ligesh

The first no-true-scotsman was committed by singletrack, when she claimed the self-identified believers in prison were atheists when they committed the crime. I pointed this out, but I even explained that no-true-scotsman, though it is a fallacy, is not really a contradiction. Human mind being what it is, it is quite possible that the every person was having a lapse of faith at the time he committed the crime. So I just asked her to back it up with the statistics.

I made the mistake of attempting to counter a no-true-scotsman with another. But later realized the mistake, and explained my position pretty much clearly. But I guess for people like newtype, taking a single line out of context makes more sense, than detailed explanations that come later.




--
:: Ligesh :: http://ligesh.com

TomboyMom

Well, that's one way to explain the data: deny it. However, there is no basis on which to do so. Several different polls and other sources have come up with very similar numbers. Do you have a theory as to why you think the number of atheists is overstated in the polls, and Christians understated?

TomboyMom

Well, yes, religious terrorists do believe that they are engaged in holy work when they commit their atrocities, and such atrocities are not rare either in history or contemporary times. However, I don't think the same can be said of religious criminals. I think they would usually admit that they were "sinning" when they committed their crimes. There are some exceptions, like Andrea Yates or an abortion clinic bomber, but most are plain old burglars who just happen to be Christian, and do not see God as justifying their crimes.

newtype_alpha

A smashing good point. TBM

I think you were onto something in the earlier connection, actually. The same people who are susceptible to obsessive memes like fundamentalism or fanaticism are also more likely to commit acts of violence in the name of that same fanatical ideology. This might explain why atheistic fanatics commit most of the same fallacies of reason and malevolent actions as their religious counterparts. As for mere criminal behavior, there doesn't seem to be anything inherent in theism which would call for criminal behavior (except for, possibly, organized crime) so I think it may be fitting to conclude that more extensive education or stronger mental reasoning skills are far less conducive to both Proestant Christianity and criminal behavior.

One other thing that might have an effect on the statistics: blacks and hispanics are also overrepresented in prison populations. I think between 85 and 90% of blacks are Protestant Christians and around 80% of hispanics are Catholic, so if you weighted prison populations by ethnic background, the representation might be more even.

ligesh

Yes, it is like a person saying that moon rotating around the earth and an apple falling to the ground are two entirely distinct phenomena. What I have done with new hypothesis is the bring both of them together. That a Jihadi and a criminal are both entertaining similar ideas of God, which is what gives them the courage to commit acts which a truly logical person would find irrational and would balk away from.

http://ligesh.com/article.php?q=/phi..._argument.html

You can read the first paper.

DMC

Again, how does this indicate that non-Jihadis are guilty of the same mindset?

newtype_alpha

I think you're misreading me a bit. I believe that DEISTS are understated, not Christians (actually I think Christians might be overstated as well).

There's something to be said for peer pressure, especially in areas like the Bible Belt and parts of Texas. It's not inconcievable that a deist living in Kansas would call himself a Christian and go to church every sunday just to maintain a connection with his community (Niel Armstrong did this for ten years), nor is it inconcievable that a deist living in San Francisco would call himself an atheist to avoid contention in the company of a group dominated by militant atheists. This problem is compounded by the fact that most laypeople don't actually know what a deist is, and even among the ones who do, the tendency to confuse "deist" with "theist" or even "Christian" is rather common (I believe you yourself made a similar mistake just a few minutes ago). Additionally, there are some schools of thought that divide up the religious world in such a way that one is either a Christian or an atheist, and no other possibilities exist; to that end, I have heard people tell me with a straight face "No, no, I believe in God, but I'm not a Christian. I'm an atheist."

ligesh

Yes. This is the gap that I am trying to bridge using my new theory of solipsist mind. A person is not aware of anyone other than himself. To him all the rest of the people are just 'black boxes'. Thus for a person, his God is for HIM alone, and the god is nothing but a supernatural agent that will bend the laws of the world in HIS favor, and God has no other purpose.

Actually it is a common misconception that believers really repent for their crimes or even find that they are really committing crime in the first place. This is called as honor among thieves. Everyone considers what he is doing to be respectful, and creates an internally consistent set of rules by which his act is justified. This is pretty much evidently seen in Mafia movies where no one really thinks that killing innocent people is a crime.

As you know even Hitler thought he was doing God's job, though God wasn't directly involved there. So holding the conceit that there is a supernatural being who will aid HIM and HIM ALONE in his brutal struggle for existence against others is a fundamental trait of every evolved being, and arises due to the solipsist nature of the mind.

http://ligesh.com/article.php?q=/phi..._argument.html

So we have to go back and find out Why and HOw god and religion evolved in the first place.

--
:: Ligesh :: http://ligesh.com

TomboyMom

But you're concluding too much from the data too. It doesn't say "fundamentalism or fanaticism," it just says Christian.
Yes, African-Americans are both more likely to be incarcerated and more likely to be Christian. Again, I'm not sure how much of these correlations are explained by the other 3 independent factors of intelligence, education and earnings. There are probably too many factors and too many relationships to draw a strong conclusion that Christianity causes crime. OTOH, we certainly cannot conclude that it does not.
Just to reiterate, though, I think we can clearly conclude that atheism does not cause crime, in spite of Christian assertions that it does.

nygreenguy

The example you posted is of an extremist view. You are using flawed logic. You essentially say:I dont see how you can possible KNOW what people are thinking when they commit a crime. It sound a bit "unscientific" and TOTALLY uncredible to me.