[QUOTE=__HRB__;182543]Is eating a lot of fiber and pooping into the river upstream shortly before the baptism takes place an outdated concept, too?[/QUOTE]


I didn't know that was ever practiced. It would take a great deal of dedication and psyllium husks to put a real floater downstream on time and in place.

It seems a piss poor way to express an opinion, unless one's religion dictates that it's the only path to whatever goal one seeks.

[QUOTE=cheesehead;182650]Yes, religion has been influential for so long that it has starved languages of positive words for alternatives.

The positive name for a worldview that is free of supernatural elements would seem to be "naturalism", and an adherent, a "naturalist" -- but those already has so many other connotations that they're no good for this purpose. (Yes, "naturalism" is indeed sometimes used for exactly that purpose -- [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naturalism_%28philosophy"]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naturalism_(philosophy[/URL]) -- but it's not an exclusive-enough meaning IMO.) They make it easy for religious opponents to mis-portray adherents as "acting like animals".

There is a group trying to popularize another term, though it's not ideal either -- see [URL]http://www.the-brights.net/[/URL]

What we need, I've concluded, is an entirely new word, but that's not easy. I haven't come up with one. Maybe someone with extensive Greek and Latin knowledge could find some novel derivative not already in use.

(I presume there's no obvious French candidate. Can you invent one that L'Académie française might approve?)[/QUOTE]

ass-hat has not been published in any notable reference material as of yet.

[quote=Primeinator;182658]However, the use of the flag in military ceremonies to honor the fallen is symbolic, yet holds much meaning for those that partake. Does this mean they are stupid? I cannot profess to read minds, but I would warrant that although the flag is a nice "symbol" to have, they do not need to have the flag present to realize the significance of what they have lost (a loved one).[/quote]

The military has the purpose is to hurt people and wreck stuff (supposedly before said people hurt you and wreck your stuff - the mileage varies), so there is a considerable selection bias for people with inferior reasoning abilities. If they get all mushy when they see their flag, doesn't mean it's the smartest thing to do with one's time.

[quote=Primeinator;182658][...]However, automatically claiming that someone lacks the ability to rationalize (the person you were negating), seems a little uncouth without ample and "unbiased" evidence.[/quote]

If you manage to hit a soft spot and make the other person angry, he's likely to do something really stupid, thereby furnishing the evidence himself.

[QUOTE=__HRB__;182661]The military has the purpose is to hurt people and wreck stuff (supposedly before said people hurt you and wreck your stuff - the mileage varies), so there is a considerable selection bias for people with inferior reasoning abilities. If they get all mushy when they see their flag, doesn't mean it's the smartest thing to do with one's time.



If you manage to hit a soft spot and make the other person angry, he's likely to do something really stupid, thereby furnishing the evidence himself.[/QUOTE]

I agree the military has been engaged in many undesirable activities and the current political environment fosters corruption- we have only to look at the military industrial complex. However, some good things can also come of the military- the Allied Army rid Europe of Hitler. The flag may not have been the best example to use. What scenarios entitle a person to "become mushy?"

Just because someone is angry does not mean they will do something stupid, though they will likely say something stupid. You seem rather unforgiving. Is one incident enough for someone to receive a permanent black mark designating them as irrational? If this were the case there would not have been one rational person in history.

[quote=AES;182659]I didn't know that was ever practiced. It would take a great deal of dedication and psyllium husks to put a real floater downstream on time and in place.[/quote]

In [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Man_Who_Would_Be_King_%28film%29"]The_Man_Who_Would_Be_King[/URL] it was the reason for a blood feud between two Afghan villages (on washday! much worse than baptism).

[quote=AES;182659]It seems a piss poor way to express an opinion, unless one's religion dictates that it's the only path to whatever goal one seeks.[/quote]

It's actually a shitty way to express an opinion, but I guess a piss poor way would work too.

[quote=Primeinator;182662]I agree the military has been engaged in many undesirable activities and the current political environment fosters corruption- we have only to look at the military industrial complex. However, some good things can also come of the military- the Allied Army rid Europe of Hitler. The flag may not have been the best example to use. What scenarios entitle a person to "become mushy?" [/quote]

None, if you think about it.

[quote=Primeinator;182662]Just because someone is angry does not mean they will do something stupid, though they will likely say something stupid. You seem rather unforgiving. Is one incident enough for someone to receive a permanent black mark designating them as irrational? If this were the case there would not have been one rational person in history.[/quote]

I don't think there is anything wrong with constantly reminding ourselves that we're a bunch of monkeys, some of whom might occasionally have had something which qualifies as a "good idea". But in general, using reason is still very hard for all of us, which is why our cognitive biases frequently cause large scale disasters.

[QUOTE=cheesehead;182650]I presume there's no obvious French candidate. Can you invent one that L'Académie française might approve?[/QUOTE]In France, in 2007 about 31% of the people were atheist.

There are some candidates, like: Rationalisme (Rationalism), or [B]Libre-Pensée[/B] (Free Mind).
For the second one (Libre-Pensée), there are several associations: [URL="http://www.fnlp.fr/"]Fédération Nationale de la Libre-Pensée (Trotskistes...)[/URL], [URL="http://www.libre-penseur-adlpf.com/"][B]Association des Libres Penseurs de France[/B][/URL].

I have not yet found a better name.
T.

Man, such an interesting topic and I don't have time to read it all.

I always say that the bible tells us [I]that[/I] god made the world, and science tells us [I]how[/I] he did it.
Do I actually believe in "god"? Hmm... somewhere about 60% yes.

And about the Big Bang: I think the name Martin Bojowald should be mentioned somewhere.

I'd surely have more to say, but I need to read the whole thread first. Or is there a short summary somewhere?

[QUOTE=T.Rex;182705]In France, in 2007 about 31% of the people were atheist.

There are some candidates, like: Rationalisme (Rationalism), or [B]Libre-Pensée[/B] (Free Mind).
For the second one (Libre-Pensée), there are several associations: [URL="http://www.fnlp.fr/"]Fédération Nationale de la Libre-Pensée (Trotskistes...)[/URL], [URL="http://www.libre-penseur-adlpf.com/"][B]Association des Libres Penseurs de France[/B][/URL].

I have not yet found a better name.
T.[/QUOTE]
I once a wrote a history paper on the acceptance of Darwin's Theory in Europe and the initial rejection of Darwin's Theory in America and how that reflected upon Europe's rise to secularism and America's rise (actually, I would say "decline") to non-secularism.

I am not necessarily promoting secularism, it's just that in a secular country you can worship (or not worship) whatever you choose to, without force (unlike in a non-secular country where there typically exists a staple religion).

[QUOTE=mart_r;182709]
I'd surely have more to say, but I need to read the whole thread first. Or is there a short summary somewhere?[/QUOTE]
No, it's honestly worth it to read the entire thread. Otherwise, you wouldn't get much (if any) out of it.

A look at the relationship between religious belief and societal ills

(Although the article discusses evolutionary science, I have not quoted paragraphs that were primarily concerned with evolution -- because this is not a thread about evolution.

However, neither have I broken up quoted paragraphs that mentioned evolution without that being the primary topic.)

[URL]http://moses.creighton.edu/JRS/2005/2005-11.html[/URL]

Abstract:

[quote]Large-scale surveys show dramatic declines in religiosity in favor of secularization in the developed democracies. Popular acceptance of evolutionary science correlates negatively with levels of religiosity, and the United States is the only prosperous nation where the majority absolutely believes in a creator and evolutionary science is unpopular. Abundant data is available on rates of societal dysfunction and health in the first world. Cross-national comparisons of highly differing rates of religiosity and societal conditions form a mass epidemiological experiment that can be used to test whether high rates of belief in and worship of a creator are necessary for high levels of social health. Data correlations show that in almost all regards the highly secular democracies consistently enjoy low rates of societal dysfunction, while pro-religious and anti-evolution America performs poorly.[/quote]Regarding "societal dysfunction and health", the article explains:
[quote][11] Data on aspects of societal health and dysfunction are from a variety of well-documented sources including the UN Development Programme (2000). Homicide is the best indicator of societal violence because of the extremity of the act and its unique contribution to levels of societal fear, plus the relatively reliable nature of the data (Beeghley; Neapoletan). Youth suicide (WHO) was examined in order to avoid cultural issues related to age and terminal illness. Data on STDs, teen pregnancy and birth (Panchaud [I]et al[/I].; Singh and Darroch) were accepted only if the compilers concluded that they were not seriously underreported, except for the U.S. where under reporting does not exaggerate disparities with the other developed democracies because they would only close the gaps. Teen pregnancy was examined in a young age class in which marriage is infrequent. Abortion data (Panchaud [I]et al[/I].) was accepted only from those nations in which it is as approximately legal and available as in the U.S. In order to minimize age related factors, rates of dysfunction were plotted within youth cohorts when possible.[/quote]Among the results:

[quote][15] A few hundred years ago rates of homicide were astronomical in Christian Europe and the American colonies (Beeghley; R. Lane). In all secular developed democracies a centuries long-term trend has seen homicide rates drop to historical lows ([URL="http://moses.creighton.edu/JRS/2005/2005-11.html#figures"]Figure 2[/URL]). The especially low rates in the more Catholic European states are statistical noise due to yearly fluctuations incidental to this sample, and are not consistently present in other similar tabulations (Barcley and Tavares). Despite a significant decline from a recent peak in the 1980s (Rosenfeld), the U.S. is the only prosperous democracy that retains high homicide rates, making it a strong outlier in this regard (Beeghley; Doyle, 2000). Similarly, theistic Portugal also has rates of homicides well above the secular developed democracy norm. Mass student murders in schools are rare, and have subsided somewhat since the 1990s, but the U.S. has experienced many more (National School Safety Center) than all the secular developed democracies combined. Other prosperous democracies do not significantly exceed the U.S. in rates of nonviolent and in non-lethal violent crime (Beeghley; Farrington and Langan; Neapoletan), and are often lower in this regard. The United States exhibits typical rates of youth suicide (WHO), which show little if any correlation with theistic factors in the prosperous democracies ([URL="http://moses.creighton.edu/JRS/2005/2005-11.html#figures"]Figure 3[/URL]). The positive correlation between pro-theistic factors and juvenile mortality is remarkable, especially regarding absolute belief, and even prayer ([URL="http://moses.creighton.edu/JRS/2005/2005-11.html#figures"]Figure 4[/URL]). Life spans tend to decrease as rates of religiosity rise ([URL="http://moses.creighton.edu/JRS/2005/2005-11.html#figures"]Figure 5[/URL]), especially as a function of absolute belief. Denmark is the only exception. Unlike questionable small-scale epidemiological studies by Harris [I]et al[/I]. and Koenig and Larson, higher rates of religious affiliation, attendance, and prayer do not result in lower juvenile-adult mortality rates on a cross-national basis.[URL="http://javascript%3Cb%3E%3C/b%3E:openNote%28%272005-11note/n6.html%27%29"]<6>[/URL]

[16] Although the late twentieth century STD epidemic has been curtailed in all prosperous democracies (Aral and Holmes; Panchaud [I]et al[/I].), rates of adolescent gonorrhea infection remain six to three hundred times higher in the U.S. than in less theistic, pro-evolution secular developed democracies ([URL="http://moses.creighton.edu/JRS/2005/2005-11.html#figures"]Figure 6[/URL]). At all ages levels are higher in the U.S., albeit by less dramatic amounts. The U.S. also suffers from uniquely high adolescent and adult syphilis infection rates, which are starting to rise again as the microbe’s resistance increases ([URL="http://moses.creighton.edu/JRS/2005/2005-11.html#figures"]Figure 7[/URL]). The two main curable STDs have been nearly eliminated in strongly secular Scandinavia. Increasing adolescent abortion rates show positive correlation with increasing belief and worship of a creator, and negative correlation with increasing non-theism and acceptance of evolution; again rates are uniquely high in the U.S. ([URL="http://moses.creighton.edu/JRS/2005/2005-11.html#figures"]Figure 8[/URL]). Claims that secular cultures aggravate abortion rates (John Paul II) are therefore contradicted by the quantitative data. Early adolescent pregnancy and birth have dropped in the developed democracies (Abma [I]et al[/I].; Singh and Darroch), but rates are two to dozens of times higher in the U.S. where the decline has been more modest ([URL="http://moses.creighton.edu/JRS/2005/2005-11.html#figures"]Figure 9[/URL]). Broad correlations between decreasing theism and increasing pregnancy and birth are present, with Austria and especially Ireland being partial exceptions. Darroch [I]et al[/I]. found that age of first intercourse, number of sexual partners and similar issues among teens do not exhibit wide disparity or a consistent pattern among the prosperous democracies they sampled, including the U.S. A detailed comparison of sexual practices in France and the U.S. observed little difference except that the French tend - contrary to common impression - to be somewhat more conservative (Gagnon [I]et al[/I].).[/quote]Among the discussion:
[quote][18] In general, higher rates of belief in and worship of a creator correlate with higher rates of homicide, juvenile and early adult mortality, STD infection rates, teen pregnancy, and abortion in the prosperous democracies ([URL="http://moses.creighton.edu/JRS/2005/2005-11.html#figures"]Figures 1-9[/URL]). The most theistic prosperous democracy, the U.S., is exceptional, but not in the manner Franklin predicted. The United States is almost always the most dysfunctional of the developed democracies, sometimes spectacularly so, and almost always scores poorly. The view of the U.S. as a “shining city on the hill” to the rest of the world is falsified when it comes to basic measures of societal health. Youth suicide is an exception to the general trend because there is not a significant relationship between it and religious or secular factors. No democracy is known to have combined strong religiosity and popular denial of evolution with high rates of societal health. Higher rates of non-theism and acceptance of human evolution usually correlate with lower rates of dysfunction, and the least theistic nations are usually the least dysfunctional. None of the strongly secularized, pro-evolution democracies is experiencing high levels of measurable dysfunction. In some cases the highly religious U.S. is an outlier in terms of societal dysfunction from less theistic but otherwise socially comparable secular developed democracies. In other cases, the correlations are strongly graded, sometimes outstandingly so.

[19] If the data showed that the U.S. enjoyed higher rates of societal health than the more secular, pro-evolution democracies, then the opinion that popular belief in a creator is strongly beneficial to national cultures would be supported. Although they are by no means utopias, the populations of secular democracies are clearly able to govern themselves and maintain societal cohesion. Indeed, the data examined in this study demonstrates that only the more secular, pro-evolution democracies have, for the first time in history, come closest to achieving practical “cultures of life” that feature low rates of lethal crime, juvenile-adult mortality, sex related dysfunction, and even abortion. The least theistic secular developed democracies such as Japan, France, and Scandinavia have been most successful in these regards. The non-religious, pro-evolution democracies contradict the dictum that a society cannot enjoy good conditions unless most citizens ardently believe in a moral creator. The widely held fear that a Godless citizenry must experience societal disaster is therefore refuted. Contradicting these conclusions requires demonstrating a positive link between theism and societal conditions in the first world with a similarly large body of data - a doubtful possibility in view of the observable trends.[/quote](to be continued)