Is Atheism on the Rise?

[JohnnieEnigma]

@Miller

Man, the irony in this paragraph is so thick you could cut it with a knife. Your friend was “prejudiced” because he assumed you only read the editorial page, but you blithely assume that he’s never read the paper at all. Folks who disagree with you about Fox News have “probably” never watched it. Have you ever tried to figure out why these people disagree with you? I rather doubt it, because when I tried to figure out why you thought something in this thread, we got two pages of justifications and gender slurs. This does not bode well for your ability to accurately judge the motivations of others.

They have been. Frequently. Have you really never seen this happen? What does that tell us about the ability to make accurate and useful observations in general?

man the irony is your post is as thick as your head. I never said he was my friend…you’re assuming. He’s a poster here. I insinuated that people make wrong assumptions based on their own prejudices, as in discrediting media sources that report factual info,and not just opinions. The poster in question discredited and wrote off the news sources as a joke, which brings me to the conclusion that he has no clue in how credible they are. So it’s more of a conclusion based on his reaction and previous posts, and not an assumption … which makes your assumption inaccurate.

And you trying to figure me out is futile. You really don’t have a clue. Not a clue.

[Brown_Eyed_Girl]

@xtisme

I obviously haven’t followed the whole thread…my apologies. To Brown-Eyed Girl as well.

It’s no problem. I’m new around here and lurking a bit more than posting. I was also going to say Inherit the Wind, but Darrow is, of course, not a fictional character.

It’s been a long time since I saw it, but wasn’t William Hurt’s character in Altered States an atheist? I checked quotes on IMDB and came up with this one:

Eddie Jessup: What dignifies the Yogic practices is that the belief system itself is not truly religious. There is no Buddhist God per se. It is the Self, the individual Mind, that contains immortality and ultimate truth.
Emily Jessup: What the hell is not religious about that? You’ve simply replaced God with the Original Self.
Eddie Jessup: Yes, but we’ve localized it. Now I know where the Self is. It’s in our own minds. It’s a form of human energy. Our atoms are six billion years old. We’ve got six billion years of memory in our minds.

I’m gonna have to rent it again to be sure. Great movie.

If it’s safe to add my two cents, it’s obvious to me that atheism isn’t represented more fully in entertainment because it doesn’t appeal to the vast majority of consumers. Religious contexts are something that most people, regardless of their personal beliefs, can comprehend and, in many cases, relate to. Like it or not, religion is deeply ingrained in our society and it’s not going anywhere any time soon.

Whether atheism is on the rise, it’s still not prevalent enough in this country to really register on the general population’s meter.

[Brown_Eyed_Girl]

Add: Oh, and according to wikipedia, Clarence Darrow was actually agnostic.

[Miller]

@JohnnieEnigma

man the irony is your post is as thick as your head. I never said he was my friend…you’re assuming. He’s a poster here.

Oh, Christ, you really got me there! What a rhetorical misstep I’ve made! I said he was your friend, and he was a poster here! This completely undercuts everything I said in my post!

That was sarcasm, by the way. Just in case you missed it.

I insinuated that people make wrong assumptions based on their own prejudices, as in discrediting media sources that report factual info,and not just opinions. The poster in question discredited and wrote off the news sources as a joke, which brings me to the conclusion that he has no clue in how credible they are. So it’s more of a conclusion based on his reaction and previous posts, and not an assumption … which makes your assumption inaccurate.

And you’ve missed my point entirely. Good for you. I’d hate to see you break your streak.

And you trying to figure me out is futile. You really don’t have a clue. Not a clue.

Oh, I think I’ve got plenty of clues from this thread alone. Figuring you out ain’t exactly the Riddle of the Sphinx.

[catsix]

Revenant Threshold said:
and Bones from that anthropology/crime show thing, who embodies the strict scientist/belittles faith whenever she sees it stereotype.

Bones is also portrayed as being an extremely socially inept nerd who offends people left and right because she has no understanding of human feelings.

While Booth has an over-exaggerated emotional range, it’s not expressed as a part of hs Christianity. He is more a parody of the gung-ho Army Ranger (which is his supposed background). Most of the characters on Bones are stereotypes. The conspiracy theory nut (Hodgins), the touchy feely artist (Angela), the hardcore scientist with no feelings (Bones and Zach), the macho man (Booth), and the serious-but-fun leader who always guides people back to their work (Camille).

House is, as noted, an utter asshole and can hardly be considered a positive portrayal of an atheist.

Brown Eyed Girl said:
Ellie Arroway in Contact.

And she was roundly pounded down by preacher Palmer Joss. Ellie didn’t win any debates with Palmer over religion. He pretty much ruins her argument both times, rather simplisticly, and that’s the end of it.

As far as atheists go, she’s a sympathetic but pretty weak character to be unable to come back from ‘Prove it’ after she admits she loved her father.

So that’s one… and you had to go to a movie that’s ten years old.

And now I see we have someone claiming that the rules of structured debate are not feminine. I seem to remember that sentiment from somewhere. It was a popular theme at a feminist forum. Thankfully it will not wash here, and hopefully we can get the thread back on track from the JohnnieEnigma hijack.

[Brown_Eyed_Girl]

@catsix

So that’s one… and you had to go to a movie that’s ten years old.

I went back even further than that.

So what’s your point?

[Brown_Eyed_Girl]

@xtisme

I never saw any indication of that myself. I think most of the cast were, again, implied to be atheist or agnostic…even the priest (I can’t recall his name…Father Mulchay, something like that) had regular fairly regular crisis of faith thingies.

I don’t think that would make him anything other than a thoughtful theist. If you’re not having crises of faith in the middle of a war, you’re not doing a whole lot of thinking about your faith. And yet, despite the crises, I don’t remember Father Mulcahey ever renouncing his faith.

This is coming from an agnostic point-of-view, so take it with a grain of salt.

Why are people discouraged about the lack of atheist/agnostic representation in film and TV? Do you think that if Hollywood treated atheism more significantly, a lot of people would change their personal faith? Or is it that you’d like to see your compelling atheistic stories brought to the masses?

[Mellivora_capensis]

On the subject of House, if I recall correctly Cameron is an atheist too. And she’s kinda cute…

ETA, isn’t Grissom (CSI Vegas) also portrayed as atheist, or at the very least agnostic?

[Brown_Eyed_Girl]

@Mellivora capensis

On the subject of House, if I recall correctly Cameron is an atheist too. And she’s kinda cute…

ETA, isn’t Grissom (CSI Vegas) also portrayed as atheist, or at the very least agnostic?

Nope. Catholic, but non-practicing.
Grissom: “Christ died for our sins. I wonder whose sins she died for?”

Sarah, OTOH, is atheist.

[Sophistry_and_Illusion]

@JohnnieEnigma

Although my perception here tonight wasn’t wrong, it’s my perception which is my reality. It’s how I perceived things based on experience, observation, and so on. How we perceive things is very real for each of us.

You’re just conflating “If I believe X, I think X is real/factual” with “Whatever I believe is in fact real.” The former is trivial; the latter is false. Or perhaps you don’t understand the difference between the two. I wouldn’t rule that out.

@JohnnnieEnigma

Or maybe the four of you disagreed with me because you didn’t want to acknowledge the points I was trying to make. Could be… Personal factors should’t always be discounted though. You can’t just write them off especially if the argument is so strong and you have logical justification or “backup” for it - which is necessary in your debate format.

Don’t flatter yourself. We are disagreeing with you because your posts are at best false, expressing the most naive relativistic touchy-feely woo-woo BS; or at worst they are totally incoherent, and lacking in any conceptual content whatsoever.

[Brown_Eyed_Girl]

@Brown Eyed Girl

Nope. Catholic, but non-practicing.
Grissom: “Christ died for our sins. I wonder whose sins she died for?”

Sarah, OTOH, is atheist.

Actually, I am incorrect to an extent. The episode was called Double-Cross . Grissom indicates that he was raised Catholic, but currently practices “secular Catholicism”, while Sara doesn’t consider herself atheist, but her comments are quite in line with agnosticism.

Grissom: Memory is a gift.
Sara: Hmmm. (long pause) From whom?
Grissom: Who do you think?
Sara: Well, I wouldn’t necessarily call myself an Athiest, but I am not sold on the notion of a higher power. However, I used to love the stories of the Saints.
Grissom: This job certainly challenges your faith.
Sara: Yes it does. But, I have science.
Grissom: I believe we need a little of both.
Sara: Sometimes, I think we made up God just to have someone to blame for our mistakes. It’s… just a theory!
…
Sara: I didn’t offend you, did I? Did I say something offensive to you as a Catholic?
Grissom: I’m not really a Catholic any more, you know. I suppose I practice a kind of secular Catholocism that involves ritualizing certain aspects of everyday life, and then viewing them with a spiritual intensity they might not otherwise possess. But, I don’t want to put too fine a point on it.

[Indistinguishable]

@Brown Eyed Girl

Nope. Catholic, but non-practicing.
Grissom: “Christ died for our sins. I wonder whose sins she died for?”

Sarah, OTOH, is atheist.

Just to clarify, Cameron from House is indeed a self-proclaimed atheist, whatever the deal with CSI is.

[DrCube]

JohnnieEnigma, do you believe that there is a real, objective reality out there? Is it potentially understandable? Can we probe it and use it to rank competing hypotheses in terms of agreement with our understanding of that reality?

It is not masculine to answer ‘yes’ to any of the above questions. And agreeing with the above is all it takes to see why people demand evidence when faced with competing assertions about reality.

Your personal opinions are not assertions about reality except indirectly: If they are based on any factual assumption whatsoever, they are potentially invalid. Most of us welcome argument; indeed, it is why this forum exists. It strengthens beliefs that can be backed up with evidence by decreasing our uncertainty about them. And if your beliefs don’t stand up to the test, that’s okay too. Why would you want to believe something that isn’t true? Why would you even want to base an inconsequential opinion on something that isn’t true?

[Miller]

Two more I thought of on the way to work this morning: Chief Garibaldi from Babylon 5, and Malcolm Reynolds from Firefly. Although in the second case, his atheism is presented explicitly as a character flaw. We only know he’s an atheist because he’s such a dick to Shepherd Book, and he’s only an atheist because he’s bitter over losing the war.

So, ignoring my original stipulation of “sympathetic,” we’ve got the following explicit atheists from American broadcast media:

Jodi Foster in Contact
The title character from House
Cameron, from House
The lead from Bones
Chief Garibaldi from Babylon 5
Malcolm Reynolds from Firefly
Sarah, maybe, from CSI

Now the other side of the coin: explicit theists from American broadcast media:

Matthew McConaghey in Contact
The other lead from Bones
Delenn and G’Kar from Babylon 5
Shepherd Book from Firefly
Gus Grissom from CSI
Michael Landon in Highway to Heaven
The entire cast of Touched by an Angel
The entire cast of 7th Heaven
President Bartlett in The West Wing
Jeremey Piven in Cupid
Willow and Tara from Buffy the Vampire Slayer
Morgan Freeman in everything from Robin Hood, Prince of Thieves to Evan Almighty
Father Mulcahey from MASH
Sherman Helmsley in Amen
Chris Rock in Dogma
Sean Connery in Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade

And that’s after ten minutes thought, just from me. As opposed to the list that’s half as long, that took the better part of a day and input from several posters to compile. Also noteworthy is that, with exception of House, all of the atheist characters on the first list have a theist counterpart on the second. Often, as a direct foil for that characters atheism. Several of the shows and movies on the second list establish the presence of the divine as an objective, observable fact.

Now, again, I’m not complaining about this. I’m not demanding more atheist representation in the media, or anything like that. But I think it amply demonstrates that JohnnieEnigma’s original claim in this thread, that American culture frowns on religion, and that this disapproval is reflected in our popular culture, is pure bunk.

[Revenant_Threshold]

@JohnnieEnigma

So yes, sometimes I would clearly like to “enlighten” others, have them open their minds to new sources, and snap out of their poorly informed ignorant prejudices. But they’re unable to do it (based on their own personal prejudices, perceptions, values). Plus, I think it would be incredibly arrogant to assume that everyone needs to think as I do.

But if you think others can be so easily puled into uninformed ignorant prejudices - how do you know the same can’t be said for you? What’s your method of ensuring your perceptions are honest when you must use your perception to tell?

Your personal feelings can have worth in a debate if they are based on cited proof, I suppose. There are clearly differing opinions for most everything. Of course an opinion does not have to be correct or factual, or agreed by everyone. But some opinions are based on perceptions as well as facts.

And those perceptions are pretty much worthless. There is no way of knowing whether they are right or not without those facts. An opinion based solely on perception is a terrible thing - and I would say that even if it was an opinion that agreed with mine. Just having perception as your evidence is no evidence at all.

Although my perception here tonight wasn’t wrong, it’s my perception which is my reality. It’s how I perceived things based on experience, observation, and so on. How we perceive things is very real for each of us.

But it was wrong. Four people have said so - as you value perceptions, you must now agree, since four perceptions see it one way and one the other.

Or maybe the four of you disagreed with me because you didn’t want to acknowledge the points I was trying to make. Could be… Personal factors should’t always be discounted though. You can’t just write them off especially if the argument is so strong and you have logical justification or “backup” for it - which is necessary in your debate format.

Certainly so - I have zero problem with opinions backed by logical justification and strong argument. That’s necessary, after all. But the opinion without those things is useless.

Just as a sidenote, do you actually think we’re disagreeing because we don’t want to acknowledge those points? You seem surprisingly quick to assume that people arguing against you have an ulterior motive and dishonest argument.

[fluiddruid]

@JohnnieEnigma

The structure of the debate may be neither masculine or feminine, but the debaters I am referring to are masculine and as a result there’s a vein of testosterone or aggression that I seem to lack. I am speaking about when you’re in the heat of a passionate debate where it gets emotional; there are times where I’ve argued with others but not with the same aggression. I wouldn’t expect you to understand simply because you’re a woman. It’s just something I’ve observed.

On the one hand, you are talking about an observation that we do not share, and on the other hand, quoting it as fact.

If you intend to state your opinions as fact, you should expect the reception you have gotten.

If you feel that you are stating a fact, please state in plain English:

• What exactly you are stating is a fact

and

• What evidence you have of this fact

Otherwise, you’re just giving a mealy-mouthed “I don’t want to debate with you because you’re super mean and I can’t be bothered to defend myself – I mean, you’re an aggressive man and women just can’t communicate with you”.

[Larry_Borgia]

In The Simpsons pretty much everyone goes to Church, even Monty Burns.

[MrDibble]

Judge Amy Gray in Judging Amy was explicitly atheist.

[begbert2]

@Miller

So, ignoring my original stipulation of “sympathetic,” we’ve got the following explicit atheists from American broadcast media:

Jodi Foster in Contact
The title character from House
Cameron, from House
The lead from Bones
Chief Garibaldi from Babylon 5
Malcolm Reynolds from Firefly
Sarah, maybe, from CSI

And in how many of these characters is the atheism explicitly presented as being a bad thing? I haven’t watched most of these shows, but I gather that in the cases at least half these characters the atheism is an explicit weakness or character flaw. (Specifically Foster’s character, House, Bones, and Malcolm.)

If presenting something as a bad thing is an example of it being supported, then His Dark Materials is totally a pro-religion/pro-catholic series.

[Miller]

@begbert2

And in how many of these characters is the atheism explicitly presented as being a bad thing? I haven’t watched most of these shows, but I gather that in the cases at least half these characters the atheism is an explicit weakness or character flaw. (Specifically Foster’s character, House, Bones, and Malcolm.)

If presenting something as a bad thing is an example of it being supported, then His Dark Materials is totally a pro-religion/pro-catholic series.

I’m not directly familiar with most of the shows from that list. However, to my knowledge, Chief Garibaldi is the only one there whose atheism is presented as an equally valid choice, and whose beliefs are not expressed as antagonism towards a theistic character. IIRC, it comes up while he’s sharing a friendly drink with a member of another species’ priest caste.