The New Psychology of Atheism

Andy Tix, from “Psychology Today” writes on the non-intellectual factors that are taken into consideration by non-religious people. It is often said by atheists that Christians just believe for emotional/psychological reasons. What we are finding out is that no matter what you believe, there are strong psychological forces at play. However, none of this tells us what is, and what is not true.

The New Psychology of Atheism

Support Help Me Believe

Published by Haden Clark

Haden lives in North Texas with his wife, daughter, and three dogs.

8 thoughts on “The New Psychology of Atheism

  1. Good point! There is usually something—that pushes people to explore in this or that, way.
    Interestingly, a good number of famous Atheists have had NO physical father (due to death) or an Absent father. Bertrand Russell? Nietzche? Hume? Freud? and others. See the book: Faith of the Fatherless by Paul Vitz.

    Like

  2. I have, over the years, discovered that when those purport atheism, I have never met one that made any real understanding. Either the points were simplistic in the extreme, meaning a stopping of following the trail of thoughts(as when one points to the suffering in the world but doesn’t seek as to why the suffering is there), rhetoric, the utilization of high dollar words (intellectual speak without understanding), or the down play of those who understand that we have been given life. I say this relatively bluntly for the reason of stating very clearly.
    The reason is this: in order to understand someone, first I look and listen. I look in their eyes and watch the facial and body language: that tells where the person is coming from: honesty or otherwise. People “tell” you what is going on in them, whether one can put it into words or just sense. A truly searching person speaks plainly, not needing high dollar words except when required (when no other words will adequately communicate). Also, they can listen to alternate explanations without getting angry or downplaying and rhetoric.
    I have pondered upon why people go to such lengths of high dollar words, university/professor type speak, rhetoric and such. One, as you may have already indicated is the life they had while growing up. Another are tragedies they never came to accept or at least, be patient with. Pride is another.
    I know, in some universities, people find their place. Among their peers, they speak a type of speak, are supported for their “genius” outlooks, and find in their intellect what they are seeking for their own validation. The only way they can continue is to keep repeating the same ideas over and over, find those who will listen (their “students” so to speak) and reward the behavior, but never question their own motivations. For to chase the rabbit down the trail might reveal something they do not want to face. Which explains so much. If I share, yes, I am looking for those of understanding, but if I’m not heard, that never changes my understanding. Whether many, several, a few, one, or none, what is true is true.
    For myself, I have pondered upon things I might also be avoiding. I suppose, some things are conscious while others in the subconscious. So, in my conscious awareness, I look for understanding.

    Liked by 1 person

  3. One other thing, and thanks for the article and your patience. I have pondered upon the intellectual. There are those who seriously ponder and are looking to truly understand, so when they share their thoughts, the writing seems very intellectual, but to those seeking as well, the sharing is actually filled with real understanding and proper explanations, though better might be had later. Then, there are those who intellectualize but are empty of any real meaning, though they sometimes have some in part, but it seems they are speaking more for their own and to be seen as smart in others’ eyes, supporting their own feelings of themselves. The question is then the purpose of the talks.

    Liked by 1 person

  4. From where I’m standing there is no such thing as non-intellectual or intellectual. Let me explain. I wouldn’t say I’m entirely with ‘Dolphinwrite’ on this one, but I tend to go with the notion that “people don’t see you, they ‘feel’ you”. Really, they do. Start from that premise, and we all might move somewhere. It’s a bit like Marxists who stay up all night trying prove themselves right, which in itself demonstrates clearly that it is not economics that drives El Mundo.

    Like

  5. The difference between pure intellectual and understanding is the first is like a computer: data in, data out, based upon preconceived viewpoints. Understanding is seeing clearly, even when you don’t know why you understand.

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: