Does Atheism Make You Mean?
Paul Bloom has written a thought-provoking article over on Slate. In “Does Religion Make You Nice?”, he suggests that the American perception of atheism may be a contributing factor to the idea that atheists are immoral people.
Of particular interest to me was a study that was cited.
In one of their own studies, they primed half the participants with a spirituality-themed word jumble (including the words divine and God) and gave the other half the same task with nonspiritual words. Then, they gave all the participants $10 each and told them that they could either keep it or share their cash reward with another (anonymous) subject. Ultimately, the spiritual-jumble group parted with more than twice as much money as the control.
While it is nice that the spiritual group participants parted with more of their money, I do not believe that the gesture is indicative of individual “niceness”. Also, it must be noted that the control group still parted with some amount of money, so perhaps there is a higher level of duty to give ingrained in those with religion.
However, giving does have its benefits.
Since giving to charity makes one happy, Brooks speculates that this could be one reason why atheists are so miserable. In a 2004 study, twice as many religious people say that they are very happy with their lives, while the secular are twice as likely to say that they feel like failures.
So there is evidence to suggest that happiness could be tied to the level of charity practiced, but that does not further the stance that is taken of the immorality of atheists.
Bloom continues with counterpoints.
In his new book, Society Without God, Phil Zuckerman looks at the Danes and the Swedes—probably the most godless people on Earth. They don’t go to church or pray in the privacy of their own homes; they don’t believe in God or heaven or hell. But, by any reasonable standard, they’re nice to one another. They have a famously expansive welfare and health care service. They have a strong commitment to social equality. And—even without belief in a God looming over them—they murder and rape one another significantly less frequently than Americans do.
Denmark and Sweden aren’t exceptions. A 2005 study by Gregory Paul looking at 18 democracies found that the more atheist societies tended to have relatively low murder and suicide rates and relatively low incidence of abortion and teen pregnancy.
Now this is some compelling data. Studies of different societies with varying levels of religious belief indicate that atheist societies tend to do better. I am not arguing that people should eschew their beliefs. That would be a ridiculous and pointless discussion. Rather, it is important to see that there is a high level of religious bias in the United States, a country that prides itself on freedom and multiculturalism.
I should note at this point that I am not an atheist, nor do I wish to discuss my beliefs in this post. I do, however, want to know what you think about this topic, because I think the discussion is a fascinating one. Bloom sums up his point at the end.
The sorry state of American atheists, then, may have nothing to do with their lack of religious belief. It may instead be the result of their outsider status within a highly religious country where many of their fellow citizens, including very vocal ones like Schlessinger, find them immoral and unpatriotic. Religion may not poison everything, but it deserves part of the blame for this one.
Head on over and read the article and let me know what you think.
Be well.
14 Responses to “Does Atheism Make You Mean?”
I once wrote of religion — in my old journal. It was a entry of high controversy. It led to negative discussion — I admire your bravery for posting this.
I like to quote lines from Dogma and say that I like the ideas that are presents with Christianity. And I’ll leave it at that.
Matthew Dryden: Part bravery, part knowing that I’ve got all of about 3 or 4 regular visitors who actually take the time to comment, and you’re one of them. :)
Yes, religion can be controversial, but it is only because it is something that people care about. Hell, a little controversy could spark more comments, so maybe I’ll get lucky and some lurkers will take a moment to weigh in on the subject. If not, no worries. I can turn to politics and sex next.
In his film Religulous, Bill Maher points out that American atheists oftentimes resort to reticence out of fear of negative repercussions from speaking out against organized religion. Matthew’s comment above echoes this pretty poignantly, and I’m not at all surprised to learn that his post on religion resulted in “negative discussion.”
I, for one, think religion is an extremely useful and necessary tool for a large segment of society. However, under NO circumstances do I think religion should interfere with government proceedings. Despite this, America’s history is so influenced by Christianity that John F. Kennedy stands out as our only Catholic president!
One nation under God, because we can get drum up more votes that you can!
Chris Pearson: It is disappointing to me that posts concerning religion do turn negative when discussion reaches critical mass. It’s as though people lack argumentation skills and do not want to listen to other viewpoints. Oh… wait a minute. I forgot this was the Internet. :)
Religion has been a useful tool for centuries now and will continue to be for some time to come. There is a smaller segment of society who do not wish to be bound by the control of an organized or even de-centralized religions. Thanks for stopping by and commenting.
I’m hard-pressed to pick any religion that will label me a sinner that is not worthy of holy communion based solely upon my political standings. I’ve remained separate from organized religion since I was able to choose for myself not to have to attend church.
While maybe I do or don’t believe in a higher power, I certainly don’t believe in allowing man-made rules, regulations and rewrites mandate whether I can feel that I am a good person or not. My religion or lack thereof has no bearing on whether I give, take, love, hate or breathe.
:D That’s all I got to say about dat! :) Thanks 4 hearing me out!
Miragi: Good point about religion not governing whether or not we are “good” people. Therein lies the common crossover between morals and ethics. We need to distinguish the two from one another. Morals are based upon our beliefs and our personal sphere, where ethics are based upon society and the mores in that sphere of influence. Yes, they are related, but they are not the same thing. Something can be ethical and yet not be moral to a person. It’s a slippery slope.
Wow, that was a fascinating discussion. Thanks for that. The statistics that show that more non-religious nations seem to have more evolved societies make some sense — as religions are major force behind hate, wars, persecution, and other societal ills.
I do believe it’s possible to be “enlightened” while still retaining religion, but I think it makes sense that a society that has shed itself of religious legalism can function at a higher plain.
ari
Ari: Thanks for joining the discussion here. Enlightenment is something that some people believe takes years to achieve. I, too, think that is probably the case. However, you make a good point that religious legalism can be a hindrance to the functions of society. Of course, religion is not the only factor in hate and wars, but rather just one more thing that can be marked as “different” about a people. If someone wants a reason to hate, they will find one. Religion just happens to be an easy target.
I would love to find a reason to say that atheism is a contributing factor in a well balanced and civilized society but I just don’t think it is. Sweden is often cited as non-religious but in England most people are considered religious by default because of the state sponsored religion. When the census takes place most people just assume they are supposed to write Church of England but they won’t have considered it, religion is largely a non-issue here.
I think there are far many other more likely factors. America is significantly more right wing than most of Europe and I also think there is a greater sense of entitlement than in much of Europe.
My feeling is that overall religion is a negative force. In my experience that is a popular view in England although as I say I think they majority simple consider it irrelevant.
To directly address the question, in general I don’t see how atheism can be considered a contributing factor in anything as it is simply an absence of one belief, not a statement about the presence of another. However, if the societal norm is to be generous then religion will amplify that and may place a greater obligation on members of society to continue the practice.
How to make a liberal mad in six seconds
God is real Abortion is wrong No gay marriage
Funny, but definitely a generalization. It’s a good idea to weigh all sides of an argument and give some thought to a response before flying off the handle. Sadly, many people just react first and think later.
So religion can indeed amplify the generosity of its members, but one might also point out that religion can also cause close-minded behavior with regards to certain issues.
This is not to say that those who practice a religion are close-minded, rather their morals are based upon their beliefs and those morals will often cross into the realm of ethics which is where more issues can arise.
It may be a stretch to say that atheism contributes to a well-balanced society, because there is not yet enough evidence to back it. We may not care enough to ever find out, either.
As for America, we do indeed have a society that has a gross sense of entitlement. It is one of the causes of a lot of our problems, but I digress. You make a very good point. Thanks for stopping by.
Hi Ian
I’ve been to seminary (Catholic), done my bit of mission work overseas and that kind of stuff.
I believe that we humans tend to see anybody who disagrees with us in fundamental issues as either evil, wrong, stupid, ugly or everything combined into one. Experience shows me otherwise; as soon as you understand somebody else perspective, well it’s not like I’m going to become a Muslim just because I actually know of what I am speaking about, but I can empathyze and understand and maybe even say something of value.
Bingo! You nailed it, Miguel. This quote sums it up perfectly:
“I believe that we humans tend to see anybody who disagrees with us in fundamental issues as either evil, wrong, stupid, ugly or everything combined into one.”
I was lucky when growing up to be able to experience many religions and many different churches, temples, and synagogues. I was able to meet many people and build an understanding of their beliefs. Granted, my understanding of those religions is not as full as someone who has practiced one their entire life, but I think I have a greater empathy thanks to this.
Arguments over religion and belief can be beneficial and valuable and can remain civil if we just pause to think and to understand what the other person is saying to us.
Comments are closed.