Amos

The problem here is that educated non believers are less likely to procreate. It is actually an age-old problem that is not likely to reverse itself.

wildernesse

But they would still have irrational thoughts--I think that's our default. Otherwise, you wouldn't have to teach your child critical thinking skills. I don't think that eliminating theism would create this perfect rational world.


Actually, I was referring more to Secular Future's seeming desire to make people believe how s/he likes, not just that irrational beliefs should be tolerated. He seems to assume that if religion were gone, then secular humanism would be the automatic replacement. Not everyone here who is a non-believer is a secular humanist, so I would guess that it still wouldn't be a world with rational people who behave how he likes.

--tibac

wildernesse

How does my religious belief impede the improvement of your life?

--tibac

Fiach

To my sincere almost depressed outlook, I think you are spot on, Mate. I mentioned that religiosity is associated with higher birth rates. In all fairness lack of education and low IQ are also associated with high birth rates. Atheists/agnostics/sceptics are unquestionably more rational in their thinking outside of the box of religion. In today's world of fragile economics, high cost of raising and educating children through university levels, the "rational" couple have one or two children maximum.

The "trailer trash" couple, sadly, suffer total lack of family planning, or if fundamentalist or catholic, actually strive to have many children for whom they will not have the financial resources or parental quality of nurturing to properly educate or teach thinking skills.

It may be that our evolutionary coping mechanisms were adapted to palaeolithic cultures and that may be where we will be stuck. Or another scenario is that evolution will take two forks. One will be that the low IQ, uneducated, religious lad will likely marry a person from the same socio-economic class, low IQ, little education. They will concentrate their genes in an enlarging population of subclass condemned to menial labour and service jobs. The other fork in the road may be the classical Atheist-Agnostic, with a Ph.D. in biochemistry and/or MD or British MbChb who is in the higher socio-economic class, critical thinker, thinks ahead, who marries most likely and educated woman, often another graduate degree holder, high IQ, critical thinker, who will delay having children for career reasons, then chose to have only one or two at most. Thus a small elite minority of low birth rate, educated, economically secure couples passing their genes on to an increasingly small number of children who go to expensive private schools.

A sci-fi plot would have two human races evolving in opposite directions, a small ruling elite in fortified communities and a large world majority of illiterate, barely verbalising, violent hominids not as smart as Cro-Magnons. I hope this never happens. It would be a sad world. My fear is that it could happen.

Fiach

Rousseau_CHN

Would the earth be better without theism?

of course, it would be! It would mean that early men already knew that the mysteru of the world can be answered simply by science and reason. That they do not need to look for evil and vengeful God for answers.

Renaissance and the Age of Enlightenment would have come at an earlier time.

But the thought of a world not having a religion is absurd.

Dr Rick

You have to teach children irrational thinking as well; no one is born a theist or a communist.



Me neither, but it would be a better, more rational world without theism.

If religion was gone, there would be one less set of irrational beliefs competing with secular humanism.

So was the thought of flight for much of our history. We won't live to see it, but such a world is possible, and I think worth talking about.

Rick

wildernesse

I disagree--I think that irrational/emotional reactions are the default for most humans. IMO.

--tibac

Amos

Hold it there Fiach. You missed the most obvious that atheists may be wrong after all!

I'll leave the poor economics out but I am not sure if education is always the true road to success. For one, it is true that education and fertility seem to work against each other and I think you are correct that that is how mankind "purifies" itself (no pun intended here).

As I see it, the common man does not strive to have more children but they just happen to come (ours did). I think they are less concerned with education and value their family above worldly richess in their pursuit of happiness.

You may also find that your elite society has more fertility problems, homosexuality and female births and that does not make procreation easier.

Amos

Except that the Age of Enlightenment followed the Renaissance after the Reformation killed it.

Rousseau_CHN

matter of opinion, actually. I am more inclined to say that Renaissance led to Reformation and then to Enlightenment. Led, not kill.