Freethought & Rationalism Archive

ligesh · 01-24-2006, 09:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DMC

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

Because they are both humans. And we expect human beings to similar, and actually form a continuum of behavioural traits, rather than be radically different. So if we find two types of human beings holding the same external ideas, the first and the simplest guess would be to assume that their internal states are also same. I am not saying that this is always the case, but rather this is the simplest, and thus the first approach that we should employ.

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

DMC · 01-24-2006, 09:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TomboyMom

I think both singletrack and ligesh are concluding too much/too little from the data. On the one hand, it is an interesting fact that, at least in the U.S., protestant Christians are incarcerated at a rate disproportionate to their representation in the population, and atheists are similarly underrepresented. At a bare minimum, it tends to disprove the Christian argument that atheists are less moral than Christians. And singletrack, in trying to say that it is because there are more Christians in the population, appears to be bending over backwards to avoid this reality.
OTOH, we cannot conclude from that that Christianity necessarily causes criminal behavior. It may, and one can imagine reasons why it might (such as the doctrine of forgiveness of sins) but we can't assume that it does without more information. So I think ligesh is going too far as well.
I think that "prison conversion", or outright dishonesty by people who are, after all, convicted criminals, plays some part in the data. However, if I recall correctly, I believe that some of the data avoids this as much as possible, but taking an anonymous survey, and by asking the question on admission to the prison. So this does not appear to be the sole factor.
In addition, the correlations between intelligence, education, and income cannot be discounted. The more intelligent, educated, and higher earning someone is, the less likely to be convicted of a crime. [This may explain to a large extent why Jews are underrepresented in the prison population.] These factors also correlate negatively with adherence to Christianity. This probably accounts for a fair amount of the discrepancy. However, this correlation is not very flattering to Christians. To put it bluntly, there are more Christians in jail because Christians are dumber, and dumb people go to jail more.
Finally, however, the discrepancy is so dramatic, that I don't think it's unreasonable that at least some of it is caused in some way by Christian doctrine, or by theism in general. It is certainly interesting to explore what these factors might be. ligesh, could you please specify exactly what you believe it is about adherence to Christian doctrine that causes more Christians to be convicted of crimes?

I know, first hand, that a good number of "christians" are not practicing christians, whereas just about everyone I have met who claims to be atheist has a firm grasp of the concept and knows and accepts the definition of the word. We are born into religious families, and we are made "christians" through association. Those of us who do not actively seek out the truth are sometimes caught between the two (belief and non belief) and many of us ignore the prospect altogether, until we are faced with a situation where we are forced to choose. In prison, that may well be the situation. Those who are forced to choose in prison, who have not decided which badge to wear, will almost always choose that which causes the least amount of controversy, be it Islam, Christianity, whatever. Atheism is not a popular stance, especially for those who are not aware of the reasoning and logic behind it. I would not conclude that atheists are more law abiding than christians, but I would conclude that atheists, per capita, are more educated and less likely to be coerced than pseudo-christians, or even some devout christians.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I would love to sit here and tell you that I think that atheism, in and of itself, is superior than theism in this respect. It seems sensible that if we realize that we must do our own work rather than depending upon a god, we will get more work done. The same would hold true for an individual developing and implementing one's personal ethic.

However, I have spent lots of time associating both with atheists and with theists, both on a personal level and within organizations, and I must tell you that my observations support Ingersoll's remark: I've been ripped off by devout Christians (both posing as friends and for the sake of the Gospel) and I've been ripped off by atheists (both posing as friends and for the sake of propagating atheism). The Twelve Step program was a living hell -- at the hands of the more devout members -- and the non-theistic alternative programs cannot be said to have been any better in this respect at the hands of leading spokespersons for Humanism (according to my observations).

Key to this, I think, is my observation (above) that most of us get our sense of ethics from our culture, not from any religion, philosophy, or ideology.

Cliff Walker
"Positive Atheism" Magazine

newtype_alpha · 01-24-2006, 09:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 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.

Maybe I'm not making myself clear on this.

In order to "bring them together," you have to first demonstrate some reason WHY they should be brought together. The only meaningful way to do this would be to figure out whether or not most religious fanatics have similar notions of God as most gangsters, robbers, drug dealers, serial rapists, etc. The only way to do that is to find out from both the fanatics and from the ordinary criminals what their notion of God actually is or was at the time they comitted the crime. If you can establish that both were thinking roughly the same thing, THEN you can proceed in demonstrating a link.

Plognark · 01-24-2006, 09:11 AM

Let's tone down the personal sniping too. Disagreement is fine, just don't make personal attacks over it.

ligesh · 01-24-2006, 09:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 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.

-------------
Jihadis believe in God. Jihadis kill for God. Christians believe in God. Christians must also kill for God.
------------

Nope, my argument is like this:

Jihadis believe in God. We expect this to make them moral, but it doesn't. Instead it makes them more confident in carrying out their bloodthirsty acts. So naturally we can expect that a Christian to be also undetered by his belief, when commiting heinous crimes.

We are not talking about people killing 'for' God, but rather how belief in God only acts as something that gives people more courage in carrying out dastardly deeds, and I am extrapolating this from the Jihadi to every believer. It is all a continuuum, with a Jihadi at one end and Buddha at the other end. We all fall in between, and thus the stronger a person's belief in God, the more he will feel confidence carrying out physically risky ventures.

There is no killing 'for' God coming into this.

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

newtype_alpha · 01-24-2006, 09:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TomboyMom

But you're concluding too much from the data too. It doesn't say "fundamentalism or fanaticism," it just says Christian.

I'm not talking about the data per se in this phrase, just in general.

Quote:

Originally Posted by TomboyMom

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.

Indeed. I wouldn't rule it out, of course, but the explanation "belief in God causes more crime" seems like a silver bullet and just isn't realistic. It's entirely possible, but we'd need alot more data to know for sure.

Quote:

Originally Posted by TomboyMom

Just to reiterate, though, I think we can clearly conclude that atheism does not cause crime, in spite of Christian assertions that it does.

Absolutely we can. I'm of the opinion that what any given person thinks about God (or the non-existence thereof) is generally irrelevant to his behavior. It would take something additional, namely what a person thinks about himself in relation to God (or the non-existence thereof) which could be related to that behavior. E.G. a theist who thinks it is God's will to blow up abortion doctors, or an atheist who thinks he can save the world by blowing up priests.

ligesh · 01-24-2006, 09:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by newtype_alpha

Maybe I'm not making myself clear on this.

In order to "bring them together," you have to first demonstrate some reason WHY they should be brought together. The only meaningful way to do this would be to figure out whether or not most religious fanatics have similar notions of God as most gangsters, robbers, drug dealers, serial rapists, etc. The only way to do that is to find out from both the fanatics and from the ordinary criminals what their notion of God actually is or was at the time they comitted the crime. If you can establish that both were thinking roughly the same thing, THEN you can proceed in demonstrating a link.

Because that's the scientific way. To explain varied phenomena using a single theory. Currently we have a strong correlation between belief and criminality, and also we have Jihadis. You propose two distinct explanations for this. Instead, I propose a single explanation, and I have also explained that criminals do not really consider their life to be sinful. In fact, only 4% of the people believe that they are going to hell, even though if you really go by the Bible, 100% of them are going to end up there.

So humans have an innate tendency to treat oneself as being radically different from others, and this is what leads to both criminals and Jihadis to draw their strength from God, and actually I have said that Jihad is actually a crime, if we take the world as a society.

But it is again trivial. The God of both the Jihadi and the criminal are actually same. A petty, jealous, arbitrary God who will do what he pleases. And it is also very clearly explained in Bible that it is not by deeds that you achieve salvation.

Look at it in YET another way. The believers are basically people who do not find the incidents as related in OT to be despicable. They think that God actively helping the Israelites to rape/massacre their neighbors, even though these neighbors haven't done any crime at all, is actually moral. And that is proof that the morality of Believers are actually skewed.

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

nygreenguy · 01-24-2006, 09:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ligesh

We are not talking about people killing 'for' God, but rather how belief in God only acts as something that gives people more courage in carrying out dastardly deeds, and I am extrapolating this from the Jihadi to every believer. It is all a continuuum, with a Jihadi at one end and Buddha at the other end. We all fall in between, and thus the stronger a person's belief in God, the more he will feel confidence carrying out physically risky ventures.

Well, 2 thing. Im a christian, and every time i have been tempted with something, i use my religon to NOT commit an evil act. My religon justifies me beiong moral. Now, i think you take an extremist POV and apply it to all of those in religon. So if we can agree its more likely for an extremist to commit these acts, where is the "faith-o-meter" that measures how "strong a persons belief in god" is as you suggested?

TomboyMom · 01-24-2006, 09:34 AM

O.K., I think I understand you better, ligesh. You're not saying that criminals, like religious terrorists, believe that their actions further their religious beliefs, but that believing in God causes people to be more willing to engage in high-rish behavior, because they think that God takes a special interest in protecting them and so forth. Is that right? If so, you confuse the issue when you bring in Old Testament commandments to commit genocide and stuff, which seems to support the former position better than the latter.

TomboyMom · 01-24-2006, 09:35 AM

One interesting question is why people who say they adhere to a religion which prohibits, for example, stealing, nevertheless steal at a greater rate than people who do not. It does seem odd that people who believe in this moral code violate it at a greater rate than people who do not. Hmmm.

01-24-2006, 09:11 AM	#64
Plognark Contributor Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 14,952	Mod Mode Let's tone down the personal sniping too. Disagreement is fine, just don't make personal attacks over it.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

01-24-2006, 09:34 AM	#69
TomboyMom Contributor Join Date: Jan 2003 Posts: 10,931	O.K., I think I understand you better, ligesh. You're not saying that criminals, like religious terrorists, believe that their actions further their religious beliefs, but that believing in God causes people to be more willing to engage in high-rish behavior, because they think that God takes a special interest in protecting them and so forth. Is that right? If so, you confuse the issue when you bring in Old Testament commandments to commit genocide and stuff, which seems to support the former position better than the latter.

01-24-2006, 09:35 AM	#70
TomboyMom Contributor Join Date: Jan 2003 Posts: 10,931	One interesting question is why people who say they adhere to a religion which prohibits, for example, stealing, nevertheless steal at a greater rate than people who do not. It does seem odd that people who believe in this moral code violate it at a greater rate than people who do not. Hmmm.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.