View Full Version : Atheists Become Emotionally Aroused When Daring God to Do Terrible Things

Thursday, May 14th, 2020, 02:22 AM
Abstract: We examined whether atheists exhibit evidence of emotional arousal when they dare God to cause harm to themselves and their intimates. In Study 1, the participants (16 atheists, 13 religious individuals) read aloud 36 statements of three different types: God, offensive, and neutral. In Study 2 (N = 19 atheists), 10 new stimulus statements were included in which atheists wished for negative events to occur. The atheists did not think the God statements were as unpleasant as the religious participants did in their verbal reports. However, the skin conductance level showed that asking God to do awful things was equally stressful to atheists as it was to religious people and that atheists were more affected by God statements than by wish or offensive statements. The results imply that atheists' attitudes toward God are ambivalent in that their explicit beliefs conflict with their affective response.

Full PDF (https://www.researchgate.net/publication/271670348_Atheists_Become_Emotionally_Ar oused_When_Daring_God_to_Do_Terrible_Thi ngs)

Weird, wild stuff

Rodskarl Dubhgall
Wednesday, April 14th, 2021, 07:31 AM

This video clip shows a clearly wiser Hawking taking the piss from Dawkins, who obviously is emotionally unhinged about cult-ure going back to his beginnings in Africa whilst surrounded by voodoo nonsense. No wonder Dawkins has lost three wives and even suffered a stroke in the same year since becoming a bachelor again in late life. Not everyone is so mindlessly simplistic as the barbarism the White Man found in the Dark Continent, but the White Saviour complex in this man induces him to declare the ignorance of the world, rather than find out why folks believe as they do and look for whatever innocent utility there exists in the main of it. A fair number of religious ideas stem from the disparity on the dynamic of is-ought, with reducing cognitive dissonance the ultimate goal, as resulting in the best experiential wisdom and hopefully the most happiness...which is not going to be found in bashing others looking for answers to the meaning of life through different parameters.

Not everyone is equally atheist in the same way. I myself don't believe in an anthropomorphic deity, outside of the idea of ancestral divinity and the honours due them before us. I do believe it's possible that the earth may be alive and conscious in a manner far beyond human understanding, because we are like bacteria on it--bacteria upon us cannot share our level of being and awareness. I do not confuse the two types of things, because man is not the cosmos, nor could the cosmos be man, but we are created in the likeness of our father and mother--as with any other creature with its creators before it. It takes two to tango, so I don't place any specially unigendered or genderless emphasis on the facts of life.

I also believe that atomic energy is the spirit of a soul and that matter is a physical manifestation of whatever body energy inhabits. Ecological cycles are what I find to be spiritual transference of energy through varied forms of materials and that immortality is achieved through procreation, otherwise one may be in the ground without that--a measurable contrast between heaven and hell. By treading a fine line between science and religion, I am open to metaphysics without dogma. I am also open to an ethical philosophy with dogma, since it makes no sense to confuse the two issues.

I've covered all the topical bases and feel no trepidation or whatever, but total ease and indifference, since the world's doing its thing whether I completely comprehend it or not and I know that I'll never know everything anyway--who cares? If I rule out all possibilities just to feign superiority over others who actually are open minded, that makes me a huge hypocrite and so, I'm not about to put myself on a very public pedestal over all the normies out there. F*ck that! I prefer normalcy to anything disturbing.