Kent university atheism study

The global Understanding Unbelief programme to advance the scientific understanding of atheism and nonreligion will today (28 May) present results from its research at the Vatican in Rome.

The multidisciplinary research programme led by the University of Kent maps the nature and diversity of ‘unbelief’ across six countries including Brazil, China, Denmark, Japan, UK and the USA

The research is supported by a £2.3 million grant from the John Templeton Foundation, and is led by the University of Kent in collaboration with St Mary’s University Twickenham, Coventry University and Queen’s University Belfast.

Researchers asked about attitudes to issues like supernatural phenomena, such as life after death and astrology, whether the ‘universe is ultimately meaningless’ and what values matter most to them. They used internationally recognised terms to identify unbelievers – atheists (i.e., people who ‘don’t believe in God’) and agnostics (i.e., people who ‘don’t know whether there is a God or not, and don’t believe there is a way to find out’).

Key findings from the research include:

• Unbelievers exhibit significant diversity both within, and between, different countries
  
• In all six countries, majorities of unbelievers identify as having ‘no religion’
  
• Relatively few select ‘atheist’ or ‘agnostic’ as their preferred (non)religious or secular identity
  
• Popular assumptions about ‘convinced, dogmatic atheists’ do not stand up to scrutiny
  
• Unbelief in God doesn’t necessarily entail unbelief in other supernatural phenomena and the majority of unbelievers in all countries surveyed expressed belief in one or more supernatural phenomena
  
• A common supposition – that of the purposeless unbeliever, lacking anything to ascribe ultimate meaning to the universe – does not bear scrutiny
  
• Most unbelievers endorse objective moral values, human dignity and attendant rights, and the ‘deep value’ of nature, at similar rates to the general populations in their countries
  
• Unbelievers and general populations show high agreement concerning the values most important for ‘finding meaning in the world and your own life’. ‘Family’ and ‘freedom’ ranked highly for all
  

Some interesting findings there. I’m not really surprised that the aggressive brand of atheism promoted by Dawkins and his pals does not seem to appeal to the majority of “unbelievers”. It does seem to miss a large category of people who reject religious beliefs but not the existence of a creative source or some form of spiritual reality. I’m not sure, however, that the study looked at that group.

https://www.kent.ac.uk/news/society/2243...niversity#

Here’s the link to the study itself:

https://research.kent.ac.uk/understandin...rtRome.pdf

They used internationally recognised terms to identify unbelievers – atheists (i.e., people who ‘don’t believe in God’) and agnostics (i.e., people who ‘don’t know whether there is a God or not, and don’t believe there is a way to find out’).

To my point about the study apparently missing out on a large section of the population who reject religion but not some form of spirituality, I looked at the PDF (linked above) and found that some of those who are included in the 'agnostic' category identify as "spiritual but not religious'.

I'm not sure to what extent the language and viewpoint of the study is entangling the concept of God with the concept of religion. For example the term 'unbeliever' sounds an awful lot like 'infidel' which, though it might be a neutral term, tends to be used to denigrate those outside of some approved religion. I don't know whether I'm being picky about word usage - it is after all difficult to find wordings to satisfy everyone.

On a related topic, perhaps even the identical topic, I heard a radio presenter a couple of days ago airing his disbelief in God, but he did so entirely on the basis of rejecting ancient scriptures. That, to me seemed to rather miss the point.

I'm not sure to what extent the language and viewpoint of the study is entangling the concept of God with the concept of religion. For example the term 'unbeliever' sounds an awful lot like 'infidel' which, though it might be a neutral term, tends to be used to denigrate those outside of some approved religion. I don't know whether I'm being picky about word usage - it is after all difficult to find wordings to satisfy everyone.

On a related topic, perhaps even the identical topic, I heard a radio presenter a couple of days ago airing his disbelief in God, but he did so entirely on the basis of rejecting ancient scriptures. That, to me seemed to rather miss the point.

I agree that the point is being missed in many of these discussions: that belief in God or a spiritual reality is not the equivalent to religious belief. One might be considered a philosophical point of view while the other adherence to dogma. One may be the result of contemplation and deliberation while the other might be due to cultural conditioning and unquestioning faith. Also the concept of that god may well be quite different to any religious teaching. Nevertheless, I think that the results as illustrated by various graphs and bar charts in the report do indicate that there is a large section of society who do not belong in either the "unbeliever" or the religious camps.

As for the use of the word unbeliever, I can understand why they used that given the scope of the study. They were trying to categorise those who declared some degree of disbelief without using one of the terms that those same people might prefer (such as Humanist or Secular, etc.).

Yes, I'm not really critical of the study.

Coming back to the radio presenter (I don't know the name, but it was someone on LBC), one of the points he raised was that (according to his perspective) there was zero evidence for God, and that (from his perspective) such evidence could not be found.

I'd like to raise that as an open question:

Is it possible to to find evidence for God?


[Bearing in mind that this is a science-based site, I'm not interested in religion as such, only on empirical observation.]

Yes, I'm not really critical of the study.

Coming back to the radio presenter (I don't know the name, but it was someone on LBC), one of the points he raised was that (according to his perspective) there was zero evidence for God, and that (from his perspective) such evidence could not be found.

I'd like to raise that as an open question:

Is it possible to to find evidence for God?


[Bearing in mind that this is a science-based site, I'm not interested in religion as such, only on empirical observation.]

It depends upon what we are willing to accept as evidence. If we are constrained to the rules of scientific evidence then we are also constrained by the boundaries imposed by scientific (methodological) naturalism. That would exclude, a priori, the supernatural and therefore God. If God is excluded a priori then evidence of the existence of God is impossible by definition.

So the question remains in the realm of the metaphysical and metaphysical naturalism is a belief (that excludes the supernatural) just as much as the metaphysical belief that God and/or the supernatural are real.

Yes, I'm not really critical of the study.

Coming back to the radio presenter (I don't know the name, but it was someone on LBC), one of the points he raised was that (according to his perspective) there was zero evidence for God, and that (from his perspective) such evidence could not be found.

I'd like to raise that as an open question:

Is it possible to to find evidence for God?


[Bearing in mind that this is a science-based site, I'm not interested in religion as such, only on empirical observation.]

It depends. It is certainly possible to find evidence for God if God makes a difference - that is, a universe which includes God is different from one without God. So, for example, if God is the fine-tuner, then universes which aren’t amenable to “life” formation are more likely in its absence, and those which are amenable are more likely in its presence. An example of the presence of God making no difference would be those who find belief in God a comfort, a core around which to organize the meaning in their lives. God’s presence or absence would have no effect on those beliefs.

So it is possible to find evidence for a God that does stuff - fixes football games, gives babies AIDS, redirects flood waters, etc. But not for a God which is only a comforting idea.

Linda

It depends. It is certainly possible to find evidence for God if God makes a difference - that is, a universe which includes God is different from one without God. So, for example, if God is the fine-tuner, then universes which aren’t amenable to “life” formation are more likely in its absence, and those which are amenable are more likely in its presence. An example of the presence of God making no difference would be those who find belief in God a comfort, a core around which to organize the meaning in their lives. God’s presence or absence would have no effect on those beliefs.

So it is possible to find evidence for a God that does stuff - fixes football games, gives babies AIDS, redirects flood waters, etc. But not for a God which is only a comforting idea.

Linda

Or maybe so, I believe a couple of studies have been done that correlate religious belief with longevity. And overall well being. Particularly among the elderly.

It depends. It is certainly possible to find evidence for God if God makes a difference - that is, a universe which includes God is different from one without God. So, for example, if God is the fine-tuner, then universes which aren’t amenable to “life” formation are more likely in its absence, and those which are amenable are more likely in its presence. An example of the presence of God making no difference would be those who find belief in God a comfort, a core around which to organize the meaning in their lives. God’s presence or absence would have no effect on those beliefs.

So it is possible to find evidence for a God that does stuff - fixes football games, gives babies AIDS, redirects flood waters, etc. But not for a God which is only a comforting idea.

Linda

Or maybe so,  I believe a couple of studies have been done that show a correlation between religious faith  and longevity, and other benefits one might expect from having a community of like minded friends.