Young people turning to alternative religions and woo-woo

[T.G.G. Moogly]

Magic and mystery are fun. People not only have no interest in reality, but they deliberately avoid learning about it.

It's also extremely easy, given the proper environment, of course.

Not sure if people do such things deliberately. I can recall in my own life and experience doing silly and stupid things that at the time and given conditions were the best I could do. There was nothing deliberate in the sense that I knew what I was doing was wrong. I remember when our 8th grade class voted for presidential candidates and was shocked that I voted for the person that lost. Afterwards I realized what drove my thinking and how stupid it was.

Yesterday I met a person who was telling me about a problem she had. Technically speaking she was absolutely correct about her complaint. She was not "wrong" but she was what I would call "wrong-headed" which was her real problem. It was her inability to realize that life is not the simple execution of rules, it was her inflexibility and narrow focus that was her source of grief, not things that other people were doing, even though what they were doing was technically "wrong."

She could have easily turned a negative situation into something constructive but didn't, and could not see that. She seemed so caught up in her emotions. Sure, we are all responsible for our actions, but we don't all possess the same level of awareness, intellect and emotional control.

 

[rousseau]

Magic and mystery are fun. People not only have no interest in reality, but they deliberately avoid learning about it.

It's also extremely easy, given the proper environment, of course.

Not sure if people do such things deliberately. I can recall in my own life and experience doing silly and stupid things that at the time and given conditions were the best I could do. There was nothing deliberate in the sense that I knew what I was doing was wrong. I remember when our 8th grade class voted for presidential candidates and was shocked that I voted for the person that lost. Afterwards I realized what drove my thinking and how stupid it was.

Yesterday I met a person who was telling me about a problem she had. Technically speaking she was absolutely correct about her complaint. She was not "wrong" but she was what I would call "wrong-headed" which was her real problem. It was her inability to realize that life is not the simple execution of rules, it was her inflexibility and narrow focus that was her source of grief, not things that other people were doing, even though what they were doing was technically "wrong."

She could have easily turned a negative situation into something constructive but didn't, and could not see that. She seemed so caught up in her emotions. Sure, we are all responsible for our actions, but we don't all possess the same level of awareness, intellect and emotional control.

I agree. Ultimately we're constrained by our knowledge, and our knowledge is constrained by both our ability to learn and what our social inputs have been. That's the physiological part of it.

Beyond that there's a gravitation to what feels good, and I'm not certain that materialism and it's implications feel good for many people.

Even in those who accept science as a functioning mechanism there is still a clinging to kind of utopian ideas - 'if we can just get rid of capitalism my life won't be so hard anymore'. Actually, I think it was Dr. Zoidberg who mentioned that Marxism became huge in Sweden with the complete collapse of religion.

Ultimately, those of us who are unable to control their lives by sheer force and will, will often turn to a kind of mystical / magical thinking to resolve that dissonance. This is why 'teaching it out of them' is a good ideal, but can't resolve the problem.

 

[Tammuz]

Actually, I think it was Dr. Zoidberg who mentioned that Marxism became huge in Sweden with the complete collapse of religion.

Marxism huge in Sweden? Since when? Newsflash for you, we never belonged to the East Bloc.

And religion has not "completely collapsed" in Sweden. It is pretty fringe, but it has not collapsed. Unfortunately Zoidberg seems a bit prone to hyperboles.

 

[Tammuz]

Actually, I think it was Dr. Zoidberg who mentioned that Marxism became huge in Sweden with the complete collapse of religion.

Marxism huge in Sweden? Since when? Newsflash for you, we never belonged to the East Bloc.

And religion has not "completely collapsed" in Sweden. It is pretty fringe, but it has not collapsed. Unfortunately Zoidberg seems a bit prone to hyperboles.

 

[steve_bank]

That is very strange. I thought Sweden, Norway, Denmark, England, France and the rest were all commie socialist fascists. At least that is what the conservatives say. Maybe I was wrong.

Seriously, from what I rad before the Stalinist abuse became known, in the USA communism was seen as a possible Utopia. Workers living in a workers' paradise. A relief from drab industrialization.

 

[Tammuz]

That is very strange. I thought Sweden, Norway, Denmark, England, France and the rest were all commie socialist fascists. At least that is what the conservatives say. Maybe I was wrong.

Yes, you were wrong.

 

[rousseau]

Actually, I think it was Dr. Zoidberg who mentioned that Marxism became huge in Sweden with the complete collapse of religion.

Marxism huge in Sweden? Since when? Newsflash for you, we never belonged to the East Bloc.

And religion has not "completely collapsed" in Sweden. It is pretty fringe, but it has not collapsed. Unfortunately Zoidberg seems a bit prone to hyperboles.

Yes, I know Sweden never belonged to the Eastern Bloc. That doesn't mean the ideology of socialism can't become dominant among a population. Marx is still even somewhat big in Canada among university educated arts students.

'If we can just get rid of capitalism my life will stop being hard'

'If we can just do [x] my life will be easier'

They're reactions that happen because life is inherently difficult and painful.

 

[Tammuz]

Actually, I think it was Dr. Zoidberg who mentioned that Marxism became huge in Sweden with the complete collapse of religion.

Marxism huge in Sweden? Since when? Newsflash for you, we never belonged to the East Bloc.

And religion has not "completely collapsed" in Sweden. It is pretty fringe, but it has not collapsed. Unfortunately Zoidberg seems a bit prone to hyperboles.

Yes, I know Sweden never belonged to the Eastern Bloc. That doesn't mean the ideology of socialism can't become dominant among a population. Marx is still even somewhat big in Canada among university educated arts students.

'If we can just get rid of capitalism my life will stop being hard'

'If we can just do [x] my life will be easier'

They're reactions that happen because life is inherently difficult and painful.

Just because it can be doesn't mean it is dominant. You are engaging in wishful thinking. Of the political parties in our parliament, only the Left Party has socialism as a declared ideology, and they tend to hover below 10% of voter support. And a lot of their voters are dissatisfied social democrats, i.e not socialists.

Anyone who dreams of abolishing capitalism, not to mention thinking it will actually happen, is out of touch with reality and needs to grow up. A market system is superior to a command economy. The real debate that grown-ups have is how to best optimize it and regulate it to fix the flaws, not abolishing it.

That arts students in Canada are fond of Marx in completely irrelevant. Their expertise is not in economics, history, or society, or anything relevant to Marx at all. You might just as well claim that creationism is big among Canadian arts students, and it is still as irrelevant, as their expertise is not in biology, geology, etc.

 

[ronburgundy]

the writer of that article doesn't seem to be aware of who Democrat voters actually are. Sure, millennials are predominately Democrat but they are not the majority of Democrat voters. The two largest Democrat voting blocks, blacks and Hispanics, are also the demographics with the highest level of religious dedication. And then both Catholic and Jewish vote is predominately for Democrats.

A few different issues here.
First, only about 2% of Dems are Jews and a huge % of them are only ethnically Jewish or very low in their religious adherence. Similarly, a huge % of "Catholics" don't observe, pratice or believe most of what the Bible or the Church says. They check "Catholic" on surveys b/c their moms would get mad if they didn't.
Second, despite minorities being mostly Dem, because white non-Hispanics comprise 2/3 of the total population and 43% of whites are Dem, a slight majority of Dems are white, and significantly outnumber any other single ethnic group.
Third, not only are many Millennials black or Hispanic, but they are actually disproportionately so, because of differences in birth rates making younger generations increasingly non-white. Like their white Millennials counterparts, minority Millennials are also shedding the formal religions of their parents.

People choose political parties for many reasons and I would think that religion is one of the minor reasons.

Religion is less a factor in party choice for racial minorities, because one of the parties is so racist and hostile to them, they have little choice but to side with the Dems even when their religious values are somewhat more aligned with the GOP.

This same factor does impact white voters to some degree, b/c racists choose the GOP for the same reason that minorities reject it, while that pushes non-racists whites toward the Dems. But among whites, religion is still a huge factor b/c Christianity is close bedfellows with intolerant bigotry. In fact, religious blacks and Hispanics are more bigoted against homosexuals. And white religious people are more racist, homophobic, and misogynist, b/c the Bible and religious traditions provide cover and encouragement of such views. These are the "traditional values" that Republicans love to go on about. They are also anti-thetical to classic liberal values. So, whites who reject traditional religion will tend to reject the GOP, while whites who embrace traditional religion will tend to embrace the party that not only seeks to make Christianity the foundation of the government, but more generally shares the "traditional values" of intolerant bigotry that is inherent to Abrahamic monotheism.

 

[rousseau]

Yes, I know Sweden never belonged to the Eastern Bloc. That doesn't mean the ideology of socialism can't become dominant among a population. Marx is still even somewhat big in Canada among university educated arts students.

'If we can just get rid of capitalism my life will stop being hard'

'If we can just do [x] my life will be easier'

They're reactions that happen because life is inherently difficult and painful.

Just because it can be doesn't mean it is dominant. You are engaging in wishful thinking. Of the political parties in our parliament, only the Left Party has socialism as a declared ideology, and they tend to hover below 10% of voter support. And a lot of their voters are dissatisfied social democrats, i.e not socialists.

Anyone who dreams of abolishing capitalism, not to mention thinking it will actually happen, is out of touch with reality and needs to grow up. A market system is superior to a command economy. The real debate that grown-ups have is how to best optimize it and regulate it to fix the flaws, not abolishing it.

That arts students in Canada are fond of Marx in completely irrelevant. Their expertise is not in economics, history, or society, or anything relevant to Marx at all. You might just as well claim that creationism is big among Canadian arts students, and it is still as irrelevant, as their expertise is not in biology, geology, etc.

You may be right. I really don't know anything about Swedish history or culture, I'm just going off of what I heard from Dr. Zoidberg.

 

[Tammuz]

Yes, I know Sweden never belonged to the Eastern Bloc. That doesn't mean the ideology of socialism can't become dominant among a population. Marx is still even somewhat big in Canada among university educated arts students.

'If we can just get rid of capitalism my life will stop being hard'

'If we can just do [x] my life will be easier'

They're reactions that happen because life is inherently difficult and painful.

Just because it can be doesn't mean it is dominant. You are engaging in wishful thinking. Of the political parties in our parliament, only the Left Party has socialism as a declared ideology, and they tend to hover below 10% of voter support. And a lot of their voters are dissatisfied social democrats, i.e not socialists.

Anyone who dreams of abolishing capitalism, not to mention thinking it will actually happen, is out of touch with reality and needs to grow up. A market system is superior to a command economy. The real debate that grown-ups have is how to best optimize it and regulate it to fix the flaws, not abolishing it.

That arts students in Canada are fond of Marx in completely irrelevant. Their expertise is not in economics, history, or society, or anything relevant to Marx at all. You might just as well claim that creationism is big among Canadian arts students, and it is still as irrelevant, as their expertise is not in biology, geology, etc.

You may be right. I really don't know anything about Swedish history or culture, I'm just going off of what I heard from Dr. Zoidberg.

Then this Zoidberg guy is talking out of his ass.

 

[Tammuz]

To re-connect to the OP, I think it has been discussed here before that quite a few atheists are into New Age or pseudoscience. Or at least you can't assume that an atheist will be scientifically minded.

Check out this: The Skeptical Disconnect

I mean that atheism, for example, is a logical extension of skepticism. Anecdotally, most skeptics that I know are in fact atheists. However, the disconnect came when I expected the reverse of this observation to also be true, i.e., that most atheists are skeptics.

...

Compounding this feeling, one attendee at the Freethought Festival came up to JREF President D.J. Grothe and myself, making a point to bring up that although he was a staunch atheist, he was also sure that malleable psychic energy existed, and that acupuncture was a legitimate medical intervention.

And importantly, this:

To me, being a skeptic is more important than being an atheist. Embracing scientific skepticism for me means a hop, skip, and a jump to atheism. God is simply another topic for which there is no evidence, and therefore deserves our skepticism.

Even if all religion disappeared tomorrow, there would still be a great need to teach critical thinking to all people on the entire planet.

I would say that atheism that is not the result of skeptical thinking is next to useless.