Re: The origins of religious disbelief
- Dear James, dear All!
This is an interesting subject: The psychology of religious disbelief.
Atheist psychologists have for a couple of generations misused state
money to research the psychology of religious belief, as if religious
belief is someting stupid and abnormal, and atheism is something
intelligent and normal. Today the table is starting turning.
The 6 best known so called new atheists are now generally more and
more discovered to be bad philosophers and partly aggressive, and
not so fine personalities. (See my messages to this group, for example.)
Dawkins has treated Islamic female students very bad, ridiculing
them. See, for example, the Youtube video where Dawkins
is extremely dull and unfair to the female students. See Hitchen,
Dawkins, and some other new atheists smoking themselves to death
(actively and passively) in front of TV camera. Other ingredients
are, for examples, mass divorse and old slavery money. Yes, indeed,
there is plenty of solid information at hand for researching the
psychology of atheists and atheism. It's high time to have the
atheists tasting their own medicine.
- Thanks Nils,
I think it is long past time for antagonistic atheists to address the biological facts and attempt to find support for either the random mutations theory of adaptive evolution or any other explanation for what can be readily observed in the context of ecological, social, neurogenic, and socio-cognitive niche construction. Instead, here we have seen nothing but the re-telling of ridiculous stories with complaints about my use of terms (e.g., pendulous human female breasts) and no clarification of any biological basis either for Natural Selection or for Sexual Selection.
The author's use of the phrase "comparatively weak mentalizing abilities" fits well into virtually all aspects of evolutionary theory that stay outside the context of the basic principles of biology and levels of biological organization, which are required to link sensory cause to behavioral affect in species from microbes to man. If Dawkins, and others like him, (here we have Clarence "Sonny" Williams) are not held accountable for their "comparatively weak mentalizing abilities," they cannot be compared to those whose enhanced abilities enable them to see beyond ridiculous theories and examine the facts. Where is Williams, for example, when it comes time to examine facts?
Medical laboratory scientist (ASCP)
Kohl, J.V. (2012) Human pheromones and food odors: epigenetic influences on the socioaffective nature of evolved behaviors. Socioaffective Neuroscience & Psychology, 2: 17338.