{"id":4219,"date":"2014-07-14T20:47:57","date_gmt":"2014-07-14T20:47:57","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/skepticink.com\/tippling\/?p=4219"},"modified":"2014-07-14T21:07:25","modified_gmt":"2014-07-14T21:07:25","slug":"scientists-discover-that-atheists-might-not-exist-and-thats-not-a-joke","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/skepticink.com\/tippling\/2014\/07\/14\/scientists-discover-that-atheists-might-not-exist-and-thats-not-a-joke\/","title":{"rendered":"Scientists discover that atheists might not exist, and that\u2019s not a joke (plus rebuttal)"},"content":{"rendered":"

This article has come from Science 2.0<\/a> (taking much from the New Scientist). However, it has been well and truly eviscerated by Jerry Coyne here<\/a>. Read this and then pop over to Jerry’s place.<\/p>\n

By\u00a0Nury Vittachi<\/a><\/p>\n

Metaphysical thought processes are more deeply wired than hitherto suspected<\/em><\/p>\n

WHILE MILITANT ATHEISTS like Richard Dawkins may be convinced God doesn\u2019t exist, God, if he is around, may be amused to find that atheists might not exist.<\/p>\n

\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0Cognitive scientists are becoming increasingly aware that a metaphysical outlook may be so deeply ingrained in human thought processes that it cannot be expunged.<\/p>\n

\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0While this idea may seem outlandish\u2014after all, it seems easy to decide not to believe in God\u2014evidence from several disciplines indicates that what you actually believe is not a decision you make for yourself. Your fundamental beliefs are decided by much deeper levels of consciousness, and some may well be more or less set in stone.<\/p>\n

\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0This line of thought has led to some scientists claiming that \u201catheism is psychologically impossible because of the way humans think,\u201d says Graham Lawton, an avowed atheist himself, writing in the New Scientist. \u201cThey point to studies showing, for example, that even people who claim to be committed atheists tacitly hold religious beliefs, such as the existence of an immortal soul.\u201d<\/p>\n

\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0This shouldn\u2019t come as a surprise, since we are born believers, not atheists, scientists say. Humans are pattern-seekers from birth, with a belief in karma, or cosmic justice, as our default setting. \u201cA slew of cognitive traits predisposes us to faith,\u201d writes Pascal Boyer in Nature, the science journal, adding that people \u201care only aware of some of their religious ideas\u201d.<\/p>\n

INTERNAL MONOLOGUES<\/p>\n

Scientists have discovered that \u201cinvisible friends\u201d are not something reserved for children. We all have them, and encounter them often in the form of interior monologues. As we experience events, we mentally tell a non-present listener about it.<\/p>\n

\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0The imagined listener may be a spouse, it may be Jesus or Buddha or it may be no one in particular. It\u2019s just how the way the human mind processes facts. The identity, tangibility or existence of the listener is irrelevant.<\/p>\n

\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u201cFrom childhood, people form enduring, stable and important relationships with fictional characters, imaginary friends, deceased relatives, unseen heroes and fantasized mates,\u201d says Boyer of Washington University, himself an atheist. This feeling of having an awareness of another consciousness might simply be the way our natural operating system works.<\/p>\n

PUZZLING RESPONSES<\/p>\n

These findings may go a long way to explaining a series of puzzles in recent social science studies. In the United States, 38% of people who identified themselves as atheist or agnostic went on to claim to believe in a God or a Higher Power (Pew Forum, \u201cReligion and the Unaffiliated\u201d, 2012).<\/p>\n

\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0While the UK is often defined as an irreligious place, a recent survey by Theos, a think tank, found that very few people\u2014only 13 per cent of adults\u2014agreed with the statement \u201chumans are purely material beings with no spiritual element\u201d. For the vast majority of us, unseen realities are very present.<\/p>\n

\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0When researchers asked people whether they had taken part in esoteric spiritual practices such as having a Reiki session or having their aura read, the results were almost identical (between 38 and 40%) for people who defined themselves as religious, non-religious or atheist.<\/p>\n

\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0The implication is that we all believe in a not dissimilar range of tangible and intangible realities. Whether a particular brand of higher consciousness is included in that list (\u201cI believe in God\u201d, \u201cI believe in some sort of higher force\u201d, \u201cI believe in no higher consciousness\u201d) is little more than a detail.<\/p>\n

\"Starry<\/a><\/p>\n

Starry Night at La Silla<\/p>\n

Creative Common license 3.0\u00a0ESO\/H. Dahle –\u00a0http:\/\/www.eso.org\/public\/images\/potw1333a\/<\/a><\/p>\n

EVOLUTIONARY PURPOSES<\/p>\n

If a tendency to believe in the reality of an intangible network is so deeply wired into humanity, the implication is that it must have an evolutionary purpose. Social scientists have long believed that the emotional depth and complexity of the human mind means that mindful, self-aware people necessarily suffer from deep existential dread. Spiritual beliefs evolved over thousands of years as nature\u2019s way to help us balance this out and go on functioning.<\/p>\n

\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0If a loved one dies, even many anti-religious people usually feel a need for a farewell ritual, complete with readings from old books and intoned declarations that are not unlike prayers. In war situations, commanders frequently comment that atheist soldiers pray far more than they think they do.<\/p>\n

\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0Statistics show that the majority of people who stop being part of organized religious groups don\u2019t become committed atheists, but retain a mental model in which \u201cThe Universe\u201d somehow has a purpose for humanity.<\/p>\n

\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0In the US, only 20 per cent of people have no religious affiliation, but of these, only one in ten say they are atheists. The majority are \u201cnothing in particular\u201d according to figures published in New Scientist.<\/p>\n

FEELING OF CONNECTEDNESS<\/p>\n

There are other, more socially-oriented evolutionary purposes, too. Religious communities grow faster, since people behave better (referring to the general majority over the millennia, as opposed to minority extremists highlighted by the media on any given day).<\/p>\n

\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0Why is this so? Religious folk attend weekly lectures on morality, read portions of respected books about the subject on a daily basis and regularly discuss the subject in groups, so it would be inevitable that some of this guidance sinks in.<\/p>\n

\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0There is also the notion that the presence of an invisible moralistic presence makes misdemeanors harder to commit. \u201cPeople who think they are being watched tend to behave themselves and cooperate more,\u201d says the New Scientist\u2019s Lawton. \u201cSocieties that chanced on the idea of supernatural surveillance were likely to have been more successful than those that didn’t, further spreading religious ideas.\u201d<\/p>\n

\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0This is not simply a matter of religious folk having a metaphorical angel on their shoulder, dispensing advice. It is far deeper than that\u2014a sense of interconnectivity between all things.\u00a0If I commit a sin, it is not an isolated event but will have appropriate repercussions.\u00a0<\/em>This idea is common to all large scale faith groups, whether it is called karma or simply God ensuring that you \u201creap what you sow\u201d.<\/p>\n

NARRATIVE PRESENCE<\/p>\n

These theories find confirmation from a very different academic discipline\u2014the literature department. The present writer, based at the Creativity Lab at Hong Kong Polytechnic University\u2019s School of Design, has been looking at the manifestation of cosmic justice in fictional narratives\u2014books, movies and games. It is clear that in\u00a0almost all<\/em>\u00a0fictional worlds, God exists, whether the stories are written by people of a religious, atheist or indeterminate beliefs.<\/p>\n

\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0It\u2019s not that a deity appears directly in tales. It is that the fundamental basis of stories appears to be the link between the moral decisions made by the protagonists and the same characters\u2019 ultimate destiny.\u00a0The payback is always appropriate to the choices made.<\/em>\u00a0An unnamed, unidentified mechanism ensures that this is so, and is a fundamental element of stories\u2014perhaps\u00a0the<\/em>\u00a0fundamental element of narratives.<\/p>\n

\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0In children\u2019s stories, this can be very simple: the good guys win, the bad guys lose. In narratives for older readers, the ending is more complex, with some lose ends left dangling, and others ambiguous. Yet the ultimate appropriateness of the ending is rarely in doubt. If a tale ended with Harry Potter being tortured to death and the Dursley family dancing on his grave, the audience would be horrified, of course, but also puzzled: that\u2019s not what happens in stories. Similarly, in a tragedy, we would be surprised if King Lear\u2019s cruelty to Cordelia did not lead to his demise.<\/p>\n

\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0Indeed, it appears that stories exist to establish that there exists a mechanism or a person\u2014cosmic destiny, karma, God, fate, Mother Nature\u2014to make sure the right thing happens to the right person. Without this overarching moral mechanism, narratives become records of unrelated arbitrary events, and lose much of their entertainment value. In contrast, the stories which become universally popular appear to be carefully composed records of cosmic justice at work.<\/p>\n

WELL-DEFINED PROCESS<\/p>\n

In manuals for writers (see \u201cScreenplay\u201d by Syd Field, for example) this process is often defined in some detail. Would-be screenwriters are taught that during the build-up of the story, the villain can sin (take unfair advantages) to his or her heart\u2019s content without punishment, but the heroic protagonist must be karmically punished for even the slightest deviation from the path of moral rectitude. The hero does eventually win the fight, not by being bigger or stronger, but because of the choices he makes.<\/p>\n

\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0This process is so well-established in narrative creation that the literati have even created a specific category for the minority of tales which fail to follow this pattern. They are known as \u201cbleak\u201d narratives. An example is A Fine Balance, by Rohinton Mistry, in which the likable central characters suffer terrible fates while the horrible faceless villains triumph entirely unmolested.<\/p>\n

\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0While some bleak stories are well-received by critics, they rarely win mass popularity among readers or moviegoers. Stories without the appropriate outcome mechanism feel incomplete. The purveyor of cosmic justice is not just a cast member, but appears to be the hidden heart of the show.<\/p>\n

ROOTS OF ATHEISM<\/p>\n

But if a belief in cosmic justice is natural and deeply rooted, the question arises: where does atheism fit in? Albert Einstein, who had a life-long fascination with metaphysics, believed atheism came from a mistaken belief that harmful superstition and a general belief in religious or mystical experience were the same thing, missing the fact that evolution would discard unhelpful beliefs and foster the growth of helpful ones. He declared himself \u201cnot a \u2018Freethinker\u2019 in the usual sense of the word because I find that this is in the main an attitude nourished exclusively by an opposition against naive superstition\u201d (\u201cEinstein on Peace\u201d, page 510).<\/p>\n

\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0Similarly, Charles Darwin, in a meeting with a campaigner for atheism in September 1881, distanced himself from the views of his guest, finding them too \u201caggressive\u201d. In the latter years of his life, he offered his premises for the use of the local church minister and changed his family schedule to enable his children to attend services.<\/p>\n

SMALL DIFFERENCES<\/p>\n

Of course these findings do not prove that it is impossible to stop believing in God. What they do indicate, quite powerfully, is that we may be fooling ourselves if we think that we are making the key decisions about what we believe, and if we think we know how deeply our views pervade our consciousnesses. It further suggests that the difference between the atheist and the non-atheist viewpoint is much smaller than probably either side perceives. Both groups have consciousnesses which create for themselves realities which include very similar tangible and intangible elements. It may simply be that their awareness levels and interpretations of certain surface details differ.<\/p>\n

THE FUTURE<\/p>\n

But as higher levels of education spread, will starry-eyed spirituality die out and cooler, drier atheism sweep the field, as some atheism campaigners suggest? Some specialists feel this is unlikely. \u201cIf godlessness flourishes where there is stability and prosperity, then climate change and environmental degradation could seriously slow the spread of atheism,\u201d says Lawton in New Scientist.<\/p>\n

\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0On a more personal level, we all have loved ones who will die, and we all have a tendency to puzzle about what consciousness is, whether it is separate from the brain, and whether it can survive.\u00a0 We will always have existential dread with us\u2014at a personal or societal level. So the need for periods of contemplative calm in churches or temples or other places devoted to the ineffable and inexplicable will remain. They appear to be part of who we are as humans.<\/p>\n

\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0Furthermore, every time we read a book or watch a movie, we are reinforcing our default belief in the eventual triumph of karma. While there is certainly growth in the number of bleak narratives being produced, it is difficult to imagine them becoming the majority form of cultural entertainment. Most of us will skip Cormac McCarthy\u2019s crushingly depressing \u201cThe Road\u201d in favor of the newest Pixar movie.<\/p>\n

POPULATION IMPLICATIONS<\/p>\n

When looking at trends, there\u2019s also population growth to consider. Western countries are moving away from the standard family model, and tend to obsess over topics such as same-sex marriage and abortion on demand. Whatever the rights and wrongs of these issues, in practice they are associated with shrinking populations.\u00a0 Europeans (and the Japanese) are not having enough children to replace the adult generation, and are seeing their communities shrink on a daily basis.<\/p>\n

\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0Africans and South Asians, on the other hand, are generally religious and retain the traditional model of multi-child families\u2014which may be old-fashioned from a Western point of view, but it\u2019s a model powerfully sanctioned by the evolutionary urge to extend the gene pool.<\/p>\n

\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u201cIt\u2019s clearly the case that the future will involve an increase in religious populations and a decrease in scepticism,\u201d says Steve Jones, a professor in genetics at University College London, speaking at the Hay Festival in the UK recently.<\/p>\n

\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0This may appear as bad news for pro-atheism campaigners. But for the evolutionary life-force which may actually make the decisions, this may augur well for the continued existence of humanity. (An image of Richard Dawkins and his selfish gene having a testy argument over dinner springs to mind.)<\/p>\n

\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 In the meantime, it might be wise for religious folks to refrain from teasing atheist friends who accidentally say something about their souls. And it might be equally smart for the more militant of today\u2019s atheists to stop teasing religious people at all.<\/p>\n

\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0We might all be a little more spiritual than we think.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Metaphysical thought processes are more deeply wired than hitherto suspected<\/p>\n

WHILE MILITANT ATHEISTS like Richard Dawkins may be convinced God doesn\u2019t exist, God, if he is around, may be amused to find that atheists might not exist.<\/p>\n

Cognitive scientists are becoming increasingly aware that a metaphysical outlook may be so deeply ingrained in human thought processes that it cannot be expunged.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":8,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[256,1054,223,21],"tags":[39,434,91,104,776],"class_list":["post-4219","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-atheism-2","category-featured","category-psychology-2","category-science-and-religion","tag-atheism","tag-neuroscience","tag-psychology","tag-science-2","tag-teleology"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/skepticink.com\/tippling\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4219","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/skepticink.com\/tippling\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/skepticink.com\/tippling\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/skepticink.com\/tippling\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/8"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/skepticink.com\/tippling\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=4219"}],"version-history":[{"count":4,"href":"https:\/\/skepticink.com\/tippling\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4219\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":4223,"href":"https:\/\/skepticink.com\/tippling\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4219\/revisions\/4223"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/skepticink.com\/tippling\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=4219"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/skepticink.com\/tippling\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=4219"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/skepticink.com\/tippling\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=4219"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}