American society trending toward a lower level of belief in gods

[Dogger807]

Gallup recently released a poll showing a definite trend towards lessening religiosity. The one that I specifically wish to address , the one most significant if the sudden drop of belief between those above the age of thirty and those below. It's a refreshing 10 point drop in belief of a god. A baby step, but a step toward the future.

Gallup Poll

I think religion is having a hard time coping with the age of the internet.

 

[Helvidius]

Not a fan of faith? The overwhelming majority of Americans still believe in some sort of higher being. Until atheists disprove the existence of God, I don't expect that to change.

 

[MKULTRABOY]

Sorry the burden of proof is not on atheists...

This is probably a healthy development as the most religious tend to be the most supportive of radicalism. (or it seems to me).

 

[Helvidius]

Sorry the burden of proof is not on atheists...

This is probably a healthy development as the most religious tend to be the most supportive of radicalism. (or it seems to me).

I never said atheists had to burden themselves with disproving the existence of God. Simply put, people will most likely continue to believe in a God if the existence of God is not disproved.

 

[MKULTRABOY]

I never said atheists had to burden themselves with disproving the existence of God. Simply put, people will most likely continue to believe in a God if the existence of God is not disproved.

Until atheists disprove the existence of God, I don't expect that to change.

Firstly you self refute in your second post. Secondly, yes you issued the burden of proof on atheists. At least that's what it is in black and white.

 

[StillBallin75]

Sorry the burden of proof is not on atheists...

This is probably a healthy development as the most religious tend to be the most supportive of radicalism. (or it seems to me).

The only party that possesses absolutely no burden of proof is agnostics.

 

[MKULTRABOY]

I don't want to derail this thread, but why should atheists have to disprove something which is held up in fuzzy logic and by nature of the argument impossible to disprove because it has no definition. That's like asking to disprove I just thought about pink elephants. Whether I did or not. No, the burden of proof is on the people with a contention that what they believe exists exists... It's the classic purple dragon under the bed analogy.

 

[StillBallin75]

I don't have a problem with being believing in God or believing in no god. What concerns me is when people feel the need to inject their religious beliefs into public policy.

 

[StillBallin75]

I don't want to derail this thread, but why should atheists have to disprove something which is held up in fuzzy logic and by nature of the argument impossible to disprove because it has no definition. That's like asking to disprove I just thought about pink elephants. Whether I did or not. No, the burden of proof is on the people with a contention that what they believe exists exists... It's the classic purple dragon under the bed analogy.

My belief is that we simply don't know enough about the nature of the universe, or the cosmos, or whatever you want to call it, and how it was created for logic to prevail one way or the other.

and for what it's worth:

 

[lpast]

This is to be expected, theres been indoctrination in schools against religion and the constant attacks on MOSTLY christianity for two decades had to have some impact.
Theres no less belief in islam I bet....they dont have any progressives indoctrinating their kids and an ACLU attacking religion at every turn

 

[Goshin]

Gallup recently released a poll showing a definite trend towards lessening religiosity. The one that I specifically wish to address , the one most significant if the sudden drop of belief between those above the age of thirty and those below. It's a refreshing 10 point drop in belief of a god. A baby step, but a step toward the future.

Gallup Poll

I think religion is having a hard time coping with the age of the internet.

According to the poll, 92% of Americans believe in some version of God in 2011.
For under-30's, the number is 84%, a modest drop of 8%... and some of those might change their minds later.

Hardly cause to blow the trumpets and proclaim atheism is triumphing... its like a Libertarian getting excited because their candidate won twice as many votes as last time (2% instead of 1%). :roll:

According to Gallup, the percentage was 94% in 1944, later rose to 98% in the 50's and 60s, and declined to 92% in recent decades. Deciding that this is a sure and certain downward 'trend' is premature.

 

[Helvidius]

Firstly you self refute in your second post. Secondly, yes you issued the burden of proof on atheists. At least that's what it is in black and white.

No, my post was not intended to suggest atheists had to disprove the existence of God; you implied it as such. The point was that people will continue to believe in a God as long as the possibility of God exists. In no way did I suggest atheists should "burden" themselves with disproving God. Basically, atheists do not have to disprove God, but as long as God is not disproved I expect the majority of people will continue to believe in a supreme being.

 

[ThePlayDrive]

Sorry the burden of proof is not on atheists...

This is probably a healthy development as the most religious tend to be the most supportive of radicalism. (or it seems to me).

I don't think he's saying that "burden of proof" is on atheists, I think he's saying that the "burden of [significant] change" is on atheists.

 

[Helvidius]

I don't want to derail this thread, but why should atheists have to disprove something which is held up in fuzzy logic and by nature of the argument impossible to disprove because it has no definition. That's like asking to disprove I just thought about pink elephants. Whether I did or not. No, the burden of proof is on the people with a contention that what they believe exists exists... It's the classic purple dragon under the bed analogy.

Religion, like atheism, is based on faith. If someone chooses to believe in God, it is not based on factual evidence or reason. Just like an atheist's view isn't based on factual evidence. As I was trying to explain in my other posts, atheists do not have to disprove God. However, as long as the idea of an existing God remains there will be people who believe in God for whatever reason.

 

[Helvidius]

I don't think he's saying that "burden of proof" is on atheists, I think he's saying that the "burden of [significant] change" is on atheists.

Thank you for explaining in one sentence what I was unable to sum up in a few posts haha. I had trouble explaining my initial post, but you summed it up nicely!

 

[Paschendale]

Religion, like atheism, is based on faith. If someone chooses to believe in God, it is not based on factual evidence or reason. Just like an atheist's view isn't based on factual evidence. As I was trying to explain in my other posts, atheists do not have to disprove God. However, as long as the idea of an existing God remains there will be people who believe in God for whatever reason.

Some atheists may hold a philosophical belief as to the existence or non-existence of supernatural beings. Many of us, however, look at the evidence and reach a conclusion that mythical creatures have left no measurable footprint anywhere in the world, and so do not exist outside our own imaginations. Please do not mix up these two groups. The latter, by the way, is the much larger group.

Modernism and education tend to conflict with religion. The more people know and understand the world, they realize that a millennia-old worldview just doesn't hold up anymore. The abject hatred, misogyny, exclusivism, blind submission to authority, reliance on supernatural beings, and attack on progress and education that are the cornerstones of all three monotheistic religions just do not mesh with the society that has been building since the Renaissance. All of the Enlightenment principals that were instrumental in founding the USA are in direct conflict with the values espoused by these faiths.

 

[Helvidius]

Some atheists may hold a philosophical belief as to the existence or non-existence of supernatural beings. Many of us, however, look at the evidence and reach a conclusion that mythical creatures have left no measurable footprint anywhere in the world, and so do not exist outside our own imaginations. Please do not mix up these two groups. The latter, by the way, is the much larger group.

Modernism and education tend to conflict with religion. The more people know and understand the world, they realize that a millennia-old worldview just doesn't hold up anymore. The abject hatred, misogyny, exclusivism, blind submission to authority, reliance on supernatural beings, and attack on progress and education that are the cornerstones of all three monotheistic religions just do not mesh with the society that has been building since the Renaissance. All of the Enlightenment principals that were instrumental in founding the USA are in direct conflict with the values espoused by these faiths.

Well, to describe all religions as being based on mythical creatures isn't accurate. And you could make that same argument about people from hundreds of years ago.

 

[Paschendale]

Well, to describe all religions as being based on mythical creatures isn't accurate. And you could make that same argument about people from hundreds of years ago.

Find me one major religion that does not hinge on the presence of supernatural beings, like gods. The most major ones right now are (1) the three western religions, all of which require a god, (2) Hinduism, which requires not only a pantheon of gods but a separate element of living creatures that returns after death, an element that has never been documented by anyone ever (even those who claim to be reincarnated do not remember their past lives), and (3) Buddhism, which also requires this mythical, unobservable soul. These five faiths represent 2/3 to 3/4 of the world population. I don't claim to speak about ALL faiths in the world, only most of them.

As for the second sentence of your quip... I don't really understand what you're trying to say. What argument? That people hundreds of years ago, during the enlightenment, were highly critical of the belief in supernatural, mythical beings... Yes, I will make that argument. It's true. They were. Or do you suggest that the people who invented these beliefs were also acting in a scientific manner, drawing conclusions based on observable evidence. Cuz I'll make that argument, too.

That there was a man in the sky throwing lightning bolts down was a reasonable scientific conclusion to the ancient Greeks. Or that little demons that infected the body were the cause of disease was reasonable to Europeans in the middle ages. They acted on what they knew, just as we do. Fortunately, we know a whole lot more than they do. We have climbed to the top of Mt. Olympus and found it bereft of gods. We have found these little demons that cause disease, and germs are hardly the work of the devil.

We used to believe a whole lot of things. Since then, we have learned. We have discovered more information, and so refined our understanding of the world around us. The things we have observed lead us to conclude that the mythical elves, fairies, vampires, ghosts, deities, spirits, and fish-people we used to attribute bizarre and unexplained phenomena to are not actually there. Keep in mind, NO HUMAN BEING HAS EVER SEEN THESE CREATURES AND DOCUMENTED IT. Do you really think that since the invention of satellites that can read a newspaper from space, no gnome has dared to pop its little head out from the earth and been captured on film? Has every vampire taken to killing rats in order to keep police from hunting them down? Has no one published a paper on the documented effects of prayer on the restoration of health? All of these phenomena were explored by people who wanted to know, once and for all, what was really going on. Not to prove a point. No one doubts a belief and then goes out in search of proof for that doubt. The proof comes first. We have this proof, and to suggest that we ignore it is sheer folly.

 

[ThePlayDrive]

Find me one major religion that does not hinge on the presence of supernatural beings, like gods. The most major ones right now are (1) the three western religions, all of which require a god, (2) Hinduism, which requires not only a pantheon of gods but a separate element of living creatures that returns after death, an element that has never been documented by anyone ever (even those who claim to be reincarnated do not remember their past lives), and (3) Buddhism, which also requires this mythical, unobservable soul. These five faiths represent 2/3 to 3/4 of the world population. I don't claim to speak about ALL faiths in the world, only most of them.

As for the second sentence of your quip... I don't really understand what you're trying to say. What argument? That people hundreds of years ago, during the enlightenment, were highly critical of the belief in supernatural, mythical beings... Yes, I will make that argument. It's true. They were. Or do you suggest that the people who invented these beliefs were also acting in a scientific manner, drawing conclusions based on observable evidence. Cuz I'll make that argument, too.

That there was a man in the sky throwing lightning bolts down was a reasonable scientific conclusion to the ancient Greeks. Or that little demons that infected the body were the cause of disease was reasonable to Europeans in the middle ages. They acted on what they knew, just as we do. Fortunately, we know a whole lot more than they do. We have climbed to the top of Mt. Olympus and found it bereft of gods. We have found these little demons that cause disease, and germs are hardly the work of the devil.

We used to believe a whole lot of things. Since then, we have learned. We have discovered more information, and so refined our understanding of the world around us. The things we have observed lead us to conclude that the mythical elves, fairies, vampires, ghosts, deities, spirits, and fish-people we used to attribute bizarre and unexplained phenomena to are not actually there. Keep in mind, NO HUMAN BEING HAS EVER SEEN THESE CREATURES AND DOCUMENTED IT. Do you really think that since the invention of satellites that can read a newspaper from space, no gnome has dared to pop its little head out from the earth and been captured on film? Has every vampire taken to killing rats in order to keep police from hunting them down? Has no one published a paper on the documented effects of prayer on the restoration of health? All of these phenomena were explored by people who wanted to know, once and for all, what was really going on. Not to prove a point. No one doubts a belief and then goes out in search of proof for that doubt. The proof comes first. We have this proof, and to suggest that we ignore it is sheer folly.

Equating belief in God with belief in elves, fairies and vampires turns the idea that atheism is the smarter or more educated philosophy into an ironic one. It displays a fundamental misunderstanding on the origins and nature of theism and it does nothing for the atheist "movement".

 

[Bigfoot 88]

It is trending in other parts of the world.

5% margins don't concern me too much.

 

[Dogger807]

According to the poll, 92% of Americans believe in some version of God in 2011.
For under-30's, the number is 84%, a modest drop of 8%... and some of those might change their minds later.

Hardly cause to blow the trumpets and proclaim atheism is triumphing... its like a Libertarian getting excited because their candidate won twice as many votes as last time (2% instead of 1%). :roll:

According to Gallup, the percentage was 94% in 1944, later rose to 98% in the 50's and 60s, and declined to 92% in recent decades. Deciding that this is a sure and certain downward 'trend' is premature.

Look at their archived polls. Never before has such a gap between ages existed.

 

[Aunt Spiker]

Gallup recently released a poll showing a definite trend towards lessening religiosity. The one that I specifically wish to address , the one most significant if the sudden drop of belief between those above the age of thirty and those below. It's a refreshing 10 point drop in belief of a god. A baby step, but a step toward the future.

Gallup Poll

I think religion is having a hard time coping with the age of the internet.

PRINCETON, NJ -- More than 9 in 10 Americans still say "yes" when asked the basic question "Do you believe in God?"; this is down only slightly from the 1940s, when Gallup first asked this question.

LOL - what a silly way to state it. 9 out of 10 instead of 10 out of 10. . .

I love my 6% slot, there - I like being on the unique and unusual side of things in life . . per female category.
Per college I'm in the 7% slot.
Per region I'm in the 4%. . . gotta work on that.

 

[SmokeAndMirrors]

There seems to be this persistent false idea that atheism is a belief in anything. While there are a few "strong atheists" out there who say there is no god, they are definitely a minority. Most atheists simply say they lack belief in god, and that in the absence of any evidence as to why they should, entertaining the possibility is pointless - like entertaining the possibility of flying purple donkeys (which also cannot be disproved, and for which there is also no evidence).

There is no burden of proof whatsoever on the majority of atheists.

At any rate, this is good to see. Strong religiosity has a strong correlation with lack of education and social strife. It's no coincidence that pretty much every society that's better off than us is significantly less religious.

Shaping your world view based upon something illogical simply from a claim of authority is not the best recipe for advancing society in a positive way.

 

[Aunt Spiker]

There seems to be this persistent false idea that atheism is a belief in anything. While there are a few "strong atheists" out there who say there is no god, they are definitely a minority. Most atheists simply say they lack belief in god, and that in the absence of any evidence as to why they should, entertaining the possibility is pointless - like entertaining the possibility of flying purple donkeys (which also cannot be disproved, and for which there is also no evidence).

There is no burden of proof whatsoever on the majority of atheists.

At any rate, this is good to see. Strong religiosity has a strong correlation with lack of education and social strife. It's no coincidence that pretty much every society that's better off than us is significantly less religious.

Shaping your world view based upon something illogical simply from a claim of authority is not the best recipe for advancing society in a positive way.

So - athiests don't believe in god.

why make it complicated?

 

[SmokeAndMirrors]

So - athiests don't believe in god.

why make it complicated?

It isn't. It's exactly that.

The reason I explained it is because people (and some in this thread) have a tendency to switch some of the words around, and reframe it as "atheists believe there is no god" in order to shift the burden of proof. Just explaining why that's incorrect, for most atheists.