A few days ago there was discussion on why the West did better at adopting secularism than the Middle East.
First it took in consideration the “Rationality Argument” by new atheist movement led by figures like Christopher Hitchens, Richard Dawkins, and Sam Harris who argue that reasoning and critical analysis lead many people to atheism. This is the most popular argument in the West, but studies have shows that while this observation might be true for parts of the West, it does not replicate cross culturally. In some countries, increase in rational and analytical thinking correlates with increased religiosity.
Then he analyzes other theories, but one particularly stood out, CREDs (Credibility Enhancing Displays):
People are more likely to become religious when religious people around them show sincerity in what they believe, willingness to help others, and even make personal sacrifices. But these kinds of religious people are most visible when there are external threats outside of individual control like wars and conflicts.
On the contrary, when external threats are absent, religiosity dives, and people get more exposed to the negative aspects of religion like suppression of rational thinking which is a (but not the only) CRED in the New Atheist movement. As religion no longer serves a purpose to the individual times of security, the negatives are emphasized, and people want to disassociate themselves from these groups.
The overall conclusion is that humans are social, not rational, species and are wired to want to be part of groups that has shown them the most goodness and acceptance. In times of conflicts, religious groups are more likely to be these kinds of groups, so religiosity increases. In times of peace, religious groups appear controlling and suffocating (like through oppressing rational thought), and the negatives are emphasized causing younger generations to want to disassociate from them, leading to religiosity decrease.
The overall implication is that being religious or not is not a main indicator on adoption of secularism, but external safety is. Safe countries produce secular people, so to spread secularism, one must focus on stopping conflicts, not on individual beliefs.
5 Comments
I can only speak for myself, but in my case it was ‘thinking’.
A huge amount of religion is transparently fear of death, a desire for social control and wishful thinking.
Edit: And, furthermore, why do you assume that people start out theists and only ‘become’ atheists?
Everyone is born atheist until indoctrinated.
People are born atheists. They don’t “become “.
>Why Do People Become Atheists?
Because people. who claim to be in charge of some religion, introduce unnecessary dependencies. So instead of gaining freedom and enlightenment, there’s only more (hidden) slavery.
There are a lot of reasons – bad experiences with religion as children, persuasion of secular education and theory, disregard or no interest is originating religious values (ex. some sins are fun and exciting), some countries have laws against religion(s), general peer pressure. Also, people are more likely to cling to religion when there is suffering and no control or influence over their life outcomes…it’s just human nature to have hope onto something.
Its less that people aren’t rational but more they follow the social winds vs indivudal thinking, which in some ways is very rational.
No one wants to be the last person left in the pew.