Are Atheists Mostly Left Brained?

reply to post by Titen-Sxull

In truth I think the decision of whether or not to believe in God is more complex than just left-right, we as humans have a tendency to simplify and condense, left-right, good-evil, republican-democrat, we're always forgetting about the subtle shades of gray and the uniqueness of every individual...

Yes it is. But to explain something so complex to the layman is difficult. There are always variables in human behavior. As I said earlier: it depends on a persons conditioning, their level of dysfunction and level of addictive qualities.

If a person shuts down their right brain - meaning their feelings, it is next to impossible to grow spiritually. Add addiction into the mix and we have an almost lost case, until the person cleans up their act.

My point and I am strong on it is: we must connect to the right brain to connect to a higher level of consciousness involving God. Ironically, or not so ironically, religion tends to dampen this connection. Why?

Because it becomes about the religion and control (which is an addictive quality); its rules and dogma and the striving for righteous perfectionism (and its leaders), rather than a connection to God.

To have a conscious contact with God we do not need any middle men and that includes any holy writings.

Thanks!

I'm going to restate something that I think most, especially the OP, have missed.


Atheists are mostly left brained for the simple reason that people are mostly left brain as well. You will not find anything different in regards to the religious.

Now for those of you who spout "left brain = bad & right brain = good" trollop ought shut your mouths. The shrill whining I hear about this most junk-science concept is astounding. To say that people inclined to logic are more limited in their understanding than creative people is unbelievably ignorant and obnoxious. It's like saying a builder is limited by the fact he uses tried and ture methods of construction.

Originally posted by Watcher-In-The-Shadows
Doesn't matter the reasons behind a action. Only the results of said action. You can shake a finger and scoff at someone who works at a soup kitchen feeding those that cannot feed themselves because they do it for the emotional pay-off they recieve or to placate whatever god they happen to believe in all you wish.

You think I'm that monstrous? I applaud these people.

Also, motive does matter.

reply to post by aorAki

By 'more open-minded' are you including the religious?\
If so, then this whole thing is laughable.
If not, then this whole thing is still laughable.

If you have a firm faith, why do you even care what Atheists think?
I don't care what the religious think about me.

NB, I'm left-handed. Sinister, isn't it!

Do I sense some cynicism?

Well, I have been challenged by the best, and it isn't on ATS.

To answer your question;

I am speaking of all religion or systems that like to make automatons of its members, this includes atheism.

I think in a way we ALL have a religion of our own!

Christians for example are split up into many groups of different beliefs, different perspectives and understanding of the religion. Basically each person has their own unique perspective to it.

Athiests for example have their own structured belief, each athiest may have a different view on the subject of belief, religion, open mindness etc.

My point is it's impossible to put people into groups, because in the end we all have our unique way of thinking, our own philosophies, questions, curiosities, limits to being open minded to certain subjects, different interests etc.

We all have our own unique religion in a way, our own way of life.

Peace.



[edit on 18-5-2009 by _Phoenix_]

Originally posted by _Phoenix_
We all have our own unique religion in a way, our own way of life.

You're confusing 'religion' with 'perception of reality'. They are quite different.

reply to post by _Phoenix_

I think in a way we ALL have a religion of our own!

Christians for example are split up into many groups of different beliefs, different perspectives and understanding of the religion. Basically each person has their own unique perspective to it.

Athiests for example have their own structured belief, each athiest may have a different view on the subject of belief, religion, open mindness etc.

My point is it's impossible to put people into groups, because in the end we all have our unique way of thinking, our own philosophies, questions, curiosities, limits to being open minded to certain subjects, different interests etc.

We all have our own unique religion in a way, our own way of life.

Yes, and no. Most are followers, you are right, because this is how it translates. But conditioning is a huge aspect of human behavior and their beliefs.

I think the object is to outgrow the human tendency to conform. I respect your view but I don't have quite the same outlook. I view most as followers as I said. This limits the range of differences in humans. This limits our horizon especially if we place all hope in man.

In pop psychology it is said that there are only a few distinct personality profiles, throw addiction into the mix and it narrows more, because man takes a more predictable path and sacrifices his individuation or uniqueness. One that matches most in his tribe.

But again, there are the variables!! Thank you!

This is why codependency is considered a social disease.



[edit on 18-5-2009 by MatrixProphet]

reply to post by Welfhard

You're confusing 'religion' with 'perception of reality'. They are quite different.

This is correct, but remember, you can make a religion out of anything that you are devoted to.

Originally posted by Welfhard

Originally posted by _Phoenix_
We all have our own unique religion in a way, our own way of life.

You're confusing 'religion' with 'perception of reality'. They are quite different.

Not when some make religion their base for reality...

Maybe for non-religious people it is different, but some live by the book and die by it.

As Phoenix said, we all have our own way of life (or should)...take the best from everything, but not all of something (aka taking an entire religion to heart).

Originally posted by Welfhard

Originally posted by _Phoenix_
We all have our own unique religion in a way, our own way of life.

You're confusing 'religion' with 'perception of reality'. They are quite different.

I did not mean religion in the literal sense, just "sort of"

So yes I meant perception of reality, but religion is belief of a perception of their reality, not so different at all, pretty similar.

My basic point was that atheists, religious people etc all have a belief, a perception, their own way of life.

We like to simplify things, religious vs athiests, but life and beliefs are not so black and white.

[edit on 18-5-2009 by _Phoenix_]

Originally posted by _Phoenix_
My basic point was that atheists, religious people etc all have a belief, a perception, their own way of life.

THANKS Captain Obvious! [Salutes]

What would we do with out you?

reply to post by Welfhard


Ah, so evil done with good intentions are acceptable? I am sure this could launch us into a fascinating argument about Nazism and what they did, to use the logic you are using. They did after all think they were doing good. All this bickering about doing good deeds with what motive is stupid, at best. If I was drowning and you were to save me I could give two craps about why you were doing it. All that would matter to me was that you are helping me. Sure people bicker and argue about who's motives are "purer" but that is little more than petty bullcrap in the end. The act is all that matters. Not the motive. Or do you universally accept the excuses of those who harm you?

*hums the "My Dog's better than your dog" song*
That's all such bickering is.

[edit on 18-5-2009 by Watcher-In-The-Shadows]

reply to post by Welfhard



Civility and decorum ring a bell? Not to mention it makes you like the vulgar word for butt.

reply to post by Welfhard


Honestly, no. I don't think you're monstrous. Don't imagine why you'd think I would based on the current bone of contention. I think you are playing the classic game I spoke of earlier "My dog is better than your dog." which is a really silly and not to mention petty game we humans like to play. Particularly when we find our identity in being the opposition to something.

[edit on 18-5-2009 by Watcher-In-The-Shadows]

You do have to laugh when people try to justify their religion to themsleves, as the OP clearly does.

You're obviously not totally convinced and need other people to verify you made the right choice.

Add to that the arrogance of your belief that only someone of your superior intelligence could arrive at your conclusions on religion, and what do you know? the next pope has arrived, maybe even the 2nd coming of JC.

Get over yourself, the majority of sheeple on this earth are those of the religious variety.



George Carlin said it best:

"When it comes to bull#, big-time, major league bull#, you have to stand in awe of the all-time champion of false promises and exaggerated claims, religion. No contest. No contest. Religion.

Religion easily has the greatest bull# story ever told. Think about it. Religion has actually convinced people that there's an invisible man living in the sky who watches everything you do, every minute of every day.

And the invisible man has a special list of ten things he does not want you to do. And if you do any of these ten things, he has a special place, full of fire and smoke and burning and torture and anguish, where he will send you to live and suffer and burn and choke and scream and cry forever and ever 'til the end of time!

But He loves you. He loves you, and He needs money! He always needs money! He's all-powerful, all-perfect, all-knowing, and all-wise, somehow just can't handle money! Religion takes in billions of dollars, they pay no taxes, and they always need a little more. Now, you talk about a good bull# story. Holy #! "



www.rense.com...

www.youtube.com...


[edit on 18-5-2009 by Horus12]

Originally posted by Watcher-In-The-Shadows
Ah, so evil done with good intentions are acceptable?

Wait, let me get this strait...

I say "Motives count." and you infer that I believe "evil done with good intentions are acceptable."

... Yea, I see how you got there.





[edit on 18-5-2009 by Welfhard]

Personally, I think most atheists are in fact left-brained because of what they are taught at school, indoctrination is very common in today's world, and it's not surprising when even those who were born as christians end up as atheists because of what they are taught in school, things such as evolution is true, and God does not exist. So they grow up with these thoughts most of their life and that's how it goes for them.

And if you think indoctrination doesn't happen and you think teacher's don't try and weaken student's faith, you've got to open up your eyes, because it's there.

reply to post by Welfhard


Then allow me to spell it out for you. You say that motives count, that someone who does something selfless for selfish reasons the act is somehow tainted or less pure, then it should go without saying that something bad done with good intentions must somehow be not as bad.
But that is without the obvious fact that without some sort of emotional or physical pay-off *no matter how small or bittersweet* no one would do anything.

And what is with this petulant tone? I remember you being more agreeable then this.

[edit on 18-5-2009 by Watcher-In-The-Shadows]

reply to post by Horus12


I respect your right to voice how you feel. Thank you for letting me do so also. Hopefully your arm isn't in too bad of shape? From all the twisting?

I will correct the misnomer that religion and spirituality are one in the same, since so many of you seem very confused on this issue. They are not! I realize that there are few textbooks with verification on this, but, oh well!

I realize this is a concept that goes over so many heads it seems on this thread, but we can hope that more will graduate to more independent thought, and not group conscious speech. Or is this too deep?

God (in the sense we know it) was created by man as a simple way to explain a world we couldn't then begin to understand....

Ug the neanderthal: Hey Lug, have you noticed how the food grows when that big shiny thing up there comes out?

Lug the neanderthal: Yeah, maybe it's the thing that made it?

Ug the neanderthal: Hmm. It must be powerful! Let's try not to piss it off and it might reward us!

Lug the neanderthal: Good idea!

(they fall to their knees and start mumbling prayers as fast as they can think of them)

....from there, once man got a little bit more savvy, he saw that he could twist that faith to his own greedy selfish needs so he created organised religion to keep the dumb in check and to screw money (or rocks/goats/whatever) out of them!

...and here we are today.

Originally posted by MatrixProphet

Society has been taught through academia to use just the left side of the brain. This would encourage the absence of God as He must be visited through our creative right brain. Man places a great importance on academia which can be good, except they have created in a sense, a monster in that; it is their way or the highway, in thinking. Which produces an automaton society?

I've taken both tests linked to in this thread, both give me the same answer - 60% right 30% left. Now, as far as I understood things, the left side of the brain controls the right side of your body and vice versa. I am left handed, but only when it comes to writing and holding a fork. Everything else (kicking a ball, playing guitar, reactive punching etc.) I do with my right side!

No offense to Welfhard or anyone else studying the brain (in whatever discipline) but we actually know very little about how the brain actually works! You might think we understand a lot, but remember not so long ago leeches were considered a cure-all! So trying to rationalise religion versus atheism like this (although an admirable idea) isn't going to give you the answer you seek - yet!

Originally posted by Darth Logan

We see no evidence of a Creator in cosmology or biology ; nothing is known to exist or happen for which the only possible explanation is Divine Intervention.

See now I would consider my self an athiest, with slight agnostic leanings. I can't believe that there's any deity watching over us that should be worshipped, but there's so much beauty and order (I believe what appears to be chaos is actually ordered in a way we cannot yet comprehend) in the universe that I can't fully reconcile that it would come from NOTHING...

"There was a big bang"

"Really? What was there before it? Why did it happen? Where did all the matter that makes up the universe appear from? What created all that matter in the first place? What created the thing that created the matter? What created the thing that created the thing that created the matter?"

"Uh..."

Religions can have good moral messages, truths about how to live your life, but then so did the fables of Aesop. Morals are morals, and people should respect them, but no-one should feel the need to organise their lives around any dogma. Look at the trouble people have caused through the ages in the name of dogma. It could have been avoided if people had realised the moral message is what's most important.

If that was a lot of rambling nonsense, I apologise, it's after 5am here, I need my zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz's

Anyway, good thread, some nice ideas, but as my signature says...






[edit on 18/5/09 by sotp]

reply to post by MatrixProphet


I am not so sure it is a can't thing so much as it is a won't thing. It's easier to shove box in the same box and call it done. Which is rather telling when someone simply takes the easy path.