Skip to comments.Are Atheists mentally ill?
Posted on 08/17/2013 8:29:34 AM PDT by Vanders9
Thanks to a couple of surveys, its being put about in certain circles that atheists have higher IQs than believers. That may or may not be the case, but one problem with this argument is that, if you accept "average group differences in IQ, you get into all sorts of sinister debates which bien pensant atheist Lefties might find less to their liking.
(Excerpt) Read more at blogs.telegraph.co.uk ...
Only the Rabid Militant ones who want to push atheism onto others like the Rabid Jihadi who wants to push Islamism...
Atheists need God. If people did not believe in God then Atheists would loose their religion.
Atheists do not believe in something they say does not exist?
There have been several studies of late that purportedly show that atheists have a higher average IQ, and that increased IQ is correlated to lowered or no religious belief. The correlation is that believers are more stupid.
This article counters that in several ways. Higher IQ doesn’t mean a better life. The article points out:
* Believers recover faster from injuries.
* Atheists have fewer kids. They are less likely to marry and more likely to divorce. Therefore, atheists act in ways contrary to social stability.
* Religious people are less likely to be depressed or commit suicide and have more friends - AKA, emotionally healthier.
* Seriously religious people (attending 2 or more services a month) are less likely to abuse drugs, alcohol and partners. Atheists are more likely to be addicted to alcohol, drugs and other substances.
* While atheism is correlated with advanced education like a master’s degree or doctoral degree, average kids who attend religious schools are more likely to graduate and to get an associate’s or bachelor’s degree than others - especially in the inner city.
So while atheists are theoretically the most educated and have the highest IQ, they are the least likely to have happy families, children, strong social relationships, be addiction free or happy in their relationships. Atheists are most likely to not donate money, be mean, die of an overdose, have no strong familial relationships, high blood pressure, poor health and kill themselves. While theoretically “smarter” and “better educated”, they are socially, physically and - in Darwinian terms - ill suited for life.
Some of this summary comes from the linked article in the article linked from FR
Loved the Ray comfort video where atheists stated that they would save their own dog before a neighbor if they were both drowning and could only save one of them.
Atheists are religious. They think they are God!!!
In those terms the only issue that matters is how likely they are to reproduce successfully.
In which believers are WAY out in front of atheists.
Because it still takes FAITH not to believe in a God. Ergo, it’s a religion. They still worship nothing.
“average group differences in IQ....
The really sad thing is not how stupid the average American is. The sad thing is that half the population is more stupid than the average American!!!!
Does a new born baby believe in God? What is a baby's religion?
Only some of us, but it appears as though the truly delusional see their Gid to be a zombie who came back from the dead after three days.
I think that’s a little harsh, but I do believe it is humanity’s natural state to believe in a Creator or a Designer. A recent study on infants found it to be the case. They see design in the world around them without somebody telling them its there.
For this reason, I do consider atheists somewhat distant from our natural state.
If you had a new tribe stranded on an island who knew nothing of the world, no internet, no books, no speeches from anyone, over time what would they come to believe? History has very few examples of cases in which societies developed to be irreligious. People sought out causes and reason beyond the natural world, because the natural world cannot answer the most important questions of life. It is that search for truth that crafts ‘religion’.
To dissuade people from asking such questions and seeking out answers requires incredible opposite forces.
In the case of North Korea, the threat of death.
In the case of the UK, a slow, zombifying diet of reality T.V. and gossip magazines.
Him or herself. Because we're all born spiritually blind.
The author is not speaking of the fine points of creed. Babies can't do math, either; but they are hardwired to do some eventually, and some scholars believe humans are hardwired for faith, as well. That may explain why atheists are so defensive about their belief system, even though it is based in denial.
It is *smart* people = valuable, and "dumb" people ≠ valuable.
There is so much more to personhood than intellectual abilities. What a random criteria to use to measure the value of a human life.
Fascinating you post this. Just last week, I was listening to a daily radio installment of the late, great J. Vernon McGee’s “Through the Bible” broadcast.
On this station, he is currently going through the Book of Psalms. On this day, he was discussing Psalm 14. In the first verse of this Psalm, we read, “The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good.”
First, we should keep in mind that, back in McGee’s day (he passed away in 1988), atheists were a much more exotic species than they are today. Nonetheless, they did exist, and McGee was unapologetic in his discussion of them. He says that Psalm 14:1 can be safely interpreted to say “the insane says in his heart there is no god.” I even found an online article by McGee saying the same thing: http://articles.ochristian.com/article15639.shtml
Additionally, John Calvin says in his commentary on this verse: “ . . . yet I am content to follow the more generally received interpretation, which is, that all profane persons, who have cast off all fear of God and abandoned themselves to iniquity, are convicted of *madness*. David does not bring against his enemies the charge of common foolishness, but rather inveighs against the folly and *insane* hardihood of those whom the world accounts eminent for their wisdom....” [Asterisks mine.]
So, there is biblical support for the view that atheists are not mentally whole or stable or sane, though, of course, we live in an age which regards the atheist with more respect than the devout Christian believer.
Christianity believes that because man is a fallen creature, and is in bondage to sin, and has a sinful nature, he is not able, on his own volition, to create a perfect society on earth. The only way he can be made perfect is by the grace of God. So, socialists need atheism in order to believe that man is capable of establishing a perfect socialist utopian heaven on earth without God’s help.
So, socialists need atheism in order to believe that man is capable of establishing a perfect socialist utopian heaven on earth without Gods help.
Great insight! Thank you.
I’d take the rationality of most atheists over the theism of every Muslim.
I don't believe that at all.
In our hearts the Lord has embedded in ALL man the knowledge that HE "Is."
We may become "spiritually misguided" or deceived.
It is *smart* people = valuable, and "dumb" people ≠ valuable.
Yup. Same of physical appearance, obviously.
At my father’s funeral, the priest pointed out that as children our parents are our first God. They know it all, take care of us, hold us, teach us. As we get older, we come to the place where we realize that our parents are mortals like us, and are fellow pilgrims on the road to God.
A baby is naturally self-centered, but he isn’t in awe of himself and doesn’t cry out to himself for aid.
a baby is different from an adult. keep up...
of course it is. what specifically and exactly made you not believe in unicorns?
or any other militant religious fanatics who want to force feed their religious practices onto others.
Don't forget the inquisition and the nut cases (Torquemada - among others) who ran it.
This says it all about religion;
for those who believe an explanation is not necessary,
for those who disbelieve an explanation is impossible.
I heard this from Jeep10 on Paltalk many years ago. It still holds up.
Besides, God doesn't believe in atheist.
The lack of evidence. Do you believe in unicorns?
we are talking about you, not me unicorn boy.
I think its more accurage to say the average American is ignorant rather than stupid, which is both better and worse. Better in the sense that you can do something about ignorance. Worse in the sense that so few people bother to.
Zombies dont eat fish. Or make logical arguments.
Yes, but the contention of the article is that we are all hard wired to develop a spirituality.
Socialists dont neccesarily need to be atheists (or vice versa) but there is a strong philosophical link in that they are both Utopian systems.
I think thats a very good summation.
Theres a “lack of evidence” for all manner of things, but people (icluding atheists) still believe in them. There are people who don’t think there’s enough evidence that a man walked on the moon. There are people who genuinely think there isn’t enough evidence that Al Quaeda carried out the 9/11 attacks. Now you think there’s a lack of evidence for the existence of the divine. Fine - but you have to concede there are plenty of people (far more in fact) who think there IS enough evidence. It follows that the quality of evidence must be a function of a belief system. After all, the available evidence is the same for everyone. Therefore you either believe or dont believe that it is sufficient. This is what MaxAmerica is trying to get over.
I am not a Belieber
Sounds like a ‘yes’. Interesting.
A silly proposition since it only takes one “believer” with a higher IQ to prove the fallacy. But whatever, it’s an essential attribute for the atheist to declare intellectual supremacy.
Your analogies are irrelevant without an accepted definition of God.
Evidence really isn’t a function of a belief system. The evidence that the earth is not flat is wholly independent of the belief systems of those who may continue to argue the opposite.
There’s no evidence that unicorns exist, hence my “un-belief” in unicorns. There’s nothing religious about that position. There’s nothing religious about my atheism.
Do you have an accepted definition of everything you don’t believe in?
Here is a tricky question.Would anyone believe in God if going to heaven was not in the equasion? If there is no heaven or hell, what would it matter? When some one can actually tell me where either one of these places exist I might change my mind.
Neither belief nor disbelief are conditional.
Then how do you judge the veracity of what people tell you?
To judge, one must have unconditional beliefs; otherwise, the judgement is arbitrary.
So when someone tells you something, you merely believe it or not unconditionally. You don’t weigh up the evidence, your prior knowledge, the known interests and truthfulness of the person?
Given the implication of your question, what’s the point of weighing evidence without belief?
What you accept as fact is nothing more than belief. You believe that to be true, no?
So you do apply conditions, it’s just that you think those conditions are facets of your belief system.