But your mistake is, you don't realize that the same is true of both sides. One can make an identical case for atheism.
-
-
I'm thinking you must think of atheism as something fairly complex if you think there's a psychology of it.
-
oh there certainly is, if the research on atheism so far is correct.
-
What is it? How does it define atheism in a way that has traits or values or behaviours that are psychological?
-
I read an intriguing paper once about atheist anger towards God. Certainly unusual.
-
That would seem paradoxical, yes. So an atheist is defined by anger towards god or the idea of god?
-
No. But the psychology of atheism might well have to talk about the unique negative emotional clusters motivating atheism.
-
But what motivates it? You still havent defined it. My husband simply not raised with any religion & not interested.
-
This might be hard to understand if you live in a culture where god-belief is common & feels natural.
- 33 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
I think so. One can leave the dichotomy an open question. Principled agnosticism. In fact I think it's rational.
-
Or not see it as a question at all? I'm English. Its very common here not to have given gods ideas much thought
-
Perhaps that's because of suppressive effect of your culture, rather than the illusion of the question.
-
Well, religion isn't suppressed. We have a state religion. Its just that not very many ppl pay attention go it.
-
Not formally suppressed, you mean. Certainly doesn't mean there are other ways to suppress it.
-
What ways? We have religious freedom. It just doesn't feel that relevant to most ppl. Elderly ppl more likely to have faith.
-
Suppression has multiple dimensions. Freedom to practice is one. Delegitimizing deep questions is another.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.