wellwisher
Well-Known Member
This is expected since Atheism originally defined itself on a negative; what it is not (does not believe in God or religion). Therefore it is like a reflection in the mirror of religion. Defining yourself what you are, allows you to branch in a unique way or direction. But defining yourself in terms of what you are not, tends to funnel you via the mirror. Atheism came from Christianity; mirror world; x and -x.Atheists, it turns out, are a rather morally driven bunch. This is news to many, including Tomas Ståhl, an assistant professor of psychology at the University of Illinois at Chicago, who this week published a fascinating study in Plos One comparing the deepest beliefs of theists and atheists.
By analyzing the beliefs of nearly 5,000 people in the United States and Sweden, he found that atheists and theists share a number of moral values: Both groups fervently believe in fairness, liberty (including freedom of belief), and the importance of protecting the vulnerable, and both groups hold surprisingly strong bents toward rationality and evidence-based knowledge.
Where they differ is revealing:
- Theists are likely to support morals such as reverence for authority, loyalty, and sanctity, which all fuel group cohesion (versus individuality).
- Atheists tend to decide whether or not something is moral by the consequences of a behavior, rather than the morality of the action that caused it (for instance, the common atheist bent that sex acts are fine as long as they’re consensual and no one gets hurt).
Atheists and believers surprisingly share moral values, except for these 2 key differences
There are molecular states in chemistry called isomers; constitutional and stereo. Isomers are chemicals that have the same formula, but differ by how the atoms are arranged in space. Enantiomers are stereo isomers, which look like mirror images, but cannot be superimposed in space; God or No God. Another form of isomer are cis and trans isomers, that have the same formula, they cannot superimpose, but they are not mirror images. This can create similarities in atheist and religious, from different approaches; ways they differ but still end in the same places; formula.
As a side note; notice the cis and trans, used as the terms to describe transsexual versus biological, are done backwards. Cis has CH3 twice on one side; female in a male body or male in female body. While trans isomers are closer to biological sex; male and female on opposite sides. My guess this was an enantiomer moment, seen in the mirror of Atheism; morphed application of cis and trans.
Classic morality is about maximizing the group. Atheism is more about maximizing the ego or individual. Maximizing the group is about the team effect; team can become more than the sum of its parts. Whereas, maximizing the individual is less about the team, and more about the ego of the teammates; politics ahead of merit.
If we tried to form a successful team, the ego of each player will need to make sacrifices, for the needs of the team. The coach will assign players, whose ego may wish something else. The coach is not there to make everyone feel good about themselves. Rather his job is to put together a team that will sacrifice for each other and win.
The religious moral codes comes from the big coach; God. The players may not agree on all the rules; subject of debate, but they will still sacrifice. The team is bigger than the ego, and the ego needs to restructure itself, to be in the right place for the team, so the gears mesh.
If the goal was the ego of the players, we may sacrifice most of the authority of the coach. The parent politics may want more play time for the second string players, so their babies can shine for them. It is less about the team, and more about nobody feeling left out, and everyone feeling good about themselves. This precludes, many of the sacrifice needed for a winning team structure; DEI instead of merit.
Atheists tend to decide whether or not something is moral by the consequences of a behavior, rather than the morality of the action that caused it (for instance, the common atheist bent that sex acts are fine as long as they’re consensual and no one gets hurt).
In this case, the word "hurt" does not include the effects of infidelity on the person or people cheated on, or an aborted baby. It is not about the larger team, beyond the ego's state of mind, during the act itself. I was so loving and caring.
In the case of the team, having an affair with a teammate's wife or girlfriend, can cause friction for the entire team. The coach will make it clear, up front, what happens if this happens, no matter how you; ego, justify it.
On there other hand, there is the team life and there is private life. On your time off, the ego can have more flexibility as long as your team spirit is not compromised; I was funny, but am now to hung over to play. This amalgam; team and home team, will result in similarities between the Religious and Atheists; good company and home people who take pride in doing a good job.
Last edited: