Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Atheists are Irrational
Study after study shows that religious Jews and Christians are happier, more stable, more charitable, have happier families and children… the list goes on. In my case, religion gives me enormous confidence, a strong purpose and a sense of fulfillment when I work toward that purpose.
So if Atheists really were interested in the best outcomes, shouldn’t they choose religion based solely on the results regardless of whether or not there is underlying proof of the existence of a deity? After all, a truly hard-data-driven approach leads to a seemingly-inevitable conclusion. Or do atheists not really care about empirical results?
Note, of course, that religious people often shy away from my argument as well. Believers, like atheists, like to wallow in the well-trodden and fruitless muck, trying to prove or disprove the existence of a god. Yet most of our lives are occupied doing things for practical, utilitarian reasons, like “Does it work better if I do it this way?” When we choose to wear clothes or use table manners or treat other people with respect, we are not doing so out of a deep conviction about The Truth, but because we get better results when we act that way.
Well, we clearly get better results when people act as if they believed in religion, even if, when pressed, they may well admit that they have profound doubts. So if we really want better lives, then why not act accordingly and follow the data?
Published in General
Do you think a non-believer can be a good person? It sounds like you don’t.
To be an atheist seems very arrogant to me. But, then again, one must have a great deal of faith to be a true atheist.
Your post raises more questions for me than it answers. But I’m going to try to filter through some of the things that come up for me. First, atheists get a certain degree of satisfaction out of being atheists. They don’t care much about being happy; instead, they care about being their own masters, IMO. Essentially they get to be their own gods; why would they relinquish that? When you refer to “best outcomes,” I’m not clear on what you mean. Many atheists may be very materially successful, have friends, rewarding activities. Also, I don’t know if atheists care about getting better results for society; they strike me as being primarily self-serving and relish their independence. So acting like they believe in the greater good (which would betray their belief system) would be unappealing.
I would speak differently if you were speaking about agnostics, because their stands leave room for flexibility of movement. When one doubts, there is room for growth. I don’t think atheists have the room or flexibility to do that–unless they aren’t really atheists!
Where in my post do you get that idea?
All I posited is that the data is strong that if one is a practicing Jew or Christian, the odds are higher that they will be happier/more productive etc. than if they are not. That is not a stretch.
The next step is the leap: that if unbelievers really want better results, then they should try practicing a faith even if they are not convinced that the faith is itself “true.”
I think the atheists on this site would disagree.
Oh certainly. I am talking of statistical probabilities here. Just as we point out that there is no unique black poverty when one controls for intact families, so, too, we can say that other metrics of happiness and success are best achieved in the main by practicing Jews and Christians.
Again, I think atheists would disagree. Atheism as I understand it argues against “might takes right” and suggests that respect for other human life comes from logic, not the Torah. As such, they would argue that a decent and good society absolutely can exist in the absence of any religion.
It could be. When it comes to non-believers, I tend to be race-blind: I use a broad brush – to me, atheists claim to be more hard-headed and data-driven, so they of all people should choose to be religious! But the same should be true for agnostics as well.
I got the idea from the last two sentences of you post. Do you think I would be a better person, or live a better life, if I pretended to believe something I really didn’t?
In some ways, atheism is like a religion–a very intolerant religion.
Furthermore, I don’t think one acquires true faith unless he or she has practiced it and knows its philosophical underpinnings in the first place.
We look at faith as a marriage between two people who leap off the cliff together not knowing each other very well. I’ve come to believe the opposite is true. Before we can have true and lasting faith, we must have knowledge. Otherwise our fledgling faith will shatter on impact.
I think imparting that knowledge was C. S. Lewis’s purpose in his World War II radio addresses that became the much-loved book Mere Christianity.
I think many atheists might say that we (believers) are miserable, too. Just too deluded to realize it.
Could one truly be happy if they choose to worship something they don’t believe exists? The ancient Greeks believed in the God of Zeus. They seemed pretty happy. Would I be happier if I believed in Zeus?
Odd, because that is not what I said.
People behave with table manners and wear appropriate clothes and try not to offend not necessarily because we believe in those things, but because when we do them, the results tend to be more positive.
It may not matter much what you believe. But what you do matters a great deal. Living your life as if it had purpose beyond narcissistic hedonism, for example, clearly yields better long term results.
Reminds me of the line from “Fiddler on the Roof” when Tevye speaks of his married daughter and his son-in-law: “ They’re so happy they don’t realize how miserable they are.”
What is our mood but what we think it is? Happy delusion must be better than cynical misery.
I don’t think they were happy. They, like other worshippers of pagan and fate-based faiths, were resigned. There is a peace in believing that nothing really matters. But it is definitely a life less lived.
Fair enough. But in the absence of the Torah (or its offshoots), we have the problem of defining what is “good” and “decent”.
I am suggesting practise, not necessarily worship.
Let me try another example: a red light at 2 AM when nobody is around may well be safe to ignore – and we could be CERTAIN that it would not be unsafe to run it (or that we would get ticketed, etc.). But since we do not think it is wise for everyone else to decide for themselves when to ignore traffic laws, most law-abiding people will stop at that red light.
They may not believe in it. But practising it leads to broadly more positive outcomes. From a practical perspective, then, we follow even stupid laws that work to make things work more smoothly most of the time.
Am I unhappy when I stop at that red light? No. Is someone who practises a religion because they know they are likely to have a happier marriage and kids who are less likely to become drug addicts unhappy just because they don’t really think Gd exists?
Because most people aren’t existential heroes. Most of us can’t be — and shouldn’t be — expected to will ourselves into belief, just as we can’t be expected to declare that rolling a boulder up a hill is a dandy way to lead a life.
The chief business of religion is meaning, but meaning isn’t like most goods. It can’t be sought for its own sake. Instead, it emerges only from the pursuit of some other good, usually unnoticed by us except during moments of contemplation. Meaning is half-hidden, like some object in our peripheral vision, but prone to vanishing the moment we turn to face it.
This, I think, is why our culture’s current crisis of meaning is such a disastrous one. We all know the problem exists, and we’d all like to do something about it, but our very knowledge all but condemns us to failure.
I believe because I believe it is true, not because I believe I will get any benefits out of it ( other than benefits that flow out of Truth ). Believing because there are fringe benefits to believing isn’t truly belief. A faith is either true or not true; going through the motions for not true is a waste of time.
What part of the religious life produces happy marriages and responsible kids — the ritual, or the belief?
It’s probably a bit of both.
To properly practice don’t you have to believe? The benefits one gets from practicing religion is the spiritual benefits they receive. If one still feels nothing from practising religion I doubt that would increase happiness.
But, if everything is just chemical reactions, they are not their own masters. There is no free will, just action and reaction. They eat a particular meal and their body reacts to that, including their thoughts. They are slaves to a chain of causation.
I don’t think I said that, did I? And I certainly don’t think we are victims of our chemical reactions. I think you’re pulling my leg, @arahant!
There are different sorts of atheists. Some are mad at God. Some just can’t believe in their Sunday School God, not understanding that when they were children, they could not have understood the full concept of God, so they were taught a smaller concept. Thus they argue against the Sunday School God who is a man with a long beard in the sky.
Other atheists are really agnostics who don’t care enough to bother with the distinction.
Some others are there because they don’t understand the “logic” of God, religion, or spirit. They are strict materialists.
There are probably other types as well, but I wouldn’t put them all in one group.
That may be what you do. But why shouldn’t others be more pragmatic about it?
Even Richard Dawkins has admitted to being an agnostic, rather than a true atheist.
Can anyone say what #4 is?
• There is a god: theist
• There is no god: atheist
• I don’t now if there is a god or not. Not enough evidence: agnostic
• I don’t believe there is a god: ?
Depends on what you think you have to believe in. One can find understanding and very practical ideas of how to live one’s life without necessarily believing in every jot and tittle. There are a range of Bible interpretations from extremely literal as history to mainly metaphorical understanding of the stories. Can one incorporate the lessons of some of those stories into one’s life without having to explicitly agree that Gd exists? Yes, one can.
Yes, I expect that you would. It does depend on what you pretended to believe.
That is what some of them believe. If there is no Gd, what is the first cause?
The humility of it means those propounding that are agnostics who lean atheist.