Why does evolution select against atheists?
- Thread starter S.A.M.
- Start date
And this has been happening more then in previous years? I find that hard to believe.
There are more people to kill now. I think we are entering an era of increasing violence, because now intelliegnce has become secondary to instinct. Torture is justified now and will become the norm, as will stripping liberties and using people as poorly paid labour. A reversal of civilisation and a decrease in empathy. Indifference to others and apathy in the cause of personal profit. Perhaps it is the Age of Atheism.
Enmos
Valued Senior Member
Care to explain that one?
You know what I meant..
Edit: Humans are the bringers of atrophy. Have you looked at the world lately? And I don't mean humanity, I mean the world.
Anyone can be an atheist, so evolution does not select against it.
Reality.
hmm interesting thread to play devils advocate.. why do thestic communities not believe in evolution or natural selection.. which there is proof of. and in something where there isnt really any proof of? im not an atheist or a theist i have an open mind and in the middle ground
Pandaemoni
Valued Senior Member
Don't know whether or not this has been pointed out yet, but the OP (well, combined with the thread title) implicates that theism is genetic.
And by extension it implicates that theists only believe in God because they have a genetic predisposition towards believing in God.
Could this perhaps suggest that it's all in their minds (or genes for that matter), as opposed to God actually existing ?
Nice going SAM
If God made genes, then there is not reason to believe he would not have inserted a God gene. More specifically it is clear that most every culture has some semblance of religious ritual in it (theistic or otherwise). It is so universal a human trait that one can well imagine it being at least somewhat hardwired into us. (That said, there is a vague--but I think incorrect--sense we all have that our minds exist separately from our bodies. I think that is the root of why it's easy to feel that any genetic influence on our minds is in a sense "tampering.")
It makes sense that primitive societies could have been benefitted by such a religiuous sense, as it would have promoted intra-group cohesion to have had a common set of religious prescriptions. Better, the belief in a religion can direct individuals to stay within the rules agreed to by the group in situations where no other group member could deterct a breach. (Because the spirits or Jesus or whomever would know that you violated the rules.)
There is the old question about whether natural selection can favor such rules on the level of a group, rather than purely based on the individual, but it is hard to see how most any "social" trait of a social species like mankind could develop if natural selsection could not select for enhanced group dynamics.
In general I have to agree though that natural selection is not working "against" atheism. It has selected for religiosity in the past, imo, because of the social benefits that common social and ethical norms instill within a group. In a religious society, atheists are the ones who reject at least some of those norms. As natural selection starts favoring the religious types, they start ostracising the non-religious ones for that failure to conform, and the process accelerates.
The more interesting question for me, if whether religiosity has started to be maladaptive in the post-hunter/gatherer world that we now live in. In early human societies, we had small leaderless groups. Agriculture brought permanent settlements and hierarchical social controls...and religion was co-opted by the leaders within that hierarchy. It's at that time also that we start to see more clear signs of theism. Prior to then there were certainly religious sites, but less evidence that there were hierarchies of celestial power with some spirits being the boss of others.
Just to point out:
Everyone believes in Natural Selection.... Darwin is not the first guy who thought that if you're strong you will win... Everyone from the very first civilizations we know of knew about 'natural selection'. Of course they didn't call it anything, they just thought of it as how things work.
For example if something is there to get you, people would hide in caves- so you'll survive...
Armies use camouflage suits- not because they study theory of evolution, its common sense.
To use natural selection, is basically pointing out the obvious.
Peace be unto you
Don't follow the logic.....
So If I create a robot, does that require I amputate my arm and put it as one of the arms of the robot?
There is no reason to believe God would put a 'God gene'- first of all how can such a gene exist when God is not made from the created things (i.e gene) - as he is the CREATOR of those genes!
Peace be unto you
Just to point out:
Everyone believes in Natural Selection.... Darwin is not the first guy who thought that if you're strong you will win... Everyone from the very first civilizations we know of knew about 'natural selection'. Of course they didn't call it anything, they just thought of it as how things work.
For example if something is there to get you, people would hide in caves- so you'll survive...
Armies use camouflage suits- not because they study theory of evolution, its common sense.
To use natural selection, is basically pointing out the obvious.
Peace be unto you
very true but some creationist dont believe in natrual selection or evolution, yet in there museum they have things that show super evolution, kinda makes me lol
No my friend. EVERYONE believes in natural selection. Everyone does NOT believe in Evolution (macro-evolution to be exact). They are not the same thing.
Peace be unto you
Pandaemoni
Valued Senior Member
No, the "God gene" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God_gene) is a (supposed) biological predisposition to believe in religion. If you created a sentient robot, there is every reason to believe that you would program the robot to believe that you were real, even if you were not around to interact with the robot. You would, in effect, let it know it had a creator.
Now I do not not follow...how can God create a gene if God is not made from genes? The same way you can create a program even if you are not yourself programmed. Or the way I can make a banana spit even if I am not made of bananas.
I do agree that there is no reason to assume that God inserted the God gene into humans, but the fact remains that there seems to be a genetic component to it, and my point was that if one believes that there is a genetic basis *and* that God exists, it is perfectly sensible to suppose that God created the God gene to lead humans to Him.
(It's a strange game God plays, in that case, though. he creates a genetic basis to predispose us to religion...but He doesn't make it clear which religion is the right one, if any. One wonders why any God would nudge people towards belief, and then hide when they come looking for Him. To me, that suggests God is a woman.
So we have a large increase in the population correlated with an Age Of Atheism, and the continuation of the common murder and torture practices of the past affects more people as a consequence.SAM said:
Even though the murder and torture is apparently much reduced in frequency or rate, the larger populations make its absolute scope or number of victims larger - at least, that is the claim, no?
How does that make the Atheism responsible for the torture and murder?
How does the continuation of common theistic practices - still being practiced mostly by theists, we notice, and justified accordingly - imply some kind of overriding influence of Atheism?
btw:
Evidence that we are entering an era of increasing violence ? That the appearance of a huge reduction in the general level of violence among humans on this planet over the past few hundred years is somehow deceptive? Something to back up the "thought" besides resentment, I meanSAM said:
Would the world be improved by a reduction of the population to pre-Atheism levels, and a return of the murder and torture rates to those typical of the Age of Theism?
Last edited: