On The Uncontroversial Subject of Religion...

And, like most people on the earth, atheists don't believe that God chose George W. Bush to lead His Nation through Its Time of Tribulation.

Just wanted to add that, not sure exactly why.

Not sure where they derive their Chinese folk and Buddhism stats from, but they should be aware that Chinese religious believers are very likely underestimated as a result of residual government anti-religious bias. That might affect your monotheistic majority -- it might be more like a monotheistic plurality. And, of course, what with African syncretism, a lot of those Christians may not really be monotheistic, strictly speaking.

Very good point. You could, of course, make the argument that all religions are an imperfect perception of some objective reality...but then just about everybody would reject that.

If Douthat is looking for a more likely explanation for religion, he might consider reading The Atlantic a few months ago. There was an excellent article about how the human brain may, for evolutionary reasons, be hard-wired to perceive religious 'truths'. Not an article the pro-religion people will like, but...Occam's razor and all that.

The trouble, I think, is that one thing just about everyone should be prepared to agree about is that most peoples' religious beliefs are false. As you can see in the handy chart I stole from this site, there's just too much diversity in religious belief.

That's true of, like, every belief system whether religious or secular, depending on what level of specificity you require among those beliefs. That individual people's beliefs don't overlap is just as much proof against religion as it is proof against Rawls.

Most religious beliefs are not particularly adversarial, most involve a complex set of practices that can't be boiled down to a question of whose god is right.

Also, the way he puts it is so broad: "a numinous reality interwoven with our own." Plenty of modern wacky theories of physics would qualify under that rubric. If all you demand is that people agree that all this crazy shit in the universe is structured on a level we don't fully understand, well that's pretty weak stuff.

What you say is true at the formal, doctrinal level. And yet, it is astonishing how much convergence there is in folk belief. Most polytheisms have a dominant god: lots of monotheisms have powerful angels and saints and so on. Most Buddhists believe something a lot more like mainstream Christianity than Westerners are led to believe, and mainstream Christian belief is probably really Pelagian and Arian, rather than orthodox.

it is astonishing how much convergence there is in folk belief

No, it's not. It's no more astonishing than the incredible number of folk cultures that use the pentatonic scale, or the incredible number of cultures that have a myth in which a farm boy living with adoptive parents encounters a mysterious figure who explains to him that he is the true son of the High King and must battle the Dark Lord to save the realm. Does that mean that there really IS a farm boy who is the true son of the High King? No. It means that everybody has some similar built-in ideas about what makes a good story.

It means that everybody has some similar built-in ideas about what makes a good story

And you don't find that astonishing?

It turns out that despite rumors to the contrary, God is actually a libertarian who is concerned that America has not yet embraced the flat tax. He is also eager to see gay marriage in all fifty states.

I read it at andrewsullivan.com it must be true.

I think the Mahdi is the one who's going to come, and the Hidden Imam is around all the time, though he is only seen by Shi'ites and they only realize it afterwards.

At least that's what I heard in my brief moments of wakefulness during my last Religion 201 lecture on Sacred Beings in Islam.

What's the difference between atheist and non-relgious? Atheism is now considered a religion?

Pithlord, how the hell is Buddhism like mainstream Christianity?

What's the difference between atheist and non-relgious? Atheism is now considered a religion?

No. Atheists believe there's no God. The non-religious just don't care.

Unless the Chinese government is counting people who should be counted as being Chinese folk religionists as Jews, Christians, or Muslims, or simply dropping them out of the survey altogether then Matt's monotheistic majority (no alliteration intended) remains intact.

I suppose one might try to save the ad populum argument for religion by saying that all of the religions are right, and are only wrong to the extent that they claim others are wrong: i.e., Jesus really [i]is[/i] the messiah, Boddhisattvas really [i]do[/i] stick around on Earth trying to help others attain enlightenment, Mohammed really [i]is[/i] God's prophet, etc. Reconciling all of this would be tricky, but many religions are already thoroughly internally contradictory anyway, so it might not be that much harder than following a single religion. I'm not a close scholar of these things, but sometimes I get the impression that Bahá'í is an attempt to sorta combine all religions and claim that they're all right.

No. Atheism is the lack of belief in the proposition 'God exists', which is compatible with the belief in the proposition 'God does not exist', but does not entail it, since not having a belief doesn't entail having one. You can be an atheist without ever once having considered the concept 'God'.

Matt, you're getting a lot of mileage out of the polysemy of the word "belief." If you make even a crude distinction between belief as the conviction that the holy has some extra-mental reality and belief as the set of contingent historical doctrines that various people have claimed to derive from that conviction, your diversity objection no longer works against the first kind of belief, which I think is what Douthat is talking about here.

dj moonbat,

No.
Atheists don't believe anything, per se. They are pursuaded by the preponderance of evidence that assertions of the existance of the supernatural are the product of human fantacy.

Ogged,

So you're saying that "that the holy has some extra-mental reality" is not a contingent historical doctrine?

Atheists don't believe anything, per se...

I wasn't being even a little bit serious.

Well, every belief is contingent and historical, but surely we can see the difference between the vague belief that there's something "real" about the holy, which I think is what most people mean when they say they're religious, and which seems to be a position that just about every known culture has endorsed to some degree, and the very specific doctrines ("No meat on Friday" "God is one, and also three") that specific religions have espoused.

I'm kind of surprised at the seeming obtuseness of this. Framing it as religion vs. non-religion is not rhetorical overreach, it's about as accurate as a broad description as one can get. All religions hold the conviction that there is (again broadly speaking) something beyond this life that we should be concerned with in this life. They vary on what this is and thus what we should be doing about it, but this is miles apart from the atheists who affirm that there is no such thing to be concerned about.

I'm a Christian theologian. I taught a course with a Buddhist Lama. We disagree on some pretty major issues, but I would never say his beliefs as a whole are false, nor would he of mine. But we would both say that we agree with each other, and disagree with a self-defined "atheist", on something pretty fundamental (even though the Lama thinks my "God" doesn't exist).

Oh, and that last paragraph is very weak indeed. You say atheists are "in the majority" on many religious questions, and then go on to cite as your examples three things that atheists reject. Woohoo. Every single person in the world is in the majority if we're only counting rejected beliefs. We are all differentiated by what we're for, which puts you back to square one (and makes atheism a very odd self-nomination).

"All religions hold the conviction that there is (again broadly speaking) something beyond this life that we should be concerned with in this life."

Or a dimension OF this life that we should be concerned with but ordinarily aren't aware of--a conviction not limited to members of religions per se.

This conviction, moreover, is often based not on reason or emotion or wish-fulfillment or faith but on direct personal experience of the numinous. Which, along with $2.50, will get you a container of coffee at Starbuck's. This sort of truth is *subjective*.

Unfortunately, Western culture tends to equate subjective with imaginary, not "real."

Douthat's phrasing obscures this point; he refers to "a response to something that's actually out there." But it may not be *out there*, it may be *in here*--which, perhaps, makes it even more surprising that so many people have such similar experiences. Is it possible there is something "in here," in all of us--whether we're aware of it or not--something we hold in common, that is in some sense "real"?

Matt, you are altogether too kind to Ross, I think.

The problem with what he's saying isn't that judging the truth of religion by world public opinion is ambiguous. It's not really even that using democracy to validate religious belief is silly on its surface. Rather, it's that any belief that there is supernatural intervention in the affairs of the world is at odds with the received scientific view (which nobody doubts in their daily life) of the world as, everywhere and always, governed by physical law. It might seem "puzzling" that someone as smart as Ross is "puzzled" by the beliefs of people who understand that, but really it's not: Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, on down the line, the world is full of people who select their most deeply held beliefs the way the rest of us choose comfort food.

You should be reading Cosmic Variance.

Unlike Marcel, I really like your formulation of how atheists are in the majority on most issues at the end. Marcel's assertion that only "positive" beliefs matter (if there's even a distinction) doesn't make any sense. Every single person in the world is in the majority if we're only counting rejected beliefs? Rejecting gravity doesn't put you in the majority. Rejecting the hidden imam, reincarnation, etc does.

"tries to run" an argument?

you sound like a policy debater.

woo.

A theologian:

All religions hold the conviction that there is (again broadly speaking) something beyond this life that we should be concerned with in this life. They vary on what this is and thus what we should be doing about it, but this is miles apart from the atheists who affirm that there is no such thing to be concerned about.

This is absolutely false. It may surprise a theologian, but "atheists" are no more uniform then "theists", but most of atheists/agnostics I know believe in values that transcend their individual welfare: well-being of family, society, humanity, environment.

Many theist who are otherwise perfectly nice seem to suggests, with varying degrees of openness that if some atheists/agnostics follow any kind of rules except their own good that is because they somehow did not notice that they do not have to. "God does not exist, everything is permitted!" My definition is "atheist" is "an agnostic sufficiently peeved by the theists to be affirmative about his lack of belief".

About the issue raised by Matt: go back 200 years. Most of the people are illiterate, and it was ever so, so that the motion that writing and reading is bad carries. One can continue in that vein. In almost all primitive culture there is connection between "experience of the numinous" and the ingestion of halucinogenic materials -- not exactly a proof of veracity of those experiences.

Even here, though, the folk practices of many Catholics (and unless I'm mistaken, Orthodox Christians and Shiite Muslims as well) has strong polytheistic elements.

You won't find many Christians or Muslims who will accept this characterization of their beliefs.

Your approach to the subject is conveniently inconsistent: one moment you're treating religions as contradictory sets of propositions, the better to debunk them; the next, you disregard their explicit theologies in favor of a genealogical account.

Is it possible there is something "in here," in all of us--whether we're aware of it or not--something we hold in common, that is in some sense "real"?

It's not only possible, it's self-evident. We are all human beings, with very similarly ordered minds. So we share a lot of built-in attitudes, practices, and aptitudes. And we're highly communicative animals, so we are adept at empathy, and have rich moral imaginations which aid us both intellectually and emotionally to build relationships and complex societies. All of this is "real".

What is not real is that dude with the long beard up in the sky who some people think sends messages to them, or has sent them to others who pass them along in a game of Holy Telephone.

More important to this thread is Matthew's point: Vodun priestesses believe that they transform themselves into bats, fly out at night and suck the souls out of their enemies. I share with Pope Benedict the belief that they do no such thing. Wherefore the claim that nevertheless, the Pope and the Vodun priestesses are "believers", while I am a "non-believer"? In what do the Pope and the Vodun priestesses share a belief?

Well, I guess they arguably share a belief in a personalistic universe, guided by unseen beings with intentionality. But if that's the argument, it would be nice if adherents of the believer/nonbeliever classification would phrase it clearly as a belief in a personalistic or intentional universe, rather than constantly referring to "something outside ourselves". I believe in something outside myself; I believe in lots outside myself. Just not the moral ghosties.

I think the atheists are not solely responsible for the 'religious vs. nonreligious' framing. I've seen opinion polls that strongly suggest that members of any religion are more comfortable with members of other religions than they are with members of no religion.

You won't find many Christians or Muslims who will accept this characterization of their beliefs.

Well, duh.

I do have problems with Matthew's last graf, because there's a fairly clear category distinction between those who have theological objections and those who step outside the domain of theology entirely to object.

If you accept ad populum for theism, aren't you at least to some extent drawn into the further argument that whoever has the most believers has first call on what the nature of that theism might be?

[Tangentially, I've long been fascinated with micro-religions. Too many of them are currently under threat in Iraq: the Yazidis and Mandaeans and even the Zoroastrians. You'll find pockets of Christian denominations across the Levant that were declared schismatic before the Catholic-Orthodox split. There are four Shakers left in the world. If you choose to become a Shaker -- it's different from the other micro-faiths in that you have to convert -- what's your motivation?]

Anyway, Daniel Dennett takes a good look at the ad populum thing.

I'm a bit rusty on my Maslow, but I believe that he and many folks would argue that the "religious experience" is universal, and that the various religions are cultural interpretations of a fundamental human reality. Someone in a Buddhist culture is predisposed to interpret a "religious experience" in Buddhist terms, a Muslim in Islamic terms, etc.

Of course there is no way you could prove that, as far as I can tell, beyond comparing the various discriptions of mystical experiences from various traditions - which is pretty thin.

I don't think that you can infer the "truth" of anything due to the fact that it is widely believed. But you can infer that it is fairly fundamental to human experience. I don't know what would "prove" that love is real, but it seems real to me in that a whole lot of people are in it at various points in time.

I think that it is safe to assume that there is a human tendency to create hierarchical social organizations in large populations. The fact that the governments of the world are not of a uniform type - socialist here, parlimentarian there, would not disprove this at all.

Douthat doesn't argue for the truth of any specific religious docterines as best I can tell. Rather, he argues for the reality of the "numenous". Why would the varieties of ways in which people approach the numenous disprove its existance?

from "Soliloquy of the Spanish Cloister"
by Robert Browning

There's a great text in Galatians,
Once you trip on it, entails
Twenty-nine distinct damnations,
One sure, if another fails;
If I trip him just a-dying,
Sure of heaven as sure can be,
Spin him round and send him flying
Off to hell, a Manichee?

Re: Rather, it's that any belief that there is supernatural intervention in the affairs of the world is at odds with the received scientific view (which nobody doubts in their daily life) of the world as, everywhere and always, governed by physical law.

Except that this is no longer the scientific view. Post quantum mechanics all we can really say about the so-called "laws" of nature is that they are statistical generalities that hold up most of the time while masking a great deal of anarchy below the surface of the reality we function in. In short, anomalous events are allowed, perhaps even encouraged by nature. Whether that implies a "supernatural" or not is very much open to question of course. But just as religious people complain that the modern world has reduced the Ten Commandments to the Ten Suggestions, so too the Laws of Nature have been reduced to the Probabilities of Nature.

In almost all primitive culture there is connection between "experience of the numinous" and the ingestion of halucinogenic materials -- not exactly a proof of veracity of those experiences.

To the extent this is the case, it's irrelevant, given the frequency of experience of the numinous without the aid of hallucinogens in cultures that are not "primitive."

Also, where experience of the numinous is concerned, it's not at all clear what "proof of veracity" would mean. Many such experiences are reported to be ineffable.

...It would be nice if adherents of the believer/nonbeliever classification would phrase it clearly as a belief in a personalistic or intentional universe, rather than constantly referring to "something outside ourselves". I believe in something outside myself; I believe in lots outside myself. Just not the moral ghosties.

Since you quoted me, I'll point out that I explicitly referred to something *inside* ourselves, not "outside," and suggested that experience of the numinous was purely subjective, i.e., with no external referent; but that we all share that *internal* referent in common. How that translates into specific beliefs is an entirely different question from the issue of whether that internal referent is in some sense real.

And "the numinous," by the way, is not a matter of "built-in attitudes, practices, and aptitudes" or "rich moral imaginations" or whatever aids us "to build relationships and complex societies" (although experience of the numinous may play an indirect role here).

Nor is it the "dude with the long beard up in the sky," nor sucking the souls out of one's enemies, nor even "a personalistic universe, guided by unseen beings with intentionality."

In other words, at least with regard to my post--and I think Douthat's piece as well--you're beating up (inadvertently, I suspect) a straw man.

I'm a Christian theologian. I taught a course with a Buddhist Lama. We disagree on some pretty major issues, but I would never say his beliefs as a whole are false, nor would he of mine. But we would both say that we agree with each other, and disagree with a self-defined "atheist", on something pretty fundamental (even though the Lama thinks my "God" doesn't exist).

For my part, I can look at Buddhism and say "maybe", I can look at atheism and say "maybe". But when I look at Christianity or any doctrine based on supernatural, human-like intelligent agents, I say "definitely not". Presumably the same reaction most Christians would have when looking at, say, Norse mythology. Sam Harris's book I guess also had some affinity with Buddhism and mysticism.

The suggestion that Buddhism and Christian are closer to each than to atheism is puzzling to me--other than similar moral systems (which many atheists also share) I don't really see any resemblance between them at all. Indeed, on the issue of animal rights, I suspect atheists and Buddhists are way closer to each other than to Christians.

Matt: as I read Douthat, he's not arguing that most people believe X, so X must be true. He's making the quite different point that many people have an experience that purports to be of Y, and it is worth taking seriously the possibility that they are, in fact, having an experience of Y.

The argument comes from Chesterton (The Everlasting Man) via CS Lewis (The Problem of Pain.) From the latter, after Lewis has defined 'awe' (as he uses it in this part of the book) as what we feel in the face of the Numinous, argued that it is widespread, and that it is not derivable from some statement of the facts as we see them:

"There seem, in fact, to be only two views we can hold about awe. Either it is a mere twist in the human mind, corresponding to nothing objective and serving no biological function, yet showing no tendency to disappear from that mind at its fullest development in poet, philosopher, or saint: or else it is a direct experience of the really supernatural, to which the name 'Revelation' might properly be given." (pp. 20-21.)

I would guess that the reference to Buddhism that looks a lot like Christianity refers to the Pure Land sects which are widely followed in Japan. They teach that for many achieving enlightenment in this sphere is too difficult. The Amida Buddha, a celestial buddhisatva, not God in the Western sense, but a powerful, if impermanent being, has created the Pure Land, a realm that believers can be reborn into, where the achievment of enlightenment is guarenteed. Since many Buddhist lay people practice, not to acheive enlightenment in this life time, but for a better rebirth, the idea of the Pure Land is not really out of the Buddhist mainstream. IMO, the resemblance to Christianity is superficial.

And "the numinous," by the way, is not a matter of "built-in attitudes, practices, and aptitudes"

How do you know, Swift? Nobody disputes that humans have the capacity to have religious experiences. Many dispute that these are anything but internal experiences. In fact, you are apparently agreeing that perhaps these ARE internal experiences. Okay, fine then. That sounds like a built-in aptitude to me, and there seems no reason to believe that it is anything but a dose of epinephrin and some neurons firing.

"There seem, in fact, to be only two views we can hold about awe. Either it is a mere twist in the human mind,

Sounds about right to me, Hilzoy. Thanks for the excellent quote.

corresponding to nothing objective and serving no biological function,

Now, here he becomes tendentious. How does he know it "serves no biological function"? We don't understand what might be the uses of beauty, or the uses of awe, from an evolutionary perspective. And what does "corresponding to nothing objective" mean? If I fall in love with a girl, is my love false unless she can be objectively verified to be beautiful? If I shiver in awe at the cosmos and the mystery of consciousness, is my shiver false unless there is an ethereal substance of the soul for it to be awed at? Awe is an objective reality. Hell, I shiver in awe at the Crucifixion, and I don't even believe in it! I find it a magnificent myth. Is the awe of someone who does believe in it better than mine, because he thinks it was a historical event, whereas I think it is simply one of the greatest fictions invented by man?

Matt, you seem to be running together the argument from common consent with the argument from religious experience. Douthat, it seems to me, is presenting a version of the latter, not the former.

Most atheists and agnostics who have addressed the argument from religious experience in a serious way do not simply "resist any consideration of the notion that religious experience might be an experience of something out there" - as Douthat would have it. Rather they examine the varied reports from various parts of the world of the kinds of experiences that might be classified as religious experiences, consider the theistic explanation of those experiences, and then reject that explanation as insufficiently supported by the phenomena.

One consideration that has seemed especially relevant to religious skeptics is that, while reports of experiences that appear to their subjects to involve some sort of liberating contact with an aspect of reality that transcends everyday human experience are fairly common, reports that the reality in question is something that possesses will, intelligence, power and other traditional attributes of God are not at all universal, and seem to show some causal dependence on the cultural background of the experience.

Nor is a universal characteristic of religious experiece that the experience presents itself as having an object, and an object that has Otto's "numinous" character of being "wholly other".

If you think of religion as a set of practices and attitudes, rather than a set of beliefs, a lot of it makes much more sense. Religion that purports to factualness is fundamentalism, but there are other kinds.

Consumatopia,

Not all Christians would accept your assumption that it depends on the existence of supernatural beings with intentionality. On the other hand, clearly the vast majority of Buddhists (and maybe even atheists) believe in such beings.

Not wanting to participate in the hijacking of the thread, but it's pretty straightforward, really.

I don't have a religion; I'm an atheist. The only difference between "atheist" and "non-religious" is that when you ask people around the world "what is your religion?", 12.7% of them say "I don't have a religion", and 2.5% of them say "I'm an atheist."

It makes no sense for a person who understands those two statements not to combine them into a single demographic. But the people who made the graph didn't understand that they're equivalent statements. Which is perfectly understandable, given that several commenters on this thread don't either.

It's a useful graph, but people really should note it's flawed. The nonreligious comprise 14.2% of the population, and form the third largest, not fourth largest, demographic bloc in the world.

From piotr: It may surprise a theologian, but "atheists" are no more uniform then "theists", but most of atheists/agnostics I know believe in values that transcend their individual welfare: well-being of family, society, humanity, environment.

This doesn't surprise me at all. It illustrates my point, which is that atheism is not a meaningful category, but a catch-all term for those who reject any religious label. Some atheists are secular humanists, others are tribalists, etc. But to say that my belief is that I don't believe in God is not to say what my beliefs actually are. Grouping the humanists, eco-ists, tribalists under a single label based on what they don't believe is sort of useless, isn't it?

As I understand it, an atheist isn't someone who fails to have a belief in the existence of God (which would be an agnostic), but someone who has a belief in the non-existence of God.

One thing I wonder about is whether the "God" in which the atheist disbelieves is the same as the "God" in which the theist believes. I don't think of myself as an atheist, but I don't believe in what Dawkins or Dennett assert theists believe in.

"Built-in aptitudes," as you described them earlier, were those "which aid us both intellectually and emotionally to build relationships and complex societies." I took that to mean aptitudes that are directed toward accomplishing things in the external world. If you want to redefine "aptitudes" to include the ability to have a purely internal experience of the numinous that is not externally directed, fine, but then you have to reformulate your argument.

And lots of people with no belief in some sort of deity have this...experience in a variety of contexts (and some, apparently, never do); when I was young I felt it during Mass, and now I'm more likely to get it as a result of my interaction with a performance, either as an audience member or as the performer. It's also my understanding that this same response can be induced by electrically stimulating the proper portion of the brain; PZ Myers (who I don't think has ever said anything insightful about religion on his blog, but I keep reading him for other reasons) had a post on this a few months back. So it appears that this religious-experience-response is the byproduct of some biochemical reaction in our brains. In my opinion, the fact that it can be explained scientifically doesn't weigh against the possibility that God exists, and if we weren't able to explain it it wouldn't weigh against the possiblity that God doesn't. People interpret this experience in a myriad of ways, and tend to put them in the framework provided them by their prior knowledge and the setup of their culture - when I was a young and religious kid, these experiences were clearly the result of a connection with the Divine, and now that I'm an agnostic adult, they're...not. The fact that lots of people agree on something isn't a reason to think it's true; most people get the Monty Hall puzzle wrong, and surely the existence of some divine power is trickier than a math puzzle dervied from a game show.

One thing I wonder about is whether the "God" in which the atheist disbelieves is the same as the "God" in which the theist believes. I don't think of myself as an atheist, but I don't believe in what Dawkins or Dennett assert theists believe in.

There's a joke about a self-declared atheist that ends something like "...yes, but the God I don't believe in is a just and loving God!"

I call myself an agnostic Deist, myself: "I don't know if there's a God or not, but if so, he probably doesn't have a long white beard nor concern himself unduly with how often I pray to him or what I do in the bedroom." Sounds like that might be compatible with your position.

As I understand it, an atheist isn't someone who fails to have a belief in the existence of God (which would be an agnostic), but someone who has a belief in the non-existence of God.

I think you use "belief" in a misleading way, and thereby draw a distinction that doesn't exist. Joe put it nicely above:

"Atheists don't believe anything, per se. They are pursuaded by the preponderance of evidence that assertions of the existance of the supernatural are the product of human fantasy."

It's no more correct to speak of atheists "believing" in the absence of a god than it is to speak of any of us "believing" in gravity ... while it's not wrong per se, it is wrong if it implies the element of faith that most religious believers will tell you they need to overcome the absence of physical evidence.

...When I was a young and religious kid, these experiences were clearly the result of a connection with the Divine, and now that I'm an agnostic adult, they're...not. The fact that lots of people agree on something isn't a reason to think it's true; most people get the Monty Hall puzzle wrong, and surely the existence of some divine power is trickier than a math puzzle dervied from a game show.

I wonder if part of the trickiness is that our ideas of what "the numinous" may or may not be are too specific, too limited, too objectified, and too freighted with associations. It's easier to decide whether one does or does not believe in the existence of X, but what if X is a straw man?

I believe in the reality of the nouminous myself, but Douthat has a terrible argument going. Color-blindness is real and fairly widespread, and limited perception of the EM spectrum is universal. Calamities like athritis and lower back pain are very common, too. I've never understood why anyone thinks "it's natural" is a sufficient argument for anything. Individually and collectively, we constantly pass judgment on features of nature and try to stomp them out, and a priori we can't just assert that Dawkins and PZ Myers are wrong to regard the religious impulse itself as something as dangerous to us as the plague.

And it seems like folks should realize that before hanging out "it's natural" as an argument in favor.

you're all jumping back and forth between different things. the common tendencies toward the same characteristics being the properties of supernatural agents is probably what ross is alluding to suggest those agents might be real. the specific theologies of different religions are concepts overlain atop the foundation. in the books Religion Explained explained by pascal boyer and In Gods We Trust by scott atran there is a cognitive anthropological account which shows just how people seem to converge upon these same characteristics, and how they tend to be the 'true belief' across cultures no matter what is reflectively professed. re: pithlord on buddhism & christian, see Theological Incorrectness by d. jason slone, who studies therevada practice in sri lanka and showed just how similar religious belief amongst the laity was to their muslim, christian and hindu neigbhors, despite the arguments by elite bhikkus that they espoused a rational non-theistic creed. i have a post where i outline the most current up to date scientific analysis of religion as a natural phenomenon.

p.s. i'm an atheist, don't pull the "are you saying religion is true if it's natural" crap on me.

the common tendencies toward the same characteristics being the properties of supernatural agents is probably what ross is alluding to suggest those agents might be real.

I don't have the sense that this was his point, or even one of his points, actually. He didn't refer to agents or agency. He wrote of a "numinous reality interwoven with our own" and "authentic, William James-style religious experience" and "encounters with something outside the usual run of sensory experience," but he didn't get any more specific than that.

Experience of the numinous does not seem to involve the concept of agency (or any concept at all, for that matter). The idea of agency may be imposed on the experience after the fact--as with the glossolalia practitioners--but it isn't a feature of the experience in and of itself.

Well, I personally believe that God/HigherPower/Spirit/TheAbsolute whatever you want to call it exists because of personal/mystical/transcendant experiences I've had. I suppose these experiences could just be neurons misfiring...but if so these misfiring neurons have certainly changed my life for the better, making me a more open and loving person living life more fully and completely.

But while I believe that the universe has far more going on than simple materialism implies, I'm no longer at all "religious" in any classic sense and am certainly a heretic by Christian standards theologically.

I also believe that what you think about God is more a reflection of what you, yourself are...if you think God is a nasty old man sitting on a thrown condemning people to eternal suffering for temporal transgressions...well, that tells you a lot more about yourself than it does about God in my view.

Your mileage may vary of course.

Marcel:

But to say that my belief is that I don't believe in God is not to say what my beliefs actually are.

Except that you don't believe that we die. Not completely and utterly like a crushed ant. Correct?

"There seem, in fact, to be only two views we can hold about awe. Either it is a mere twist in the human mind, corresponding to nothing objective and serving no biological function..."

The part in bold seems to be a superfluous and unsupported assertion.

I'm sorry, but why can't writing about religious belief v. unbelief rise above the terms we all hashed out at 2 a.m. in the college dorm, all those years ago. If we were physicists, it would be as if we had been continually discovering, forgetting, and rediscovering Newtonian gravity for the past 300 years.

Güzel Sözler
porno
sex
pornotube
sextube
89
mobilya
sohbet
sohbet
sohbet
Site ekle
Site Ekle
arkadaş
porno
Mirc
turkce mirc
Sohbet
Sohbet
amerikan KAPI
tosya ahsap
sex
ahsap KAPI
thank you grup.

very Good Site Thanks You

www.r10.net küresel ısınmaya hayır seo yarışması
www.r10.net küresel ısınmaya hayır seo yarışması
www.r10.net küresel ısınmaya hayır seo yarışması
Sağır Oda
dizi izle
www.r10.net küresel ısınmaya hayır seo yarışması
dizi izle
resim galerisi
haber
forum
küresel ısınma
küresel ısınma
küresel ısınma
r10 seo yarışması
r10 seo yarışması
r10 seo yarışması

Thanks

mirc
mirç
mırc
mırç
mircturk
turkmirc
mirc indir
mirc yukle
mirch
mırch
mirc turk
turk mirc
mırcturk
turkmırc
mırc turk
turk mırc
turkiyemirc
türkiyemirc
turkiye mirc
türkiye mirc
mircturkiye
mirctürkiye
mirc turkiye
mircturk
turkmırc
muhabbet
forum
forum
turkforum
turkiyeforum
mirc
turkmirc
toplist
site ekle
pagerank
turkmirc
turkforum
sohbet
chat
sohbet odaları
bedava sohbet
bedava chat
türk
karar

thanks ;)

thanks ;)

thanks ;)

thank you

Thanks

harbiarkadas.com
harbiarkadas.net
harbiarkadas.org
itirafet.org
ebedava.net
elektronikmarket.net
ameribress.com
clitoriacream.net
superspenisbuyutucu.com
megabress.com
rednightperformans.com
performansartirici.com
penisplus.tv
penispluspenisbuyutucu.com
penispluspenisbuyutucu.net
cinselmerkez.com
aseks.net
erotikcamasirlar.com
vajinatr.com
bakirevajina.com
cinselkozmetik.com
kozmetikmedikel.com
eturknet.com
tecavuz.net
yutuvideo.com
ponotubesex.com
laraperuk.com
sackanagimerkezi.com
peruksa.com
perukmarket.com
aseks.com
aloveshop.com
erotikgiyim.com
geciktiricispreyler.com
geciktiricihap.com
geciktiriciler.com
azdirici.com
bayanuyarici.com
fntazialemi.com
fantaziservisi.om
cinselmazemeler.com
cinselfantaziurunleri.com
erotikdakikalar.com
erotikmarketiniz.com
seksmarketiniz.com
sekshatlari.com
erotikdergiler.com
erotikderginiz.com
penisbuyutucuviprx.com
penisbuyutucuvigrx.com
penisbuyutuculer.com
vigrxpenisbuyutucu.com
sismebebekler.com
sismebebekshop.com
yemekeviniz.com
sanalmarketiniz.com
elektronikmarket.net
ebedava.net
kontortr.com
elaydin23.com
turkcellkontorcu.com
aveakontoral.com
vodafonekontoral.com
toptankontorcu.com
cinselkozmetik.com
bayanpartnerler.com
erkekpartnerler.com
kizarkadaslar.com
yonjaarkadas.com
siberalem-siberalem.com
sexpartnerler.com
sekspartnerler.com
erotikpartnerler.com
gencyuz.com
erkekarkadaslar.com
bayanarkadaslar.com
yemekeviniz.com
sanalmarketiniz.com
baskahaber.com
medikalkozmetik.net
kozmetikmedikal.com
zayiflamavediyet.net
zayiflamahapii.com
zayiflamabandii.com
kilovertr.com
zayiflamatr.net
diyettr.com
toksinbandi.net
botoxtr.com
botokstr.com
selulittedavii.com
selulitgiderici.net
selulitkremii.com
catlaktedavisii.com
catlakgiderici.net
catlakkremii.com

Thanks Best Regards
mirc
mırc
mırç
mircturk
mirctürk
turkmirc
mirc indir
mırc indir
mirç indir
mirc yükle
mırc yükle
mirc yukle
mırc yukle
mirch
mırch
mirc turk
turk mirc
mırc turk
mircada
mircturkiye
muhabbet
mirc sohbet
mırc sohbet
mirc chat
mırc chat
mırc ındır
mirc ındır
türkçe mirc
turkce mirc
turkçe mırc
turkce mırc
oper mirc

thanks for all

sevişen insanlar video 31 çeken adam videosu kadın öğretmen sınıfta \"fil penisi\" annesiyle sevişen kız ful dvd pornoflim 12 yas fil jigalo sarışın fahişelerde se nefis KIZ SİKİŞİ yapay sik sokan lezbiy seks porno fotorafları siyah kız orosbu noları hoyratca sikişenler sex 39 bedava videaler dul mature porno penis veam büyük kalçalar sex yapış vidyoları www.filimcanada.com 50cm yarak videoları lezbiyen aşkım adultxvideo school teen videoları yaşlı karı erotik izle rapid adul yeşilçam sex yapanlar amcıklarını traş eden göğüs elleme roman kızı sikiş vivid grup sex sexi karı fotografları teacher kendini okşayan kızlar lezbiyen lezbiyen show yasli kadinlarin sex v japon kızları sikiş vi erotik zevk tat vidola sikişen üniversiteli asyalısex karısının isteği üzere erotik japon video 3d porno fılm olgun kadın kendini kü alyssa milano erotik f erotik çorap porno http://www.adultkurt.c ellerini sokan pornola seks.porno öğrenci kız iki erkek youtube popo sikiş traşlı am sikişi annesinisikiyor sikişme suyu sıcak lezbiyen po sıcak sikş kırmızılı kadın sik erotik videolar lezb YAŞLI KADININ BÜYÜK PE tuvalettesikiş yeni sikis video+18 sikişen kadın ve erkek ovguide adult tube.com suluamcuk turbalılıporno çocuk sevişiyor erotik gizli sevişmeler vidyo ateşli şişman kadın kürt olgun kadınlar p sıcak esmer adult erot eroti brezilya vidyola japon kızın porno çıtır kız yaşlı amcayl kızkardeşiyle sex hayvanca sikiş yap seksen yasındakı bayan 18 teen erotik video i annesinin evli bayanlardan eroti fotbolcu karıları sex dişçi sex ypiyor vdeos sarışınların bedava si zorla rus sekssi seven kızlar yegesini evli kadınların seks i SEK İZLE ÜNLÜLER amına mum sokan kadın kardeş EVLİ KADIN FOTORAFLARI ablam istedi sikiş sex penis 50 cm lik ya türkçe evli kadın seks dvd porno yapan izle olgun kadın sex fişm, koca yarak amına giriy video sikiş en genç kanada borno sokuş sikiş videoları dolgun bacaklı kadın v DÜNYADA EN BÜYÜK PENİS seks animals seksene porno hikaye sex kadın giydir orosbu sikişenleri porno gurup vido seks sexi kadınları giydir cüceyle sex evli kadınların sıcak seksi dörtlünün seksin güreşci pornolar eFUCK porno 15 lik seksi manitalar YAŞLI KADINLARIN GENÇ gulben ergen sikis adult firikik kadınlar azgın sikiş seksizle.comm erotic kilot görüntüle son model video sikişl sulu vajinalar sex penis video amcuk pornolar sex partisine gittim kız erkek sikiş videol kadınların domalma vid Kürt erotik videolar manuel seks izle. türk arkadan sunan sex adultkurt online izle adultkurt porno bbghikaye Seksene.Net - Sex Vide adult kurt sex www.zevkkahvesi.com porno ikiz tepeler büyük memeli şişman ka very young rus porno roman kızları pornosu zevkmania video kadın satan vidolar sikis yapan videolar güzel göğüslü sarışın genc kız sex film adul sarhoş adam pornosu sıcak lezbiyen vidyola yatakta amını okşayan spor salonunda delicesine sikişen kad am sikme videolari am youtubesikiş vidyoları perinur sex yaşlı kadın sıcak sex banyoda sikiş yapanlar pirsik kız seks yapan kadınlar eşek amsiker sex sıcak seks vidoları büyük yaraklı adam sik şişko kadın sikiş izle dul olgun sexi kadın v karımın videosu yerli sikiş sözlü kürt pornosu yapay vajinayla seks i bedava diskoda gurup s dolmuşcu ögretmenle se küçük annesini sikiyor japon kızı seks YAŞLI VE OLGUN KADIN otopark sex neslihan free sevişme erotizm filmleri izle dulların sikiş videola karups sik hija aşk seks sikiş vidolar kadın am ve gotten sik yaşlı karı sex kategor erotik olgun tvualet kurt kadını sikişi lollita erotik filimiz sıcak porn lezbiyen olgun öğretmen porno d porno ikiztepeler Kanepede Sevişen Kızla seks yapan güzel kadın kız vajinası nasıl tra kız yurdu banyoda sex MİATEENS TURKCE İZLET erotık lezbıyen erotizm filmleri izle cocuk ve olgun sex kuçuk hemşıre pornosu cigolo arayan yaşlılar yaşlı cocuk seks kürt kızı sevişiyor sıcak erotizm olgun Alyssa Milano sex film ingiliz sexs firikikle kurtadult.com köpükler altında sikiş seksene gerdek gecesi erkekerkeğe uykuda kardes bace sik büyük memeler yaslı le üvey anne siyle sikiş paralı kadın sikisi sünnetsiz erkeklerin s paris hilton pornofilm olgun kadının çocukla genç kız sex resim gencdullar sıcak olgun kadınlar oralsexs porno porno-videoları sex-vi travesti kadını sikiyo film lezbiyen porno video izle japon ögretmenine veriyor sevişen şişko kadın erotik firikikler bağırtarak inleterek s porno-videoları sex-vi porno-videoları sex-vi lezbiyen filim izle tesettürlü kadın dişçi ayata sikismek üçlü porno genc kiz seks videolar kadın amına salatalık kudurdumforum sexsi seven kadınlar t sekx yapan genç kızlar 14 bbs porno buyuk gogus videyasli tiny 18 sex video younger babes danse sınıfta lezbiyen sexsi sex seks video sex sek zenci y rus seks natural yarağını kadının ağz seks erotik sikiş sünnetsiz adam izle disko sex videoları olgun kadın çocuk siki rrus seks natural denizin kizlar sex olgun amlar tuba büyüküstün sikişi muhteşem vivid sikişle parıshıltonseks yeğenine siktiren teyz erotik gelin damat hik selenafirikik olgun kad 3d erotik videos kızlar denizde sevişme üvey anne sikiş gay sünnetsiz erkek se kardeş şikiş hikayeler zenci kıza seks discoda sex partileri beyaz kadınlar erotık porno şikiiş sesli ve kadın popo videoları i ürk kadınlarının azgın adult34 izle sünnetsiz adam siken a sikişen insanlar video hd erotic sıcak KALTAK KARILAR çiftliktesevişme aaaa siirtli kız sikişi bagırarak sik büyük pens tecavüze uğrayan kadın \"parmak yalama\" sex anne ve çocuğu arasınd nürgül yeşilçay ormand erotik guzel video buy dul sex istiyor zenci erotik büyük penis filmi dans eden zenci kadın sarışın kadın se banyoda kadın am traş turk liseli porno bedava ama pirsik takı alo sex izle soyunarak sevişenler seks vidio arkadaş sex parno sex güzel seks yapan kadın seksene videolar idaal teens türkçe fabrika kızı se sert am sikmeler olgun kadın sexs video adult 3d izle amini traş ediyor vide erotik grup porno sex delice seviş erotık porno sex adult erotık porno sex adult vajina kılsız video SKSİ KADINLARIN MUHTEŞ kırmızı sütyenli kız erotik fabrika sexs fi annesi ile kızı sikişi olgun erotik yaşlı kad kızı suda sikiyor 3 kuaför sex sıcak sikiş sahneler amına makina sokan ikiz tepeler porno öğretmen annemi siktim eşşek yaraklı adam 21 sikis genç erkek sikiş video erotik anime hareketli seks sikiş pembe sks nez domalmiş disko videoları izle s sünnetsiz erkeklerin s vajinaya soktum sikiş video ünllüler ablamın amının bozulma üvey annesini gizli si seksi çorap giyen kadı sikiş arayan kadınlar uyurken sikien kadınla moms erotik seksene vidyolar free sevişme download anne ile kızı sikişiyo disko videolar zencı büyük penisli adamlar sıyahı porno fılmler amcıga boşal topluluk seks izlettir şişman kadınlar erotik küçük kız göğüs video ikiz tepeler sex erotik brezilyalı pirsik am kız 18 kardeş seks türkçe azgın köylü orosbu video seks dulmatureler paris hilton seks down teen ızle hikaye domalttı öğretmenini siken öğre free fuck dvd video i lezbsexi 13 da sex yapan öğrenc fahişe arab sex torrie wilson + 18 ero free sevişme dowload adamın siki amına sokm porn- porn- porn- sica türk erotizmi +18 yaşlı işi bitmiş kadı sıcak.seks.com şişman karılarla sikiş bbg alyssa milano sex am orosbu çılgın anal videolar kızı annesi sikiyor lezbiyen erotik izle vivid sikiş video kadın götünü sikmepenis resimleri yaşlı erkek erotik fli vivid adult izle ÇIPLAK SEXİ DANSLARI SEX MUAYENESİ öperek sikişenler erotık fılmı cevıren u birden fazla memesi ol ablamcom. otobüste erotik video kad zadarmo porno şikişenlerin hayat hik japon erotik video annesiyle sex sedasayansevişiyor sarışın erkek sex genç kız sexi on sekiz erotik vido www.büyükgötporno.com porno izle zevke gel sikisi download sikiş izle zevk al 1 adam 1 kıza seksi d mağazada sevişen lezbi harika dvd fullporno s kardeşle sex çıb lak gölde sikiş animeerotik hemşire sıcak video www.evlibayan.sex web kamera kız Sex party dul sikiş videoları okşayan kız ğayların vidyosu doctor torrie wilson seks h onsekizlik türbanlı po arap kızı sex sikişen kadın ve erkek zenci göğüs videoları yarak sok canlı siyah bayan amcığı sex yapan olgun lezbiy adult photo izle download sikisi GÜVENİLİR EROTİK VİDEO Elle amını okşayan kad kalın peniş sikiş vido teen 14 yaş sex vedio sex arkadan kola çiftlik konulu porno f 31 çeken adam izle üvey annesini zorla si çocuk sikişi izlesene eotik ünlüler cep telefonu evde sex asyalı kızlarerotik vi travestli kız pornosu evli kadinlarin sex vi olgun erotik videolar zevk alma sikişmek gerçek real seks video kıyafet elbise çiş yapan erkek videos sibel can seksin dans penisi boğazına kadar zevk partnerı evli kadın seks video gurup oral izle erotik ortam college sınıf porno sex sikis videol lezbiyen sıcak sikişme olgun kadın erotik vid kızı ile sikişen anne genç kızın yarak merak kadın çocukla sevişiyo karı çıblak ikiztepeler porno vıde domalma sex sikiş vide 2009 sex videoları iz temizlikçi kadın kürt bedava tül çoraplı sik 13 porn ru gaylar çoklu videoları torrie yarak erotik kadını giydir türkçe sevişme filmi free sevişme porno kadın inliyor erotik hikaye diskoda sex partisi zorla sex yaptıran erk lavaboda sex yapıyorla öğrenci öğretmeniyle s GTA SİKME ŞİFRESİ akşam sex izle şişman seksi kadın iki erkek bir kadın si travesti penisini göst ikiztepeler sex tek geçelik sikis fili öğretmenle sikişen götten manuel porno havuz kenarında sevişe ablamcom sex ve göğüs seksi bed sarışınlar ikiz tepeler mini etek giyen olgun evlilerin sikiş vidiol sınıf sex WWW REAL 18 V?DEO