Health and Religion

[Spendulus]

Atheism is poison? Don't you mean Poison are atheists?

Many good things are poisons, they are just metered in small amounts.  Lisinophil, a blood pressure medicine is modeled directly after the venom of the Fer De Lanc snake.

Coffee, in sufficient doses will kill you.

[1714185927]

1714185927

[CoinCube]

Edit:  You mention religions and sin, but the only mention of atheism is at the start when you link a high IQ to both atheism and infertility.

So, you've written a post about the evils of a high IQ, and the benefits of religions and not sinning. I have yet to see that you've shown that "Atheism is poison".

Athiesm is by definition the rejection of religion. To show that athiesm is poisonous it is sufficient to show that the world is poisonous when religion is rejected.

I have presented the evidence that convinced me that this is the case.

[CoinCube]

You can reject massive 35 year longitudinal studies if you wish. I am unaware of any data or studies that indicate Terman was wrong.

Proof by counterexample = black people

Average intelligence < white people
Average athleticism > white people

Not a counter example.

If the Terman data is sound and can be extrapolated to the population as a whole then black college graduates should be on average more athletic then blacks who did not go on to college.

The same should hold for white college graduates and for college graduates in general regardless of race.

[Moloch]

You can reject massive 35 year longitudinal studies if you wish. I am unaware of any data or studies that indicate Terman was wrong.

Proof by counterexample = black people

Average intelligence < white people
Average athleticism > white people

Not a counter example.

If Terman data is sound and can be extrapolated to the population as a whole then black college graduates should be on average more athletic then blacks who did not go on to college.

The same should hold for white college graduates and for college graduates in general regardless of race.

It doesn't matter since your premise is based on pseudoscience

1) Terman was not doing a study on whether intelligence had any relation to health or athletic ability, he only commented that it was a common misconception of his era to assume smart people were weak and sickly

2) This non-study has not been confirmed once, much less peer reviewed

3) The amount of anecdotal evidence showing intelligent people have little to zero athletic ability is staggering...

Have you met a Jew?
Have you seen South Park?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q_uTVLBKJwY

[CoinCube]

It doesn't matter since your premise is based on pseudoscience

1) Terman was not doing a study on whether intelligence had any relation to health or athletic ability, he only commented that it was a common misconception of his era to assume smart people were weak and sickly

2) This non-study has not been confirmed once, much less peer reviewed

3) The amount of anecdotal evidence showing intelligent people have little to zero athletic ability is staggering... Have you met a Jew?

Both athleticism and IQ are likely indirect measures of biological fitness. Since the majority of our genes probably come into play either directly or indirectly to make and operate the brain muscles and skeletal system most damaging genetic mutations will probably show-up as reduced intelligence, reduced athleticism, or reduced lifespan.

No one is arguing that traits of athleticism and intelligence are distributed homogeneously between races.

Individuals with high IQ have also been shown to live longer.

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/research-confirms-a-link-between-intelligence-and-life-expectancy/

Edit: Here is detailed information on the study you are so casually dismissing.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_Studies_of_Genius

The Genetic Studies of Genius, today known as the Terman Study of the Gifted,[1] is the oldest and one of the longest running longitudinal studies in the field of psychology. It was begun in 1921 to examine the development and characteristics of gifted children into adulthood. The study was started by Lewis Terman at Stanford University and is now the oldest and longest running longitudinal study in the world.[2][3]

[Moloch]

I still don't get whatever point you are trying to make...

How does the fact that intelligent people choose Atheism, lead to the conclusion that Atheism is poison?


Shouldn't you trust smart people, who make informed decisions based on research and evidence?

[mrflibblehat]

Oh, so Intelligent people choose Atheism and that is bad (for you)?

[organofcorti]

Edit:  You mention religions and sin, but the only mention of atheism is at the start when you link a high IQ to both atheism and infertility.

So, you've written a post about the evils of a high IQ, and the benefits of religions and not sinning. I have yet to see that you've shown that "Atheism is poison".

Athiesm is by definition the rejection of religion. To show that athiesm is poisonous it is sufficient to show that the world is poisonous when religion is rejected.

I have presented the evidence that convinced me that this is the case.

That doesn't really follow though, does it? You haven't shown that the world is poisonous when theism is rejected, just that following a religion seems to correlate with benefits for the user, and that a high IQ correlates with things you consider negative.

So, what you haven't done is shown either that atheism is poison, or that rejection of religion is poison.

Edit: God, why does posting on this board make me feel like I'm marking undergrad philosophy papers?

[Moloch]

Edit:  You mention religions and sin, but the only mention of atheism is at the start when you link a high IQ to both atheism and infertility.

So, you've written a post about the evils of a high IQ, and the benefits of religions and not sinning. I have yet to see that you've shown that "Atheism is poison".

Athiesm is by definition the rejection of religion. To show that athiesm is poisonous it is sufficient to show that the world is poisonous when religion is rejected.

I have presented the evidence that convinced me that this is the case.

If you can watch this debate and believe that Atheism is more poisonous than the Catholic Church, I'll eat my hat

The Catholic Church is a Force for Good in the World - Full Version
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JZRcYaAYWg4

[CoinCube]

That doesn't really follow though, does it? You haven't shown that the world is poisonous when theism is rejected, just that following a religion seems to correlate with benefits for the user, and that a high IQ correlates with things you consider negative.

So, what you haven't done is shown either that atheism is poison, or that rejection of religion is poison.

Edit: God, why does posting on this board make me feel like I'm marking undergrad philosophy papers?

Pointless barbs aside lets look at the definition of poison.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/poison

noun  
1.  a substance with an inherent property that tends to destroy life or impair health.
2.  something harmful or pernicious, as to happiness or well-being:

Your failure to follow stems from a frame of reference error. You are looking at the world as if atheism is normal and theism is the intervention. In actuality theism is the base human state dating back to the earliest records of human life. It is widespread atheism the modern phenomenon or intervention.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_religion#Prehistoric_period_.28300th_millennium_to_34th_century_BCE.29
 
Multiple studies of fertility show that those who have adopted the atheist philosophy have a fertility rate that drops below 2.1 the minimum needed for replacement of the population. Atheist have also been shown to report significantly lower levels of wellbeing compared to the highly religious. I provided multiple other more abstract and anecdotal examples of toxicity in the OP. From this follows the conclusion that the adoption of an atheistic worldview is likely poisonous to homo sapiens.    

The point on high IQ is tangential and I brought it up only to show that high IQ individuals who usually make good decisions in most areas may be predisposed to error in this one.

[CoinCube]

Oh, so Intelligent people choose Atheism and that is bad (for you)?

Bad for them. I don't really care much though I probably should.

The Catholic Church is a Force for Good in the World - Full Version
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JZRcYaAYWg4

Moloch that video is 2 hours long. Since I am not Catholic will my watching it really contribute to the discussion. If you truly think it will I will watch it but I don't have time today.

[Moloch]

Oh, so Intelligent people choose Atheism and that is bad (for you)?

Bad for them. I don't really care much though I probably should.

The Catholic Church is a Force for Good in the World - Full Version
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JZRcYaAYWg4

Moloch that video is 2 hours long. Since I am not Catholic will my watching it really contribute to the discussion. If you truly think it will I will watch it but I don't have time today.

I think it will... it's not solely directed at Catholics, most of it relates to any denomination of Christian

Based on the survey at the end of the debate, over half of the audience converted to Atheism

I watched it several months ago, and thought it was quite informative... Atheists always have better answers than Christians

[CoinCube]

Moloch that video is 2 hours long. Since I am not Catholic will my watching it really contribute to the discussion. If you truly think it will I will watch it but I don't have time today.

I think it will... it's not solely directed at Catholics, most of it relates to any denomination of Christian

Based on the survey at the end of the debate, over half of the audience converted to Atheism

I watched it several months ago, and thought it was quite informative... Atheists always have better answers than Christians

Ok I will watch it tomorrow and get back to you with my thoughts

[Moloch]

Moloch that video is 2 hours long. Since I am not Catholic will my watching it really contribute to the discussion. If you truly think it will I will watch it but I don't have time today.

I think it will... it's not solely directed at Catholics, most of it relates to any denomination of Christian

Based on the survey at the end of the debate, over half of the audience converted to Atheism

I watched it several months ago, and thought it was quite informative... Atheists always have better answers than Christians

Ok I will watch it tomorrow and get back to you with my thoughts

If debates aren't your cup of tea, here are 2 other videos where Atheists destroy anything Christians can throw at them


Madalyn Murray O'Hair on the Donahue Show - Antitheist atheist
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0XEnj-ZVltU

Oprah vs Atheism
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7uk1_NSuFvQ


There is a near endless list of Christians and Atheists debating, and there is always a clear winner

[CoinCube]

There is a near endless list of Christians and Atheists debating, and there is always a clear winner

It is impossible to prove that the philosophy of Nihilism is factually wrong. The best one can do is show the consequences that result from adopting such a worldview.

That said I will keep an open mind and watch the first of your links tomorrow. Like all of us my time is limited so I will skip that other two.

[Moloch]

There is a near endless list of Christians and Atheists debating, and there is always a clear winner

It is impossible to prove that the philosophy of Nihilism is factually wrong. The best one can do is show the consequences that result from adopting such a worldview.

That said I will keep an open mind and watch the first of your links tomorrow. Like all of us my time is limited so I will skip that other two.

Who said anything about nihilism?

Atheism is not nihilism...

[bonski]

I'm a Christian but this thread's saying that atheism is poison? No they aren't , I respect what they're belief is even they do not believe in God. This thread is just putting religion versus atheist. Why not start with your self, love one another, if you got some extra cash feed the poor, feed the beggar. Because there are atheist that are doing this. And I'm wishing one day they will change their belief that God is real.

[Moloch]

I'm a Christian but this thread's saying that atheism is poison? No they aren't , I respect what they're belief is even they do not believe in God. This thread is just putting religion versus atheist. Why not start with your self, love one another, if you got some extra cash feed the poor, feed the beggar. Because there are atheist that are doing this. And I'm wishing one day they will change their belief that God is real.

The only real difference between Christians and Atheists is...

Atheists do not need to have their morals dictated to them by God... we understand right from wrong without your book

We have also read your book and deemed God himself to be immoral

Reading the bible is what converted 90% of Atheists to Atheism... if we had not read the bible, we would still be Christians

[organofcorti]

That doesn't really follow though, does it? You haven't shown that the world is poisonous when theism is rejected, just that following a religion seems to correlate with benefits for the user, and that a high IQ correlates with things you consider negative.

So, what you haven't done is shown either that atheism is poison, or that rejection of religion is poison.

Edit: God, why does posting on this board make me feel like I'm marking undergrad philosophy papers?

Pointless barbs aside lets look at the definition of poison.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/poison

noun  
1.  a substance with an inherent property that tends to destroy life or impair health.
2.  something harmful or pernicious, as to happiness or well-being:

That also applies to religion. If you think atheism is poisonous, then you must think theism is just as poisonous. There's certainly much more historical evidence of religious persecution.

Your failure to follow stems from a frame of reference error. You are looking at the world as if atheism is normal and theism is the intervention. In actuality theism is the base human state dating back to the earliest records of human life. It is widespread atheism the modern phenomenon or intervention.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_religion#Prehistoric_period_.28300th_millennium_to_34th_century_BCE.29

Theism posits a god. Atheism not "anti-theism" in the same way that amoral is not "anti-moral". Regardless of historical accident or human preference, the scientific preference is for any additional hypothesis (eg there is a god) to be proven. "Atheism" does not require any additional hypothesis, since there is no proof the theist position reflects reality.

Therefore the "theist" frame of reference -- regardless of how long it has been around, or to which authorities you appeal -- is one that should be considered hypothetical until proven otherwise.

Multiple studies of fertility show that those who have adopted the atheist philosophy have a fertility rate that drops below 2.1 the minimum needed for replacement of the population. Atheist have also been shown to report significantly lower levels of wellbeing compared to the highly religious.

Significantly? What is the p value on that? How did you get "significantly" out of that study?  You certainly didn't quote any stats.

I provided multiple other more abstract and anecdotal examples of toxicity in the OP. From this follows the conclusion that the adoption of an atheistic worldview is likely poisonous to homo sapiens.    

If you're trying to prove that a minority of the population is evil and poisonous, you'd best use very clear and well documented experimental evidence only, instead of anecdotes. Use of anecdotes taints the reading of the experimental evidence you've included.

If you'd written all that about some other minority, this post would have been labelled "hate speech" regardless of how much anecdotal or abstract evidence you have.

[CoinCube]

I'm a Christian but this thread's saying that atheism is poison? No they aren't , I respect what they're belief is even they do not believe in God. This thread is just putting religion versus atheist. Why not start with your self, love one another, if you got some extra cash feed the poor, feed the beggar. Because there are atheist that are doing this. And I'm wishing one day they will change their belief that God is real.

bonski no one is saying that atheist are poison = bad people. At least I certainly am not saying that seeing as how I was an agnostic/atheist for the entirety of my adult life.

The argument in this thread is that the philosophy of atheism is poisonous aka harmful/damaging/destructive to the atheist.