Brain Differences Found Between in Believers in God and Non-Believers
-
The word we use in Sweden would translate to exercising. Both practicing and exercising are synonyms to training. What would the word be for the ones that are "practicing" without believing? Because I know several people that considers themselves as believers but they usually don't go to church and don't think of themselves as practicing. So in my world the ones believing were called believers, and the ones going to church, practitioners.
"The ones who care enough to do it right care too much to compromise." Matthew Faithfull
Jörgen Andersson wrote:
What would the word be for the ones that are "practicing" without believing
I'd call them cowards.
I was brought up to respect my elders. I don't respect many people nowadays.
CodeStash - Online Snippet Management | My blog | MoXAML PowerToys | Mole 2010 - debugging made easier -
That's quite a cynical view and I would protest that most people that believe in God do not fit into your description. You clearly do not believe and you are biased by the radicals that make the news or your own isolated experiences.
Quote:
Deities and belief in them stems from man trying to explain things he couldn't.
Certain men, prophets, have claimed to talk with God. Billions and billions believe in God and it has nothing to do with trying to explain things we can't on our own. I challenge you to survey people who do believe in God and find out why. It has nothing to do with trying to fill a gap of knowledge.
Quote:
No deity has ever dictated levels of standards or morals
That's your opinion. I disagree.
Quote:
in order to control other men.
Again, quite cynical. Yes, some in history have been that way. But what benefit do I get from claiming that god says killing is wrong? How am I "trying to control other men." What's the purpose then?
Quote:
then that gives anyone free range to act as they want so long as their particular deity has provided them the mandate.
And how is that different than not believing in God? Where do morals come from then?
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
ryanb31 wrote:
Quote:
Deities and belief in them stems from man trying to explain things he couldn't.
Certain men, prophets, have claimed to talk with God. Billions and billions believe in God and it has nothing to do with trying to explain things we can't on our own. I challenge you to survey people who do believe in God and find out why. It has nothing to do with trying to fill a gap of knowledge.
I was talking there about deities from the earliest times. Why does that thing keep happening? Must be some sort of god. If it is a bad thing, then how can we appease it. If it is a good thing then how can we keep it happy.
ryanb31 wrote:
Quote:
No deity has ever dictated levels of standards or morals
That's your opinion. I disagree.
Exactly, you and I disagree. Neither of us have any proof, but your belief is based on having a belief in a god and mine isn't therefore your belief is more valid in your opinion.
ryanb31 wrote:
Quote:
in order to control other men.
Again, quite cynical. Yes, some in history have been that way. But what benefit do I get from claiming that god says killing is wrong? How am I "trying to control other men." What's the purpose then?
I didn't know that you were the one to claim that god said it was wrong to kill. If you are trying to control a large number of people, and a large number of people who all live together then you try to eliminate that which makes controlling them difficult. Can't say I've ever been in such a situation, but I'd guess that people killing each other is probably a pita. The thou shalt not kill thing has a get out clause for war (amongst a number of other things), that is certainly convenient.
ryanb31 wrote:
Quote:
then that gives anyone free range to act as they want so long as their particular deity has provided them the mandate.
And how is that different than not believing in God? Where do morals come from then?
It's not, that's kind of my point. If it doesn't matter what god you believe in then believing in any specific god is the same as believing in no particular god. It is how you act
-
Quote:
I suspect believers make terrible programmers.
How so? The article states, "They're much less anxious and feel less stressed when they have made an error." I see that as a good thing. In my experience, those who get all stressed out perform worse than those who remain calm because they can't think straight. Based on that evidence I would have to say that believers would make better programmers.
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
ryanb31 wrote:
How so? The article states, "They're much less anxious and feel less stressed when they have made an error."
It also says that they have less activity in recognizing their own errors. That is horrible programming and horrible engineering... In fact science itself is the based on the idea of making a hypothesis and then proving it wrong or right. If you can not even recognize your own errors, then by default you are a poor scientist.
Quote:
"Obviously, anxiety can be negative because if you have too much, you're paralyzed with fear," he says. "However, it also serves a very useful function in that it alerts us when we're making mistakes. If you don't experience anxiety when you make an error, what impetus do you have to change or improve your behaviour so you don't make the same mistakes again and again?"
Quote: Albert Einstein
Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.
I have a few other definitions of insanity that are applicable here, but I will keep it civil ;)
Computers have been intelligent for a long time now. It just so happens that the program writers are about as effective as a room full of monkeys trying to crank out a copy of Hamlet.
-
The word we use in Sweden would translate to exercising. Both practicing and exercising are synonyms to training. What would the word be for the ones that are "practicing" without believing? Because I know several people that considers themselves as believers but they usually don't go to church and don't think of themselves as practicing. So in my world the ones believing were called believers, and the ones going to church, practitioners.
"The ones who care enough to do it right care too much to compromise." Matthew Faithfull
It's quite simple: a practising Christian is one who believes in God, and tries to follow the teachings of Jesus. Whether they go to church or not is irrelevant, it is what is in the heart that matters. And we use the term 'practising', because however much we try, we will never be perfect.
Use the best guess
-
ryanb31 wrote:
Quote:
Deities and belief in them stems from man trying to explain things he couldn't.
Certain men, prophets, have claimed to talk with God. Billions and billions believe in God and it has nothing to do with trying to explain things we can't on our own. I challenge you to survey people who do believe in God and find out why. It has nothing to do with trying to fill a gap of knowledge.
I was talking there about deities from the earliest times. Why does that thing keep happening? Must be some sort of god. If it is a bad thing, then how can we appease it. If it is a good thing then how can we keep it happy.
ryanb31 wrote:
Quote:
No deity has ever dictated levels of standards or morals
That's your opinion. I disagree.
Exactly, you and I disagree. Neither of us have any proof, but your belief is based on having a belief in a god and mine isn't therefore your belief is more valid in your opinion.
ryanb31 wrote:
Quote:
in order to control other men.
Again, quite cynical. Yes, some in history have been that way. But what benefit do I get from claiming that god says killing is wrong? How am I "trying to control other men." What's the purpose then?
I didn't know that you were the one to claim that god said it was wrong to kill. If you are trying to control a large number of people, and a large number of people who all live together then you try to eliminate that which makes controlling them difficult. Can't say I've ever been in such a situation, but I'd guess that people killing each other is probably a pita. The thou shalt not kill thing has a get out clause for war (amongst a number of other things), that is certainly convenient.
ryanb31 wrote:
Quote:
then that gives anyone free range to act as they want so long as their particular deity has provided them the mandate.
And how is that different than not believing in God? Where do morals come from then?
It's not, that's kind of my point. If it doesn't matter what god you believe in then believing in any specific god is the same as believing in no particular god. It is how you act
Quote:
Must be some sort of god. If it is a bad thing, then how can we appease it. If it is a good thing then how can we keep it happy.
No, that isn't how it started. But I do understand your point now.
Quote:
Neither of us have any proof
Not true. And I know we would go back and forth on this forever because it simply boils down to you do not accept the proof that God exists.
Quote:
Can't say I've ever been in such a situation
My point was, what do I gain by claiming there is God and that God has set forth morals? You said we do it to control people, but who am I trying to control?
Quote:
I have morals yet do not believe in any god.
I know, where do your morals come from?
Quote:
You will claim that is because I was raised in a religious country that has developed societal morals only from having a history of religious morals.
No, I asked you where they came from. I am not making claims about your morals.
Quote:
I think that is simply how societies of any species develop.
Are you saying that animals have morals? Do their morals develop over time? Any examples?
Quote:
Or do some of these gods provide morals to animals too? Or do they have their own deities mandating the way they interact with each other?
Actually it is really simple. God created animals to act within their sphere. They do not have choice. That is what separates us from the beast.
Quote:
Which essentially means "you poor fool, you've been brainwashed by some bad elements, I know the truth so I am better than you".
Like I said earlier, very cynical and biased from the radicals. From my experience the majority of people who do believe in God do not feel that way towards you at all. Your experience may be different, but I would suggest that most God fearing people do not look down at you.
Quote:
I simply do not believe in any god because from all I have seen and read and heard I cannot believe there is such a thing.
Which is humorous to me because for that same exact reason I do believe in God, so much so that yo
-
ryanb31 wrote:
How so? The article states, "They're much less anxious and feel less stressed when they have made an error."
It also says that they have less activity in recognizing their own errors. That is horrible programming and horrible engineering... In fact science itself is the based on the idea of making a hypothesis and then proving it wrong or right. If you can not even recognize your own errors, then by default you are a poor scientist.
Quote:
"Obviously, anxiety can be negative because if you have too much, you're paralyzed with fear," he says. "However, it also serves a very useful function in that it alerts us when we're making mistakes. If you don't experience anxiety when you make an error, what impetus do you have to change or improve your behaviour so you don't make the same mistakes again and again?"
Quote: Albert Einstein
Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.
I have a few other definitions of insanity that are applicable here, but I will keep it civil ;)
Computers have been intelligent for a long time now. It just so happens that the program writers are about as effective as a room full of monkeys trying to crank out a copy of Hamlet.
Quote:
If you can not even recognize your own errors
But that is not what it said. It said there was less activity. It did not say they are brain dead and can't see their own errors. They don't freak out over them.
Quote:
If you don't experience anxiety when you make an error, what impetus do you have to change or improve your behaviour so you don't make the same mistakes again and again?
For one, standards and ethics. This article does not go into it but those who believe in God also tend to have better work ethics and standards. This article is focused on such a small portion that to take it serious in any way is just silly.
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
-
Maybe I have the wrong understanding of the word practicing then. Just curious what was wrong with my message, what in that message was abusive?
"The ones who care enough to do it right care too much to compromise." Matthew Faithfull
As Pete said, the usage means to actually do the thing. Common things that are 'practised' in English are Religion, Law and Medicine.
Reality is an illusion caused by a lack of alcohol
-
ryanb31 wrote:
Quote:
Deities and belief in them stems from man trying to explain things he couldn't.
Certain men, prophets, have claimed to talk with God. Billions and billions believe in God and it has nothing to do with trying to explain things we can't on our own. I challenge you to survey people who do believe in God and find out why. It has nothing to do with trying to fill a gap of knowledge.
I was talking there about deities from the earliest times. Why does that thing keep happening? Must be some sort of god. If it is a bad thing, then how can we appease it. If it is a good thing then how can we keep it happy.
ryanb31 wrote:
Quote:
No deity has ever dictated levels of standards or morals
That's your opinion. I disagree.
Exactly, you and I disagree. Neither of us have any proof, but your belief is based on having a belief in a god and mine isn't therefore your belief is more valid in your opinion.
ryanb31 wrote:
Quote:
in order to control other men.
Again, quite cynical. Yes, some in history have been that way. But what benefit do I get from claiming that god says killing is wrong? How am I "trying to control other men." What's the purpose then?
I didn't know that you were the one to claim that god said it was wrong to kill. If you are trying to control a large number of people, and a large number of people who all live together then you try to eliminate that which makes controlling them difficult. Can't say I've ever been in such a situation, but I'd guess that people killing each other is probably a pita. The thou shalt not kill thing has a get out clause for war (amongst a number of other things), that is certainly convenient.
ryanb31 wrote:
Quote:
then that gives anyone free range to act as they want so long as their particular deity has provided them the mandate.
And how is that different than not believing in God? Where do morals come from then?
It's not, that's kind of my point. If it doesn't matter what god you believe in then believing in any specific god is the same as believing in no particular god. It is how you act
ChrisElston wrote:
I have morals yet do not believe in any god. I have never killed anyone. You will claim that is because I was raised in a religious country that has developed societal morals only from having a history of religious morals. I think that is simply how societies of any species develop. Or do some of these gods provide morals to animals too? Or do they have their own deities mandating the way they interact with each other?
IMO some of the best examples of why god has nothing to do with societal morals have become prevalent in the last couple centuries and they keep piling up and will continue to do so. We as a society feet slavery is immoral and changed our ways, not god. We as a society feet that women and men are equal and are changing our ways, not god. Not having faith in god does not mean you lack morals. Instead having faith in such gods with such beliefs means the person lacks empathy for they are fear driven and believe they must behave or be punished in the afterlife.
Computers have been intelligent for a long time now. It just so happens that the program writers are about as effective as a room full of monkeys trying to crank out a copy of Hamlet.
-
Quote:
If you can not even recognize your own errors
But that is not what it said. It said there was less activity. It did not say they are brain dead and can't see their own errors. They don't freak out over them.
Quote:
If you don't experience anxiety when you make an error, what impetus do you have to change or improve your behaviour so you don't make the same mistakes again and again?
For one, standards and ethics. This article does not go into it but those who believe in God also tend to have better work ethics and standards. This article is focused on such a small portion that to take it serious in any way is just silly.
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
ryanb31 wrote:
But that is not what it said. It said there was less activity. It did not say they are brain dead and can't see their own errors. They don't freak out over them.
Actually you are reading it wrong....
Quote:
Compared to non-believers, the religious participants showed significantly less activity in the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC), a portion of the brain that helps modify behavior by signaling when attention and control are needed
This means the believers have less control. In other words they are ignoring the state around them. While in some cases this results in less error, that is because instincts kick in and often are correct. The non-believers over think the situation and an error can occur. However, in the world of science and new territory instinct is not enough.
ryanb31 wrote:
For one, standards and ethics. This article does not go into it but those who believe in God also tend to have better work ethics and standards.
:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: Says you! Now you are just backing up your claim that belief is better with asinine assertions that have no evidence. *golf clap*
Computers have been intelligent for a long time now. It just so happens that the program writers are about as effective as a room full of monkeys trying to crank out a copy of Hamlet.
-
Quote:
Must be some sort of god. If it is a bad thing, then how can we appease it. If it is a good thing then how can we keep it happy.
No, that isn't how it started. But I do understand your point now.
Quote:
Neither of us have any proof
Not true. And I know we would go back and forth on this forever because it simply boils down to you do not accept the proof that God exists.
Quote:
Can't say I've ever been in such a situation
My point was, what do I gain by claiming there is God and that God has set forth morals? You said we do it to control people, but who am I trying to control?
Quote:
I have morals yet do not believe in any god.
I know, where do your morals come from?
Quote:
You will claim that is because I was raised in a religious country that has developed societal morals only from having a history of religious morals.
No, I asked you where they came from. I am not making claims about your morals.
Quote:
I think that is simply how societies of any species develop.
Are you saying that animals have morals? Do their morals develop over time? Any examples?
Quote:
Or do some of these gods provide morals to animals too? Or do they have their own deities mandating the way they interact with each other?
Actually it is really simple. God created animals to act within their sphere. They do not have choice. That is what separates us from the beast.
Quote:
Which essentially means "you poor fool, you've been brainwashed by some bad elements, I know the truth so I am better than you".
Like I said earlier, very cynical and biased from the radicals. From my experience the majority of people who do believe in God do not feel that way towards you at all. Your experience may be different, but I would suggest that most God fearing people do not look down at you.
Quote:
I simply do not believe in any god because from all I have seen and read and heard I cannot believe there is such a thing.
Which is humorous to me because for that same exact reason I do believe in God, so much so that yo
ryanb31 wrote:
Quote:
Must be some sort of god. If it is a bad thing, then how can we appease it. If it is a good thing then how can we keep it happy.
No, that isn't how it started. But I do understand your point now.
How can you, or anyone, possibly know that?
ryanb31 wrote:
Quote:
Neither of us have any proof
Not true. And I know we would go back and forth on this forever because it simply boils down to you do not accept the proof that God exists.
There cannot be any proof, that is why it is called belief. There is no proof of the existence of God (although I see we are now firmly back on your god and ignoring all the others (which is perhaps the main problem I have with God or any other god, if your god is right then all others must be wrong, but if another god is right then yours must be wrong. As they cannot all be right then they must all be wrong.)), and there is no proof of his (or any other's) non-existence either. Give me proof and I would have to accept it.
ryanb31 wrote:
Quote:
Can't say I've ever been in such a situation
My point was, what do I gain by claiming there is God and that God has set forth morals? You said we do it to control people, but who am I trying to control?
You are not trying to control anyone (that I know of), but as I said before, you were not the one who came up with these decrees from your particular god, nor were you the one who spread it around the world, killing all those who would not accept this god who said "thou shalt not kill".
ryanb31 wrote:
Quote:
I think that is simply how societies of any species develop.
Are you saying that animals have morals? Do their morals develop over time? Any examples?
I am not saying that animals have morals, but plenty of species manage not to kill each other without the mandate from a god yet you seem to think that without that man wouldn't. Plenty of species do kill each other too of course. And as frequently mentioned, those who have been told by a god not to kill do just as much as those who have not. Considerably more so over the course of human history.
-
ChrisElston wrote:
I have morals yet do not believe in any god. I have never killed anyone. You will claim that is because I was raised in a religious country that has developed societal morals only from having a history of religious morals. I think that is simply how societies of any species develop. Or do some of these gods provide morals to animals too? Or do they have their own deities mandating the way they interact with each other?
IMO some of the best examples of why god has nothing to do with societal morals have become prevalent in the last couple centuries and they keep piling up and will continue to do so. We as a society feet slavery is immoral and changed our ways, not god. We as a society feet that women and men are equal and are changing our ways, not god. Not having faith in god does not mean you lack morals. Instead having faith in such gods with such beliefs means the person lacks empathy for they are fear driven and believe they must behave or be punished in the afterlife.
Computers have been intelligent for a long time now. It just so happens that the program writers are about as effective as a room full of monkeys trying to crank out a copy of Hamlet.
Very good points. And these are also things, along with an acceptance of homosexuality, that some of the main religions fight very hard to resist. Generally attempting to impose their views on the wider society that does not, or no longer, holds them.
“I believe that there is an equality to all humanity. We all suck.” Bill Hicks
-
As Pete said, the usage means to actually do the thing. Common things that are 'practised' in English are Religion, Law and Medicine.
Reality is an illusion caused by a lack of alcohol
-
Nagy Vilmos wrote:
Common things that are 'practised' in English are Religion, Law and Medicine.
and homosexuality.
“I believe that there is an equality to all humanity. We all suck.” Bill Hicks
And the trombone.
Reality is an illusion caused by a lack of alcohol
-
And the trombone.
Reality is an illusion caused by a lack of alcohol
-
AspDotNetDev wrote:
I suspect believers make terrible programmers.
and I suspect science would prove you wrong. :)
"The secret of happiness is freedom, and the secret of freedom, courage." Thucydides (B.C. 460-400)
Ye of little faith. :rolleyes:
-
ryanb31 wrote:
But that is not what it said. It said there was less activity. It did not say they are brain dead and can't see their own errors. They don't freak out over them.
Actually you are reading it wrong....
Quote:
Compared to non-believers, the religious participants showed significantly less activity in the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC), a portion of the brain that helps modify behavior by signaling when attention and control are needed
This means the believers have less control. In other words they are ignoring the state around them. While in some cases this results in less error, that is because instincts kick in and often are correct. The non-believers over think the situation and an error can occur. However, in the world of science and new territory instinct is not enough.
ryanb31 wrote:
For one, standards and ethics. This article does not go into it but those who believe in God also tend to have better work ethics and standards.
:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: Says you! Now you are just backing up your claim that belief is better with asinine assertions that have no evidence. *golf clap*
Computers have been intelligent for a long time now. It just so happens that the program writers are about as effective as a room full of monkeys trying to crank out a copy of Hamlet.
Quote:
This means the believers have less control
Quote:
In other words they are ignoring the state around them.
:wtf:
Quote:
that have no evidence.
:wtf: At least this time you got there a lot faster.
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
-
ryanb31 wrote:
Quote:
Must be some sort of god. If it is a bad thing, then how can we appease it. If it is a good thing then how can we keep it happy.
No, that isn't how it started. But I do understand your point now.
How can you, or anyone, possibly know that?
ryanb31 wrote:
Quote:
Neither of us have any proof
Not true. And I know we would go back and forth on this forever because it simply boils down to you do not accept the proof that God exists.
There cannot be any proof, that is why it is called belief. There is no proof of the existence of God (although I see we are now firmly back on your god and ignoring all the others (which is perhaps the main problem I have with God or any other god, if your god is right then all others must be wrong, but if another god is right then yours must be wrong. As they cannot all be right then they must all be wrong.)), and there is no proof of his (or any other's) non-existence either. Give me proof and I would have to accept it.
ryanb31 wrote:
Quote:
Can't say I've ever been in such a situation
My point was, what do I gain by claiming there is God and that God has set forth morals? You said we do it to control people, but who am I trying to control?
You are not trying to control anyone (that I know of), but as I said before, you were not the one who came up with these decrees from your particular god, nor were you the one who spread it around the world, killing all those who would not accept this god who said "thou shalt not kill".
ryanb31 wrote:
Quote:
I think that is simply how societies of any species develop.
Are you saying that animals have morals? Do their morals develop over time? Any examples?
I am not saying that animals have morals, but plenty of species manage not to kill each other without the mandate from a god yet you seem to think that without that man wouldn't. Plenty of species do kill each other too of course. And as frequently mentioned, those who have been told by a god not to kill do just as much as those who have not. Considerably more so over the course of human history.
Quote:
Of course it is humorous to you that anyone could come to a different conclusion to that which you have.
Not what I said. It's humorous that people come to different conclusions based on the same exact situation.
Quote:
I'm not so arrogant as to believe that I have all the answers.
Are you saying that those that believe in God are arrogant? If so, do you know the definition of arrogant?
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
-
It's quite simple: a practising Christian is one who believes in God, and tries to follow the teachings of Jesus. Whether they go to church or not is irrelevant, it is what is in the heart that matters. And we use the term 'practising', because however much we try, we will never be perfect.
Use the best guess
I believe that's the answer I didn't know I was looking for. :thumbsup:
"The ones who care enough to do it right care too much to compromise." Matthew Faithfull
-
Quote:
Of course it is humorous to you that anyone could come to a different conclusion to that which you have.
Not what I said. It's humorous that people come to different conclusions based on the same exact situation.
Quote:
I'm not so arrogant as to believe that I have all the answers.
Are you saying that those that believe in God are arrogant? If so, do you know the definition of arrogant?
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
Nope. I would say that anyone who knows absolutely everything they think is right and there is nothing beyond that conforms quite nicely to a definition of arrogant though, I don't have those abilities. Of course, having belief is kind of like a global get out cause for that and almost anything else. There is a wonderful phrase that runs all through the laws of association football which reads "if in the opinion of the referee". This essentially means that the referee can never be wrong. Belief gives you the same get out. The answer to the question "why" can always be "because that is what I believe" and it cannot be countered in any way.
“I believe that there is an equality to all humanity. We all suck.” Bill Hicks
-
Jörgen Andersson wrote:
What would the word be for the ones that are "practicing" without believing
I'd call them cowards.
I was brought up to respect my elders. I don't respect many people nowadays.
CodeStash - Online Snippet Management | My blog | MoXAML PowerToys | Mole 2010 - debugging made easierThere are plenty of other people I would have expected that answer from. It's easy to say that when you live in a country of relative freedom, but think of the fact that there are still many countries where it could render you a terminal punishment to have the wrong belief.
"The ones who care enough to do it right care too much to compromise." Matthew Faithfull