Fusebox said:
"Atheists most hated" type that into google and get the suggestion. But I think you're just nit picking over the way I phrased it. I think you all are looking for an argument about nothing, as an agnostic/weak atheist myself.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Religious people are nicer
- Thread starter legend166
- Start date
- Status
"Atheists most hated" type that into google and get the suggestion. But I think you're just nit picking over the way I phrased it. I think you all are looking for an argument about nothing, as an agnostic/weak atheist myself.
Done.
http://newsjunkiepost.com/2009/09/1...eists-are-most-hated-and-distrusted-minority/
"Atheists are also the minority group most Americans are least willing to allow their children to marry."
Goddamn it America, that's just fucking scary! Especially given the high percentage of atheists among your highly educated, it just seems like a recipe for a fucked up future.
http://newsjunkiepost.com/2009/09/1...eists-are-most-hated-and-distrusted-minority/
"Atheists are also the minority group most Americans are least willing to allow their children to marry."
Goddamn it America, that's just fucking scary! Especially given the high percentage of atheists among your highly educated, it just seems like a recipe for a fucked up future.
shanshan310 said:
Because you insinuated that religious people must have some sort of religious radar to be able to have differing opinions and attitudes towards other belief systems or lack thereof, when my original post made no claim of that.
As for the uncontrolled study in the OP, you can't conclude anything from that at all. I was just posting anecdotal evidence. What activities are considered nice? How nice? Why not measure other activities? Where did the subjects take place? How many of which religion? What were the demographics of the area, and how do you weigh it against bias - for example how do the viewpoints towards minorities differ between rural west virginia and say NYC?
MisterAnderson
Member
"Religious people" are definitely more hostile/hateful IMO, whether they are "nicer" to their friends or strangers, or not. While most religions don't directly promote hate, I'd say that most "hateful" people tend to be religious by nature.
Just look at human history.
Just look at human history.
shanshan310
Member
teh_pwn said:
My point was that while you (and I lot of other people) said that "religious people are only nice to other religious people", the study showed that religious people were doing random acts of kindness to strangers - people whose beliefs they couldn't possibly know or have influence over.
I guess sarcasm doesn't quite work with text :s
Wow. This thread is an EXCELLENT post for an examination in IRONY.
-Religious people are judgmental.
-Religious people don't like it when you challenge/disagree with their beliefs.
-It's their feeling of superiority that makes me want to punch things.
----Just exchange the word "Religious" with "Atheist"----
Those three recurring themes permeate this whole thread!
SIDE NOTE:
Religious people are nice to your face? What does that mean?!?! Isn't that the definition of being nice? As opposed to the majority of atheists here being rude/mean/shallow/judgemental in the face of everyone here.
Fact of life - We ALL judge.
-Religious people are judgmental.
-Religious people don't like it when you challenge/disagree with their beliefs.
-It's their feeling of superiority that makes me want to punch things.
----Just exchange the word "Religious" with "Atheist"----
Those three recurring themes permeate this whole thread!
SIDE NOTE:
Religious people are nice to your face? What does that mean?!?! Isn't that the definition of being nice? As opposed to the majority of atheists here being rude/mean/shallow/judgemental in the face of everyone here.
Fact of life - We ALL judge.
bonesmccoy
Banned
MisterAnderson said:
The 20th Century disagrees with you!
shanshan310
Member
^ I actually thought he made some good points.
Just look at GAF's religious thread history.
MisterAnderson said:
Just look at GAF's religious thread history.
FunkyMunkey
Banned
Barkz said:
Not only that, but it's a great demonstration of the study conducted.
Jeels said:
Called it spot on early in the thread. Reading this post and then the dozens that follow is just hilarious.
ZombieSupaStar
Member
i love being agnostic, i get best of both worlds, with committal to none 
Buckethead
Banned
"Real" religious people, i.e.: those that actually read and understand the Bible are very nice people.
I agree.
I agree.
Poimandres
Member
Buckethead said:
The thing is, there are several ways to interpret the Bible.
Is it the straight up word of G? Is it allegorical? Are certain aspects a reflection of the times and not to be followed? What is the central message?
There is no single correct "understanding of the Bible".
Buckethead
Banned
Hello Straw Man,Poimandres said:
How are you?
I haven't seen you in awhile.
-Bucket
P.S. Old Testament maybe, NT no chance.
Buckethead
Banned
Agreed upon? No.Fusebox said:
Poimandres
Member
Buckethead said:
I'm not pro or anti religion, in case you were assuming something.
I'm not trying to devalue the Bible either, but if you really think there is only one way to "understand" the Bible (OT or NT) then I simply can't agree. Let's not even get in to Gospels not included in the Bible, and their relevance.
Barkz said:
You were the playing the victim.
You were most certainly complaining.
If you were really including atheist people when you referred to 'everyone', then your rant about atheists being "rude/mean/shallow/judgemental in the face of everyone" is just downright bizarre.
Buckethead said:
Ah.. well, were you implying that there is only one correct interpretation of the NT and you're in full agreement of that interpretation?
Or just put me out of my misery and explain your cryptic comment instead of making me work for it.
Arrowgigantic
Member
My headline for this article
Study Reveals Religious People Lie To Research Teams To Preserve Their Self-Identification As "Good People"
Buckethead
Banned
I'm not really assuming anything, I just think your statement is erroneous and on the surface a false appeal to reason.Poimandres said:
I've seen a lot of people make general statements when they've never read it in it's entirety in the first place let alone given it a thorough study which is beyond tiresome for people who have.
Opinion is one thing, legitimate study and intellectual understanding is another.
Far too often does interpretation fall into the former instead of the latter.
Anyway I'm going to workout so I may not be able to respond until tomorrow.
RiccochetJ
Gold Member
A lot of organized religions I've had the pleasure of being subjected to tend to have a caste system that no one talks about in public but holy shit are they awesome at talking about it in tiny groups.
Earthstrike
Member
To be honest, I kind of do see the overreaction to the notion of religious people being nicer. The study seems to be correct with respect to its own premises that it laid out.
The only real problem I see is that their definition of nice was constrained to things like how much volunteer work people do and how much money they donate to charity. The problem I have is that actions that I would interpret as "not nice" such as voting against gay rights have absolutely no weight in such a study.
Almost everyone tries to be nice. Atheists will justify their argumentative nature by talking about how the world will be a better place if its free of organized religion/has people use intellect and reasoning as the basis of decision making, and so their harsh rhetoric is "nice." Christians will try to be "nice" by disrespecting the wishes of people like Terry Schiavo and organizing a largely useless protest to try to extend her life beyond her own wishes.
Even the notion that everyone should be a selfless asshole and only seek their own best interest is embraced as a "nice" philosophy by libertarians and capitalists since it is viewed by them to be the best economical way to raise the standard of living.
Everyone tries to be nice, the measure shouldn't be effort, it should be results.
The only real problem I see is that their definition of nice was constrained to things like how much volunteer work people do and how much money they donate to charity. The problem I have is that actions that I would interpret as "not nice" such as voting against gay rights have absolutely no weight in such a study.
Almost everyone tries to be nice. Atheists will justify their argumentative nature by talking about how the world will be a better place if its free of organized religion/has people use intellect and reasoning as the basis of decision making, and so their harsh rhetoric is "nice." Christians will try to be "nice" by disrespecting the wishes of people like Terry Schiavo and organizing a largely useless protest to try to extend her life beyond her own wishes.
Even the notion that everyone should be a selfless asshole and only seek their own best interest is embraced as a "nice" philosophy by libertarians and capitalists since it is viewed by them to be the best economical way to raise the standard of living.
Everyone tries to be nice, the measure shouldn't be effort, it should be results.
Poimandres
Member
Buckethead said:
I was replying to your statement that ""Real" religious people, i.e.: those that actually read and understand the Bible are very nice people."
What makes a person a "real religious person"? That sounds like an opinion and judgement on your behalf
How does one "understand the Bible" when there is no consensus even among scholars? That sounds like an opinion, and interpretation
I agree that there is a gulf between legitimate study and barely informed opinion, but study of a the Bible is always going to rely on interpretation to a certain extent.
You can have an "informed opinion" or "an understanding" but there is no single understanding. How is that erroneous?
I guess this has already been said but..
I would probably guess that religious people are in general nicer because they believe there's 'someone' over there, looking at them. Protecting them and basically giving a meaning to their lives. Having a meaning for your life makes you enjoy your life so much more, and therefore feel happier, which makes you be nicer to other people.
Of course, you don't need religion for this. You can basically build your own life and try to live it as you're imagining it. That gives your life a meaning, and that will make you enjoy your life more.
It's too bad a lot of this 'religious people' is only nice to the people that believe in their same religion. Even if, when looked from far away, most religions have pretty much the same basic guidelines.
Oh well..
I would probably guess that religious people are in general nicer because they believe there's 'someone' over there, looking at them. Protecting them and basically giving a meaning to their lives. Having a meaning for your life makes you enjoy your life so much more, and therefore feel happier, which makes you be nicer to other people.
Of course, you don't need religion for this. You can basically build your own life and try to live it as you're imagining it. That gives your life a meaning, and that will make you enjoy your life more.
It's too bad a lot of this 'religious people' is only nice to the people that believe in their same religion. Even if, when looked from far away, most religions have pretty much the same basic guidelines.
Oh well..
Monocle
Member
This is one of the more salient clues that this article was written by someone squinting through a film of pro-religious bias. Dawkins and Harris go to extravagant lengths to avoid inaccurate generalizations about religious people, particularly in their published work. Did this guy think his audience would appreciate being insulted with such amateurish spin doctoring? Impartiality may be beyond him, but honesty shouldn't be too much to ask of a columnist for a mainstream newspaper.
As for the research itself, religion may well make people who live in developed countries "nicer." It's not exactly a revelation that places that aren't beset by scarcity and social instability are less likely to summon up the caustic provincial tribalism that bubbles away in the core of our most influential religious traditions. (I'm assuming the people interviewed weren't selected from one of the innumerable places in Africa or the Middle East where gangs of pious brutes will gladly shatter your face if you seem like you belong to the wrong sect.)
We'd all do well to remember that the appearance of goodness is an inconsistent indicator of actual virtue. Niceness, in any case, is a tertiary virtue, and easily faked with hypocritical acts of charity. There are superior qualities that I value in others and strive to cultivate in myself. The capacity for self-criticism, for instance. Pragmatism. Compassion. Loyalty. Curiosity. Self-respect. Confidence. Tolerance. Open-mindedness. I don't care how nicely you behave: if you deliberately frighten or stultify or lie to children, promote or engage in flatfooted and uncritical opposition to science, or believe that being of a certain race, gender, creed, or sexual orientation weakens another human's claim to the same rights you would claim for yourself, you have more important things to do than maintaining a wholesome appearance. Work instead toward being more rational and decent in daily life.
As a formerly rather devout Christian, they do tend to be nice at first because we're encouraged to act with kindness and portray a respectable Christian demeanor. Of course Christians are also on the lookout for evil, in order to avoid it, and are very quick to judge for people that they should avoid, as well. All the better to avoid temptation...
So I have to agree, religious people are superficially nicer. I'd like them to do a poll of "fallen" Christians, because I'm pretty sure I do all that 'nice person' stuff too.
I feel like we would all benefit from ethics and emotional/empathy training at a young age. That's basically what religion has become, ignoring all the flying things and glowy lights and shit.
This too.
So I have to agree, religious people are superficially nicer. I'd like them to do a poll of "fallen" Christians, because I'm pretty sure I do all that 'nice person' stuff too.
I feel like we would all benefit from ethics and emotional/empathy training at a young age. That's basically what religion has become, ignoring all the flying things and glowy lights and shit.
Matthew Gallant said:
This too.
Does it bother you that other people are trying to claim they're happy? Really, just because this test (?) says religious people are nicer, it doesn't mean anything. Instead of trying to have others demonstrate if they're nice or not, demonstrate that you can be as nice yourself, too.Fusebox said:
That's how I think, anyway..
Pixel Pete
Member
Monocle said:
If nothing else, the vagueness of the study does absolute nothing to quell the 'us vs them' mentality that is causing so many problems.
kunu said:This is getting kind of worrying. Don't generalize like this, it just makes you come off as ridiculously judgmental.
Woops, my sarcasm meter is off.
Well it wasn't exactly sarcasm, nor was it meant to be accurate in anyway.
Lets call it flippancy.
Mik2121 said:
You've lost me.
Fusebox said:
Often times church folk really do go to those lame ass meetings at the public library that the county seat calls or whatever crap is going on at the courthouse.
And we really did drag bags and bags of clothes and boxes of food to the shelters seasonally. And the money boxes for various church and secular charities too.
Not everyone in the faith is a Christian unbeliever or a faith burnout, to be fair.
But those don't exactly translate into being "nicer". (although some of us squee at the chance to be "officially" Christian to others. ie helping people in crises of faith, etc. though that canbe damn annoying.)
Pixel Pete
Member
Fusebox said:Well I took 10 bags of clothes to vinnies last weekend. TEN bags, all designer labels too and nothing torn but nobody asked me to be part of the survey.
If there was ONE, JUST ONE piece of D&G in there you are going to hell.
- Status