pizzahut451 said:
kowhoho said:
pizzahut451 said:
ManusJustus said:
pizzahut451 said:
ManusJustus said:
If anything, Atheists are more 'moral' than the rest of society as we have the lowest crime rates of all 'religious' groups, though that probably has more to do with atheists tending to be more educated and wealthy, which are better predictions of likelihood to commit crime.
|
just a fiiiiiiine example of arrogance that is so incredibly high among atheists
|
Its not arrogance if its a fact. Look at statistics on the matter, you'll find that atheists tend to be more educated and wealthier than the rest of society and that atheists have lower crime rates.
As I said before, I think economics is the biggest predictor of crime, and it makes sense that wealthy people aren't going to be knocking up banks and jacking cars. Thus, atheists commit less crime but aren't necessarily more moral than the rest of society, though its ridiculous that people would consider atheists less moral when they are the best behaved members of society.
|
Oh yeah? The fact that you generalize everything in that post makes me wanna puke. First of all, a group of people CANT be more educated than the other. You'll find atheists who are smarter than christians and christians that are smarter than atheists. And statistics werent done on ALL christians and atheists, so its pretty stupid to say that ''atheists tend to be more educated and wealthier than the rest of society''. That is incredibly arrogant
|
Oh, now I see why you don't want to talk to me. It's clear you have some prejudice going.
Education has nothing to do with intelligence. If the statistics are reliable and say that atheism and low crime rates/wealth are correlated, you can reasonably come to the conclusion that an atheist is less likely to commit crimes or make little money than other people. That is incredibly stupid. That is like saying a white person has a less chance to comitt a crime than a black person. Atheisam and religion have nothing to do with those people comitting crime. To tie those people with the fact that they are atheists or religious and say thats the reason for their high or low crime rates is dumb. Thats why that statistic is retarded and biased. And if someone was a REAL christian, he or she wouldnt comitt a crime and thats another reason why that statistic sucks.And another thing...unless the statistic is used on a whole group of people, we cant really say that the other group is less likely to comitt a crime and to make little money than other
This isn't arrogance. I think what you read his post looking for arrogance. You wanted to believe this guy was arrogant because of your inherent prejudice against him. Nowhere in his post was anything "generalized."
I'm sure you thought he was implying that atheism and wealth and all that are CAUSEATED, when in fact he only stated that they are CORRELATED. In other words, you can use the data to make predictions about atheists, non-criminals, and wealthy people, but you can't say that the variables of the study are directly causing one another.EXACTLY!!!!
If you were EDUCATED in Probability and Statistics you would have known that of course. The fact that you haven't taken the course (or just didn't really retain what you learned) has no bearing on your intelligence, however.
In short, you need to calm down. Im not sure about that, i posted that post a while ago, and im sure i was calm back than as i am now.
|
Statistics are constantly being used for the betterment of mankind and are a huge component of all the developements which make your life easier. For you to say that they are 'stupid' or 'biased' is quite frankly an insult to what humanity has accomplished for itself.Bias is always present as human error cannot be entirely removed from a human study, but there are methods that statistics use (such as random sampling or double-blind studies) which bring the potential for bias down to an acceptable level. A good statistcical study ensures that its results have less than a 5% chance of happening by chance, and those studies are often repeated many times regardless, so there is a complete certainty of their results.
You also seem to be overlooking the point I'm trying to make. I never said that atheism CAUSES wealth, low crime rates or anything of the sort. Neither did he. I can most definitely say that an atheist is less likely to commit crime or be poor because of the negative correlation between the two. This prediction is only based on the correlation between the variables. This is not a generalization and in no way does it imply that NO atheist would commit crime.
Let's use a different example.
Consider a study where students' GPA and the hours they watch TV are compared. Let's say that the study finds a strong negative correlation between Hours of TV Watching and GPA (more hours of tv = lower GPA). From this data, assuming it was taken with a randomly collected sample of students and biases were minimized, I can predict that a student who watches a lot of TV will have a low GPA. Yes? However this does not mean that watching TV CAUSES bad grades. There could be a third unknown variable which is causing both the high amount of TV watching AND the low GPA, such as inherent laziness.
Now let's move on to your use of the term, "real christian." Can you actually define to me right now what a real christian is? I seriously doubt it. I find it funny that you call my arguments shallow and them use terms with no operational definition. There are a thousand sects of christianity that don't agree with one another. Are you so vain as to say that your church has a monopoly on morality? Your statements are uninformed, narrow-minded and arrogant. |
