-
Website
http://willwilkinson.net/flybottle -
Original page
http://www.willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2008/11/09/why-are-american-atheists-less-happy-and-cooperative/ -
Subscribe
All Comments -
Community
-
-
Top Commenters
-
Popular Threads
- A Little Mystic Nationalism
- Scott Winship on Income Inequality
- Now Let Us Praise Results-Facilitating Virtue!
- Why Are There So few Women in Philosophy?
- Hey, I Can’t Actually Quite Imagine a World in Which Things Are Exactly as Different as the Need to Be to Give Me What I Want, but It Would Be Neat if I Could!!
To take a different argument of the same form:
There is greater economic growth under Democratic presidents than under Republicans, therefore higher taxes are:
1) Not detrimental to growth?
2) Not inconsistent with growth?
3) Causative of higher growth?
1 and 3 are tenuous conclusions at best. 2 is certainly "true", but not strong enough to have policy implications at the margin.
Mapping back to the original argument, can we conclude that secularism is:
1) Not detrimental to national happiness?
2) Not inconsistent with happiness?
3) Causative of higher happiness?
1 and 3 are pretty clearly stretches absent deeper analysis (we don't have the relevant counterfactual of a modern Swedish society with religion). 2 is again "true" but neither is high pollution inconsistent with happiness.
IMO the only thing we can conclude at this point is that secularism doesn't cause everything to crash and burn (like O'Reilly et. al would perhaps have us believe). That's useful but we can probably all agree there is a lot more data gathering/analysis to be done.
From your own words, I think it's clear that on balance it's not such a good thing at all.
But it's pretty obviously far riskier to draw inferences about supposedly universal features of happiness from data on happiness in the U.S.
Lower risk is better.
I love your blog, but I always disagree with you when you talk about faith. I'm a Protestant Christian and am always struck by how impressed and pleased atheists are to discover that the link between crime, happiness, etc. and religious belief are pretty loose.
It is true, of course, that many secular nations have less crime, violence, etc. and that they also rate themselves highly on various happiness measures. Atheist friends of mine often cite this as a problem for us. For if religion doesn't make a society better and happier, what good is it?
My problem is that our conception of what makes a 'better' society is relative to whether you're religious or not. Let me share my perspective as a Christian believer.
Christianity is NOT about being happy. In fact, I am certain that after I became a Christian I would have rated lower on most of the measures of happiness you talk about. My life became more difficult and conflicted as the Lord began to work sin out of my life. Atheists can be content because the Holy Spirit is not at work in their hearts. I regard the Christian life as the spiritual equivalent of chemotherapy - the working out of the cancer of sin. We don't get the 'happiness' you're after. We're after joy and communion with God, and to have that, you must go through a long struggle with God that may include a great deal of suffering.
I think most Americans who call themselves Christians don't actually understand this. They are nominal Christians, even if they go to Church regularly. Having a genuine relationship with God is fairly rare. Most Christians, I believe, have intimations of such a relationship. To meet Christians who have walked with God for a long time, or who are at least deeply committed, well, that is a rarity. You have no idea how weak we really are. Yet even among these Christians, my mentors, friends, and teachers, happiness is far from ubiquitous. These people face struggles and challenges that no secular person faces and usually do not even understand.
To simply look at crime rates and happiness ratings of secular nations is impressive. I am struck myself. But I am not threatened. Christ told us that life in this world would not be easy and would not always be a happy one. That is because the world is in a state of war between sin and love, a battle that rages within every human soul.
I know that many Christians have claimed that a society without God will be full of crime, etc. I think they got it wrong. A society without God is very different. I think it loses transcendent values, a sense of connection with God, Christian joy, and a proper grounding for its commitment to fairness and equality (on the last point, I agree with Waldron). This loss is incalculable to my mind, but to yours it is no loss at all.
I would suffer and die before I became an atheist again, at least I think I would, for a great amount of what you call happiness. The moments of joy and communion with the Lord that I have experienced give my life meaning even without the happiness you speak of. Of course, I think happiness, in your terms, is valuable. But I would trade it off to know the Lord forever. And that's a trade-off that isn't in your schema.
At least you think you would? So what if you didn't die? And you did find a never ending happiness because Christ wasn't always bringin ya down and telling you you're always wrong, and that you need to cleanse your sins for your mistakes, instead of thinking about them in a way to learn from your mistakes?
It's like if you see a kid seeing or watching something they shouldn't be watching for their age. If you just punish them, send them to their room crying, telling them they need to cleanse themselves and that they are sinful, they won't understand anything about what was wrong about seeing it in the first place. They will just be sad that they are now considered less of a human. If you just talk to them and ask questions to figure out why or how they were able to see it then you can explain to them WHY they shouldn't be seeing it in the first place, and they don't bear all this filth and guilt and disgust and uncomfortableness of their own being for just being curious.
I don't think its right that people live feeling like at the end of their life they will be judged by someone they've never physically met. I'm much more content dealing with what I would think of myself if I were to do something that would hurt or disturb someone's life in a bad way. And that judgment is consistently there in my own mind, and I don't have to rely on someone/ something else to do that for me. This is why people are happier in secular states. They have to deal with their sins right THEN, not at the end of their life.
Also - Don't you think atheists would value life more than someone who thinks that they will just have an eternal life of paradise AFTER they die? I cherish every second of every day, I cherish the words I type right now, because I am expressing myself. I just started reading "The Ancestor's Tale" by Dawkins himself, which is a very big book for me, but it made me want to see where Dawkins is right now. I wanted to know if it would be possible in my lifetime to meet the man, and if possible take a class under him or something and I stumbled onto this site. Of course, if I were religious, I would think that everything is planned out for me already. How boring. No, I can make my own choices, and nothing is laid out for me yet. I can change my life at any given moment.
This is an extremely touchy subject for me personally, as my mother's side, every one of them, is religious. My father's side, is all atheist. Me and my only sibling, my sister, were raised under no specific belief, and my mother decided NOT to indoctrinate us and let us literally choose if we wanted to be religious when we got into our teen years. How amazing. I love my parents for this. Letting me choose my own life, and not getting in the way of my own personal realizations. My mother's side is uptight, and I cannot voice my own opinions around them without creating a hostile feeling environment, which is not enjoyable to them. I love to debate, but it makes them feel insecure and act as if I am attacking them personally. And I'm not. I just really want to understand their point of view, but they would never let me. I don't even think that they know I am an atheist. This is how much of a lack of communication there is. My cousin, stationed in Hawaii, was not visited by his own grandparents when they happened to vacation there because he decided to become a Muslim in his years oversea. this is rejection of their own blood because of a different prophet. Sad. I would have LOVED to visit my cousin, I have not seen him in years since he enlisted. But I can't. Sad. My dad's side is very laid back. They mostly went to college or joined a union. No one on my mother's side has done either. Of course this is just my family, and by no means represents any other family with the same views in any way. I am just merely sharing my own personal experiences in being in the middle of both sides of my family, and being in the middle of this insane debate that will take many a lifetime for human beings to actually figure out for sure.
And to Paul Sand and webgrrl, this is true. I live in Alaska and it is much the same situation. Unless you keep your mind busy learning or with other activities, you can become depressed in the winter in a snap! We have those sunlight lamps here, too, but I don't think I've seen them in public places, only in homes. Along with the natives here being more susceptible to becoming alcoholics, you have a recipe for a lot of sad people, and depression. And this is all chemically, not because of beliefs or moral differences among people.
I would not want you to change your own beliefs. If you were to change beliefs, I would hope it would be because of yourself, your own learnings, and not because of anyone telling you what to do. The same as if you yourself chose to be a Christian.
What I do not agree on is the indoctrination of children into organized religion. I think children should be allowed to choose for themselves when they find the time is right to accept whatever god/gods and prophets to believe in, according to what kind of person they grew up as. For all I know, I may become a Buddist or a Janeist after a few years. I see myself as continually maturing, continually become ripe with knowledge and I accept any differences that I may find with what I believe in my life and combine all these experiences into my own personal knowledge. We will all have different histories when our final days come, why should any of them be even remotely the same? Okay I really have to stop, Thanks to anyone who reads this :D
Kristin
Are you aware that divinity was conferred on JC by emperor Constantine ?
Some of the smartest people I know have faith, even though I completely agree it does not make sense. But plently of apparently smart people also believe in socialism without having Dawkins or Hitchens sneer at them.
Say you believe, for example, that an omnibenevolent God loves you, wants you to be happy, forgives your shortcomings and will reunite you with your loved ones after death. I see no way this wouldn't raise your happiness and kindness towards others a considerable amount. For how wonderful the world would seem if such a scenario were true.
On the other hand, many believe in a God who demands a life of great worship, servitude and contrition, free from most earthly pleasures. And should you fall short of leading such a life, you stand a great chance of being tormented ETERNALLY in a lake of fire, along with 95% of humanity. This type of belief isn't likely to lead to anything you could call happiness.
So I guess what I'm getting at is, whether or not someone believes in God really doesn't say much about them at all. You'd have to dig deeper into their worldview in order to get at a fruitful discussion about how that worldview affects their lives. Secular Humanism vs. Christian fundamentalism, for instance, might be worth looking at.
(Sadly, it's necessary for me to be taken seriously to point out that I am myself an atheist.)
Religious people who see increasing secularism as a sign of moral decay make some pretty offensive allegations against atheists.
In return, many atheists look down upon believers as ignorant rubes.
The most important thing to realize is that there is a "vast middle" in society, of believers and nonbelievers who have better things to do than try to tear each other down.
There is an inherent tension between the two worldviews, but coexistence is obviously possible. Unfortunately, high-profile conflicts will go on for some time because of the political implications.
A person of religion threatens me not at all as I'd love for them to be right on some level and I encourage my children to explore all sides of the issue and will even attend church with them. The person of relgion is generally deeply commited to having their children believe as they do and threatened by views like mine. My discomfort being around people of faiths is the need to walk on pins and needles not to offend them while I gladly share in grace or head bowing ect when they might request.
Granted that you won't want to include the trade-off in your own calculations (I never meant to argue this *for you*, just *for me*). My view is merely that it'd be question-begging to use this as any kind of argument against persons of faith, particularly Christians. I recognize you never explicitly said that it was.
and Sweden (19.2 Male/8.1 Female) are higher than in the US (17.7 Male/4.5 Female).
http://www.who.int/mental_health/prevention/sui...
As for the rest of it, cultural homogeneity would seem to be a bigger factor than anything else. If the Scandinavian countries had anything close to the Muslim immigrant population that Britain and France do (and let's note that the immigrant populations of Britain and France are far below what they are in the US) that they would have as many social problems as Britain and France do. (In fact, European attitudes towards Middle Eastern and Indic immigrants in general make stereotypical southern redneck attitudes seem positively enlightened by comparison, so any study of their happiness had to be carefully tailored to produce the result the researchers were looking for.)
Do you have evidence for this? (And what do you mean by "better" exactly?)