Link Between Intelligence And Atheism

[crowTrobot 2]

So, I assume you spend the same amount of hours going after every other book in the world. I believe you, but I doubt that is the general case.

actually it's not necessary to spend ANY time trying to refute other ancient books because relatively few people (in the USA) base their entire lives on metaphysical claims in them, and government & educational policies aren't ever going to be affected by superstitious nonsense they contain.

[jmkiser 0]

Woah, this topic has gone way out of hand.#1Lois, most of the "angry and rude" posts by the atheists have nothing to do with their evil god-complex minds and hearts. They are frustrated because they feel they are pointing out things that are so obvious... 2+2=4 type stuff. They're frustrated because you ignore most of it and just keep on going. I used to feel like that... I used to think "There is no way that these Christians can stare at these obvious problems and just deny them one after another after another... I mean, the logical is so simple that a newborn baby could get it". My problem then was that I didn't take into account your own religiosity. The point is that you're obviously very stout in your beliefs and that will never change. I have come to terms to respect the fact that you will go with as much as you know and that the rest doesn't matter. If I bring up a point that you are able to refute, you will do so. If I bring up a point that you have no idea the answer to, you will sit back and admit that you don't know but it doesn't matter because god does ... At the same time, you can understand how we feel. When the homeless guy from the street screams at us that the world is ending... well, a lot of religious stuff you say that makes no physical sense whatsoever can sound like that to us. There is very little difference when talking about the y2k apocalypse or a man rising from the dead. We use the same standard that you do about the y2k guy as everything else.#2To those frustrated that the religious will deny what you deem as the obvious till the end of time, they're going to do so. The most we can do is respectfully disagree and make our points. Sure, between each other, we can go on and on about the crazy actions of the religious, but on here the bashing really gets us no where. I, personally, will make a remark or two, but the whole point is that it's all in good fun.A religious person is going to believe what a religious person is going to believe. The most you can do is point out the flaws that you see. Do it as respectfully as possible. If I see a step out of line, I'll be a bit more harsh, but I'm only doing so because that person stepped out of line... not because I'm sooooo frustrated that they just can't seem to use their brains.These forums are a great place for personal points of views from all sides. We can take some fun jabs at each other, but we should leave them at that. For example:I win.

[jmkiser 0]

#7 is why there is no possible way for you to ever understand why it is you fail. The answer to the OP's question is really pretty easy, guys, and it actually has nothing to do with God. You believe that you and you alone are good enough- you are your own God. In my mind that puts you in some pretty fascinating company- Satan knew God personally and still thought he and he alone was good enough. That didn't work out so well for him. He had EVERY possible reason to believe and STILL thought he was better. Satan is easily the most intelligent entity roaming the planet right now- how far did his intelligence get him. One can never accept anything in life, in marriage, raising kids, jobs, whatever it is- we can never accept ANYTHING unless we simply get over ourselves.

The idea that some of the most intelligent in this world are non-believers only points to exactly that. You can make whatever conclusion you want to from that statement. You can even believe that their intelligence is the level of their real stupidity... I really don't care and it really doesn't matter.The problem comes when you start pegging us. I mean, cmon... we have to get over OURselves? Sure, I get that your frustrated from all the insults and disbelief from atheists, but you can be a well-adjusted individual at times. And that means realizing where they are coming from and just recognizing it. To turn around and say we all have a god-complex is absurd.Sometimes I hate the term atheist because then it gets people to thinking "well, if they have a label, they have to have certain things in common". Atheist doesn't mean a damn thing more then a person who just doesn't happen to think that there is a god. I know plenty of black people that hate watermelon. I, also, know plenty of atheists that just don't give a damn about the issue of religion.Just because you don't like one of them, don't try and dirty the name

[jmkiser 0]

So, I assume you spend the same amount of hours going after every other book in the world. I believe you, but I doubt that is the general case. Face it, guys like you are just as passionate as I, just in a different direction.

I don't think that any of us would deny that we are passionate.I think we all, also, realize that the Bible gets a lot more attention and affects a lot more lives, currently, then the story of Vesuvius.I am going to spend a lot more hours going after the Bible and I'm not going to give as much attention to other historical books in the world. There's plenty good reason for that, too, and I don't have to be a hippie and try to be "fair" to all the books. Loismustdie during his "confused" stage

[Loismustdie 0]

The idea that some of the most intelligent in this world are non-believers only points to exactly that. You can make whatever conclusion you want to from that statement. You can even believe that their intelligence is the level of their real stupidity... I really don't care and it really doesn't matter.The problem comes when you start pegging us. I mean, cmon... we have to get over OURselves? Sure, I get that your frustrated from all the insults and disbelief from atheists, but you can be a well-adjusted individual at times. And that means realizing where they are coming from and just recognizing it. To turn around and say we all have a god-complex is absurd.Sometimes I hate the term atheist because then it gets people to thinking "well, if they have a label, they have to have certain things in common". Atheist doesn't mean a damn thing more then a person who just doesn't happen to think that there is a god. I know plenty of black people that hate watermelon. I, also, know plenty of atheists that just don't give a damn about the issue of religion.Just because you don't like one of them, don't try and dirty the name

I don't have the pleasure of knowing these atheist who don't care about the Bible. The only ones I know can't seem to live and let live. Also, you know damn well you don't know any black person that doesn't like watermelon.

[crowTrobot 2]

JM did you hear that paul came out as a creationist who doesn't believe in evolution?

[jmkiser 0]

I don't have the pleasure of knowing these atheist who don't care about the Bible. The only ones I know can't seem to live and let live. Also, you know damn well you don't know any black person that doesn't like watermelon.

You're right... all my black friends would devour the melon if it was raised in front of my facebusted

[jmkiser 0]

JM did you hear that paul came out as a creationist who doesn't believe in evolution?

Actually, I get a lot of similar questions from my best friend. About how strictly pro-life he is, his marriage views, his religion, etc.You then ask yourself... so why do all the typical libertarian atheist groups absolutely love Ron Paul?Because no matter his own personal beliefs, he would never infuse them with government. Specifically, he works to seperate federal government from the average citizen's lives. I, of course, wish that there was a candidate that was as strong on individual liberties that shared a lot more of my viewpoints. Right now, the best option is Congressman Dr. Paul because of the way he views (and especially acts) on the federal government AND him being more electable then any Libertarian candidate at the moment. Ron Paul is more then just the guy that he is. I notice that there a lot of people baffled about why he has such a diverse following when he seems to have such a one track mind on his views. I hate to say the same old thing that he always repeats, but it's true.... "This country loves the true message of freedom". Whether it's Ron Paul, a Libertarian candidate, a Constitutional candidate, a Republican, etc... whoever it is, the overall message of individual liberties in this country is a big passion and worry for LOTS of people in this country. And we're all different, too. I, personally, recognized a real problem from the late 90's till today. Some say that it was downhill since the Nixon administration. Many say that it was from ww2... eh, whatever you think happened, how it happened, when it happened, etc. isn't too relevant. What IS recognized is the state of our government today and that something really needs to be done about it.

[Balloon guy 158]

all of nature reveals the glory of zeus. All of nature points towards a Higher Being, the Bible reveals Him. Mythology is easily dismissed cause it's in the section of the library labeled: Myth...the fact that you see "god" in nature isn't evidence that the bible is true. it doesn't make it any less obviously the product of primitive superstitious humans.Didn't say it did, I said what I said above.#1 through #6 and #8 are more or less just philosophy of living. #7 however is an unsupported factual claim that has nothing to do with the others. #7 is the loopy part. making a wild faith-based connection between #7 and the bible compounds the loopiocity.#1-#6 are Biblically based truths, which according to you are loopy, #7 is a foundational teaching that any reasonable person would see as a good thing, unless that person has a all encompassing desire to not agree with anything the bible says, no matter how paranoid it makes the person look.using subjective interpretation of vague OT prophecy to support the validity of metaphysical claims made by primitive humans is loopy.Big words no mean truth, however history proving a prophecy is a hard one for your side, best to cloud it with subjective adjectives that you can pretend make you reasonable for dismissing.saying increased human intelligence hasn't improved human standard of living is also loopy.There are so many directions I can go with this. Saying the US must be the smartest in the world, pointing to global warming ( even though I don't agree with science on this either) and asking how smart a standard of living if we are killing our planet, crime stats, I could copy paste the Ted Kazinski manifesto. Arguing standard of living as the criteria for who is right, then we are realy arguing which is more important, the heart or the mind. Rush's Hemisphere comes to mind.I think I'll just let this one go.

[simo_8ball 0]

All of nature points towards a Higher BeingI'm assuming what you mean by this is that all of nature looks as though it has been designed to fit in with its surroundings?If so, isn't that basically by definition what evolution by natural selection would create?It reminds me of Wittgenstein:"Tell me, why do people always say it was natural for man to assume that the Sun went round the Earth rather than that the Earth was rotating?"His friend answered, "Well, obviously because it just looks as though the Sun is going round the Earth."Wittgenstein replied, "Well, what would it have looked like if it had looked as though the Earth was rotating?"

[solderz 0]

Keep your "intelligence". I will keep my hope of heaven anyday.

That is truly awesome.

[crowTrobot 2]

All of nature points towards a Higher Being, the Bible reveals Him. Mythology is easily dismissed cause it's in the section of the library labeled: Myth...

all of nature reveals a higher being to you because you have an emotional/egocentic need to believe one exists, and you choose to ignore the fact that all evidence from natural sciences points to an entirely mechanistic universe. you are making a subjective rather than an objective observation.but beyond that, you still have no basis to say the bible reveals the same god you think nature reveals. you're making a blind-faith link between the two (although you are in distinguished company doing that - francis collins & c.s. lewis both make involved philosophical/naturalistic arguments that god must exist, then jump blindly to the christian god as the true one). the iliad happens to only be considered mythology because nobody at all takes it literally. however note that MOST OF THE WORLD considered the bible to be mythology, just as you presumably consider the koran, vedas, book of mormon, or other non-christian metaphysical texts in the *religion* sections of the library to be mythology. obviously the fact that a religion is founded on a particular text does not mean that text is not mythological. there is nothing special or unique about the bible that suggests it is any different.

#1-#6 are Biblically based truths, which according to you are loopy, #7 is a foundational teaching that any reasonable person would see as a good thing, unless that person has a all encompassing desire to not agree with anything the bible says, no matter how paranoid it makes the person look.

i agree that most of the moral philosophical teachings of jesus are beneficial for humanity. however that's ALL those things are - moral philosophy. the fact that jesus (supposedly) said some things that make moral sense doesn't prove he was the son of god, or provide any evidence that we are subject to a higher being. other philosophers of morality came up with many of the same conclusions he did independant of the bible. in fact MOST HUMANS who follow the moral teachings of jesus do so because they've decided what does and doesn't make moral sense ON THEIR OWN, and hand-picked from the bible what fits their personally-derived moral senses. that is why you follow jesus and ignore leviticus etc. that is why many modern christians do not consider homosexuality to be a sin. #1 through #6 are clearly just philosophy of living, not biblical-exclusive truths that are in any way evidence for the validity of metaphysical claims in the bible.also on #7 you are basically saying whether it's true or not, deluding ourselves into thinking we are subject to a higher authority is a reasonable (beneficial) thing for humanity. history is not on your side with that argument.

Big words no mean truth, however history proving a prophecy is a hard one for your side, best to cloud it with subjective adjectives that you can pretend make you reasonable for dismissing.

i don't have to disprove something that isn't proven. there are ZERO secular scholars that lend any credence to the fulfillment of any OT prophecy. it's all either too vague in meaning and can be applied to anything you want it to be, or the evidence points to some obvious contemporary application that christian scholars are unable to refute (just as the book of revelations rather obviously describes contemporary events). and in the case of OT prophecies of a jewish savior, the gospel authors were aware of them and seem to be trying to make jesus fit the bill - in at least one case (matthew) SELF-ADMITTEDLY. fulfillment of prophecy is one of the biggest religious crocks there is and is in no way evidence metaphysical events in the bible are true.

There are so many directions I can go with this. Saying the US must be the smartest in the world, pointing to global warming ( even though I don't agree with science on this either) and asking how smart a standard of living if we are killing our planet, crime stats, I could copy paste the Ted Kazinski manifesto. Arguing standard of living as the criteria for who is right, then we are realy arguing which is more important, the heart or the mind. Rush's Hemisphere comes to mind.I think I'll just let this one go.

this is really a subject for a different thread, doesn't have much to do with the original point - which was that the bible was obviously not inspired by intelligence any more advanced than the primitive superstitious humans of the time.

[crowTrobot 2]

You then ask yourself... so why do all the typical libertarian atheist groups absolutely love Ron Paul?

because he's the only candidate that knows (or at least the only one brave enough to say) that islamic hatred of us is mostly our fault.

[Vick07 0]

because he's the only candidate that knows (or at least the only one brave enough to say) that islamic hatred of us is mostly our fault.

Actually, for the most part, it's Britain's fault, from when they gave Palestine back to the Jews after the Muslims had it for a thousand years, and after Britain promised to give the land to the Arabs if they would rebel against the Ottomans. They hated us since then. But, back to the original topic, is it not logical that those who do not believe in a God or afterlife would strive harder to succeed in this world and make it better than those who are striving in this world only to get to or be happy in the next one?

[Balloon guy 158]

It ultimately gets back to this;If all the knowledge in the universe was the number 1,000. What number would all of mankind's knowledge represent? 100? 200? 4?To be so dogmatic that our intelligence is worth bragging about is the problem. And to say that the limited vision we have about everything is enough to decide that there is no God means that you already knew the answer before you were asked the question.I'm cool with trusting the Bible, and surprisingly I know what that represents to many and am still cool with it.But I'm pretty cool so it could just be that.

[Balloon guy 158]

All of nature points towards a Higher BeingI'm assuming what you mean by this is that all of nature looks as though it has been designed to fit in with its surroundings?If so, isn't that basically by definition what evolution by natural selection would create?It reminds me of Wittgenstein:"Tell me, why do people always say it was natural for man to assume that the Sun went round the Earth rather than that the Earth was rotating?"His friend answered, "Well, obviously because it just looks as though the Sun is going round the Earth."Wittgenstein replied, "Well, what would it have looked like if it had looked as though the Earth was rotating?"

Evolution is brutal, compassionless, and cruel. If evolution were the supreme law of the land most people would be dead, as would most animals that do not provide fur or food for us, and it would be proper. To pretend otherwise is vanity.Evolution has no soul, yet you and I do. We know inside that we are going to exist forever, we all expect something after life. Evolution gives no answers except survival of the fittest, no promise but death. Evolution is just our way of not being held to a standard that we don't want to live with. It's the easy way out.

[Loismustdie 0]

Evolution is brutal, compassionless, and cruel. If evolution were the supreme law of the land most people would be dead, as would most animals that do not provide fur or food for us, and it would be proper. To pretend otherwise is vanity.Evolution has no soul, yet you and I do. We know inside that we are going to exist forever, we all expect something after life. Evolution gives no answers except survival of the fittest, no promise but death. Evolution is just our way of not being held to a standard that we don't want to live with. It's the easy way out.

Your on a roll my friend. Excellent work.

[crowTrobot 2]

It ultimately gets back to this;If all the knowledge in the universe was the number 1,000. What number would all of mankind's knowledge represent? 100? 200? 4?

no it ultimately gets back to this: the fact that we don't know everything is not evidence that the bible is true, any more than it is evidence the FSM is god. the fact that we don't know everything about the universe doesn't justify ignoring what objective evidence we do have and believing anything you want on subjective grounds. you're certainly free to do that if you choose, but don't pretend it's intellectually justified in any way. by definition it's crazy.

To be so dogmatic that our intelligence is worth bragging about is the problem. And to say that the limited vision we have about everything is enough to decide that there is no God means that you already knew the answer before you were asked the question.

nobody was bragging. they were pointing out a (very real) negative correlation between higher education and religious belief. if you want to mindlessly believe what you believe and don't care about anything else that's not a big deal. but if you care if what you believe is intellectually supportable or not it's a HUGE deal.also you and lois still fail to understand that an atheists starting assumption is not to decide that god doesn't exist and work from there. an atheists starting point is I DON'T KNOW - SHOW ME THE EVIDENCE.

[Don Giovanni 0]

Evolution has no soul, yet you and I do. We know inside that we are going to exist forever, we all expect something after life. Evolution gives no answers except survival of the fittest, no promise but death. Evolution is just our way of not being held to a standard that we don't want to live with. It's the easy way out.

huh? how do we know inside we are going to exist forever? i dont feel that way. i dont see any reason to believe that. i dont expect anything after life. no see, evolution is a scientific fact that explains what we are today. religion is your way to ignore that, your easy way out.

[crowTrobot 2]

Evolution is brutal, compassionless, and cruel.

as are tidal waves and earthquakes. is that evidence that they don't exist?

If evolution were the supreme law of the land most people would be dead, as would most animals that do not provide fur or food for us, and it would be proper. To pretend otherwise is vanity.

that is not true because evolution works on the species level as well as the individual. in fact evolved intelligence in humans has led to more advanced social structures and more EVOLVED social morality to maintain those structures. evolution is precisely the reason humans have propagated.

Evolution has no soul, yet you and I do. We know inside that we are going to exist forever, we all expect something after life.

obviously not everybody "knows" that lol, and just as obviously not everybody who thinks they know that thinks it is evidence the bible is true. you might as well be talking about hindu reincarnation.in fact there's hundreds of millions of atheists that believe in a soul in some sense (buddhists included).

Evolution gives no answers except survival of the fittest, no promise but death. Evolution is just our way of not being held to a standard that we don't want to live with. It's the easy way out.

no, ignoring evidence-based reality because you can't deal emotionally with it is the easy way out.

[simo_8ball 0]

Evolution is brutal, compassionless, and cruel.

Yes. So is nature. Nature is predator/prey/survival. What difference does it make? Just because you want the world to be sunshine, rainbows and lollipops doesn't mean that a theory supporting that view is better than one refuting it.

If evolution were the supreme law of the land most people would be dead, as would most animals that do not provide fur or food for us, and it would be proper. To pretend otherwise is vanity.

Please elaborate. I'm sure scientists would like to know about this apparent glaring error with the theory of evolution because it seems to have passed them by. I honestly don't know where you're coming from with this point.

Evolution has no soul, yet you and I do.

Do we? I don't think I do.

We know inside that we are going to exist forever, we all expect something after life.

When I die, I'm gone. Kaput. Kablammo. Done. Dusted. That's it. I don't expect anything after death. Just because you believe it doesn't make it true.

Evolution gives no answers except survival of the fittest, no promise but death. Evolution is just our way of not being held to a standard that we don't want to live with. It's the easy way out.

Whether it's easy or not doesn't matter. It doesn't change the truth of a theory.

[Loismustdie 0]

Yes. So is nature. Nature is predator/prey/survival. What difference does it make? Just because you want the world to be sunshine, rainbows and lollipops doesn't mean that a theory supporting that view is better than one refuting it.Please elaborate. I'm sure scientists would like to know about this apparent glaring error with the theory of evolution because it seems to have passed them by. I honestly don't know where you're coming from with this point.Do we? I don't think I do.When I die, I'm gone. Kaput. Kablammo. Done. Dusted. That's it. I don't expect anything after death. Just because you believe it doesn't make it true.Whether it's easy or not doesn't matter. It doesn't change the truth of a theory.

Ummmm.... last I looked theory isn't truth. Last I looked, evolution as creation...... hasn't been proven, in fact, not even close. Why in the world would anyone get so worked up at ones choice to NOT believe that which hasn't been proven? That's the reaction of a zealot, a fanatic. Dare we say it the reaction of the religous? Oh, lord, let's not go down that road. If we could only spend some time pointing out everything that you believe in your religion that you cannot prove either, what a time we could have!! But, truth is, I don't really care. I have no reason whatsoever to debunk what you believe, I have no reason to spend hours a day trying to talk it down, because it gains nothing. You will follow your religion as doggedly as I follow mine, with one difference.... I won't waste my time on your websites coming after you. That's yours, enjoy. I have no desire to hunt you down to tell you everyday how ****ing dumb you are and what a fool you must be. No desire whatsoever. Honestly, why do you guys even bother? What's the attraction? Why so afraid of another perspective? Why so afraid of God?

[simo_8ball 0]

Ummmm.... last I looked theory isn't truth. Last I looked, evolution as creation...... hasn't been proven, in fact, not even close. Why in the world would anyone get so worked up at ones choice to NOT believe that which hasn't been proven? That's the reaction of a zealot, a fanatic. Dare we say it the reaction of the religous? Oh, lord, let's not go down that road. If we could only spend some time pointing out everything that you believe in your religion that you cannot prove either, what a time we could have!! But, truth is, I don't really care. I have no reason whatsoever to debunk what you believe, I have no reason to spend hours a day trying to talk it down, because it gains nothing. You will follow your religion as doggedly as I follow mine, with one difference.... I won't waste my time on your websites coming after you. That's yours, enjoy. I have no desire to hunt you down to tell you everyday how ****ing dumb you are and what a fool you must be. No desire whatsoever. Honestly, why do you guys even bother? What's the attraction? Why so afraid of another perspective? Why so afraid of God?

1) I never claimed evolution is truth. Read closer.2) I think it is God's will pulling me and everything else to the ground - that gravity stuff is just an attempt to deny God. What are your thoughts on this sentence?

[crowTrobot 2]

Last I looked, evolution as creation...... hasn't been proven, in fact, not even close.

evolution is only about species descending from each other through modification over time, and that has been proven beyond all reasonable doubt - to the point where THE MAJORITY OF RELIGIOUS PEOPLE WORLD-WIDE now accept it as "part of god's plan". you are living in the stone age as far as that is concerned.otherwise evolution says nothing about "creation". evolution makes no explicit claims about abiogenesis or the big bang or anything else in science.

Honestly, why do you guys even bother? What's the attraction? Why so afraid of another perspective?

because the "perspective" you support currently includes a divisive and dangerous agenda.

[LongLiveYorke 38]

Evolution is brutal, compassionless, and cruel. If evolution were the supreme law of the land most people would be dead, as would most animals that do not provide fur or food for us, and it would be proper. To pretend otherwise is vanity.Evolution has no soul, yet you and I do. We know inside that we are going to exist forever, we all expect something after life. Evolution gives no answers except survival of the fittest, no promise but death. Evolution is just our way of not being held to a standard that we don't want to live with. It's the easy way out.

This is your problem. You're trying to personify evolution. You're casting the argument as one of morality, as one of right vs wrong. Evolution, or rather the law of natural selection, isn't a philosophy. It isn't a description of what "should" happen or how people "should" act or anything like that. Rather, it's a simple, self-evident, and somewhat circular phenomena. Those species which are more likely to survive will be more likely to survive. That's all.Due to the specific ways that we (and by "we", I mean all species on this planet) reproduce and the above phenomena, something called evolution takes place. Because those that survive have a tendency to make more like themselves, then after a given generation there will be more creatures that are more likely to survive than there are creatures that are less likely to survive.Calling this "evil" or "cold" or anything like that is missing the point. It's like saying that gravity is evil because it makes us fall. It's like saying that conservation of energy is cruel because it would be nice to have an infinite amount of energy.