The total amount of suffering per year in the natural world is beyond all decent contemplation. During the minute that it takes me to compose this sentence, thousands of animals are being eaten alive, many others are running for their lives, whimpering with fear, others are slowly being devoured from within by rasping parasites, thousands of all kinds are dying of starvation, thirst, and disease. It must be so. If there ever is a time of plenty, this very fact will automatically lead to an increase in the population until the natural state of starvation and misery is restored. In a universe of electrons and selfish genes, blind physical forces and genetic replication, some people are going to get hurt, other people are going to get lucky, and you won't find any rhyme or reason in it, nor any justice. The universe that we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil, no good, nothing but pitiless indifference

We are going to die, and that makes us the lucky ones. Most people are never going to die because they’re never going to be born. The number of people who could be here, in my place, outnumber the sand grains of Sahara. If you think about all the different ways in which our genes could be permuted, you and I are quite grotesquely lucky to be here, the number of events that had to happen in order for you to exist, in order for me to exist. We are privileged to be alive and we should make the most of our time on this world.

Why are those deemed "religious" considered weak and inferior to those proclaimed irreligious and/or atheistic? — Lone Wolf

Without the hope of salvation, which religion provides, life is demonstrably not worth living. — Thorongil

Because of their irrational and dogmatic thinking. — Noblosh

Because of their irrational and dogmatic thinking. — Noblosh

Ooh, brilliant refutation. I'm, like, totally devastated. — Thorongil

Refutation of what? — Noblosh

Refutation of what? — Noblosh

My "irrational" and "dogmatic" thinking. Plus, you assumed that I was religious. — Thorongil

Because of their irrational and dogmatic thinking.

as many brilliant scientists and thinkers are considered religious. — Lone Wolf

I neither claimed it's yours nor that you're religious. — Noblosh

I largely agree. Most atheists are confirmed optimists and believers in progress, so they view any philosophical or religious tradition that stresses the rottenness of life and the imperfection of human nature as backwards thinking, primitive, and so on. As naturalists, they conceive of salvation on purely materialistic terms. Consider what Richard Dawkins says in the River Out of Eden:



The total amount of suffering per year in the natural world is beyond all decent contemplation. During the minute that it takes me to compose this sentence, thousands of animals are being eaten alive, many others are running for their lives, whimpering with fear, others are slowly being devoured from within by rasping parasites, thousands of all kinds are dying of starvation, thirst, and disease. It must be so. If there ever is a time of plenty, this very fact will automatically lead to an increase in the population until the natural state of starvation and misery is restored. In a universe of electrons and selfish genes, blind physical forces and genetic replication, some people are going to get hurt, other people are going to get lucky, and you won't find any rhyme or reason in it, nor any justice. The universe that we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil, no good, nothing but pitiless indifference

But then notice how in a more recent documentary he blinds himself to the logical consequences of these claims and sounds the clarion call of optimism in the last line:



We are going to die, and that makes us the lucky ones. Most people are never going to die because they’re never going to be born. The number of people who could be here, in my place, outnumber the sand grains of Sahara. If you think about all the different ways in which our genes could be permuted, you and I are quite grotesquely lucky to be here, the number of events that had to happen in order for you to exist, in order for me to exist. We are privileged to be alive and we should make the most of our time on this world.

Without the hope of salvation, which religion provides, life is demonstrably not worth living. Your typical atheist, like Dawkins, realizes this on some level, but the fact is clearly too much for him to bear, as shown above. — Thorongil

It is enough to make me question the validity of evolution and his suppositions, among other things — Lone Wolf

What's the point of studying science and philosophy if everything is meaningless and purposeless? We're just going to die, and recede into a state of stupor as time advances. — Lone Wolf

That can be explained through compartmentalization: they could have separated their academic pursuits from their beliefs, basically being disingenuous with themselves for the sake of avoiding cognitive dissonance. — Noblosh

It is enough to make me question the validity of evolution — Lone Wolf

Clearly the brilliance of scientists such a Isaac Newton, Gallileo Gallilei and others was not hindered by belief in a creator. It is said Newton wrote more on theology than in science. Why would it be wrong to ingrain a religious belief into logic? — Lone Wolf

Provided we are all headed to decay and nothingness anyway, it makes no sense to not allow it. — Lone Wolf

Without the hope of salvation, which religion provides, life is demonstrably not worth living — Thorongil

What do Dawkins' statements have to do with the theory of evolution? — Noblosh

Why? Newton tried to scientically extract prophecies from the Bible and ended up wasting his time, Galileo tried to reinterpret the Bible himself based on his scientific observations and ended up in house arrest. So yes, such beliefs hindered them.

I don't know and I don't really care about what nonsense Dawkins utters, science tells us that information isn't lost and that makes death in some sense, an illusion. Sure, organisms may cease to operate but their impact on the world is preserved, whatever that may be.

Frankly, I don't see how you could have missed it... — Lone Wolf

In your opinion Newton wasted his time on that particular project — Lone Wolf

I find it strange that one who seems to be against religion to ignore one of the most prominent atheists of the day. — Lone Wolf

they could have separated their academic pursuits from their beliefs, basically being disingenuous with themselves for the sake of avoiding cognitive dissonance. — Noblosh

He got no results from that particular endeavour thus he wasted his time. — Noblosh

Why are those deemed "religious" considered weak and inferior to those proclaimed irreligious and/or atheistic? — Lone Wolf

Is it truly stronger and superior to declare oneself completely free of dependencies? — Lone Wolf

It is not uncommon for scientific research to run into a dead end. But we do not say that the effort was a waste of time. — WISDOMfromPO-MO

Probably for the same reasons that in contemporary society people who are introverted are considered inferior to those who are extroverted, those who are altruistic are considered inferior to those who are selfish, those who are cooperative are considered inferior to those who are competitive, those with little sense of humor are considered inferior to those with a well-developed sense of humor, etc.

Who is stigmatized, marginalized, ostracized, hated, etc. varies with cultural context. — WISDOMfromPO-MO

There seems to be recent narrative that couples Christian fundamentalism with a wild west flavored libertarianism.

I tend to view certain types of God fearing peoples as brutes with guns who don't believe that government does any good whatsoever. In a situation of being in a lawless society, lacking a tribal association and a gun, I would be the weak one until I joined the atheists group. For sure they'll have guns also. Maybe we'd have to defend ourselves.

Ideally God would be the representative of necessary values that optimize and help life to flourish. God is an abstraction of the ideal king, leader, something like a hierarchy of organizing principles. That changes and should evolve depending upon the cultural context though.

If reason is of a high value to the optimization of life then God should have quite the capacity. — Nils Loc

I guess that depends on your view of life. In the animal kingdom, survival, procreation, and minimization of suffering seem to be the driving factors when it comes to behavior. When you add the human element, I think you could exchange thriving for surviving. So whatever allows you to thrive physically and mentally makes you superior.

Attractive looks and healthy reproductive organs make you superior when it comes to procreation. Intelligence and charisma can be useful in thriving financially. Exercise and proper diet help you thrive physically.

For some, belief in a higher power makes them mentally stronger. Unfortunately, you can't choose to believe or not believe - it's a function of your genetic make-up and your life experiences. I currently don't believe in a higher power or an afterlife. That won't change until I am presented with strong evidence of such, or at least a very convincing argument. — CasKev

Why can't you choose to believe or not believe? — Lone Wolf

I have not seen anything in the study of genetics that forces one to think a certain way or not to. — Lone Wolf

What would you consider to be strong evidence of a creator? — Lone Wolf

What makes the lack of believing in a superior being mentally and physically superior? — Lone Wolf

Why are those deemed "religious" considered weak and inferior to those proclaimed irreligious and/or atheistic? — Lone Wolf

Those from an atheistic view seem to see it as if the religious are largely crybabies who are afraid of water. — Lone Wolf

Most atheists are confirmed optimists and believers in progress, so they view any philosophical or religious tradition that stresses the rottenness of life and the imperfection of human nature as backwards thinking, primitive, and so on. — Thorongil

Without the hope of salvation, which religion provides, life is demonstrably not worth living. Your typical atheist, like Dawkins, seems to realize this on some level, but the fact is clearly too much for him to bear, as shown above. — Thorongil