العلم يفضح نفسيات الملحدين

[ناس]

العلم يفضح نفسيات الملحدين فعندما ترى ملحدا يتحدى الله أن يعاقبه ويستعرض بذلك ،

فهو في أعماقه خائف من وقوع العقوبة .. دراسة علمية تثبت ذلك :

atheism-belief
Emotional Reactions of Atheists May Reveal Echoes of Belief

A recently published study from Finland finds that even atheists have a hard time asking God to harm their loved ones.


The heads and hearts of atheists may not be on precisely the same page. That’s the implication of recently published research from Finland, which finds avowed non-believers become emotionally aroused when daring God to do terrible things.

“The results imply that atheists’ attitudes toward God are ambivalent, in that their explicit beliefs conflict with their affective response,” concludes a research team led by University of Helsinki psychologist Marjaana Lindeman. Its study is published in the International Journal for the Psychology of Religion.

Lindeman and her colleagues describe two small-scale experiments. The first featured 17 Finns, recruited online, who expressed high levels of belief, or disbelief, in God. They read out loud a series of statements while skin conductance data was collected via electrodes placed on two of their fingers.

Atheists “may have found using the word God stressful because others, possibly their friends and family, do take God seriously.”
Some of the statements were direct dares to a deity (“I dare God to make my parents drown”). Others were similarly disturbing, but did not reference God (“It’s OK to kick a puppy in the face”). Still others were bland and neutral (“I hope it’s not raining today”).

The arousal levels of the believers and non-believers followed precisely the same pattern: Higher for both the God dares and otherwise unpleasant statements, and lower for the neutral ones.

Compared to the atheists, the believers reported feeling more uncomfortable reciting the God dares. But skin conductance data revealed the underlying emotional reactions of the two groups were essentially the same. This suggests that taunting God made the atheists more upset than they were letting on (even to themselves).

Of course, perhaps it wasn’t the presence of God, but rather the subject matter of the statements (such as the death of their parents) that caused the atheists’ emotional arousal. The second experiment was designed to test that hypothesis. It featured 19 Finnish atheists, who participated in an expanded version of the first experiment. It included 10 additional statements—variations on the God dares which excluded any mention of supernatural forces. For example, in addition to “I dare God to turn all my friends against me,” they read out loud the statement: “I wish all of my friends would turn against me.”

The results: The atheists showed greater emotional arousal when reading the God-related statements than while reading the otherwise nearly identical sentences that omitted the almighty. To the researchers, this indicates that “even atheists have difficulty daring God to harm themselves and their loved ones.”

“There are at least four potential explanations for these findings,” Lindeman and her colleagues write. The simplest and most provocative is that “atheists’ explicit beliefs may differ from the implicit reactions that exist outside of conscious awareness.”

But other possibilities are equally plausible. Atheists “may have found using the word God stressful because others, possibly their friends and family, do take God seriously,” they note. Alternatively, they may have found the idea of God “absurd or aversive,” leading to the heightened emotional response.

Finally, the researchers note, “although atheists did not currently believe in God, they may have been influenced by their own previous beliefs.” They point to research from 2006 that found three-quarters of American atheists were once believers.

Perhaps the emotional response measured in this study is an echo of that previous belief. If so, it suggests that even for committed non-believers, it’s difficult to totally erase the idea of God from one’s psyche.

[واكد]

اين المشكله ؟؟
وماذا يثبت هذا البحث؟

لاحظ :

two small-scale experiments

تجارب محدوده وعدد الذين خضعوا للاستفتاء 36 شخص اي شريحه صغيره جدا كما ان البحث لم يتطرق بدقه الى الفئه العمريه وهي عامل مهم في دراسه الاحصائيات واستتناج مايفيد منها.

alternatively, they may have found the idea of god “absurd or aversive,” leading to the heightened emotional response.

مايعتريني انا شخصيا هو الحزن عندما افكر بسخافه الاعتقاد بوجود اله ومن المؤكد ان ذلك سيؤدي الى تسجيل انفعال ما تتحسس به المجسات المستخدمه لقياس رد الفعل.

اما عنوان الموضوع فهو مجرد محاوله للتضليل واعطاء حجم اكبر لهذا الموضوع .
مستقبلا تكرم علينا برابط الموضوع .

[Gear]

بغض النظر عن صحة الدراسة لعدم وجود مصدر او رابط للدراسة ،فخوف الملحد ليس دليل على وجود اله و ﻻ يجعل السماء تمطر ضفادعا

[ناس]

اين المشكله ؟؟
وماذا يثبت هذا البحث؟

تتسأل عن المشكله ومن ثم تتسأل عن الاثبات :)

لاحظ :

تجارب محدوده وعدد الذين خضعوا للاستفتاء 36 شخص اي شريحه صغيره جدا كما ان البحث لم يتطرق بدقه الى الفئه العمريه وهي عامل مهم في دراسه الاحصائيات واستتناج مايفيد منها.

من المضحك انكم قله ومحدودين وتستقل غيرك في ابداء رأيهم :)

مايعتريني انا شخصيا هو الحزن عندما افكر بسخافه الاعتقاد بوجود اله ومن المؤكد ان ذلك سيؤدي الى تسجيل انفعال ما تتحسس به المجسات المستخدمه لقياس رد الفعل.

هذاا شأنك في كونك تعتقد ان هناك اله او لا

اما عنوان الموضوع فهو مجرد محاوله للتضليل واعطاء حجم اكبر لهذا الموضوع .
مستقبلا تكرم علينا برابط الموضوع .

حاضر ولا يهمك

وهذا المصدر

http://www.psmag.com/blogs/news-blog...-belief-56395/

[ناس]

اقرأ ايضاً


http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/1...1#.VLQql9KsVcs

[ناس]

وللاستزاده

According to polls, almost all Americans believe in God. So atheists naturally stand out as dissident nay-sayers, especially when challenging the use of "God" in the Pledge of Allegiance, or the display of religious symbols in public places. Such protests make many Americans wonder about the motivations and character of militant unbelievers

http://www.amazon.com/Atheists-Groun.../dp/1591024137

[ناس]

:)

Two sets of researchers ask whether nonbelievers turn toward God after contemplating death.



Are there atheists in foxholes? That timeless question (the literal answer to which is yes) is a shorthand way of asking whether, when confronted by their own mortality, even nonbelievers’ thoughts turn to God.

Research published earlier this year tentatively concluded that they do. But a new study, conducted by scholars from three countries, reports that death-related thoughts lead us to reaffirm whatever belief system gives our lives meaning—and for atheists, that’s something other than religious faith.

“Our tentative conclusion is that even nonreligious people are tempted toward religious belief, if only implicitly, in the face of death,” writes Oxford University psychologist Jonathan Jong. He is lead author of a paper entitled “Foxhole Athiesm, Revisited,” published in the Journal of Experimental Psychology.

“The psychological comforts of religion do not appear to be of universal necessity,” counters University of Missouri psychologist Kenneth Vail. He’s the lead author of the paper “Exploring the Existential Function of Religion,” published in the Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin.

Both papers provide evidence that reminders of death increase the religiosity of believers. This supports one of the basic tenets of Terror Management Theory, a school of thought built on the insights of the late anthropologist Ernest Becker.

According to TMT, a basic function of religion is to provide a buffer against death-related anxiety. It does this, primarily, by promising believers an ongoing existence that transcends earthly mortality. So it’s no surprise that both sets of researchers found a link between thoughts of mortality and increased devotion.

In the first of three experiments Vail describes, death reminders enhanced the religiosity of both Christians and Muslims. Christians were more likely to express belief in Jesus and deny the divinity of Allah and Buddha; conversely, Muslims were more likely to express belief in Allah and deny the divinity of Jesus and Buddha. (Buddhists do not, however, claim divinity for Buddha, and Islam’s Allah is usually seen as the same monotheistic God worshiped by Christians and Jews.)

Similarly, Jong found that when reminded with death, “participants explicitly defended their own religious world view, such that self-described Christians were more confident that supernatural religious entities exist.”

But when it came to nonreligious people, Jong found a disconnect between conscious beliefs and unconscious ones. Like the believers, the nonreligious responded to death reminders by strengthening their commitment to their world view—in their case, the firm belief there’s no such thing as supernatural entities.

But using an implicit association test, he found that after thinking about death, nonbelievers “wavered from their disbelief.” Specifically, 71 students from the University of Otago in New Zealand were presented with a series of 20 nouns, which they were instructed to categorize as “real” or “imaginary” as quickly as possible.

Jong reports that “while believers strengthened their beliefs, non-believers wavered from their disbelief” after thinking about their own mortality. Specifically, they were slower to label such concepts as “God” and “heaven” as imaginary.

In other words, when death was on their minds, “believers more readily judged religious concepts as real,” he writes, “while non-believers found it more difficult to judge religious concepts as imaginary.”

While respectful of Jong, Vail takes issue with his methodology; he isn’t convinced a less-rapid response time necessarily denotes increased doubt. Furthermore, he notes that all nonbelievers are not created equal.

His research, conducted with Jamie Arndt of the University of Missouri and Abdolhossein Abdollahi of the University of Limerick, Ireland and Islamic Azau University in Iran, distinguished between atheists and agnostics, and found they reacted to death reminders quite differently.

Specifically, in one experiment, death reminders “motivated agnostics to increase their religiosity, belief in a higher power, and their faith in God/Jesus, Buddha, and Allah.” Basically, they were more open to immortality-promising deities of any stripe.

But in a separate experiment, the notion of death did not increase atheists’ very low levels of religiosity or belief in a higher power.

In Vail’s view, this suggests people who strongly reject religious belief find other ways of dealing with “the psychological problem of death,” such as devoting themselves to some secular cause that will endure beyond their lifetimes.

So while the larger conclusions of the two papers “largely converge,” as Vail notes, they point to different answers regarding whether, say, Christopher Hitchens started to waver from his firm disbelief in his final days.

“Implicit religious belief is a difficult thing to sample,” Jong concedes, “and we hope that more work is done on this in different samples, including more militant atheists.”

Any volunteers?

http://www.psmag.com/navigation/book...ersions-43291/

[ناس]

:)

Foxhole atheism, revisited: The effects of mortality salience on explicit and implicit religious belief


Abstract
Although fear of death features prominently in many historical and contemporary theories as a major motivational factor in religious belief, the empirical evidence available is ambivalent, and limited, we argue, by imprecise measures of belief and insufficient attention to the distinction between implicit and explicit aspects of cognition. The present research used both explicit (questionnaire) and implicit (single-target implicit association test; property verification) measurement techniques to examine how thoughts of death influence, specifically, belief in religious supernatural agents. When primed with death, participants explicitly defended their own religious worldview, such that self-described Christians were more confident that supernatural religious entities exist, while non-religious participants were more confident that they do not. However, when belief was measured implicitly, death priming increased all participants' beliefs in religious supernatural entities, regardless of their prior religious commitments. The results are interpreted in terms of a dual-process model of religious cognition, which can be used to resolve conflicting prior data, as well as to help explain the perplexing durability of religious belief.

[واكد]

المشاركة الأصلية كتبت بواسطة ناس

تتسأل عن المشكله ومن ثم تتسأل عن الاثبات :)



من المضحك انكم قله ومحدودين وتستقل غيرك في ابداء رأيهم :)




هذاا شأنك في كونك تعتقد ان هناك اله او لا



حاضر ولا يهمك

وهذا المصدر

http://www.psmag.com/blogs/news-blog...-belief-56395/

تحياتي

شكرا على الرابط وتعقيبا على استخدامك المتعمد لعنوان مثير لاعلاقه له بالبحث نهائيا وهذا يدلل على محاوله للتضليل وعدم الامانه في النقل.
المقال الاصلي ليس به اي فضائح ولايتحدث عن فضائح قليل من الامانه العلميه لايضر اليس كذلك ؟

كوننا قله لايعني باننا غير مؤثرين ويكفينا ان اعظم علماء العالم يرون مانراه وكون من امن اكثريه لايدل على انكم على حق اليس كذلك ؟
انا لم ات من عندي بالمعلومات ولم اختلقها فالبحث هو الذي قال بان التجربه اجريت على عدد محدود ولكنك يبدو لم تقرا البحث جيدا لهذا سارعت بالسخريه وهذا ليس في صالح النقاش اذا كان القصد منه فائده الجميع .

لم استتنتج اي شيء من البحث ولم ار فيه اي جديد فقد سبقته ابحاث وابحاث اوسع واشمل لذا فهذا البحث الذي قدمته حضرتكم محدود تماما ولاعلاقه بين مضمونه والعنوان الذي اخترته .

[ناس]

يبدو لي من ردك بأنك ليس قارئ جيد ولاتقرأ مابين السطور ولم تؤشر على روابط الصفحة الرئيسية للابحار بكل حذافير الموضوع واستشهاداته وااستشهادات استشهااداته


شاكر لك