"The majority of social science research on
religiosity and associated variables has tended to focus on putative
beneficial aspects, implying that the absence of religious belief is
accompanied by liabilities. However, a closer examination of the
literature reveals that the mechanisms of most beneficial associations
with religiosity are attributable to factors other than beliefs,
chiefly, social engagement and embeddeness in supportive groups. Often,
those with the lowest levels of well-being and prosociality are
uncommitted or indifferent religious believers, not socially engaged
nonbelievers.Therefore, defining individuals who are not committed or
engaged in socially supportive groups solely in terms of their lack of
religious belief virtually guarantees that atheists and agnostics will
appear inferior on a variety of outcome variables. However, nonbelief
and secular worldviews can also be practiced in social groups such as
atheist, humanist, and freethought organizations. Contrary to prevalent
stereotypes, organized nonbelief is also associated with well-being and
prosociality equivalent to that seen with organized religious belief.
Notable areas of relative advantage for nonbelievers are in the domains
of outgroup tolerance and moral universalism.
Human knowledge has progressed exponentially since the dawn of modern science. It is no longer reasonable to accept claims without sufficient objective evidence. The harm from religion, alternatives to medicine, conservatism, and all other false beliefs will be exposed on this blog by reporting the findings of science. This blog will also reinforce what should be the basics of education: History, Civics, Financial Literacy, Media Literacy, and Critical/Science Based Thinking.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment