But

Life is tough, it’s unfair, and for most creatures most of the time it’s unpleasant. Life changes. It evolves and evolution happens because of large amounts of mass death. Whole species are wiped out and the species that depended on those species are wiped out in turn like a line of dominoes of death. Whatever survives by sheer luck or by adaptability move in only to be challenged by the next disaster. When creatures live for a long time in an environment that has not challenged them, they become sitting ducks for extinction. Religious beliefs are a safe, warm environment that doesn’t challenge people to move beyond their present level of maturity.

The attributes you have described in people of faith are the attributes of children, and I think that is an appropriate metaphor for what religion does to people. Having a perpetual parent figure to watch over them, judge, reward or punish them and to answer all their questions in a single old book keeps them in the role of children. Some Christians even explicitly insist on becoming “as little children.”

But children have to grow up or die. Childlike minds inside full grown bodies do terrible destruction when they think their parent figure is threatened. They militarize against those with different parent figures or they wrap C-4 and nails around their bodies and get on a bus. 9/11 is just a tip of the tongue taste of what will happen if we don’t grow up soon.

The religion as opiate metaphor is very appropriate too. This addiction holds us back as a species. We keep rebuilding social institutions based on old models that were in place at the time sacred scriptures were written. We need entirely new social paradigms that don’t have to fit into the religious mold. Opiate addiction is a terrible thing to watch. The addict slowly deteriorates into a feeble robot programmed to do only one thing, to get more opiate. Going “cold turkey” is painful but remaining addicted is fatal.

We have to grow up as a species or go extinct. Having advanced adult technologies with childish world views and social systems is a disaster waiting to happen. We can insist on challenging childish myths and a few individuals will suffer. Or we can wait for the whole thing to blow up and maybe the few who survive will finally learn their lesson and reject the growth-retarding drug of religion. But with that method there’s no guarantee they will.

We atheists are evidence-oriented, and I haven’t seen evidence that it’s safe for the vast majority of people to relinquish religious illusions.

Tara, not to worry. Seriously, “the masses”, as you call them, are not the fragile little flowers you seem to think they are. People are quite amazingly tough, once the initial shock of whatever challenges them wears off. On the whole, we’re survivors. Look at the aftermath of any disaster for your evidence.

And, for those that really are stupid, also not to worry. The stupid tend to be very stubborn and not easily swayed. A person can talk themselves blue in the face and not make the tiniest dent on what a stupid person has decided is true.

I think you’re pretty safe on this one.

However, I asked for it. I wanted it and I demanded to know the answers to my questions- both the psychological ones, such as “Why when I look into the sympathic and caring eyes of my pet(s) I felt God and saw in them God, esp when I was extremely sad about something?” and the religious ones, which could only be answered through studying both religious texts and mythical texts- like “Why is the Babylonian flood myth (for example) like the Noah flood myth? or “Why is Osiris like the Jesus myth?” These questions could only be answer through studying many texts and through Psychology.

Once it hit home that there was no historical Jesus and God was a human concept, it hit hard and with a feeling of sorrow, but it didn’t last, probably in part because I was also studying Humanism all that time too or the study of Psychology helped. I don’t know, but now I only have moments where I feel sad or angry about it all.

Does this mean I think there is absolutely and completely no god what so ever? Sort of. Like I’ve said before there maybe something science has yet to discover that our still somewhat primitive minds attrubite to a deity- like the extremely strong emotions where we feel at one with pets, nature, etc. or some element in us and in the universe that triggers those feelings. However, neuro-psychology hasn’t definitively said yet, but if that is the case it is a god within us- figuratively speaking of course- and it might not be such a bad thing to hone in on that in an effort to better ourselves and in effect make us “god above all gods”- again figuratively speaking. In otherwords, it would mean we would have to realize that the power to better ourselves is within all of us and not some external source.

Sounds some what philosophical too, but I think that it is where all of this lies- most people cannot fathom relying only on themselves, so they create a god concept that is external and rely upon it like a parental figure, just so they can cope with daily life (a security blanket if you will). For some people, if that concept is shattered, they can’t deal or find their inner resources to cope with life. There in lies the Psychology of Religion.

Meanwhile, I tend to be reluctant to discuss my skepticism with believers, unless they have a certain emotional strength (besides having the requisite intelligence to potentially grasp how it is that the complex world we see is the result of natural processes).

I love to read and hear Richard Dawkins and Chris Hitchens. They are a breath of very clean air. But I am not yet convinced it is a good thing for them to speak to the general public. I have known a few people who I think would fall apart if they lost their faith. And today’s kids, a lot of them are neglected or don’t have the benefit of a stable home, and religion can be one of their few sources of hope and stability and social support.

We atheists are evidence-oriented, and I haven’t seen evidence that it’s safe for the vast majority of people to relinquish religious illusions. I suspect a lot of religious leaders are atheists who believe most people are better off holding some form of religious belief. Those of us who are openly skeptics are, I suppose, the ones who have come to conclude that skepticism is pretty much a good thing for anyone. I share their passion for truth and for debunking religious mythologies, but I am reluctantly skeptical about whether the masses can operate more effectively without any opiate.

Because this is a somewhat pessimistic view, I am very much on the lookout for any evidence that I am mistaken. My guess and hope is that in the near future there will be a lot more empirical research on the psychology of change in religious belief.

Given that living as an atheist presupposes a certain level of intelligence and emotional balance,…

I”m not really convinced that atheists command a higher average level of intelligence and/or emotional balance than any other group when sorted out by beliefs in God or gods. Some people complain that atheists are fools, other people boast that they are brilliant. I’ve met what I would consider examples of both but just like a random selection of people, most seem to be in between.

But let’s assume hypothetically that a given atheist is as intelligent and emotionally balanced as you are describing. You ask,

…should an atheist refrain from discussing their worldview with persons who are less fortunate in the areas of IQ or emotional strength,…

I don’t see the problem with an intelligent and well balanced person discussing their world view with someone who is not as smart or mature. If two dense and immature people discussed such things it seems to me that they could lead each other into unwise conclusions, but even that possibility is just a guess. The only likely problem might be a difficulty in getting an idea or concept across from either one to the other. Communication is an art that requires a sensitivity to the continuing response from the listener. Sometimes smart people have that, sometimes thick people have that, and sometimes neither have that.

…especially persons going thru major personal crisis?

Now this is a different matter. If a person of any level of IQ or EQ is going through a major personal crisis, then they are vulnerable and should be handled very carefully with patience, compassion and respect. Being sensitive to that is just like the communication sensitivity, something that both bright or dim people may or may not have.

I get the sense that your question is implying a kind of unfairness about a smart, stable person talking about world views with a dim, brittle person. That would depend on the motivation behind the conversation. If the smart person’s intention is to manipulate the slower one, or to take advantage in some disrespectful way and to confuse them or convince them of something that is not necessarily in their interests, or something that they wouldn’t agree to if they fully understood it, then that would be, in my personal view an immoral and unethical thing to do.

At least on this blog, I seldom see such shameful behavior. Often if the cognitive or emotional levels are mismatched there is frustration and misunderstanding on both sides, and it can sometimes even lead to an exchange of insults but it is seldom about an intentional and disrespectful manipulation. On the few occasions that I have witnessed such behavior I have spoken up against the smarter person’s remarks and their motives.

Regardless of the levels of thoughts and feelings most of the conversations here between atheists and believers is about trying to reach mutual understandings about who each person is rather than a struggle for one to convert the other to their world view. That’s basically futile anyway, and so it gets boring quickly.

Tara, please tell us more about where your question is coming from, so we can answer it more helpfully.

Given that living as an atheist presupposes a certain level of intelligence and emotional balance, should an atheist refrain from discussing their worldview with persons who are less fortunate in the areas of IQ or emotional strength, especially persons going thru major personal crisis?

I would be very appreciative of serious and thoughtful responses!

So while I don’t really have a hierarchy of approval for various religions, your practice would be up near the top.

My question really was just to determine if atheist view ‘unuplifting’ religions/viewpoints any differently than ones that have goals of virtue and kindness. I guess I mean do you rank me, who is a Christ follower attempting to live a life of love and giving in the same category as someone who by religious standards is only out for themselves and their own benefit. I’m sorry for wording my questions unclearly, it’s sometimes hard to put down exactly what I’d like to know!

Obviously it depends who you are talking to because I get the feeling some don’t appreciate change for the good in my life if it has roots in religion. Which is understandable, I guess, given your viewpoint.

Interesting conversation, still though. I think it’s amazing how ranging the beliefs are even within atheism (and branches thereof)….