https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T64_El2s7FU&feature=g-all-u

Very interesting. Please watch and leave comments. Especially atheists!

Very informative.

The part I like best is where he mentioned the 90% Chimp and 10% beehive behaviour.

I also liked the part where he showed that religious societies outlive the other secular ones. He also mentioned that group think can also be toxic.


Concerning the Chimp and beehive behaviours, I interpret it as human beings being naturally selfish but having the capacity to realize that we can achieve more as a group.


Religions, especially dogmatic ones, help the members to bond and focus on particular goals. That bond between members can help defeat outside groups which are not so cohesive. Look at the empires of the world- they had strong beliefs or religious convictions be it the Roman empire, the British or America.


However, religion does become toxic because hostility towards non-members arises. We have seen slavery and genocide of unbelievers. Human beings have now evolved or are evolving away from religion. The world is so interconnected that we do not need local religions appreciate/understan the importance of a co-operative effort in creating a better world for human survival or the survival of the human race.


Thank you, Pastor AIO for the video

logicboy:

However, religion does become toxic because hostility towards non-members arises. We have seen slavery and genocide of unbelievers. Human beings have now evolved or are evolving away from religion. The world is so interconnected that we do not need local religions appreciate/understan the importance of a co-operative effort in creating a better world for human survival or the survival of the human race.

Thank you, Logicboy, for the appreciation. What evidences have you, though, that human beings are evolving away from religion. Is this evolution genetic, or is it cultural?

Pastor AIO:

Thank you, Logicboy, for the appreciation. What evidences have you, though, that human beings are evolving away from religion. Is this evolution genetic, or is it cultural?

As nations get developed and people get smarter, they stop believing in religion. It is not genetic or cultural. There is hardly any developed and free country that is not secular.

Top 10 developed countries in the world have a properly established separation of church and state. Google the human devlopment index. Norway tops the bunch, followed by Australia. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Development_Index#Inequality-adjusted_HDI_2

Pick the smartest people from any country in this present day and you would see that there are many atheists among them. The first person that comes to mind is Wole Soyinka of Nigeria. Soyinka is the first person that comes to your mind when thinking of smart Nigerians.While this can be written off as a coincidence, we can look at scientists in the West who are generally more atheistic than the general population. This of course, is assuming that scientists are smarter than the general public. http://www.freethoughtpedia.com/wiki/Scientists_and_atheism

Where does our technology come from (Toyota, Smasung, Sharp, Honda, LG, Apple, Microsoft)? Atheistic societies i.e. scientists, Japan, South Korea, China. USA is also a bedrock of technology but it's population is majorly religious which betrays its secular laws and the atheistic nature of it's scientists. Furthermore, religion is in the decline in America.


This is not to say that all atheists are smarter than religious people. This is my attempt at explaining studies that show a correlation or link between irreligiosity/atheism to intelligence
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religiosity_and_intelligence

logicboy:


As nations get developed and people get smarter, they stop believing in religion. It is not genetic or cultural. There is hardly any developed and free country that is not secular.

I generally understand evolution to involve genetics. But I think now that what you are saying is not that humans are evolving away from religion, but rather that some societies are going through a phase of being less religious. Whether or not that phase is temporary or permanent I cannot tell. Whether or not it is reversible or will then progress onto something else, I cannot tell.

To say that the smartest people are Atheist you would first have to tell me what you understand by intelligence and how you measure it. And then what you mean by religiousness and how you measure it.

I think that you will find that some 'extremely religious' people are so out of force of habit, cultural patterning etc. Would you measure their religiousness by the same yardstick that you measure someone who is prone to mystical experiences? Especially if that person does not live by religious rituals and patterns and perhaps finds some of the experiences unwelcome.

Pastor AIO:

Thank you, Logicboy, for the appreciation. What evidences have you, though, that human beings are evolving away from religion. Is this evolution genetic, or is it cultural?

That religion is on the decline is very obvious. The Europeans freed themselves from the tyrany of the pope and the church hundreds of years ago and have since evolved secular societies with religion playing less inportant roles in the affairs of the state and in the lives of individuals.
Church attendance is considerably down from where it was a century ago and is going down every decade.
Most Europeans, even catholic Italy and Spain, are merely cultural christians rather than religious christians.
Every generation sees a decline in the importance of religion in their lives.

However, poverty , economic and political disenfranchisement are always nearby to push any society into a quasi form of religious revival.

Pastor AIO:

I generally understand evolution to involve genetics. But I think now that what you are saying is not that humans are evolving away from religion, but rather that some societies are going through a phase of being less religious. Whether or not that phase is temporary or permanent I cannot tell. Whether or not it is reversible or will then progress onto something else, I cannot tell.

To say that the smartest people are Atheist you would first have to tell me what you understand by intelligence and how you measure it. And then what you mean by religiousness and how you measure it.

I think that you will find that some 'extremely religious' people are so out of force of habit, cultural patterning etc. Would you measure their religiousness by the same yardstick that you measure someone who is prone to mystical experiences? Especially if that person does not live by religious rituals and patterns and perhaps finds some of the experiences unwelcome.

Sorry for the late reply, I have been dealing with being banned.


How "religious" and "intelligence" are defined are stated in the wikipedia article on religion and intelligence. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religiosity_and_intelligence

Intelligence is an umbrella term used to describe a property of the mind that encompasses many related abilities, such as the capacities to reason, to plan, to solve problems, to think abstractly, to comprehend ideas, to use language, and to learn. There are several ways to define intelligence. In some cases, intelligence may include traits such as creativity, personality, character, knowledge, or wisdom. However, some psychologists prefer not to include these traits in the definition of intelligence.[1][2]

A widely-researched index or classification of intelligence among scientists is Intelligence Quotient (I.Q.). I.Q. is a summary index, calculated by testing individuals' abilities in a variety of tasks and producing a composite score to represent overall ability, e.g., Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale. It is used to predict educational outcomes and other variables of interest.

Others have attempted to measure intelligence indirectly by looking at individuals' or group's educational attainment, although this risks bias from other demographic factors, such as age, income, gender and cultural background, all of which can affect educational attainment.[1]
Dissatisfaction with traditional IQ tests has led to the development of alternative theories, all of which suggest that intelligence is the result of independent abilities that contribute to human performance. In 1983, Howard Gardner proposed the theory of multiple intelligences, which claims a broadening of the conventional definition of intelligence is needed, since, if intelligence is defined as the cognitive or mental capacity of an individual, this would logically include all forms of mental qualities, not simply the ones most transparent to standardized I.Q. tests. The categories of intelligences Gardner proposes are logical, linguistic, spatial, musical, kinesthetic, naturalist, intrapersonal and interpersonal intelligences.[3]
Jean Piaget developed stages as an alternative to IQ after studying the nature of the wrong answers on items. The Model of Hierarchical Complexity was formed as an alternative to IQ. Performance on the items varying in hierarchical complexity from 0 to 14, is absolute, and does not require norms. Because the orders are content and context free, they can be used to measure performance in any domain, including the ones mention by Gardner and Goleman.