if someone were biased in favor of them, how does this make those ideas less likely?
Many people in this comment section are young and thus still have plenty to learn, myself included. But I can't agree to what you said, because your point seems to be more targetted towards two ideas: 1. That human biases/determinism shape faith more so than a higher power, and 2. The common fundamentalist idea that only one religion is right, the others are dammed. For the second point, assuming you have faced that idea, I'd recommend just ignoring it because while it is widespread, both of us can agree any divine element would be wise enough to discern nature and nurture. But the first point is far more interesting because, if you think about it, faiths have lived Millenia with that idea being well established. Portions of the Old Testament were written on a time in which Israel had already been conquered, and the authors were in exile. Back then, being conquered means your gods become inferior to the conqueror's. Not only that but even back then it was known of the "Far East", which already had Vedanism, Brahmas and Buddhism, the list goes on. While this latter contact is still hypothetical, the idea of different religions coexisting (even if not peacefully), and that your birth would determine your faith, was well accepted (to the point where the Old Testament will constantly use terms like "The god(s) of X people"). Our world got bigger information wise, but we'd be underestimating our ancestors for assuming they would never have thought "oh, maybe if I was born in Babylon, I wouldn't be worshipping Yahweh".
Yes, all that we have regarding spirituality is based on human experiences and minds. That is only natural, you can't expect us to witness an angel and NOT be biased on our interpretations. But as a counterpoint to the idea that thus, the divine would not exist: how are you sure anything in this world that we study is not subject to our interpretative bias? One of the biggest challenges of scientific thinking is adequately doing a study while trying to remove all bias (I recommend reading Popper's philosophy and its influence on statistics). Even so, we fail, and we are always going to objectively fail: we will never visit all planets in the universe in our lifetime to determine if alien life does or doesn't exist, the same way any natural study will determine a sample with limited elements (unless you'd want to study the trillions of cells that exist on the planet, it's better to select a reasonable amount). The point is, this distance to the absolute truth is well accounted for, and it hasn't prevented our scientific knowledge to go far and wide. Even so, this limit to our capabilities does prevent us from studying any hypothetical spiritual phenomena, assuming it lies beyond our senses and instruments. So right off the bat, we admit if spirituality exists, it can't be currently accessed by our science (biased by our own limits). That leaves us to other methods and lines of thinking that don't necessarily point towards materialistic experimentation: philosophy, personal experiences, etc.
And this is the point: for Millenia, there have been wise people who debated religion, who had faith in the non-material, and who even allegedly experienced it. Don't you think we'd be too arrogant and biased to assume they were obviously wrong because they were in the past and didn't have the resources we have today? If you read the Vedas and many Buddhist texts, you'll find wisdom that was written ~700 years before Christ, and that perfectly describes many of the biggest problems the current western civilization faces. Not only that, but how many people across the centuries have said to have witnessed the paranormal/spiritual? Don't you think we'd be arrogant and biased to assume for them they were hallucinating, even if they were more accustomed to their own environments than both of us? Some people go as far as using notions such as "mass hallucinations", which sounds scientific but is just a junk term that gets overused as an easy solution to a not so simple issue.
In conclusion, if I were you, I'd instead search what COMMON wisdom lies across the different views. Search the similar points talked about in the Bible, in the Vedas, by Buddhism, by native american religions. If what we believe is so determined by our environment, then what rose in common, even in completely distant cultures, and that was preached and respected from the common to the wise, then that right there is true wisdom. I could go on and say this wisdom might change your views, but only your future self will determine so. As long as you do your research and try undermining your own biases, that is.
So many of the former believers I've met were driven out of their faith by empathy; they couldn't square the idea of being loving with the teachings of their congregations.
Former minister Dan Barker recounts his mother, shortly after leaving her Christian faith saying, "I don't need to hate anymore!"
These folks saw their fellow congregants acting contrary to what they understood their faith to require.
That's not atheism though. That's just quitting a specific congregation or religion.
@@foodchewer OP didn’t say that’s atheism. They just explained which path ultimately led some people to atheism. Most people don’t leave their beliefs, they just leave the hate fueling church and join one that is open and caring.
I see that too, and it makes me more convinced to stay in my faith to work from within and build love.
@@pansepot1490Christianity fundamentally believes that people deserve to be tortured for eternity if they believe anything but the dogma. There is no church that doesn't teach the Bible. You can't whitewash Hell. And you shouldn't expect people to ignore it. I can't fathom how someone coul believe in Hell and still function on a day to day basis.
@@SolaPersona I am Christian. Do not believe in hell. Find your own path, stop letting other people dictate what you are allowed to believe.
I became an atheist because I started to doubt the things that used to convince of my religion's truth. This wasn't as much of a cold logical process as much as it was a slow creep of doubt that eventually became stronger than the belief. Now I'm unconvinced of my old beliefs.
I tried to hold onto my faith but the doubt kept increasing. After a few years I realized I was holding onto the faith for the sake of holding onto it. I was ignoring doubt. But when faced with the doubt head-on, it was too much for religion to overcome.
@@JM1993951 In the end I was holding on to it for the sake of holding on, too. I didn't know who I was without it, because right up to the day I left I was very active and devoted.
Exactly this.
"slow creep" rings a bell. For me it was an almost unconscious drip, drip until the structure just collapsed.
I never had a slow influx of doubt so much as I could never bring myself to actually believe, even a little bit, as much as I tried. At eight years old, I told my mother that I didn't believe in god which shocked her. It kinda shocked me too that I would say it out loud but when I thought about it later I realised I'd said it because it was absolutely true.
Speaking for myself, on my own behalf; I realised I was an atheist when, as a child, I learned that there was more than one religion and that religion was different in different countries. It made me realise that religion is a cultural phenomenon, and it was a short few steps from there before I was fully atheist.
That was when I was a child, and I've become more stable in my position the older I have gotten and the more about religion and the world I have learned.
You're not alone in that experience. In my case, it was product of moving around to a few different countries while young -a formative experience that few have.
If your youth is more static, and you have direct imprinting from one religious community, that experience shapes you far more than any argument I may have.
Did you ever consider that your "realization" might be wrong?
That's great. Sadly a lot of people I know view this fact as them being "special" which somehow makes them even more devote.
This is simply a genetic fallacy. The existence of many religions or worldview does not have any bearing of the truth claims of individual worldviews
@@seanmurphy7011 Their realization came after they had already been raised believing a religion. Of course they considered their position might be wrong, they didn't hold that position up until they had reason to hold it.
here in Indonesia, people are more open to „agnostic“ as I am observing. although it’s mandatory to „label“ our religion, but many people in the social media are not shy anymore to declare that they are agnostic“ rather than „atheist“.
I don't think your observation could represent 280 million people. Around you, sure. The whole nation? Doubt it.
@@Marta1Buck fair point. but the fact people are getting aware of exiting the religion is normal. it’s somewhat surprising, especially for the nation who happens legalized 7 major religions on their law. the polarization is getting wider and details.
here in the philippines i guess its the same, but many are athiest especially the younger educated class
It's just one's simple desire to keep their head intact.
it's considered normal to leave a religion but def not to not believe in a god. Like it does not compute for most ppl since they assume it's a basic fact that a higher power exists.
As someone that has a family that are super religious and the church is cult-ish, a HUGE reason I went down the athiest route was being in public school with kids that different religions and seeing how they rebelled. Once i became a Teenager, unironically metal music helped me question a lot of spirituality- especially Death's Spiritual Healing album- in which they criticize Televangelists and greedy people who use Jesus and religion as a means to fool and scam people. Which reminded me SO MUCH of what the church my family goes to was doing at the time. (They're like an MLM scam but with Jesus instead of business). For a time I was a cringe edgy athiest until a close friend of mine became a Buddhist and I saw how it genuinely helped him, which opened up my mind to "hey not all religious people are stupid or too lost in the sauce". I'm still atheist but very respectful to other people's spirituality and believes, the only thing I won't respect is the "pastors" and churches that scam uneducated/desperate people for money. And athiests that belittle or mock religious people, look it doesn't hurt to be kind 😂
sounds like apollo quiloboy to me
even thou it helped he is still being irrational by believing in un proven gods.
@@jmgonzales7701 what are you talking about
have you seen any hard proof of any god yourself because i doubt you have or are you just some really young kid saying some nonsense not knowing what they're talking about
@@xxGreenRoblox Thanks for telling me i look young, I'm 48.
There are no hard proof for God no good arguments for its existence. Its mainly Cope for us humans and a product of education and superstition rather than rationality. Our belief in God is also based on our parents and geography.
there’s no reason to respect religious
I suffer from the mental illness of thinking that if I present people with strong arguments and data that they will change their opinions accordingly, but "You cannot reason a person out of a position he did not reason himself into in the first place.” - Jonathan Swift
Whats your argument?
This goes both ways. Literally, any and all groups subscribe to undefendable positions from time to time.
So everyone should change their opinion to match yours?
@@LuckyFlesh That would be great, thanks.
@@jonrendell No problem. :)
I genuinely feel like I'm too neurodivergent to ever be truly religious. Curious about spirituality? Yes. Interested in the lore, mythology, and history of various religions? Definitely. Drawn to the aesthetics and symbolism of faith and worship? Absolutely. But i feel like my brain is wired in such a way that i don't think i could ever truly believe in any faith. I would ask too many questions, or think about things a little too hard for it to make sense to me. I'm not even saying this as an "I'm smarter than everyone" ego thing. I just genuinely don't think i have the capacity to be religious in the traditional sense of the word
I know exactly what you mean and I feel the same way.
Have you ever read Thomas Aquinas? There's no way he was a neurotypical.
@@grimtheghastly8878 I read somewhere people one the autistic spectrum tend to be more likely believing in some form of impersonal deity (like Higher Mind or something) that a tradional idea of a person god with whom you have a personal relationship.
There's also some wild ideas about ancient people having DID (dissotiative identity disorder) more often on average and treating it as a disorder, but rather a normal thing, with alters being essentially treated more like external gods, but that's too far out and likely impossible to prove. Google it up, I'm not best at explaning things.
So, one form of neurodivergence or another can definitely have an influence on religiosity, its distinct flavour or even the likelihood of being receptive to it.
P.S. I love the mythology. ☺️
I feel you dude; even though I don't fully believe in the Abrahamic god, I'm faking it to participate in community, just think of it like roleplaying
ADHD here and I love to research, theorize, and pick a part ALL religions, and yea also not religious. Closest I get nowadays is agnostic deism. Maybe a supreme being set the universe into motion and is letting play out to see what happens (like a super-sim in madden lol)… but yea no personal god or anything. I also think it’s kinda conceited to think I’d be a special being to something so unknowable/powerful; furthermore, it’d solve the whole “problem of evil” by the being either neutral or completely hands off… as you can tell I’ve hyper-fixated on these topics a little too much.
I became an atheist later in life because I got tired of the hypocrisy of religious people and got tired of being let down by empty promises. I had doubts many years before I actually left Christianity.
You were born an atheist, but were indoctrinated. This is child abuse.
Perhaps if the people who tried to bring me up baptist hadn't insisted on a completely literal interpretation of the bible I wouldn't have become an Atheist.
Those fundemantalist baptist guys almost converting you to atheism? Yeah those guys are one of the least christian christians
You act as though your beliefs are in the hands of another?
@@atlas4698I mean, when you’re a literal child, they kind of are.
@@logy650 Yes, but as an adult or even child, you decide what you believe. Why act as though some unpleasant Baptist is controlling you to this day?
@@bobboulden Why not just join normal christianity? Those fundamentalist baptists are almost heretics
I grew up in religious extremism. A bad experience in the religion led me to start thinking rationally for the first time in my life and I lost my faith in a few months.
Sorry to hear that. I'm just an internet rando, but I hope it didn't go too badly.
I also was raised by a religious extremist(my mother).
My father was religious but not in the same way.
I did have a phase where I thought I was becoming an Atheist but ultimately landed on Agnosticism.
Truth is, I don’t know the answer, so I won’t pretend that I do.
Yep, I can relate.
@@HomeByTheSeasI just operate on the assumption that all faiths are untrue but will be ready to change my mind when I see evidence
@@TaLeng2023 That’s fair, For me I don’t like to make an assumption but rather utilize evidence as the basis for any of my personal beliefs.
The truth is, our terms may not even suffice. You could easily replace the terms God and Holy spirit with Energy and Manifestation and it would describe the same idea.
We just don’t have the capacity to put all of existence under our scope. However we have been working to understand it and that’s enough for me.
I just cannot answer this question everyone has, let alone determine if it is actually even the correct line of questioning. I have my own opinions, everyone does.
I have had people try to “bring me closer to God” but in reality they just want me to fuel their ego, the same with the Atheists that wanted me to “choose logic instead of religion”.
Of course, not all of either group is as arrogant to think they’re correct and everyone else has to be wrong. But the ones who were, only drove me further into my decision to become a proud Agnostic.
Whatever someone chooses is fine by me! Just respect my choice as well.
One thing about the study that said rationality isn't tied to athiesm, especially in the UK. In the UK religion is such a mild version that it doesn't have any sway over public life. So people don't need to be athiest. It's not an option they even need to think about. Whereas in the US where religion is such a force, people will be forced to make a choice and engage critical thinking.
Exactly this, only after I came to the US where I see religion being pitted directly against rationality and/or science (e.g., either God isn't real or evolution is fake). I imagine in culture where religion are not interpreted literally (like my country), there isn't this dilemma where you have to pick one over the other.
Europe as a whole has been slowly losing faith since the religious wars of the16th and 17th centuries, when people could see directly the toxic effects of giving too much credence and power to the overtly religious. The American immigrants, however, needed religion to justify and absolve them for genocide and slavery. Meanwhile, Europeans were doing all that stuff across the seas and out of sight.
Postscript: I wrote this in response to a different thread, however RUclips has placed it here,
Yeah I don't think a simple study of rational thinkers is gonna predict necessarily whether atheists become atheists due to reason.
@@niu-3-whether believing in God, supernatural is rational or not can depend on the person.
Anglicanism has long been the state religion of the UK. Traditionally it has had power and it has made great efforts to oppress those of differing denominations, particularly Catholics. So I present an alternative hypothesis: Most Christians in the UK are Anglican (and its offshoots) or Catholic. Calvinist demographics are low. Both of these have a long tradition of embracing reason and critical thinking. Most US Christians are offshoots of Calvinism, and Calvin not only rejected reason but called it a wh0r3. Might have more to do with which religion than whether a particular one wields power.
I recall what killed my faith in catholicism.
I was in a cathechism meet where they handed us a little slip of folded up, flower shaper piece of paper and told us to put into water. Now, I knew this trick, it was paper that was sensitive to temperature and moisture, as soon as I'd put it into water, it'd unfold. When exactly that happened, the cathechists then told us that this was God giving life to the flower-shaped paper and making it bloom.
So, I'd guess my nonbelief would be that I realized the church was lying to me about something and wondered what more they were lying to me about. This has changed absolutely nothing about my life.
Was there a metaphor there?
okay then so you’re not religious right??
So what causes the world to work that way?
@@gloopdevyoinky9271 is he saying he converted because he didnt understand a metaphor?
@@lycan6432 probably sounded smarter when he was typing it.
I grew up without any specific religion. My dad was private about any faith he had, and made sure my mom didnt indoctrinate us with anything she herself had been forced into in childhood.
He always told me: "believe whatever you want to; just make sure you can explain it". I have since found that very very few people share that perspective when it comes to beliefs. That basic rule kept me from so much delusion. It's kept me sane in any religious conversations or endeavors, and free from anger with politics.
It's helped me realize there's really nothing to these faiths. Not to mention a large part of the morality they all trumpet is just re-purposed from philosophy with gods demanding morality intead of rationality fostering it
Thank you for the story about your healthy upbringing TITTYtoucher2000
Your youtube handle is CRAZY
That's a good dad, but what is that username?😂
I was raised without any religious instruction from my parents. They weren't atheists, just vaguely agnostic and very busy. This was in the American south in the 1950s and 60s, so the culture around me was certainly very theistic and very Christian. I assumed I was supposed to Christian, so I was, at least nominally. But the religion that our neighbors espoused seemed to be about buying new clothes at Easter and giving gifts at Christmas. And, although I was told that God is love, the most fervent Christians seemed to be the ones who were most eager to see other people burn in hell for eternity. And, by the way, we still said the Lord's prayer and had Bible verses read out every morning for years after such practices were held to be unconstitutional in public schools. So now I don't pretend to know if there is a God, just like I don't pretend to understand string theory. Could be, don't know, so I'll just tend my garden, like Candide.
Fantastic video. I grew up in a baptist-christian household for most of my life and was constantly told not to question god because his authority is 'absolute' therefore me questioning him is the same as my faith wavering and thus becoming lukewarm rather than 'steadfast'. As a child, I never thought anything of it, but when I was 19 I began to truly question everything. Human nature is to question, to be curious, and to seek logic and reasoning. It made no sense that I was supposed to blindly accept these ancient words as facts and not question them, as that goes against my very human nature. Restricting me from approaching my own religion with basic analytics is what drew me away from it. To outsiders, it just seemed like I became atheist because I wanted to 'avoid accountability for my sins' and many still see me as 'lost' til this day, but ultimately I feel more human than ever, and there's no changing that fact. I wanted freedom to think. There's no 'thinking' when I'm fed what to think.
I definitely agree that "rationality" is overemphasized in explaining the process of secularization and the rise of atheism, and I myself can say that the main reason I'm an atheist is because my grandparents, despite being theists, almost never went to church, used religious figures or even talked about religion, which in turn made my parents make the switch very easily.
However, I am surprised that there is no mention of how violence from religious groups or institutions can cause people to become atheist. I've heard many stories in the LGBT community about how homophobia or transphobia pushed them away from their religious families, or how almost all personal tales of people living in cults end with them becoming atheist. I feel like this is am extremely important factor, especially as many of the "new atheists" come from places with a lot religious extremism which is why they are so much more vocal about atheism and nonreligion than someone like me who has been atheist their whole life.
the violence is the lack of credibility enhancing display
I think that the aspect you refer to gets classified under “leaving religion because of critical thinking”. Afaik, there’s people who leave cults and/or have experienced abuse in their church and still they remain believers. There’s lgbtq Christians and lgbtq churches.
Well that seems to be addressed in credibility, if you see people not respecting their own beliefs or doing immoral things that is a factor of disbelief
@@RandPersonnthey are heretics as harsh as it sounds, homosexual behaviour is formally condemned in the new testament but that doesn't mean hatred for homosexual people, in fact most Christians view LGBT as victims of life who were presented a sort of challenge that lead them to sin
@@Nicolas_II (I am quoting another comment) The bible says a lot of things. Not all of it coherent or internally consistent. It would be impossible to believe everything as the bible teaches, as you would need to believe some things that other parts of the bible condemn. As this is a clearly demonstrable fact, easily discovered with minimal research, the bible is clearly not infallible.
As an ex-mormon who now considers myself agnostic, I can tell you that I saw big doctrine issues with the God I was being taught about and the requirements to get into the best kingdom of heaven. I left. But technically, I was just an "inactive member." Years later, I ended up doing more research on Mormon history. I officially resigned from the LDS church when I learned more and decided I didn't want to be affiliated with Mormonism in any way.
I went to a few different Christian churches with friends, but I feel I have a distrust for organized religion.
I have a fascination with religion and philosophy as a whole. This semester, I'm taking an online intro to world religion class at my community college. The textbook is Religion Matters by Stephen Prothero. I'm super excited to learn about religion academically. I really enjoy this channel, too.
I had the same experience with the church. After my first year at BYU I became an agnostic tending towards atheism because of the church leaders’ terrible, unrighteous and unethical behavior and too much emphasis on things that aren’t even remotely Christlike or follow his teachings in the NT. Three years later I was in a weather related accident where I was thrown through the windshield and declared dead by the EMTs. Let’s just say that I had an experience that changed my mind about the existence of God and Jesus. However, my beliefs about them are very different from what I learned at home and in the church. I’m glad that I had this experience because it taught me that the church doctrines aren’t healthy and actually go against what is found in the NT. In recent years it’s only gotten worse, and I am thankful to be out.
@@monicacall7532 I'm also really thankful to be out. I find it outrageous how the LDS church behaves, and then the leaders don't think apostates have any good reason for leaving. I feel like no longer being in agreement with who God is and who they say God is makes the most sense to leave any religion. But of course, we "just wanted to sin."
Although I will say I do enjoy ice tea on a hot summer day now. 😄
I grew up LDS and took years to deconstruct my belief until there was nothing left. The cognitive dissonance that left me when I finally accepted atheism was an incredibly freeing. I was black listed from callings in the church for a few years now because I would teach transparently in classes (things about church history, old and new testament contradictions) and I would do so with an open mind, asking how people come to terms with the history, but it upset people too much. People just want to believe a fairy tale because it makes them feel good. Continued study made it so I just couldn't believe anymore.
I always enjoy hearing about others' experiences in the church, out of the church, entering and leaving too, because these are such real experiences. I too love the study of religion, philosophy, sociology, cognitive/neuroscience, and the church through books like candy. I also really enjoy this channel because it makes me think. Meanwhile, I have had many times thinking deeply about my beliefs and questioning. While I've gone through times where my testimony seemed to be teetering on the edge, I have experiences that remind me why I believe what I believe. Once I strip away Mormon culture, I love the doctrine and have yet to find anything that brings me more hope and peace in my life. As a scientist and professor in a top-5 university department, I'm very aware of the many reasons why people struggle to believe (naturalistic, cultural, historical, etc.), but I'm also deeply aware of how much "faith" I put in the science that I rely upon in every experiment done in my lab. While the epistemology of science and religion is different, I have found the tools used to obtain truth in the different fields are equally different, so I find no conflict in my faith and my science... just religious culture and science culture... or when people use faith tools to put bounds on science or use scientific tools to put bounds on faith and reality. However, I acknowledge and accept that not everyone else feels the same since their life experiences have not been the same as mine. Thus, I appreciate people sharing their experiences, like you have, since it gives me a glimpse into the journey of someone else. I regularly think about what is different about my two brothers who left the church in their 30s while I've only grown in my love for the gospel (this past year, I had an "oh-crap" moment when I was called to teach Sunday school, and knew I'd have to face a number of open questions I had, ranging from deutero Isaiah to 1800s discussions aligned with Alma 32. Oddly enough, this was a blessing having to study these as it has strengthened my faith (even if a bit more nuanced than your typical member), as long as I peel away the cultural contamination and make sure that I focus on the two great commandments by strengthening my connection to God and also serve and lift others, wherever I am and whomever they may be and whatever their beliefs are. Anyway, thanks for sharing your experience, and I wish you the best.
@@NLs-su2ig For me I feel like our stories are opposites in a couple of ways. I'm currently a younger member of the church and love my good friends and community but hate how evil the church is some times.
You should know as a sociology major that personal experiences especially in high control groups shouldn't be the reason you believe. As for the reasons why you think people "struggle" (naturalistic, cultural, historical) You forgot to mention doctrinal issues. This is the main issue that I have with the LDS church and I think one of the main reasons others do too.
Also what scientist has ever put a bound on faith? Or on reality? Its always been the other way around.
I would recommend instead of thinking about your 2 brothers, you should call them and ask them why they left (also people just need to call their families more often).
As a humanist I like the second great commandment. My favorite book of mormon verse is: "when you are in the service of your fellow beings ye are only in the service of your god" (or something like that).
What is your favorite BoM Verse?
Something that was hinted at was most important for me becoming an atheist - anti-creds, if you will. Seeing respected people in positions of authority behaving in ways contrary to their teaching is a glass breaking moment, even more so when you try to raise the issue to someone else and they dismiss it. I can process people being hypocrites as an atheist, because that’s just an inherent flaw in our coding. But I couldn’t handle or understand it within the premise that certain people are being guided by the divine, and are actually using the whole front to steal and horde wealth.
With this kind of question there has to be a distinct difference made between "Why does a group of people become less religious?" and "Why does a religious person choose to become an atheist later on in life?" Equating trends of a population with the choices of individuals just becomes messy.
A population consists of many individuals, many of whom think they are making up their own minds. However, an important aspect of religion is that it often says "We believe .... x, y or z." There's both strength and weakness in sharing belief. It can be very hard to break out of a shared belief, especially if there are "credibility enhancing displays." Do you stop crossing yourself, reciting shibboleths, giving rice to the Brahmins?
Religion affected my childhood to a great extent. I lived in a multigenerational family, and, despite not attending a place of worship, my Grandma strongly influenced our morality because of her own Welsh Chapel upbringing. Believing in God was just as natural as breathing.
As I grew up, I was not a churchgoer, but I have been described by several people as the best Christian that they knew because my life revolves around Christian morality. I live a life strongly influenced by religious ethical beliefs..
I also know a lot about religion. I trained to be a teacher at a Protestant college and did my degree at a Catholic college. When I got a job teaching, I was asked to teach some Religious Studies because it was assumed that I must have a strong religious background. Yet I did not, I was actually somewhat apathetic about religious practice. However, I enjoyed studying religion even though I had no interest in participating.
Despite my religious apathy, I still believed in God. Throughout my life, I have questioned this belief. I've tried to be rational about such beliefs. I've even tried to be an athiest, coming up with rational reasons why there is no God.
I am 70 years old. Despite my efforts to become an athiest, my belief is as strong today as it was when I was a child. I do not have an unquestioning belief in God. I question God's role all of the time. However, no matter how hard I try to not believe, however much I criticise ir rationalise, I am unable to accept that God does not exist. I am quite happy not to have this belief dominate my life. I am equally happy that my life has been positively influenced by the morality of people whose belief in God is strong.
Despite all of my attempts, theism comes naturally to me, and atheism is out of my mindset. I've come to accept that I am just not a natural athiest, even though several of my relatives, with the same upbringing, have been athiests for years.
As long as you're aware of how it affects your decision making, I'd say it is healthy to believe in something. If believing in God makes you a more empathetic and caring person, then there is no reason to stop.
It seems to me you have a really healthy relationship with religion. There is no reason to try to become atheist.
I grew up culturally religious (going to church on Sundays as a child and attending the kids service there) but just never really believed even though I really enjoyed the year I spent attending church and preparing for my conformation for almost one year. The youth group at my church was really great, fun and open-minded so I feel like I also learnt a lot.
But my parents on the other hand are really different. They still believe in God, but in no way that would influence their ability to be rational and scientific. Because to them religion is about belief, emotion, philosophy and has nothing at all to do with science.
And I think as long as you don't use religion to harm anyone or deny scientific realities there is really no reason to stop.
Ok, but the devil is in the details - does you god tell you what to do? does your god tell you what others can do? does your god have a plan for us that you have to enact? do you talk to your god, and does it talk back?
If not, then you are an atheist as far as the rest of us are concerned, though you can call yourself whatever makes you comfortable and believe whatever you see fit.
If yes, then I don't think you know what it means to be atheist, despite your claims at "trying" to be one.
Having been rised an atheist, I can't possibly genuinely believe in a god. I understand why people do it and all the rational arguments for it, yet I have 0 units of faith. I can see why it may even be beneficial to believe. I have a couple of very religious friends. I've been to church with them a few times and it all just sounds like complete made up stuff to me. Genuine faith is extremely difficult to build and to loose. It takes childhood education or an extreme experience to get it or to loose it.
@@ericb9804 This seems like a weird definition of atheism. There are many believers out there whose religion barely shows at all to other people. For many it is a very private matter that you don't talk about in your daily life unless someone specifically asks. I grew up Christian, going to church as a child. My parents both believe in God but I find it hard to think of anything concrete where their belief actually influenced what they did or said at all. Pretty much everything they say or do, their opinions that could be argued to be influences by being Christian could very well also stem from something else.
That is quite normal in many countries, thinking all religious people are loud about their beliefs and push them onto others is quite ignorant
As an atheist I can tell you that no, religion is not dying out and as long as people are afraid of death it won't be going anywhere either.
I agree with you on your premise but not on the death part.
Religion is such a wide group of extremely complex, interconnected systems of beliefs, cosmologies, mythological, philosophical and moral systems, sociology, morality, traditions and now that you cannot over simply them like that. It's like saying: atheists are death cultists and nihilists. It's obviously isn't true. Neither is your statement applied to the followers of a single religion let alone the insanely varied religions.
I also do believe religion is part of the human condition, like speech, music and tool use, and others. There is no humanity without religion. (Note, I didn't say there is no human without. But it is a key part of the species as a whole.)
ANECDOTAL EVIDENCE lol
yes it is dying. I dont know how old are you or where you are. I have seen in Mexico and USA, people are becoming more and more able to say that God is not the ultimate creator. It seems as if Gods powers are shrinking, and this is why organized religion is putting up all sorts of "marketing" about how teh world is trying to end religion. This is not the case, people are growing tired of a "God" that does not answer expert when it is convenient to the particular church hierarchy theya re a part of.
It takes humanity a long time, but we get there. How long ago was it, that we used to worship everything ? Eventually we ahve borrowed it down to 5 or 6 religions, most of them with one God.
We will eventually get to teh point where we realize, that there is no one running the circus, it is up to us.
We will understand that consciousness is not what WE SAY it is.
This is my thought and my hope in short. I thought Id share it
What's your take on death? What are your biggest doubts/fears?
Average intelligence, fear and liars - religion will always exist. If it doesn't, I'll create one. It's worth too much money not to.
I was raised without religion for my first 8 years, although I did have books of Greek and Egyptian myths and even bible stories, I knew they were just stories. When I was introduced to religion (Christianity), I initially thought it was just a weird story time hour where we focused on the most boring of my storybooks. When I realized they believed it was all true, I felt a deep revulsion for them and began to misbehave in church until I was banned. I said ‘I don’t believe in those stories or any gods’, and was asked if I was an atheist. Being about 10 or 11 by then, I didn’t know what that was. They said ‘it means you’re a devil worshipper’, and I replied with a laugh, ‘How can I worship a devil when I don’t believe in that either?’
No one ever seems to study the people who were raised with love and without religion… I can’t be the only one? To me it just never computed, always seemed ridiculous, and like a waste of time, energy, resources, and life. Imagine I came to you and said ‘Alice is the one true god, she created the universe, and the Queen of Hearts is the devil.’ You would just think I was silly and maybe a little nuts. That is how religion has always seemed to me.
When I was 11 or 12-ish, it slowly dawned on me that yes, in fact, religion *_is_* still around, and *_not_* just a thing you learn about in Medieval Europe history class.
And yes, the students who are taking the Religion subject *_are_* practicing the Christian doctrine, *_not_* treating it as a historical object of study.
To me, it's always seemed similar to geocentrism, miasma theory and the like; a thing of the past from when humanity didn't know any better.
I was an adult by the time I realized that people actually believed in Christianity.
Sure, I had been to churches and stuff like that, but I always saw that as some sort of hobby that those people just liked, and they agreed on the philosophy. And the crazy people in the US you heard about was obviously crazy first, and then organized themselves through a religion as an excuse for legitimacy.
To me, the Bible was obviously no more true that the Red Riding Hood, or other such fairy tales. It came as a bit of shock when I found out that people actually believed in that "truly believing" way.
I eased into atheism, but there was certainly a straw that broke the camel’s back.
We had moved about 2 years ago, and never really entered another church (bad experience with some megachurch leaders), but still watched services on Easter and such.
I kept seeing things like how Christians were against the lgbtq+ community, among a bunch of other things don’t remember at the moment.
One day, I brought up evolution in front of my friend who was IN A SCIENCE CLASS WITH ME while we were waiting for pickup. He said he didn’t believe in evolution, and then his older brother came over, made fun of me for believing in evolution, then mocked my favorite shirt.
As I got into the car, I said “mom, I think I’m atheist.” Because I refused to be part of a group who were so cruel, and who would make fun of someone who understands fundamental facts of reality.
That's a valuable data point. Appreciate your candor. It shows that dumping religion, like joining relating isn't entirely based on rationality. (Though in your case the rational theory of evolution was the starting point). Sometimes, its caused by mockery. By the way, I commend your reaction to mockery. It is certainly more mature than the reaction to mockery found in the bible (2 Kings 2:23-24)
@@exoplanet11Honestly while the Christian “reject the truth with unrighteousness in their heart” canard is stupid, I suspect the reasons a lot of people become atheist are more emotional than they like to think. For me, the religion was top to bottom completely unappealing to me. Church was sickly saccharine, the concept of heaven was completely unappealing and a lot of the rules made no sense (ie being against homosexuality, lust being bad, no remarriage after divorce). Basically I had to follow rules I didn’t like in order to go somewhere I didn’t want to go to avoid being tortured forever. Combine that with having never felt any spiritual presence (and now seriously wondering if I’m neurologically incapable of it) and I was already kinda eyeing the exits by the time I started learning about atheism.
To be clear I revisited the subject later wanting to believe during a low point in my life and I still found the actual religion too unappealing and frankly man made for me to seriously consider.
For me, growing up Muslim, I saw my coreligionists doing hard tasks, which made them seem credible. Yet, I soon saw Christians who were just as committed to their faith. This quickly led to an erosion in my belief that Islam was special or unique.
So, you need to think reasonably and rationally. Cuz your point shows your past ignorance, not the reality
Wdym hard tasks lol?
Isn't the point of Islam that it's supposed to be easy and also a bit flexible?
@@EspeonMistress00Considering the five pillars of faith and all the other various Hadith, which inevitably are used as a gap filler for anything the Quran missed, Islam is fairly ritualized and rigid compared to most Protestant flavors of Christianity.
Also, a lot of the Islam you see today in MENA is effectively that part of the world having their own little revival over the last two centuries as a backlash against colonialism and Western ideology. Islam a thousand years ago, at least at the top levels of society, was heavily influenced by Neoplatonism. I'm not qualified to dive much deeper, but there was a fair more leeway in 1024 than in 2024, though that probably also had to do with Islam being barely three centuries old at that point.
@@EbonySaints I think being against colonialism is reasonable, but I don't think embracing religious fundamentalism, lowering the age of marriage from 15 to 9, discriminating against LGBT people and killing/punishing adult women simply for not wearing hijab are good, rational ways to fight against imperialism. Cuba is one of the most anti-American and anti-Western countries on earth, yet it has very liberal LGBT rights. Cuba is officialy an atheist state.
Dear Brother/Sister, I encourage you to come back to Islam. Belief in Islam is not special or unique because of the actions of the Muslims, rather it is because our religion is the only one in which a Hujjat-Allah (proof of God) is still alive and on Earth today, that being the Twelfth Imam, al-Mahdi (AS). I encourage you to read into Surah al-Nahl, and the story of Imam Mahdi AS. Barakallahu feek 💚🍇
I'm from the Czech Republic, one of the most Atheistic countries in the world. The reason why some many people here are Atheists might be historical. A combination of forced conversion from Protestantism to Catholicism, which was connected with oppression by German speaking Habsburgs until 1918 and rule of Communist regime in 2nd half of the 20th century might have lead to loss of interest in faith. Interestingly enough, neighbouring Poland, which was also a part of Communist block, is heavily religious, so Communism is not as much of a factor.
What is typical for Czech people is belief in Luck or rise of modern alternative spirituality. A lot of people are seeing alternative healers or tarot card readers in order to get better or find out what their fortune is.
My dad was first generation Czech/American. He basically told me what you have related. Lots of anti-Habsburg sentiment over the ages. In fact, when Czechs immigrated to the US, over 75% of them gave up the Catholic religion. I remember growing up, that my dad said he was an athiest. I was shocked. My mom (first generation Slovenian) was brought up in the Catholic faith and raised my brother and myself as Catholics. Looking back, I can now relate to my dad's idea. I have been an atheist for 20 years and know exactly what he meant. He would tell the story about two women who couldn't stand each other but were religious. When they died, they both went to heaven and continued bickering. He said, who in the hell would want to put up with that. I agree. Thanks for your insight.
Thanks for that account. I had previously thought of Ireland as the country most messed up by Protestant/Catholic conflicts. But I forgot about Czechia. ...and you didn't even mention the Defenestrations of Prague.
@@paulkoza8652 but isnt this just confirmation bias? you are relying on anecdotal reasoning for your atheism, you look for evidence that supports you existing belief in atheism you mentioned your dads atheism and agree with his perspective without critically engaging with any alternative viewpoints, why so? genuinely, why?
@@mikaela43523 First of all, I have a functioning brain. Second of all, because he was right.
@@paulkoza8652 first of all this is ad hominem and second of all this is begging the question, how is your dad right? because you said so? thats your evidence?
Rationality is detrimental to religious belief, BUT... That is only applicable, if you actually use your rationality on your faith. (and the religious tend to be good at avoiding that, and to compartmentalize their faith) Also, the more intelligent you are, the better you are at rationalizing your faith, which you are deeply invested in, and deeply want to believe, and you deeply want to avoid disbelieving. Hence why there is no clear societal correlation.
For me it was not being able to square the concept of a loving God with the existence of Hell. My mom was Christian and my dad was Atheist, though he never tried to push it on me and I was raised Christian. When people at my church told me that Atheists go to hell I knew they were talking (not specifically) about my dad. When they described that Hell was a place where people are punished for eternity then I had to question what kind of person heaps infinite punishment on another for guessing the wrong religion. Eventually I questioned *why* it was that I believed in God and I realized it was simply because I had been raised in a Christian church and family. If I had been raised Buddhist I would be equally sure of Buddha, if I were raised Hindu I would be equally sure of Vishnu and Shiva, etc. Finally I realized that while dooming someone to infinite punishment was not something a loving god would do, its a potent way for humans to control other humans with the threat of violence in the afterlife.
It seems a lot of folks in the comments including you associate God solely with Christianity and do not see Him as a concept in many religions.. this is quite sad
@ahmadjuwayni6256 he IS a concept in many religions. A contradicting concept, that can be loving, wrathful, have complete control over your life, or none at all. It can send you to hell for not believing, or for being a woman who shows a bit of skin. It can forgive a murderer, but not a woman who has a child out of wedlock.
So yes, God is a concept in many religions. Which to follow, if all of them contradict each other? If following one damns you in another? The answer is don't follow any at all.
@@ahmadjuwayni6256 I understand that God as a concept exists in other religions. I was raised in Christianity though and when I realized that I didn't believe in the Christian God I didn't see a reason to go seeking God elsewhere. The only reason I had beleived in the Christian God was because I had been raised Christian. There was no other reason for me to believe in a god other than that I had been told of one as a child. Now I have studied lots of other religions and I haven't been presented with any evidence that any other gods exist either, though they are still fascinating to learn about.
@@ahmadjuwayni6256 did you even read the comment? they absolutely saw the same concept. Hence why they rejected all religion and not just converted to another
The version of Hell in the Torah is more likely what the Bible meant, where it's a temporary punishment to purify your soul. You'll note that the Bible itself doesn't give much info on it
Excellent video. As a young atheist I would disagree, but now as an older atheist I subscribe to the idea that we are what our peers want us to be, mostly. We humans aren't half as rational as we think we are, but we are a hyper-social species.
Also, what our parents want us to be. Catholic children generally grow up to be Catholics; Protestant children, proteastants; Muslim children, Muslims; etc. Childhood indoctrination is very powerful.
Some of us paid an enormous social price for losing our religion. It would have been infinitely easier socially just to continue to pretend to believe.
Maybe you are what your peers expect you to be, but speak for yourself. I'm not. I don't need the permission of others to have thoughts of my own.
@@1970Phoenix I grew up a Jehovah's Witness. Do you think it was free to leave?
Precisely.
Critical thinking got me a lot of the way there, but I was sitting on the train one day, thinking that I believed in God but couldn't really articulate what the word "God" meant. In an effort to pin that down, I asked myself if I could imagine a universe without god, and what would I expect that universe to look like, and I realised that I didn't have to imagine, it was right here, in front of me, and around me, a universe without a god would look exactly like this universe here, that I live in.
This realisation came in a flash, and had an intensity that I can only describe in religious metaphors - the scales fell from eyes and I could see things as they were for the first time, an albatross of doubt and confusion slipped from neck. I could see my fellow train passengers, and superimposed upon them, their parents, and their grandparents, and their ancestors stretching back to first single celled organisms. I could see their eyes with their electrical connections to the meat-computer brains that control their bodies, the cells they were made of, their nuclei and twisted strands of DNA with their heritage stretching back through their ancestors, and beneath that the clouds of quantum electrons in their energy levels. It probably only lasted seconds but felt like a lifetime and I returned to normal consciousness utterly convinced that there was no god.
Sounds like you were tripping balls
Oh wow, this was extremely similar to my experience.
So how many drugs were you on?
Sounds similar to the classical "mystical experience"
@@oremukihss
Yeah, after you guys smoke some zaza and starts sounding like a smartass all because you don't believe in God anymore.
This makes a lot of sense. I was always confused why Christians, despite what their religion says, continuously force their religion on others and harm other religions that weren't theirs. Like, didn't the bible tell them to love everyone and to respect other people's beliefs? They're basically going against their own religion-
That's why both extremes (zealots as well as non practicing) are considered wrong in both Christianity and Islam. The fact that it happens is less on the religion and more on the people themselves.
@@saajiddaya2152 I agree, If people really are educated about their scriptures their would not even be a fight between people their faith/ideology in judiasm, islam or christianity.. It becomes so ridicouless that people even go believe atheist ideology even if they believe aliens exist or think they came from apes millions of years ago...
I feel like a big factor in going specifically for atheism, and not general agnosticism is trauma. At least where atheism isn't more widespread. Many people who actually push for atheism or have a distaste for religion usually grow up religious and are quick to point out injustices in beliefs, whereas the more culturally indifferent atheists arent actually cemented in any one belief and are just as likely to identify as agnostic.
Atheism specifically, at least coming from the US, is usually in kahoots with people who grew up in a religious population where many injustices were overlooked, on top of very irrational thinking being common, all in the name of god. When this is a factor in your life, when those systems failed you when you needed them, or are the cause of many factors of your problems, its easy and validating to say atheism is the better way.
Some religions are just more reasonable than others which is why reasonable people leaving their religion is not a universal phenomenon across all cultures.
@@izzymosley1970 don't forget about what they do to convert people and what happens to you if one becomes an apostate 🤯
This is why history is so interesting. Some religions fit a time and a place so much better and thus last whilst others function as little more than a cult. (I use cult to mean a minority religion/viewpoint)4
So what you're saying is religions need to GIT GUD!~
I think this rather depends on the which version of religion one is leaving. For example, theistic evolution is much more rational than young earth creationism.
Rationality was what solidified my atheism, but ultimately the reason I am an atheist is because I grew up simply not believing in a god, both my parents are atheists and so I grew up atheist. It's entirely possible to reason yourself into or out of religion when you become old enough to start making decision for yourself, but especially as you're growing up your environment is the single strongest influence on your beliefs, one way or the other
Y tf u everywhere
Reason is unreliable. We are not omniscient beings. A flawed human.
@@atlas4698 It's hella more reliable than stories made up by primitive slave holders to justify their genocides and misogyny.
Leaving religion cured my depression
In truth why people belive blindly, it's due to early indoctrination and societal pressure, which is hard to see as positive.
I think the perfect anecdotal argument that atheism doesn’t equate to rationality was how quick a lot of adherents of “New Atheism”, including some of the four horsemen themselves, adopted conspiratorial, irrational, bigoted, dogmatic and pseudoscientific views in spite of their atheism. Richard Dawkins in particular has views that these days are indistinguishable from those of American evangelical Christians.
Couldn't've said it better myself 👏
You're very correct about that. Harris always was kind of that too. It took me a little while to see it sadly.
@@lukelee7967 I remember Harris making a comment about where was heaven located, implying it was somewhere up in space. That alone just made him lose a lot of credibility whenever he discusses religion.
They underestimated how much of their worldview is shaped by religion. They thought that ditching just the God-belief is enough to free their minds. They forgot to question other beliefs that come with Christianity
Also, Dawkins's campaign on buses "There's probably no God. Now stop worrying and enjoy your life." The god he doesn't believe in seems to make people worry. The idea that a god could make people glad didn't occur to him. But that's what a lot of people experience, no matter which religion.
If the question is how does someone become an atheist then where I live the answer is “you’re born…”
The question how a theist becomes an atheist is completely different…
Which means atheism is just irrational, or at the least arational. It's also impossible for atheism to be "true" since it's not a result of rational thinking about what one beliefs, but a meaningless descriptor of a psychological state.
Thanks for making all the non-believers irrational/arational people.
Labling babies athiest is a bit silly when they dont have the capacity to understand the question. Is my dog also an atheist?
Completely agree, why is the default position theism?
@@MBEG89 Because by the time an individual can articulate a position (about 4 or 5, being both able to speak language, and to have some grasp on the basic concept of religion and faith), one has already been taught what their community believes and expects them to believe. Let alone by the time one has the information and faculties to even begin forming their own opinions and questioning what their community has taught them.
Babies aren't born religious, but they aren't born atheist either - to call them atheist (or any similar position) is to imply they've made a decision, have any understanding of that decision, or can articulate it. The default position is Null, Blank, Mu, Data Not Found. The 'default' position in the sense "the position most people hold by the time everyone around them can be told what their position is," is whatever their community believes, barring some precocious folks who started questioning things much earlier than others. Often that's theistic, but certainly not always.
@@MBEG89
Because across human society theism was and still is the norm. You cannot find any atheist civilizations appearing before the 1900s. Religion, mythology and science were deeply interconnected to the point that not believing in religious ideas would be like not believing in a proven scientific concept today.
education kills religion too, rational thought is like garlic to that vampire
I was a Pentecostal pastor who felt inferior when I would go to clergy prayer gatherings in my city because I was the only one without a seminary degree. So I went to seminary. That was the beginning of the end of my faith. First nail in the coffin: Hermeneutics class: learning about genre and interpretation and context, and realizing there were many ways of interpreting the Bible other than my own. Second nail in the coffin: Patristics class. and reading folks like Bart Ehrman and Elaine Pagels and others. Realizing that "orthodoxy" was really just the folks who won the theological war, and that there were many versions of Christianity in the early church. It wasn't just "the faith once delivered to the saints" (Jude 1:3) that I believed and had been taught. Third nail in the coffin: Christology class, and "historical Jesus" studies. Realizing that the canonical gospels were not actually historically reliable documents, but retro-fitted theological tracts, and that everybody's version of Jesus ends up looking a lot like themselves (I think Albert Schweitzer famously came to a similar conclusion in his historical Jesus studies). By the time I got my masters, I was no longer a Christian. I went on for a PhD in history and became a history professor. When I first left the faith, I read guys like Dawkins and Hitchens, and called myself an atheist. I no longer wear the label for many reasons, but I'm still not a theist. I guess where I'm at is that while it's still interesting to me (hence my watching and commenting on this content), I just don't care anymore. The question of God's existence has become irrelevant to me. Perhaps I'm an "ignostic," I dunno.
There weren’t many versions of Christianity in the beginning. I believe in the Catholic Church which means I surrender to the collective wisdom of the thousands of Bishops in history.
What kind of seminary did you go to? I don't think that Pentecostalists would have seminaries that teach that stuff. Are there just not any seminaries where they don't teach these things, because they're the only things that are vaguely academic about studying to become a minister or priest? That is, there's just no point to any seminary where they don't do a deep dive into these issues, because there's nothing left to teach people beyond what they learn as children otherwise?
@@fij715 Read "Lost Christianities" by Bart Ehrman
@@stevenglowacki8576 I actually ended up going to a Catholic seminary, believe it or not (there's a whole long story there). Pentecostals (at least of the variety that I was), generally send their minsters and ministerial hopefuls to "Bible Colleges," not seminaries. And no, they don't teach this stuff in Bible Colleges, that's for sure.
@@arlenhanson6262 No
The reason someone becomes an athiest is not necessarily the reason they stay one. I know that rationality was a reason I became an athiest, (along with community, and teenaged bravdo) but it plays a bigger role in why I continue my athiesum. As my learning and research continues I become more welcoming to people of faith, more able to see how they use there rationality to maintain there faith. But I do not become more convinced of there claims.
Maybe you're just a nice person, meeting people as they come, judging only their behavior? It's a generally good way to be. Where my difficulty lies is in indirect behaviors that influence law and directly affect my life. Legislating based on religious teachings that have been proven illogical, impractical, incorrect in the time since they were written down. That is to say, upholding prejudices against women voting(see "Repeal the 19th), for example or any of the Project 2025 nonsense.
You should learn about the argument from motion
@@InternetCrusader-rb7ls The "argument from motion" takes as an unquestioned given the premises that 1: there must be an emotionally satisfactory explanation for the existence of the universe, and 2: the "prime mover" that set it in motion must be God. It's circular reasoning motivated by faith, and it begs more questions than it purports to answer. It's logical nonsense.
@@bartolomeothesatyr
The argument doesn’t mention emotion once. It never claims that the unmoved mover is God, other arguments prove that based on this one’s conclusion, and you can’t show that the reasoning is circular because you don’t even know what the premises of the argument are.
You have no idea what you’re talking about.
@@InternetCrusader-rb7ls The Argument from Motion according to Aquinas:
1. Evident to our senses is motion-the movement from potentiality to actuality. Things are acted on.
2. Whatever is moved is moved by something else. Potentiality is only moved by actuality.
3. Unless there is a First Mover, there can be no motions.
4. Thus, a First Mover exists.
Aquinas never even seriously entertained the possibility that effects could be their own cause, or that things could happen without cause, or that the universe itself is an infinite causal loop. It's a circular argument because it takes the necessity of a First Mover as a given premise even while it argues for the existence of a First Mover. What this line of argument boils down to is that Aquinas would rather engage in rhetorical sophistry than seriously engage with the idea that things happen for no discernible reason. It's motivated reasoning to justify the dismissal of emotionally-discomforting lines of argument.
honestly the main reason why I left was that the building was too cold, and the meetings were too early.
My church had free food and i loved going to church. but I am not religious.
I was raised within a very Catholic household and family. Several of my family members are priest, nuns, and even bishops. So, I was very religious myself to the point where I performed every Sacrament up to marriage.
My path to atheism began with two questions to my late grandfather (the most pious man I've ever known): "Why can't women be priests?" and "There are many religions in the world and all of them believe as strongly as we do, what makes us right?"
I don't quite remember why I asked him those questions, but I do remember not receiving satisfactory answers. So, I suppose my pathway was rationality.
Why do you want women to be priest? Gender Equality?
"What make Christianity true" is often asked. Perhaps, better start with: do objective truth exist?
@@ianbuick8946 I asked that particular question because I knew many women in my Church and family that were as pious as anyone else. Their only option to express that piety as a member of the Church was being a nun or a Minister of the Eucharist. Men, on the other hand, can be priests, deacons, ministers of the Eucharist, monks, etc.
As far as the question on truth, it was more of a discussion on faith than a search for truth. Why am I faithful to this religion? Why is my faith the one I should follow? Why are people faithful to other religions? Etc.
Edit: Also, keep in mind, I was 16 at the time. The concept of "objective truth" hadn't been introduced to me yet. I'm 34.
@@ianbuick8946 Objective truth exists. We just have trouble knowing what it is at times. That’s why we’ve developed things like the scientific method and historical methods to help us get closer to understanding objective truth. Based on the data that I have observed, I do not consider Catholicism to be objectively true.
@@ianbuick8946 Why do people *not* want women to be priests? There doesn't seem to be any reason with much legitimacy that I can find. Usually it boils down to 'tradition,' with a sprinkling of 'one of the early christians really didn't like women and his opinions still hold weight.'
Maybe there was something else that made you switch and rationality was just along the way?
For me, it was researching the history of my own religion, and the ways it was influenced and changed throughout time. Freedom ! Now I can examine the texts with less bias and pull out the wisdom that is universal.
Reading the Bible was my first step toward atheism. The process took many years.
The final straw was that a friend in my D&D group became a fundamentalist Christian and I watched her change from a sweet and accepting, non-judgemental person (though a bit naive) into a hate-filled, science-denying paranoid, and I realised I didn't want to be associated with a cult that would do that to a person. That also awakened an interest in science for me, so, yay!
It certainly had nothing to do with existential threats. I was a victim of brutal domestic violence at the time, and was (and still am) being stalked by by violently malignant narcissistic sister - who, by the way, was a Christian last time I spoke with her (but wasn't when I deconverted).
In short, my own increasing analytical thinking made me not a fundamentalist anymore, but the lack of analytical thinking in religious people I knew pushed me the last step into atheism.
BTW It took a good 20 years after that for me to become a true sceptic. I tried a lot of beliefs along the way which - looking back - were pretty irrational
Do you have data?
Not sure why she would reject science. It's (to me) the gears that makes God's creations function.
But I am somewhat of a heretic, so what do I know?
I'd think that what predicts atheism isn't a rational analytical mind, but being able to analyze one's religious beliefs neutrally and objectively. Even if one is generally rational and analytical, that doesn't mean they can't make rational and analytical mistakes due to bias.
Some Christians think atheism implies a hate for God, I tried explaining that I've never experienced anything otherworldly or divine in any sense so I'm not inclined to believe in any religion that demans blind faith. personally, as a terror management response and someone with terrible anxiety, im expectedly inclined to believe in religion because of how terrifying the concept of death is, but I can't because of how illogically convenient religion is, exacerbated the stark lack of evidence of divinity.
And you do not understand why Christians would think that lol? Some atheists talk more about God than I do!
@@fij715 Maybe that's because you never realize you're talking to an atheist unless you bring up the topic of religion.
I don't hate God because I don't think he exists. That being said, if he did exist as depicted in the Bible, I definitely wouldn't like him very much.
I became an atheist when I was exposed to it's ideas, it just made more sense to me and made me happier
Exactly. Humans are not Spockian logic machines. We're emotional too. And that emotion is what drives us to do anything.
Wants always preceed needs. If you don't want money then you don't need to work. If you don't want shelter then you don't need a home. If you don't want to live then you don't need to eat, drink, sleep, stay healthy, etc. So on and so forth.
It was only after I became an Agnostic-Atheist that I started to find rational arguments for my new set of beliefs to be appealing. But that was only a post hoc rationalization sorta thing I did after losing my faith and before I declared it publicly so as to prepare myself for the expected attacks I was going to receive from my religious surroundings.
Rationality was just like a shiny new sword, sheild, and suit of armor. The old emotional ones worked just fine; and I could still use them for my new cause (e.g. anti-theism), but they had lost some of their potency.
@I-am-Hrut ugh you sound like an atheist 😅 "smartest guy in the room" complex.
@@Mai-Gninwod actually no! I had a kinda shitty childhood in a dangerous part of Mexico. In hindsight I think that the idea that there’s no one out there looking out for us made more sense and made me value the people that actually are there for me. Everyone is different I guess.
@@I-am-Hrut Even if you have enough money to stay alive, you might still have a need to work; labor is not only a source of money but also kills boredom and boosts your self estimate (incl. confidence & experience).
@@Apollorion Alternatively, if you don't believe in free will, then axiomatically all of your wants are necessary preceeded by unconscious processes outside of your control.
The threat of excrutiating pain for eternity in hell for the crime of not believing ... yep, that pretty much did it for me.
@@tariq_sharif For me the idea of a place or a form of existence or plane of being, where people are suffering for infinite amount of time at some point became completely ridiculous. Not even unethical, not scary, just completely devoid of meaning.
Like, somebody has to answer the questions, what "eternal suffering for all eternity" means, how it works and how it doesn't, somebody has to make sure people don't become bored, don't break down completely, somebody has to "pay the bills" so to speak, they had to figure out the rules of it, the logistics, everything.
According to Christian theism, everything that exists was created by Abrahamic god, so it would have to be that dude. But, like... It's so pointless. The idea of hell doesn't make any sense and you have to avoid thinking about it entirely to accept it, as a premise.
There's more if you'd start digging, but it was the first doubt for me. Later I learn, that smart people are not automatically free from religion, I've heard plenty of smart people talk religion and it always feels to me, like mind games of some sort. Arguments that make perfect sense to them and which weren't designed to convinced anybody who already doesn't believe it.
@@donatodiniccolodibettobardi842 the meaning is explained in the parable of the rich man and Lazarus. Because the rich man wanted to drag Lazarus through the mud both before and after death but didn't want to admit he shouldn't do things like that, he was permitted to sink himself lower, and pain himself as much as he wanted.
@@Makaneek5060 That doesn't make much sense to me, either, sorry. You missed the point of my comment, as well, I think.
Abrahamic religions also tends to be so hopelessly anthropocentric, it's hard to take their claims seriously sometimes. Such a big cosmos around us and we think there are so many elaborate rules, invented just for us...
@@donatodiniccolodibettobardi842 well the elaborate rules are the most culturally dependant aspect of them certainly. Different continents or hypothetically different planets would have different collections of them. The core rules (love God and your neighbor for Christians, remember your God who delivered you from Egypt for Jews, Good thoughts words and deeds for Zoroastrians) are really distillations of what makes life not so much better in all ways, but tolerable in the face of persecution, and I would say for these three, that's where their ideas of equity come from.
specifically for me it is the idea that the reason you are compelled to do good in the world as a christian (specifically in my case) isnt out of simply a love for mankind and goodwill towards your neighbor but fear you might be tortured for all eternity. all the "love thy neighbor as yourself" falls flat when its really "love thy neighbor as yourself, or else"
I was raised a Catholic and went to Catholic schools (Sisters of Mercy, Christian Brothers, Jesuits). I was devout, was an altar boy, and at one time even wanted to be a priest. I was never abused by a priest or a member of a religious order. What changed me was the question of the need of a messiah, or savior: if there was no original sin, then there was no need for a savior. Jesus Christ was then reduced to a human religious figure, not a god. So I suppose you could say it was a rational decision. I stopped going to church one day, to see how I felt, and I didn't feel guilty. Is that a rational response? I've never been a Catholic since then. However, I did get married in the Catholic Church, not because I thought I had to, but because the country I live in is mainly a catholic country and that was the expected route towards marriage. I saw it as a cultural matter and treated the ceremony with respect; after all, marriage is basically a public declaration of union of two people among friends and family, in a public ceremony, so that was fine with me. I'm now 74 and am not a believer in any god that I've heard of, and know that death is not too far away. I feel I have lived a good life and have been largely ethical in my behavior. I respect other people's beliefs and do not argue religion with anyone. I don't believe in an afterlife and that's fine with me--the idea of lasting forever is scary! Very interesting topic from a very interesting channel. Religion is a fascinating topic, even for unbelievers.
man i wish u could marry without needing to have a specific religion, i didn't have that privilege.
I cannot understand how the Abrahamic religions can sit and look at their texts and think this is from God. The sources are so dubious and biased I can't fathom a God who will send you to hell on the basis of believing would choose to communicate his existence in such a way. It is turly baffling to me. I think tradition and culture is the biggest reason people believe
0:40 - Well I did become an atheist when I was about 20 years old, but certainly not because of some book written by some racist like Harris or some narcissist like Dawkins.
I think there is a difference between "capacity for rational thinking," which seems to be the definition of "rationality" here and in research, and "adherence to principles of skepticism," which is what I normally think of myself when I hear "rationality" in the context of religion. People usually need to be trained in skeptical thinking and also willing to apply it to their own religious beliefs. I don't think either of these traits are captured in the rationality tests put forward by researchers.
I also think there is something to be said about cognitive dissonance. Some religions have truth claims that are far more obviously out of line with evidentiary support than other religions. Some religions are also more brittle than others. It would be interesting to see difference between fundamentalist/high-participation religions and others, because I think "rationality" is going to produce more atheists in fundamentalist environments where CREDs are high (e.g. Mormonism).
CREDs are also likely pretty highly correlated with a lurking variable of personal commitment to the religion, or "sunk cost fallacy" for lack of a better word. The more sacrifices one makes for their own religion, the more painful it becomes to even consider leaving that religion. If someone is in an environment where they're seeing a lot of CREDs, they're likely also making personal sacrifices to engage in the CREDs themselves.
I like what you wrote, but I'm missing the definition of CRED. Please expound. Also, this one left Mormonism via applying the principles of skepticism form of rationality. EDIT: nvm. It came up later in the video.
It’s actually quite hard to define rationality and it gets even harder when you try to distinguish it from logic
4:51 Growing up, I didn't have any form of "I saw Jesus" in my entire life, where some of my classmates did have them. My parents didn't go to church, though they did sent me and my younger sister to a Chirstian School. Fast foward to my adult years: I discovered that this whole time I've been aphantasic. I can't visualize what I imagine, at all, and that I think is a big reason for my atheism. I couldn't "see Jesus" anymore I could "see" an apple, no matter how hard I tried. Plus, I had some teachers at school that made me question the creation mith, and the whole thing fell apart. By 15yo I was already calling myself an atheist.
Aphantasia's an interesting thing. I think I'm... partially aphantasic? I can visualise things in my head, but only in brief flashes. I can't "hold" images for longer than like a second at most. I think I can do it longer if I really practice or I'm emotionally invested, but outside that no luck.
It's not because of my aphantasia, but I'm convinced I have neurological reasons for my lack of spirituality. I've tried engaging in those practices, like praying, meditation, fasting, reading holy books, none of them give me any sort of spiritual or non-materialistic feeling.
@@Colddirector Pretty sure that Aphantasia is something neurological. I've been like this for as long as I can remember. I can reproduce music in my ears but not images in my eyes. I've read about people that can reproduce smells or touch-sensations and that's crazy for me.
@@daniel_rossy_explica Here's a fun one, I've had a scent reach me from 100ft away and I could see the plant and color of the flowers vividly in my head. Brain pretty much went "YELLOW FLOWER".
So, if you don't mind the question: If you don't see images in your head are memories like bullet points?
@@ElGreco15 I may have the feeling of reliving a scene from my youth, or a memory like a story I told several times, but with no images at all. I know where people were, relative to me, for instance, but I don't see them in my head.
This is some good food for thought for churches who are losing members. I was active in Unitarian Universalism for about 10 years, and my main critique was their lack of outreach as institutions. Individual members might be active in various causes, but not always representing themselves as UU. And the congregation was more about cultivating everyone's inner life. I think this is because UUism doesn't wanna be "evangelical" and proselytize, but there is a happy medium between meditating privately and standing on corners telling people to convert or perish. Find a way to be out in the world practicing your faith as a visible member of your faith, but doing good without shaming others. You won't get the atheists to convert, but you might pique the interest of seekers who are still open to institutionalized religion.
Another thought, faith without works leads to an atmosphere ripe for atheism. Sola Fide when taken to the extreme that it is a internalized, invisible expression of faith alone that saves actually can lead to the damnation of others.
What about the people who just were atheists since childhood?
Creds. People gave them creds that there are no gods. I'm speaking from experience - my parents never outright told me that no gods exist, but that's how they acted.
I think it's probably a very complicated question with many variables at play.
Pretty much me. I wasn't raised atheist, per se, but I was raised in a more or less secular household. I was allowed to pursue whatever knowledge or belief that made sense to me as long as I didn't bother or hurt anyone else. I naturally gravitated towards skepticism and nonbelief.
@@timmccarthy9917thats probably it. i was raised completely without religion and i am thus irreligious myself
@@timmccarthy9917 idk if there's a term for this but I think negative creds are a big factor too. If your experience with religious people and religious institutions is more negative than positive (something I think is pretty common these days), you're less likely to become religious
contradictions within religion can both lead people to seek more idealistic solutions, or more nehilistic ones
I didn’t watch the video yet but I’m ready to start arguing with strangers in the comments 💪
Oh no you're not! 💪🦾
@@stunningkruger yes I am, here’s why.
1. I’m here
2. I’m arguing with you right now
Checkmate ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
@@ozymandias3097 okay boss ...you win! 🏳
FIGHT ME (I dunno about what, pick something)
@@stunningkruger no I don’t
Credibility/cultural learners.
Translation: children inheriting cultural traditions from their parents or immediate community (read: indoctrinated into supernatural beliefs).
There's a reason why an Afghan born in Afghanistan to Afghan parents is more likely than not going to grow up practicing and affiliating with Islam. Same goes with a Protestant Christian in America, or a Hindu in India. This video is straw manning Dawkins because he acknowledges that. He knows intellect and scrutiny aren't a direct dismantling force for theism.
I can't tell you the actual reason I became an atheist, but it wasn't some quick decision. It took literal years to "admit it". There are plenty of post-hoc rationalizations as to why, but truth is I just believe some percentage just doesn't accept religion as their culture norm. Personally, I just don't know if I have ever or would ever fully accept it.
You really should at least cover Ernest Becker and "The Denial of Death" since it deal so much with culture and religion. I know it is only tangentially related but it's an interesting look at the subject of religion either way.
The reason I am an Atheist isn't because of some huge revelation, or any personal experience with religion (which growing up as a Baptist was very moderate and mostly positive).
When I became a teenager I just realized that I couldn't believe in it just like I can't make myself believe in Santa Claus. I have never seen evidence of supernatural phenomenon or magic. I lived many years as a secular 'cultural Christian'. But as an adult I chose to actually read the bible page for page, and it not only drove home my non-belief out of 'rationality', but also I realized that the Bible (and the morality of mainstream Christianity in general) is something I just cannot morally align myself with and so I dropped all pretense of religiosity.
I do believe that Jesus was a real person though, and I actually believe there is more truth to his story than most mainstream Atheists give credit too. I have no issue with Jesus, just his followers lol.
I feel like it would really benefit the Christians if more put emphasis on why and how their religion is verifiably true (at least to them).
@davidmorgan5581 there is A LOT of literature for this. Read C S Lewis Mere Christianity or G K Chesterton orthodoxy. Look into the resurrection argument
@@Rocky-ur9mn all of them are flawed, failed to be demonstrated and have been rebutted.
so you like jews who make doomsday cults, everyone has a type.
@@DiMadHatter just no
Instead of a cause of atheism, rationality might be more usefully seen as a set of linguistic tools and concepts to articulate pre-existing doubts. These doubts are more likely to arise from religious apathy and a lack of CrEDs. Rationality doesn’t directly lead a person to atheism, but it can be used to articulate, explore, and justify an absence of any emotional or social need for religiosity.
this makes a lot of sense, and i’m glad i saw your comment. for my own changes in belief, i had my problems with my old faith before i really allowed myself to think at all. the reasoning HAD to come later. but i never really knew how to explain that order of events, because it doesn’t seem to make sense.
First time watching this channel, and I'm excited to watch more.
I did find it odd that the arguments are framed as if having a religious belief is the default and you then need to "become" or "convert" to atheism.
I think the better question is why humans invented religion, and why people continue to practice it.
I wish you'd mentioned how surveys of scientists show them being dramatically less religious. Plus the most accredited scientists seem to be even less religious than scientists generally.
The explanations given here do a good job explaining apatheists, but not the extreme differences between scientists and the general public.
and globalisation and cross cultural exposure was the catalyst, they see no more of in-group/ out group, they realise, alternatives, not just as an alternative, but sometimes better
One critique. You don’t “convert” to atheism. It’s not an ideology, but a rejection of theism. That’s it. Nothing special about it.
exactly this, everyone is born an atheist.
I wasn't raised religious but as a child I vaguely believed in God. I didn't really understand why, I think I did just because most others around me did.
In my rebellious teens I was a staunch atheist, but as I matured and began to experiment with psychedelics (especially DMT) I began to broaden my pondering on reality.
Science tells us that we are made from pieces of the universe (physical matter) which has evolved into forms that allow it to experience itself subjectively. The universe could exist without conscious life, and yet here we are. Whether that is the result of a higher power, some form of universal consciousness, a simulated reality, pure random chance, etc. I don't know, but I take solace in not knowing.
At least you have enough brain power and integrity to say you don't know, unlike the atheist 😂
Being conscious is a way for the universe to know itself. The conscious mind may not be random necessarily. I feel agnostic, as I feel some sort of higher power source may exist, but not in any religious way, more that physical things will always change but will always exist in some form. Once created, you imprint into time and space.
Although seemingly contradictory, the first two studies don't actually clash. It's completely possible that thinking critically about your religious convictions leads to atheism, AND that there's no correlation between critical thinking ability and atheism. Because being good at critical thinking is not the same thing as applying that critical thinking to your religious convictions. It seems plausible to me that lack of CREDs (or some other cause) leads you to examine your religion critically and, whether you're particularly good or bad at that sort of thinking, doing that increases rates of atheism. That is, social changes tricker introspection, but its the act of rational introspection which leads to atheism.
But I'm not read up on the literature, so I don't know if this two-step line of thought has been considered / studied / accepted / refuted.
Interesting observation. I dove into the first study, however, when it came out and was surprised by how weak the statistical significance was, yet still getting published in Science. I'm not surprised to seeing others having difficulty replicating it. Regardless, the second study was interesting.
Yeah in order to critically think about your religious beliefs and potentially identify as an atheist you first need to be willing to do so and see atheism as an equally valid perspective. If you have strong prejudiced against atheists you're never even going to consider it in the first place.
I hate to get political but I think the reason you'd find people in the UK being more religious if they're analytical is because atheism and christianity kind of switched places on what is socially acceptable there, and now a lot of people kind of just fall in line and become athiests, whereas before it was you fell in line and became a christian.
Genuine question from a Yank: do you think that the artificial class system so ingrained in the British psyche tipped people into those slots, or do you really think atheism is a written dogma with a list of do's and don't's that are punishable by law? Like religion was.
because Muslims here want to be separated from the violence in the middle east; many muslims are very liturgical and intelligent; even if they may not be the brightest student in class.
so now, if you want philosophical and even discussions regarding things;
it's honestly better to have a Muslim or a Christian, since so many have true faith; since those of the "born christian" have mostly left churches.
but in devoutly religious areas, the Atheist/Agnostic/Secularist often is the most analytical.
Well... that's creds. Being rationally minded is an atheistic CRED.
That's exactly what I was thinking. Going against the mainstream belief seems to give a unique selection bias towards those who are more analytical. Or put another way: if you're going to be something other than the default in your area you're going to end up doing a lot more research to analyze and justify your belief (or lack there of)
@@TheThrivingTherapsid If it's a CRED, then what's the cost associated with it? How do you even show your rational mindedness? It's not exactly a quality being broadcast publicly like wearing unique clothes or even (eg) being vegetarian/vegan.
I think a more appropriate title would be "Why societies become less religious".
That was certainly true in my case. I stopped being a Christian when I realized that the story of salvation in the Bible was so completely improbable as to be essentially impossible. There was literally almost no chance of that being a true story. And since the basic requirement of Christianity is believing that story, I just left.
I had ," study to show yourself approved," and in doing so I studied myself out of the concept of faith.
You can’t reason someone out of what they had not reasoned themselves into.
Also I’m curious what you would think about the large majority of scientists being atheist means?
Having gone through both the extreme atheist and religious pipelines, I now drop labels. Enjoying discussing and exploring philosophy and spirituality is what I love to do and that's all that matters. There is no difference between science and religion - they complement each other, and can never be separated.
I disagree because science is more observation based, while theism is more doctrines and unsubstantiated beliefs for the most part.
@@baonemogomotsi7138 It's a common stance to take, and a belief that I held myself for many years. Then as I began to research, read, and (most importantly) discuss this with people from different backgrounds, faiths and professions, I realised that this separation only exists as itself another form of 'unsubstantiated belief'. What I mean is that we're taught that these two concepts are opposites and therefore must be separated, but this is actually immensely reductive and mostly western-hemisphere humanistic atheistic secularism which has reached this conclusion as an extension of the (largely successful) separation of church and state. But it is a fallacy to truly divide the two, or to attempt to define one of them as empiricist and the other as rationalist. Do you have faith that scientists' published papers are real? That they are properly vetted and that this benefits humanity as a whole?
@@AxeBearingVoyagerHow is believing that a scientist went to the proper scientific procedures when publishing their work in any way comparable to believing a guy can turn water into wine and resurrect from the dead?
One of the things is a plausibility, the other is pure fantasy.
I'd say that in theory you are wrong, as someone else pointed out above science is based on observable evidence that's measurable and testable, while religion and spirituality are rather rooted in subjectivity and personal experience.
But in practice? I totally agree with you. Unless you study each and all fields of science (lol) and can run the tests and collect the data yourself, you really don't have much choice other than to have faith in the scientific community's members' methodology and integrity. And that in itself is subjective, and often not entirely rational...
And as someone who considers themselves "spiritual but not religious" as well, this blindspot makes people hella irritating a lot of times. Being closed-minded isn't exactly rational, is it.
@darkcreatureinadarkroom1617 I can see where you're coming from, but I still disagree because the scientific claims are more educated analysis of the environment than the "God did it" nature of theological beliefs so I lean more on siding with these educated men and women than the theological teachings.
I realized that religion was the only area of my life where I put logic and reasoning aside. Then I realized I had no way of demonstrating my god or any other gods. So I became an atheist.
Thales, Socrates, Aristotle, Pyyrho, Copernicus, Bruno, Galileo, did the reverse . . .
*Joshua 10.12-13; 20* “On the day the Lord gave the Amorites over to Israel, Joshua said to the Lord: 'Sun, *STAND STILL* over Gibeon, and you, moon, over the Valley of Aijalon.' So the *Sun* _STOOD STILL,_ and the moon stopped, till the nation avenged itself on its enemies . . . So Joshua and the Israelites *defeated* them completely, but a few _survivors_ managed to reach their fortified cities.”
*Qur'an 31:29* “Do you not see that Allah has subjected the sun and the moon, _each_ ORBITING for an appointed term, and that Allah is All-Aware of what you do?”
*Qur’an 36.38* “The _sun_ TRAVELS for its fixed term. That is the design of the Almighty, All-Knowing.”
*Qur'an 13:3* “It is He who spread the Earth…”
*Qur'an 15:19* “The Earth, we have spread it…”
*Qur'an 20:53* “Who has made for you the Earth as a bed...”
*Qur'an 43:10* “made the earth as a bed . . .”
*Qur'an 50:7* “The Earth, we spread it out . . .”
*Qur'an 51:48* “And we have spread out the Earth...”
*Qur'an 78:6* “Have we not made the Earth a bed?”
*Qur'an 79:30* “After that, He Spread the Earth.”
*Qur'an 3:151* “We will cast t____r into the hearts of those who deny the Truth”
It doesn't have to have logic to be meaningful to people.
@@Based_Stuhlinger I can only speak for myself. Whats meaningful to me is believing in things that can be demonstrated as true or reasonable. As far as I can tell, God and other supernatural claims don't fall into that category.
@@Xzyrra666By that metric all stories should be disregarded because none of it is ''true.'' The point of religion is the allegorical nature of it's stories/concepts and shared values within a population of people. Religion binds people with something deeper than materialism, which Atheism actively promotes and has no answer to.
@@Based_Stuhlinger _By that metric all stories should be disregarded because none of it is ''true.''_
No. I'm talking about beliefs. I care if my beliefs are actually true.. I can read any work of fiction and still find enjoyment or meaning in it.
_"The point of religion is the allegorical nature of it's stories and a shared culture within a people. Religion binds people with something deeper than materialism which Atheism actively promotes and has no answer to."_
People find meaning in religion and structure their lives/communities around it. Cool. Not me. The truth of something isn't impacted by the number of people that believe it or how strongly they believe it. Also, there's nothing religion does that can't be done through secular means. Morality, culture, social cohesion, etc., are not dependent on religious dogma.
Atheism doesn't promote anything and cannot be an answer to anything other than "Are you convinced that a god exists?" Atheism isn't a packaged world view like Christianity or Islam.
A total intellectual transparency on the part of theists would make all the difference.
true but I'm not convinced that'll ever happen
What exactly does this mean?
@@drooskie9525
An unconditional willingness on the part of theists to acknowledge what's true, even if it's inconvenient for them to do so.
@@somethingyousaid5059 This is a virtue that would benefit anyone.
@@Roescoe
Yes, theists and non-theists alike.
I'm an atheist because my dog was hit by a truck and now I hate God for letting it happen.
I know it's God's fault because the truck belongs to a local church.
Is that some sort of theist joke, that I'm not getting?
@tokeivo It’s poking at the widespread myth that “atheists didn’t come to their conclusion rationally, they’re just looking for an excuse to defy/blame god for all their problems”.
Most famously illustrated in the “gods not dead” film, where the main antagonist (a college philosophy professor 🤦♂️) became an “atheist” bc his mom died, and the heroic Christian protagonist deduces that “you actually just hate god!” using his god-powered facts & logic.
The fact that this is taken completely seriously both within the film & by viewers, tells you a lot about the way the target audience thinks.
@@UGNAvalon yeah they just think that anyone is athiest is just hating god. u cannot hate what does not exist
In economics there's the concept of REVEALED PREFERENCES. Simply put, don't listen to what people say, watch what they do. I _caught myself_ talking to God a few months ago. The Revelation that all of my atheism was the product of apathy and pride in my own intellect has been the greatest, most painful, and most healing gift I've ever received.
Truth is to be pragmatic and unfiltered.
I'm an atheist for the same reason Christians and Muslims don't believe in Zeus.
No you're not, you're just a zombie parrot 🤡
And pray tell what reason do you think Christians and Muslims don't believe in Zeus?
@@Roescoe Maybe because they think it's a bunch of nonsence that should have stayed in the Bronze Age? But I would love the hear from any Christian or Muslim why they don't belive in Zeus, Ra, Enki, or Krishna.
@@Roescoe Their parents didn't tell them to
@@Roescoe Are you Christian or Muslim? Why don't you believe in Zeus?
Religious abuse and trauma definitely sets one on this path
I was basically born into being an atheist because I suffered some pretty violent abuse as a child and decided that there's no way a god could exist and allow such things to happen without being fundamentally evil.
From there I went through an "Angry Atheist" phase, I debated plenty, I did all sorts of dumb stuff, and then I got into learning about the histories of religion and finding channels like this.
My "Modern" brand of Atheism is basically just a belief that it's impossible for any religion to be correct. We have no proof at all of any of it, and yet we do have plenty of reproducible proof for more logical scientific answers, and that's aside from all the constant editing that all religions have gone through over time, and aside from the fact that a lot more than one religion exists. It just makes more sense to be an atheist, it's the more logical option of the two. Some will say "Well you can't rule it out, that's unscientific" and I'd ask them if they're willing to say Goblins might exist since we can't prove they don't exist. I can make an evidence based decision and say that they don't, and the same applies to any deities or magic.
And honestly, this might be the angry teenager in me still talking, but even if there *were* proof and there *were* a god or gods, I'd reject them. I don't want my life to be part of some great plan, I don't want my existence to be in service to someone else's will, I'm me and no one else. The fact that nothing matters means that everything matters as much as you want it to, And to me, it all matters quite a bit. The bad stuff may be harder to bear, but the good stuff is even sweeter.
Such a sad story. So many have suffered this. I'm sorry man. Anyhow I'd say read and follow the teachings of Jesus and ignore all the other stuff people say He said.
I’m sorry you had to suffer that. Your life and experience is yours alone and I mean no disrespect or insensitivity, but God, as personal as he may be portrayed to be, is a lot bigger than any one person’s individual circumstances
@@thethrowbackguy4319 "God was too busy with more important stuff to be bothered stopping a child from being beaten half to death." Is not the argument you think it is buddy.
@@ClaireSunshine Wouldn’t the atheistic view agree that the universe void of a loving creator is much bigger than a single suffering child (you) on Earth? So yeah, maybe you didn’t/don’t matter. Or maybe he really was busy. Allowing the many children who also (unfortunately) suffered terrible things to stay alive. To not only later live to tell the tale and complain that he wasn’t there for them, but also make something with their lives that they were too helpless to save by themselves
@@thethrowbackguy4319 It's people like you that convinced me there is no god in the first place.
For me, my military service changed my entire world view. I felt like I bought into lies and then questioned everything. I relied on my faith to feel comfortable with death should the occasion come. The deconversion (apparently not a real word but I’m using it) from faith in so many things in my life was a world shattering thing to get through.
If someone has faith in a religion, it is not for me to interfere. I’m not trying to make an atheist out of anyone because we all get to choose what we believe and if it fits well in their life, good for them. Everyone has their own journey in life and we all leave it alone.
I never actually became an atheist, but at some point I realized that it's all mythology...Including the religion I was raised in.
Mythology is cool, I do enjoy reading it...But it shouldn't be evangelized, control lives/governments, etc. It's just stories.
Exact same thing here. I've been forced to go to church and attend religious lectures at school throughout my childhood and up to my teens. Even though I attended all that stuff I never got truly engaged in it, all it was for me was people telling some fantastic stories and the idea of god and all of that just didn't make much sense. And when in History and Polish class we started discussing greek and roman mythologies for n-th time, it all just kinda clicked, "Huh, aren't mythologies just religions that fell out of fashion? With enough time won't that be the case with every single current religion?"
I didn't become an atheist, I was born one! Are we born with religion? I was never exposed to religion and when I was I didn't need it to make sense of the world. I certainly don't need it to have morals or values.
I was raised an atheist, but in the most stressful part of my short life so far, I found God. I think you might be right with stress changing neuroplasticity.
Genuine question: How much does it personally matter to you that your god beliefs are founded on an accurate representation of reality?
In other words...if you were fairly certain that your specific god beliefs did not describing something real in the universe, would that lower certainty decrease your confidence in those beliefs?
@@maxwellli7057 people be like "God is mean and scary!" and i be like "puts me to sleep every night wishing I were clean as I thought I was, but I empathize" 😂
@@sharpienate do you have pronouns? 🤡
@@sharpienate if you mean objectively recorded and scientifically observed phenomena, not very much at all.
I truly rely on this channel for serious information on corners of religiosity (and areligiosity) that I have not had time to delve into before. Thank you for all of your fine work.
I'm not surprised the studies about mentalising didn't hold up. They were seeing being imaginative and emotional intelligent as synonymous. Just because someone is good at attributing certain emotions and intentions to another doesn't mean they're good at correctly doing that. I have met many Christians who happily attribute malign intentions to non Christians as if that is definitely the case. They have the capacity to try to imagine what another is feeling but they do it very badly
I am technically not athiest, I'm agnostic.
Wouldn't be surprising if god existed, wouldn't be surprising if god didn't exist.
I'm still just gonna be me, after all.
Kings in the sky exist to justify Kings on the earth. As I don't believe in the latter I won't believe in the former.
That is not what Christianity teaches. You are making a caricature of Christianity because you are bitter.
"Kings on the earth" Do you consider yourself the king of your own actions? Or perhaps you're a determinist.
@@Roescoe I will say this only once "don't post while stoned". You that is not me. I neither consider myself any sort of King nor am I a determinist.
What about the well-known cases of Christian anarchists?
@@TomBall-r4d Who is in control of your life?
Rational analysis for me! And I was a quite convinced believer before! Also, analyzing my feelings, I found what I thought a "need for god" (or whatever, it is hard to put these things into words) was "just my feelings", nothing supernatural required! And that was the decisive blow for my faith that pushed me over to atheism! And I never really looked back ever after, though in the beginning, there were some moments of doubt.
One of the questions that really got me thinking about it was asking "How do you tell the difference between something in your mind being from a divine source, and just your brain feeling something or seeking confirmation bias?" And I realized I didn't really have a good answer to that. Sure, I could say "Well, I look to the Bible to see if it fits with it" but that just as likely would be the confirmation bias part, cause I already believed the Bible
@@sammysamlovescats Interesting!
@@sammysamlovescats This is why eastern spirituality (and some western, the closest resonance you'll find is in the magical traditions, rather than organized religions) prioritizes meditation so strenuously. Step one has to be learning how your mind operates. and that only happens with regular, long-term observation, just like a naturalist tracking the behavior of a species of bird, you have to watch the specimen daily over the course of potentially years to get a complete understanding of how they move through various seasonal changes.
If you watch your thoughts with a critical eye, you learn which ones are internally sourced, which ones come from your intellect, vs a story spun to justify an emotion reaction, vs reactions to something basal in the physical body, or alternatively, whether those thoughts are not sourced from within yourself. This comes in many forms, whether it's from some kind of divine source, or it's subliminal messaging from that McDonald's ad, or you picked something up from the second-hand store with a bad energy, or other spirits with their own agendas to push.
Again, though, to become a wine sommelier, you need to take time studying the nuances of all the different vintages. If you've never made a concentrated effort to distinguish the tastes, then all wine is just going to taste like wine. All your thoughts are just going to feel like thoughts, no matter how many layers of subconscious patterning built up that thought structure. You're left with a shallow understanding of the thought because you only know how to study it skin-deep. Jungian active imagination is a technique to talk directly to the patterns in your subconscious, to speak with the spirits bouncing around your skull, and if the field of psychotherapy has anything to say about it, taking time to learn how your mind operates is incredibly beneficial, even in a mundane life!
Sounds unstable 😂
I started becoming an atheist at age 9 when i first heard my grandma use the whole "god helps those who help themselves" nonsense to my questions on why god didn't prevent bad things from happening. It just sounded a little too convenient.
Would you be willing to read The Reasons for God by Timothy Keller with an open mind, or a closed one? I found it spoke many things which seems very neat, which I associate with convenience, which I am interpreting you are suspicious of given your last sentence.
Religion can only survive if people believe there is no alternative. When different cultures communicate and we see how different people live, and young people are exposed to the fact that people lead productive, happy lives without religion, religion tends to die out.
I'm to the point where I believe some people are genetically predisposed to believe in fantastical theories and some aren't. I was raised in a Southern Baptist church, but never did I believe what they were teaching for one minute. Others believed without question. And some believed "just in case".
What's funny is if you look at many religions, not just christianity. They are describing these different personality traits even in those people. The people who are more rational and more into matter are usually denoted as the "dark" force. Check out zoroastrianism, gnostic christians, pagans, aborigines, and voodun. They all believe that same thing.
very astute point, there is some scientific evidence of this individual and heritable difference too. i think there are and will always be some for whom pattern finding, deference to authority, metaphysical belief or sensations come much more naturally and strongly than with others
We know it is possible to chemically alter the brain to induce a feeling of "divine connection". Psychedelics are famous for it. The idea that atheists might just be lacking in whatever chemical process induces that feeling in other people has always made sense to me.
I kind of fear the day when something like that is discovered, though. Seems like the kind of thing that will lead to lack of faith being filed under "mental illness" alongside depression and ADHD, at least in the USA. Queue Bible Belt states mandating JesusMeds for school-age children.
I can believe this because I have a sister, paternal grandmother and paternal uncle who are hardcore fanatics, but it seems to have missed me