Free Will, Original Sin, And Education

Proponents of the Abrahamic religions like to talk about the sinful nature of humanity due to Original Sin.  They also promote the concept of Free Will and push for overcoming our weaknesses with such.  All of this is magical thinking and is counter to reality and harmful.  This article is a good example of science-based thinkers promoting something that works.

Students need trauma-informed care

Two Solvable Problems

If all politicians were science-based thinkers, many problems in society would be solved.  Following are two examples of societal dysfunction and realistic solutions.

1) The Homeless

This article presents another viable "band-aid" for the problem. However, to solve the problem, affordable housing is a solution, along with adequate social services.

2) Ex-Convict Unemployment

This article and this article present ways to help former criminals return to gainful employment.  However, to solve the problem, improving economic mobility is a solution, along with economic equality of opportunity.

 

THE Challenge For Atheism

Religion has been a part of the great majority of humanity throughout its history.  Yes, us science-based thinkers know that the claims of all religions have been falsified by science.  However, essentially, the beat goes on.  Why? In my opinion, it is the social support it fosters.  THE challenge for us atheists is to provide a valid replacement for such.  Yes, there are many atheist and humanistic groups organizing and also doing some great social work.  However, frankly, I see THAT needle barely moving in the society at large. 

Understand, I have no answers other than what I have already said on this blog: those with more influence and money than me * MUST step up or we are whistling in the dark.

* How about an anti-Rupert Murdock/Roger Ailes to found an anti-Fox News? Or an anti-Pat Robertson to found an anti-700 Club?

A Google Search for "Religion's Value is the Social Interaction"

It's Not The Religion, It Is the Socialization

"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.
 

Read more at http://researcherslinks.com/current-issues/Atheism-Wellbeing-and-the-Wager-Why-Not-Believing-in-God-With-Others-is-Good-for-You/9/16/120/html#eqf0pDB1BIxcWBPl.99

Action Is Greater Than Words

"Well done is better than well said" ~Benjamin Franklin, founder of my Alma Mater in 1740. Talk is cheap. Action is required to achieve what needs to happen to make a difference in society. Ben had it correct. Vote (but intelligently after educating yourself), work toward a better society, volunteer and give to help those less fortunate, support your loved ones.

Ya, I know, the above does sound preachy.  But, it does show that one does not have to be religious to make good moral points. Franklin's religious beliefs were complicated but had deistic qualities.  Prior to Darwin, it was reasonable to belief in an interventionist god.  However, after such, - - -

Introduction to Penn