Yesterday I quoted a long article that suggested that religious people and atheists are more psychologically alike than they admit. The religionists argue that supernatural beliefs are hard-wired into our brains. Evolution, has left us with a tendency make belief in non-material beings come easily. As highly social and tribal animals, for example, we need to keep track of the thoughts and intentions of other people, even when they are not physically present. From there, it is a short step to conceiving of non-physical entities such as spirits, gods and dead ancestors who “know” what we are thinking and influence our lives. Some hardcore atheists also tend to entertain quasi-religious or spiritual ideas such as there being a higher power or that everything happens for a purpose.

Sloan Wilson posits another way atheists behave, as if they are part of a religion: “playing fast-and-loose with scientific facts”. “Atheists say that religion is bad for humanity and deny that it is not an evolutionary adaptation. This, he says, is not true. “This is how atheism becomes an ideology. It is organised to motivate behaviour. Using counterfactual beliefs in order to so leaves little difference between atheism and a religion”.

But the difference is that for atheists there are no rituals, no membership rules, no sacred texts and no proselytising. Psychologist Marjaana Lindeman at the University of Helsinki in Finland adds: “There is no evidence for the argument that all people have an implicit belief in the supernatural.” (Thank you! Ed.). Nor does atheism provide a sense of meaning and purpose, encourage people to do good, or endow you with great enthusiasms, except in the case of a very few individuals. (Based on an article in the New Scientist)

My comment: some people need a religion, others don’t. We are all discrete, unique individuals with scores of views, beliefs and points of view. Social scientists like to make generalisations from the particular, but it seems a pointless exercise. Education should allow us to form our own views, not go along uncritically with the majority. That’s a good thing. Religion can (not inevitably) lead to intolerance and cruelty (the Spanish Inquisition). Ask the Islamists, who use violence, and the American evangelicals, who support the Trump oligarchy in every particular to the detriment of the poor and sick. These are political groups and have nothing to do with the prophet Mohammed or Jesus Christ, whose names are being used by disagreeable tribes to impose their beliefs on others. What you can say is that “good” religion teaches morality and ethical behaviour from an early age, which is sorely needed. This is also one objective of humanistic beliefs like Epicureanism. We need more positive morality and ethical behaviour.

I believe you can be moral and ethical while being indifferent to both religion and atheism (all ‘isms in fact). I was once offered a very large contract provided I put a significant bribe directly into the bank account of the CEO of the customer concerned. The order would have accounted for one quarter of our total annual sales. I refused. It had nothing to do with religion and everything to do with ethics and the slippery slope.

Tomorrow: something funny!