m****s
发帖数: 18160 | 1 ☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
leonana (leonany) 于 (Fri Jun 17 01:41:49 2011, 美东) 提到:
投诉人(ID):
Leonana
投诉对象及职务(限版主）:
Jesus版主dignity
投诉标题:
滥用权力打击异己
投诉目标(更改处理决定/更改板规/弹劾板主...):
更改处理决定/更改板规/弹劾板主
投诉理由及证据:
基督徒Id Huo转帖刷屏每天高达近20首贴，阻碍版面正常交流数日，版主对版友这些天
公开的
质疑照常装聋作哑，并在被网友质疑前每篇刷贴mark奖励, 另外严重怀疑此人即为id为libajia的马甲，具体请参考
赏罚记录
22 Dignity SEEKETERNAL 2011-06-15 01:58:09 10.00(伪币) [浏览]
23 Dignity SEEKETERNAL 2011-06-15 01:58:09 10.00(伪币) [浏览]
24 Dignity SEEKETERNAL 2011-06-15 01:58:09 10.00(伪币) [浏览]
25 Dignity littletshirt 2011-06-15 01:57:26 10.00(伪币) [浏览]
26 Dignity huo 2011-06-15 01:55:16 10.00(伪币) [浏览]
27 Dignity huo 2011-06-15 01:55:16 10.00(伪币) [浏览]
28 Dignity littletshirt 2011-06-15 01:55:16 10.00(伪币) [浏览]
29 Dignity huo 2011-06-15 01:55:16 10.00(伪币) [浏览]
30 Dignity huo 2011-06-15 01:55:16 10.00(伪币) [浏览]
31 Dignity huo 2011-06-15 01:55:16 10.00(伪币) [浏览]
32 Dignity huo 2011-06-15 01:55:16 10.00(伪币) [浏览]
33 Dignity huo 2011-06-15 01:55:16 10.00(伪币) [浏览]
34 Dignity littletshirt 2011-06-15 01:55:16 10.00(伪币) [浏览]
35 Dignity huo 2011-06-15 01:54:32 10.00(伪币) [浏览]
36 Dignity littletshirt 2011-06-15 01:54:11 10.00(伪币) [浏览]
37 Dignity littletshirt 2011-06-15 01:54:11 10.00(伪币) [浏览]
38 Dignity huo 2011-06-15 01:54:11 10.00(伪币) [浏览]
39 Dignity huo 2011-06-15 01:54:11 10.00(伪币) [浏览]
40 Dignity huo 2011-06-15 01:54:11 10.00(伪币) [浏览]
41 Dignity huo 2011-06-15 01:54:11 10.00(伪币) [浏览]
42 Dignity SEEKETERNAL 2011-06-15 01:54:11 10.00(伪币) [浏览]
43 Dignity huo 2011-06-15 01:53:18 10.00(伪币) [浏览]
44 Dignity huo 2011-06-15 01:53:18 10.00(伪币) [浏览]
45 Dignity huo 2011-06-15 01:53:18 10.00(伪币) [浏览]
46 Dignity huo 2011-06-15 01:53:18 10.00(伪币) [浏览]
47 Dignity huo 2011-06-15 01:53:18 10.00(伪币) [浏览]
48 Dignity huo 2011-06-15 01:53:17 10.00(伪币) [浏览]
49 Dignity huo 2011-06-15 01:53:17 10.00(伪币) [浏览]
50 Dignity huo 2011-06-15 01:53:17 10.00(伪币) [浏览]
51 Dignity huo 2011-06-15 01:53:17 10.00(伪币) [浏览]
52 vonage SEEKETERNAL 2011-04-08 09:50:39 10.00(伪币) [浏览]
53 vonage Beginner10 2011-04-08 09:50:29 10.00(伪币) [浏览]
非基督徒id 转载belief精华贴直接被删贴并封禁14天，八知道是不是被质疑后怀恨在心
http://www.mitbbs.com/article_t/TrustInJesus/529599.html
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
leonana (leonany) 于 (Fri Jun 17 01:43:16 2011, 美东) 提到:
此为版主解释
发信人: Dignity (饥不择食), 信区: TrustInJesus
标 题: Re: Dignity 封 leonana 在 TrustInJesus 版 (转载)
发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Fri Jun 17 01:29:10 2011, 美东)
这里是讨论交流基督教的版面，不是转载些反基督教的带侮辱性言语的文章的地方。
160;
版主:Dignity
160;
Fri Jun 17 01:22:08 2011
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
leonana (leonany) 于 (Fri Jun 17 01:54:00 2011, 美东) 提到:
被删帖子大致如下，请版主解释是违背了哪条版规，还是没讨论基督信仰，还是有啥侮辱基督教的东东，还是
单纯的连内容都没看找个借口公报私仇？
http://www.mitbbs.com/article_t/Belief/31230097.html
http://www.mitbbs.com/article_t/Belief/31229938.html
http://www.mitbbs.com/article_t/Belief/31225037.html
http://www.mitbbs.com/article_t/Belief/31229194.html
http://www.mitbbs.com/article_t/Belief/31227162.html
http://www.mitbbs.com/article_t/Belief/31225914.html
http://www.mitbbs.com/article_t/Belief/31221595.html
http://www.mitbbs.com/article_t/Belief/31219917.html
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
leonana (leonany) 于 (Fri Jun 17 01:54:30 2011, 美东) 提到:
1
发信人: septaphobia (恐妻症), 信区: Belief
标 题: 达尔文名言
发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Tue Mar 3 23:29:29 2009)
http://news.sohu.com/20090212/n262203101.shtml
“人自负地以为自己是神干预下的杰作，我宁可谦卑地相信人是由动物创造。”—
——1838年记载于记事簿
“假如我的理论被证实，哪怕只有一人认同，都是科学发展的一大步。”———
1844年致妻子的秘密便条
“最强的物种会取代对手，成功挣扎求存，因为他们最能适应环境。”———1859
年出版的《物种起源》
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
leonana (leonany) 于 (Fri Jun 17 01:55:12 2011, 美东) 提到:
发信人: RealNewton (牛顿), 信区: Belief
标 题: 为上帝撒谎成性zz
发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Tue Mar 3 14:49:40 2009)
老文新读
·方舟子·
我以前已一再指出，原教旨基督徒在传教时，往往有撒谎的习惯，而且大概觉得为
传教而撒谎也会得到上帝的宽恕甚至奖赏，所以即使谎言被戳穿，也不会觉得有丝毫的
羞愧、悔改。例如，我已撰文证明过在网上颇为著名的传教士微言、钱锟、里程、林献
羔等人都撒谎，但对他们的传教职业好像也没有什么影响。网上还有一个特别狂热的原
教旨基督徒“基甸”，在1995年左右开始上网传教，就撒了个弥天大谎，声称英国著名
的科学刊物《自然》也刊登神创论的论文。这个谎言被我戳穿后，他并没有表示出任何
的羞愧，仍然继续撰写大量的谎言连篇的传教文章。我早已失去了继续揭露他的兴趣，
以为他已在非信徒中名誉扫地。直到现在，看到涂建华主办的“科学无神论”网站竟然
把基甸在2002年年底写的《“上帝不存在的证明”与“上帝存在的证明”》一文当成“
学术争鸣”文章登出，才觉得还有多说几句的必要。
“学术争鸣”允许出错，但不允许造假，基甸的文章根本达不到这个起码的要求。
他所引用的吉米·霍尔特文章还可算是学术争鸣，我在后面再跟霍氏争几句，现在先来
戳穿一下基甸的谎言。他先是撒了一个关于我的谎言：“在美国的传媒和网络上常常会
看到很多‘某某还有某某这样的名人都是无神论者’的消息，也常常被中文网上的反基
人士（方舟子等）拿来为无神论‘壮胆’。”别的无神论者怎么想的，我不知道，但被
点了名的我却从来没有以某某名人是无神论者来为自己壮胆，倒是常常在得知我尊敬的
某个名人无神论立场不坚定后而为他遗憾。对我来说，相信无神论是理性思考的结果，
而不是盲目的信仰，所以不像信徒那样没有安全感，没有必要拉名人为自己壮胆。我之
所以多次撰文证明达尔文、爱因斯坦以及绝大多数杰出的科学家都不信神，恰恰是因为
基督徒反复自作多情地把这些名人拉来为自己壮胆。
基甸还撒了个关于霍氏的谎言：“对绝大多数的一般人而言，霍氏认为真正合乎理
性的选择只有有神论和不可知论（上帝的存在既不能证明，也无法证伪，所以无法在理
性上判定真伪）。”这个谎撒得相当弱智，只有不知理性为何物的人才能撒得出来：有
神论和不可知论在逻辑上互相对立，非此即彼，怎么可能都属于“合乎理性的选择”？
细读霍氏原文，并无这种说法，恰恰相反，他借哲学家范·因瓦根（Van Inwagen）之
口说，相信上帝的存在并不是据于理性，但是人们也不能很好地证明它是非理性。他进
一步指出，同样，有神论者也不能证明无神论是非理性。（见霍氏文章的倒数第三段。
原文见：http://slate.msn.com/default.aspx?id=2075653）也就是说，在霍氏看来，有神论和无神论在逻辑上是对等的，既不是出于理性的选择，也不能证明是非理性。这似乎是不可知论的观点，但是他并没有对不可知论进行判断。所以基甸所谓“霍氏认为”如何如何，绝对是个谎
霍氏之所以怀疑某些自称无神论者的美国名人是否真算得上无神论者，是由于他误
解了什么是无神论。霍氏把无神论者定义为相信上帝不存在的人，而要求他们证明上帝
不存在。霍氏的定义与一般的不同。例如，《美国传统词典》、《韦氏英语词典》等美
国英语大词典，都把无神论者定义为“不相信或否认上帝或神灵的存在的人”。只要不
相信上帝的存在，就都被认为是无神论者，霍氏所说的那类相信上帝不存在的人，只是
无神论者的一部分（有时被称为强无神论者），但是并非无神论者的全部。不相信上帝
的存在，并不需要自己去证明，只要认为上帝存在的证据不足以令人接受，就可以不相
信。举证的责任是在有神论一方。正如我们不相信孙悟空、狐狸精、圣诞老人、独角兽
、维纳斯、邱比特……等等的存在，并不需要自己去证明，而只要认为没有确凿的证据
证明它们存在，就够了。取证的责任是在相信上帝、孙悟空、狐狸精、圣诞老人……存
在的一方。
因此，如果你要当一名无神论者（不相信神的存在），并不需要自己去做任何证明
，而只要认为有神论的证明不能令人信服，就行了。如果你要像我一样当一名强无神论
者（相信神不存在），情况稍微复杂一些。这时候人们会要求你做出论证。要证明某个
事物不存在，往往是很困难甚至不可能的，但是也并非全都如此。如果指的是某个具体
定义的神，那么是有可能证明其不存在的。例如我们有非常好的理由（种种不合理的设
计现象）相信这个世界不存在智能设计者。我们也有理由相信基督教所说的那个全能、
全善的上帝是不存在的。其中一个很好的理由就是霍氏提到的“来自邪恶的论证”：一
个全能、全善的上帝怎么可能允许世界上存在邪恶？上帝或者没有能力制止邪恶（非全
能），或者不愿制止邪恶（非全善）。有神论者对此常以“自由意志”为由做辩解，如
霍氏引用因瓦根的说法：既要上帝让我在X（善）和y（恶）之间做选择，又要上帝保证
我会选择X（善）而不是y（恶），这在逻辑上是不可能的。但是这个辩解是个狡辩。世
界上许多邪恶——天灾 ——和任何人的自由意志都没有关系，为什么上帝不制止？即
使是某些人的自由意志导致的邪恶——人祸——也往往与受害者的自由意志无关，不是
受害者所能自由选择的，上帝为什么不保护这些无辜的受害者？霍氏其实也知道这个“
自由意志”是一种狡辩，所以他才以开玩笑的口气说自己相信上帝是100％恶但是只有
80％的效力，如此才能解释世界上发生的一切事情（邪恶可以解释为是上帝无能去制止
）。
要证明这个“100％恶80％能”的霍氏上帝或其他类似的奇怪神灵不存在，是不可
能的。但是我们相信这些神统统不存在，并不是非理性的选择，而是完全理性的：对未
知的事物，如果我们预先认定它不存在，那么要推翻这个认定，只要等以后发现了它就
行了；反之，如果我们预先认定它存在，那么要推翻这个认定，却需要彻底查找所有的
地方才行，而这往往是不切实际的。所以，在实际上，特别是在科学研究中，为了能够
检测，在没有确凿的证据表明某个事物存在以前，我们都是认定它不存在的。有神论者
实际上也在悄悄运用这个原则，比如，基督徒信仰的是一神论，显然认为希腊神话中的
神或道教中的神不存在，尽管他们并没有彻底地去搜寻过。他们在对待自己的神和别人
的神时，采用了双重标准。我们却对所有的神采取同一个标准：认定神不存在，而等着
别人来向我们显示神存在的确凿证据。
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
leonana (leonany) 于 (Fri Jun 17 01:55:54 2011, 美东) 提到:
发信人: liebling (liebling), 信区: Belief
标 题: 反对同性恋权益的著名基督徒同性恋丑闻经典回顾
发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Fri Jan 30 12:01:03 2009)
1. 佛罗里达州共和党州议员Robert W. Allen
罗伯特．艾伦身兼马侃佛州竞选委员会共同主席。七月的一个下午，艾伦在佛州一个公
园Robert W. Allen的男厕所中引诱一名便衣警察从事性行为而被逮捕。消息传出后，
艾伦不再担任佛州马侃竞选委员会共同主席。
2. 共和党领导Jim West
While in the legislature he served as Senate Majority Leader. During these
years, Jim West supported several anti-gay bills, including one that would
have banned gays and lesbians from working in schools and day care centers.
He also proposed a law that would ban all sexual activity among persons
under the age of 18 (the bill failed). He would later admit that he
regretted voting for those measures.[1] In 1995, when West was a state
senator, he advocated the impeachment of then-Gov. Mike Lowry for alleged
sexual harassment.
West was involved in a sex scandal in 2005. He was accused of sexually
abusing two young boys in the 1970s and 1980s when he was a sheriff's deputy
and Boy Scout leader. He was also accused of misusing his office as mayor
to lure teenage boys for sexual relationships. West called the molestation
allegations "flat lies". However he admitted to having private online
relationships in the past year through the Gay.com website (see ([3]).
West confirmed the accusations of meeting men over the Internet but denied
the charges that he had sought out minors (see[4]). Using the name "Right-
BiGuy" he allegedly offered internships to young gay men (some of whom were
just graduating from high school - none of whom, however, under the age of
18.
3. 共和党佛罗里达州参议员Mark Foley
继克林顿总统于1998年被揭露与白宫实习生发生婚外情事件后，美国政坛再度传出一件
令人震惊的性丑闻。9月29日，美国广播公司（ABC）在晚间新闻节目中独家披露佛罗里
达州共和党籍众议员马克·福利（Mark Foley）向国会一名年仅16岁的男性实习生发送
内容极为淫秽的简讯，有性骚扰这名未成年实习生之嫌。消息曝光后，福利马上宣布辞
去国会众议员一职，并称自己嗜酒成瘾，翌日便进入戒酒所接受治疗。数日后，福利通
过委任律师发表声明正式“出柜”，宣称自己是同性恋者。
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
leonana (leonany) 于 (Fri Jun 17 01:56:24 2011, 美东) 提到:
发信人: RealNewton (牛顿), 信区: Belief
标 题: 基督徒与进化论
发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Fri Feb 27 16:12:40 2009)
如果宗教试图解释自然，那么它与科学的对立是必然的，历史上对科学家的屠杀和现代
基督徒对进化论的谣言都充分说明了一点。
基督徒能接受还是假说的宇宙大爆炸，但同样是科学成果比宇宙大爆炸证据还要多且已
经上升为理论的进化论却难以接受。
这就是因为宗教对自然的解释与科学发生了冲突，这种冲突是必然的，宗教如果失去了
对自然的解释效力，那么后面的一切都是空虚的。
所以对自然的解释上，先是和科学攀亲，把科学说成是证明宗教的，攀不上的地方就造
谣攻击，如对进化论。
但是有些聪明的科学家毕竟是比普通的基督徒聪明点，在宗教与科学之间按两套思维方
式进行处理。这在牛顿时期就已经体现出来了，牛顿就已经把神踢得远远的，只给神留
了个第一推动的位置。
-若为自由故
http://zhidao.baidu.com/question/56979659.html
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
leonana (leonany) 于 (Fri Jun 17 01:57:03 2011, 美东) 提到:
发信人: arsablue (真神), 信区: Belief
标 题: 數位美國總統對宗教的看法
发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Sun Feb 15 11:56:51 2009)
"The government of the United States is in no sense founded on the Christian
Religion." ~ George Washington
"I do not find in Christianity one redeeming feature." ~ Thomas Jefferson
"The Bible is not my book, nor Christianity my religion." ~ Abraham Lincoln
"A just government has no need for the clergy or the church." ~ James
Madison
"I believe in an America where religious intolerance will someday end...
where every man has the same right to attend or not attend the church of his
choice." ~ John F. Kennedy
"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and
nonbelievers." ~ Barack Obama
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
leonana (leonany) 于 (Fri Jun 17 01:57:48 2011, 美东) 提到:
发信人: arsablue (真神), 信区: Belief
标 题: 你的腦袋如何創造神 (new scientist)
发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Fri Feb 6 08:41:15 2009)
說到科學研究信鬼神是怎麼回事， 剛出來的 New Scientist 就有這樣一篇,
大家看看。
http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20126941.700-born-believe
Born believers: How your brain creates God
WHILE many institutions collapsed during the Great Depression that began in
1929, one kind did rather well. During this leanest of times, the strictest,
most authoritarian churches saw a surge in attendance.
This anomaly was documented in the early 1970s, but only now is science
beginning to tell us why. It turns out that human beings have a natural
inclination for religious belief, especially during hard times. Our brains
effortlessly conjure up an imaginary world of spirits, gods and monsters,
and the more insecure we feel, the harder it is to resist the pull of this
supernatural world. It seems that our minds are finely tuned to believe in
gods.
Religious ideas are common to all cultures: like language and music, they
seem to be part of what it is to be human. Until recently, science has
largely shied away from asking why. "It's not that religion is not important
," says Paul Bloom, a psychologist at Yale University, "it's that the taboo
nature of the topic has meant there has been little progress."
The origin of religious belief is something of a mystery, but in recent
years scientists have started to make suggestions. One leading idea is that
religion is an evolutionary adaptation that makes people more likely to
survive and pass their genes onto the next generation. In this view, shared
religious belief helped our ancestors form tightly knit groups that
cooperated in hunting, foraging and childcare, enabling these groups to
outcompete others. In this way, the theory goes, religion was selected for
by evolution, and eventually permeated every human society (New Scientist,
28 January 2006, p 30)
The religion-as-an-adaptation theory doesn't wash with everybody, however.
As anthropologist Scott Atran of the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor
points out, the benefits of holding such unfounded beliefs are questionable,
in terms of evolutionary fitness. "I don't think the idea makes much sense,
given the kinds of things you find in religion," he says. A belief in life
after death, for example, is hardly compatible with surviving in the here-
and-now and propagating your genes. Moreover, if there are adaptive
advantages of religion, they do not explain its origin, but simply how it
spread.
An alternative being put forward by Atran and others is that religion
emerges as a natural by-product of the way the human mind works.
That's not to say that the human brain has a "god module" in the same way
that it has a language module that evolved specifically for acquiring
language. Rather, some of the unique cognitive capacities that have made us
so successful as a species also work together to create a tendency for
supernatural thinking. "There's now a lot of evidence that some of the
foundations for our religious beliefs are hard-wired," says Bloom.
Much of that evidence comes from experiments carried out on children, who
are seen as revealing a "default state" of the mind that persists, albeit in
modified form, into adulthood. "Children the world over have a strong
natural receptivity to believing in gods because of the way their minds work
, and this early developing receptivity continues to anchor our intuitive
thinking throughout life," says anthropologist Justin Barrett of the
University of Oxford.
So how does the brain conjure up gods? One of the key factors, says Bloom,
is the fact that our brains have separate cognitive systems for dealing with
living things - things with minds, or at least volition - and inanimate
objects.
This separation happens very early in life. Bloom and colleagues have shown
that babies as young as five months make a distinction between inanimate
objects and people. Shown a box moving in a stop-start way, babies show
surprise. But a person moving in the same way elicits no surprise. To babies
, objects ought to obey the laws of physics and move in a predictable way.
People, on the other hand, have their own intentions and goals, and move
however they choose.
Mind and matter
Bloom says the two systems are autonomous, leaving us with two viewpoints on
the world: one that deals with minds, and one that handles physical aspects
of the world. He calls this innate assumption that mind and matter are
distinct "common-sense dualism". The body is for physical processes, like
eating and moving, while the mind carries our consciousness in a separate -
and separable - package. "We very naturally accept you can leave your body
in a dream, or in astral projection or some sort of magic," Bloom says. "
These are universal views."
There is plenty of evidence that thinking about disembodied minds comes
naturally. People readily form relationships with non-existent others:
roughly half of all 4-year-olds have had an imaginary friend, and adults
often form and maintain relationships with dead relatives, fictional
characters and fantasy partners. As Barrett points out, this is an
evolutionarily useful skill. Without it we would be unable to maintain large
social hierarchies and alliances or anticipate what an unseen enemy might
be planning. "Requiring a body around to think about its mind would be a
great liability," he says.
Useful as it is, common-sense dualism also appears to prime the brain for
supernatural concepts such as life after death. In 2004, Jesse Bering of
Queen's University Belfast, UK, put on a puppet show for a group of pre-
school children. During the show, an alligator ate a mouse. The researchers
then asked the children questions about the physical existence of the mouse,
such as: "Can the mouse still be sick? Does it need to eat or drink?" The
children said no. But when asked more "spiritual" questions, such as "does
the mouse think and know things?", the children answered yes.
Default to god
Based on these and other experiments, Bering considers a belief in some form
of life apart from that experienced in the body to be the default setting
of the human brain. Education and experience teach us to override it, but it
never truly leaves us, he says. From there it is only a short step to
conceptualising spirits, dead ancestors and, of course, gods, says Pascal
Boyer, a psychologist at Washington University in St Louis, Missouri. Boyer
points out that people expect their gods' minds to work very much like human
minds, suggesting they spring from the same brain system that enables us to
think about absent or non-existent people.
The ability to conceive of gods, however, is not sufficient to give rise to
religion. The mind has another essential attribute: an overdeveloped sense
of cause and effect which primes us to see purpose and design everywhere,
even where there is none. "You see bushes rustle, you assume there's
somebody or something there," Bloom says.
This over-attribution of cause and effect probably evolved for survival. If
there are predators around, it is no good spotting them 9 times out of 10.
Running away when you don't have to is a small price to pay for avoiding
danger when the threat is real.
Again, experiments on young children reveal this default state of the mind.
Children as young as three readily attribute design and purpose to inanimate
objects. When Deborah Kelemen of the University of Arizona in Tucson asked
7 and 8-year-old children questions about inanimate objects and animals, she
found that most believed they were created for a specific purpose. Pointy
rocks are there for animals to scratch themselves on. Birds exist "to make
nice music", while rivers exist so boats have something to float on. "It was
extraordinary to hear children saying that things like mountains and clouds
were 'for' a purpose and appearing highly resistant to any counter-
suggestion," says Kelemen.
In similar experiments, Olivera Petrovich of the University of Oxford asked
pre-school children about the origins of natural things such as plants and
animals. She found they were seven times as likely to answer that they were
made by god than made by people.
These cognitive biases are so strong, says Petrovich, that children tend to
spontaneously invent the concept of god without adult intervention: "They
rely on their everyday experience of the physical world and construct the
concept of god on the basis of this experience." Because of this, when
children hear the claims of religion they seem to make perfect sense.
Our predisposition to believe in a supernatural world stays with us as we
get older. Kelemen has found that adults are just as inclined to see design
and intention where there is none. Put under pressure to explain natural
phenomena, adults often fall back on teleological arguments, such as "trees
produce oxygen so that animals can breathe" or "the sun is hot because
warmth nurtures life". Though she doesn't yet have evidence that this
tendency is linked to belief in god, Kelemen does have results showing that
most adults tacitly believe they have souls.
Boyer is keen to point out that religious adults are not childish or weak-
minded. Studies reveal that religious adults have very different mindsets
from children, concentrating more on the moral dimensions of their faith and
less on its supernatural attributes.
Even so, religion is an inescapable artefact of the wiring in our brain,
says Bloom. "All humans possess the brain circuitry and that never goes away
." Petrovich adds that even adults who describe themselves as atheists and
agnostics are prone to supernatural thinking. Bering has seen this too. When
one of his students carried out interviews with atheists, it became clear
that they often tacitly attribute purpose to significant or traumatic
moments in their lives, as if some agency were intervening to make it happen
. "They don't completely exorcise the ghost of god - they just muzzle it,"
Bering says.
The fact that trauma is so often responsible for these slips gives a clue as
to why adults find it so difficult to jettison their innate belief in gods,
Atran says. The problem is something he calls "the tragedy of cognition".
Humans can anticipate future events, remember the past and conceive of how
things could go wrong - including their own death, which is hard to deal
with. "You've got to figure out a solution, otherwise you're overwhelmed,"
Atran says. When natural brain processes give us a get-out-of-jail card, we
take it.
That view is backed up by an experiment published late last year (Science,
vol 322, p 115). Jennifer Whitson of the University of Texas in Austin and
Adam Galinsky of Northwestern University in Evanston, Illinois, asked people
what patterns they could see in arrangements of dots or stock market
information. Before asking, Whitson and Galinsky made half their
participants feel a lack of control, either by giving them feedback
unrelated to their performance or by having them recall experiences where
they had lost control of a situation.
The results were striking. The subjects who sensed a loss of control were
much more likely to see patterns where there were none. "We were surprised
that the phenomenon is as widespread as it is," Whitson says. What's going
on, she suggests, is that when we feel a lack of control we fall back on
superstitious ways of thinking. That would explain why religions enjoy a
revival during hard times.
So if religion is a natural consequence of how our brains work, where does
that leave god? All the researchers involved stress that none of this says
anything about the existence or otherwise of gods: as Barratt points out,
whether or not a belief is true is independent of why people believe it.
It does, however, suggests that god isn't going away, and that atheism will
always be a hard sell. Religious belief is the "path of least resistance",
says Boyer, while disbelief requires effort.
These findings also challenge the idea that religion is an adaptation. "Yes,
religion helps create large societies - and once you have large societies
you can outcompete groups that don't," Atran says. "But it arises as an
artefact of the ability to build fictive worlds. I don't think there's an
adaptation for religion any more than there's an adaptation to make
airplanes."
I don't think there's an adaptation for religion any more than there's an
adaptation to make airplanes
Supporters of the adaptation hypothesis, however, say that the two ideas are
not mutually exclusive. As David Sloan Wilson of Binghamton University in
New York state points out, elements of religious belief could have arisen as
a by-product of brain evolution, but religion per se was selected for
because it promotes group survival. "Most adaptations are built from
previous structures," he says. "Boyer's basic thesis and my basic thesis
could both be correct."
Robin Dunbar of the University of Oxford - the researcher most strongly
identified with the religion-as-adaptation argument - also has no problem
with the idea that religion co-opts brain circuits that evolved for
something else. Richard Dawkins, too, sees the two camps as compatible. "Why
shouldn't both be correct?" he says. "I actually think they are."
Ultimately, discovering the true origins of something as complex as religion
will be difficult. There is one experiment, however, that could go a long
way to proving whether Boyer, Bloom and the rest are onto something profound
. Ethical issues mean it won't be done any time soon, but that hasn't
stopped people speculating about the outcome.
It goes something like this. Left to their own devices, children create
their own "creole" languages using hard-wired linguistic brain circuits. A
similar experiment would provide our best test of the innate religious
inclinations of humans. Would a group of children raised in isolation
spontaneously create their own religious beliefs? "I think the answer is yes
," says Bloom.
Read our related editorial: The credit crunch could be a boon for irrational
belief
God of the gullibile
In The God Delusion, Richard Dawkins argues that religion is propagated
through indoctrination, especially of children. Evolution predisposes
children to swallow whatever their parents and tribal elders tell them, he
argues, as trusting obedience is valuable for survival. This also leads to
what Dawkins calls "slavish gullibility" in the face of religious claims.
If children have an innate belief in god, however, where does that leave the
indoctrination hypothesis? "I am thoroughly happy with believing that
children are predisposed to believe in invisible gods - I always was," says
Dawkins. "But I also find the indoctrination hypothesis plausible. The two
influences could, and I suspect do, reinforce one another." He suggests that
evolved gullibility converts a child's general predisposition to believe in
god into a specific belief in the god (or gods) their parents worship.
Michael Brooks is a writer based in Lewes, UK. He is the author of 13 Things
That Don't Make Sense (Profile)
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
leonana (leonany) 于 (Fri Jun 17 01:58:28 2011, 美东) 提到:
发信人: EUV (祥林嫂), 信区: Belief
标 题: 信基督教其实也是贪图利益.
发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Thu Jan 8 20:12:10 2009), 站内
发信人: Landau (heaven), 信区: Military
标 题: 信基督教其实也是贪图利益.
发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Thu Jan 8 20:08:42 2009)
不过就是告诉你,信基督教的话,每个月给教会捐一点钱,上帝会保佑你的,你会得到更多
的,更永恒的利益.
所以我见过这里很多中国人的基督教教徒家庭每年捐给教会上千美金,有的甚至数千美
金. 中国去年大地震的时候,他就捐个10 美金. 问他为什么给教会捐这么多, 给地震那
些受难的人捐这么一点. 答曰: 我捐给教会,以后可以上天堂. 我捐给地震灾民,能得到
什么呢?
还见过那些每个月虔诚奉献给教会的人, 对他的亲人和朋友却吝啬到极点.对他们父母
简直就是大逆不孝. 一个男的给他国内的单身的母亲一点钱, 后来她信教的老婆因此和
他大打一架. 他信教的老婆每年捐给教会的钱就远远不止这个数.
我在想,如果圣经告诉你,你信上帝,你得不到好处, 上帝不会保佑你. 还有人会信基督
教吗?
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
leonana (leonany) 于 (Fri Jun 17 01:59:35 2011, 美东) 提到:
发信人: jadetreeaz (末日救星), 信区: Belief
标 题: [合集] 进化论只是假说
发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Mon Dec 15 20:26:45 2008), 站内
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
eftoman (粥，不是稀饭) 于 (Thu Aug 14 11:41:38 2008) 提到:
说进化论“只是”假说而已的
不论（宗教）信仰是啥的
请去精华区－信仰和科学(5)－进化论与神创论(1)目录里看看
x-5-1
或者找些靠谱的科普看看
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
rushDMV (吃什么像什么) 于 (Thu Aug 14 11:49:48 2008) 提到:
用不着科普了，进化论最开始的一环，原始地球条件下产生蛋白质和核糖核酸能在实验
室里重现么？第二环，两种基本物质形成单细胞生物能在实验室重现么？这不是假说是
什么？进化论要完善还有无数的大山要翻越呢。
如果这两种基本物质不是地球自然产生的，那么必然少不了一个外因，这个外因被教徒
解释成上帝也是有可能的。你当然可以说是陨石啊，彗星啊带来的，那就等于把地球生
物的进化推广到宇宙生物的进化了，扩大了外延，问题一样没解决。
我说这个不是要维护基督教，我是很科学的讨论这个问题。
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
pkpkpk123456 (esperado) 于 (Thu Aug 14 11:56:55 2008) 提到:
生命起源和物种起源是两回事，原始生命的产生的确需要解释，但这和进化论的主题没
有直接关系。
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
a12345 (上山打老虎) 于 (Thu Aug 14 11:57:15 2008) 提到:
任何理论不可能保罗宇宙万象，进化论只是一种对目前地球现存生物演化过程描述最接
近事实的理论，进化论不承载解释生物起源的任务。
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
nicemannot (耐丝曼的，不是) 于 (Thu Aug 14 13:01:51 2008) 提到:
这个不在进化论的范围以内
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
yiyuanlouzu (不破楼兰终不回) 于 (Thu Aug 14 13:08:51 2008) 提到:
faint! 民科又来了。
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
arsablue (蟠桃真人) 于 (Thu Aug 14 13:50:05 2008) 提到:
進化論第一步就說萬有引力存在, 誰能驗證萬有引了呢？
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
theisland (theisland) 于 (Thu Aug 14 14:10:20 2008) 提到:
我觉得说进化论是假说的基督徒可能有不少是看了“游子吟”（在华人基督徒中广泛流
传的护教书籍）的结果。经常看到“游子吟”上的观点被几乎原封不动的翻版过来。对
于他们来说，一个生物博士写的关于生物的批评大概很靠谱吧。
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
AllenLiu80 (春水流啊流) 于 (Thu Aug 14 14:28:03 2008) 提到:
不行，我要闭着眼睛喊：进化论是假设，是假设，就是假设……
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
whywhy00 (landau) 于 (Thu Aug 14 15:11:43 2008) 提到:
我早就说过，相信创造论不一定是基督徒。只有头脑简单的人才会相信整个的生物界是
进化来的！
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
Ragnorod (Ragnorod) 于 (Thu Aug 14 15:47:26 2008) 提到: | m****s
发帖数: 18160 | 2 处理结果
1.查看了一下Id Huo的发帖，转帖与版面相关文章，但并非每天转帖20多篇。对网友的
质疑，版主对其发文的方式也给予了建议，建议其为方便网友浏览，合并到几个帖子里。
2.关于奖励，虽是与版面有关的文章，但是不适于对同一人每篇奖励。建议版主多鼓励
原创，对原创的文章加以多多鼓励，也有助于增添版面活力。
3.基督信仰版定位于基督信仰，禁止攻击他人或他人信仰，对此相关言论，版主有权删除
处理
【在 m****s 的大作中提到】
: ☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
: leonana (leonany) 于 (Fri Jun 17 01:41:49 2011, 美东) 提到:
: 投诉人(ID):
: Leonana
: 投诉对象及职务(限版主）:
: Jesus版主dignity
: 投诉标题:
: 滥用权力打击异己
: 投诉目标(更改处理决定/更改板规/弹劾板主...):
: 更改处理决定/更改板规/弹劾板主
| l*****a
发帖数: 38403 | 3 1，这个处理和你老板说得截然相反，这个站谁说了算？
2，按你的处理方式也就是版主可以在此版肆意攻击别人和别人的宗教信仰，对不对？
附注：日莲宗是日本佛教
【 以下文字转载自 TrustInJesus 讨论区 】
发信人: Dignity (饥不择食), 信区: TrustInJesus
标 题: Re: 请问你会搬到一个信日莲教的家庭住吗？
发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Fri Jun 24 01:21:54 2011, 美东)
我会选择4
日莲正宗教的人，若是信的较虔诚，都会让法师或是自己把家里的每件家居都要被处理
下（一种宗教仪式的方法），甚至每年都会去日本总部拜神，带些圣品回家，因此家里
邪气很重，要小心。 | l*****a
发帖数: 38403 | 4 麻烦回复一下，别总是头一缩当看不见， 让人恶心
【在 l*****a 的大作中提到】
: 1，这个处理和你老板说得截然相反，这个站谁说了算？
: 2，按你的处理方式也就是版主可以在此版肆意攻击别人和别人的宗教信仰，对不对？
: 附注：日莲宗是日本佛教
: 【 以下文字转载自 TrustInJesus 讨论区 】
: 发信人: Dignity (饥不择食), 信区: TrustInJesus
: 标 题: Re: 请问你会搬到一个信日莲教的家庭住吗？
: 发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Fri Jun 24 01:21:54 2011, 美东)
: 我会选择4
: 日莲正宗教的人，若是信的较虔诚，都会让法师或是自己把家里的每件家居都要被处理
: 下（一种宗教仪式的方法），甚至每年都会去日本总部拜神，带些圣品回家，因此家里
| d********d
发帖数: 1424 | 5 发信人: desertland (沙漠之狐), 信区: TrustInJesus
标 题: 投诉huo即godwithus同学灌水刷屏
发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Thu Jun 30 17:41:49 2011, 美东)
违反版规站规，干扰版面正常讨论秩序
要求按例 被暂时取消在本版的发文权力 14 天
2 M Godwithus Jun 28 总有一些人把好的文章帮顶
3 M Godwithus Jun 28 第十三课 感恩的生活
4 M Godwithus Jun 28 第十四课 神的律法：十诫
5 M Godwithus Jun 28 第十五课 神的律法：十诫（续）
6 * Godwithus Jun 28 感谢板上的非基督徒
7 * Godwithus Jun 28 本人两个ID的声明
8 M Godwithus Jun 28 第十六课 祷告
9 M Godwithus Jun 28 第十七课 主祷文
10 M Godwithus Jun 28 第十八课 主祷文（续）（完）
11 * Godwithus Jun 28 Dignity 封 cutegg 在 TrustInJesus 版 (转
载)
12 * Godwithus Jun 28 请不要把公共版面当成你自己家
13 M Godwithus Jun 29 童女怀孕
14 * Godwithus Jun 29 John 3:16
15 * Godwithus Jun 29 这些也是神默示的吗？
16 M Godwithus Jun 29 查理西缅和卫斯理的对话-生命季刊杂志
17 * Godwithus Jun 29 给斑竹增加一些难度
18 M Godwithus Jun 30 韦斯敏斯德小要理问答(附经文和略解)
19 M Godwithus Jun 30 “威斯敏斯德信条”简释
20 M Godwithus Jun 30 第一章 论圣经
21 M Godwithus Jun 30 第二章： 论上帝和三位一体
22 M Godwithus Jun 30 第三章 论上帝永远的旨意
23 M Godwithus Jun 30 第四章 论上帝创造之工
24 M Godwithus Jun 30 第五章 论上帝护理之工
25 * Godwithus Jun 30 路德的小本基督徒要学(信义会)
26 * Godwithus Jun 30 基督教异端异教之我见
27 * Godwithus Jun 30 又看了一遍cri的我们错了
28 * Godwithus Jun 30 基督徒请进 对圣经无误的看法
29 * Godwithus Jun 30 第六章 论人的堕落、罪恶和刑罚
30 * Godwithus Jun 30 第七章 论上帝与人所立的圣约
31 * Godwithus Jun 30 第八章 论中保基督
32 * Godwithus Jun 30 第九章 论意志的自由
33 * Godwithus Jun 30 第十章 论有效恩召
34 * Godwithus Jun 30 第十一章 论称义
35 * Godwithus Jun 30 第十二章 论得儿子的名分
36 * Godwithus Jun 30 第十三章 论成圣
37 * Godwithus Jun 30 第十五章 论悔改得生
2 huo Jun 30 浅探聚会所 - 李常受带领下的发展与转变(一)
3 huo Jun 30 浅探聚会所 - 李常受带领下的发展与转变(二）
4 huo Jun 30 第十四章 论得救的信心
5 huo Jun 30 《使徒信经》简释
● 基督教异端异教之我见（二）(8.0k) 0/0 Godwithus
2011-06-30 |
|
