"It seems to me that to organize on the basis of feeding people or righting social injustice and all that is very valuable. But to rally people around the idea of modernism, modernity, or something is simply silly. I mean, I don't know what kind of a cause that is, to be up to date. I think it ultimately leads to fashion and snobbery and I'm against it."
Jack Levine: January 3, 1915 – November 8, 2010
Friday, September 26, 2014
Comment And Answer
This comment was left by mistake on a thread not related to the post it addresses, but it deserves an answer.
siuan sancheSeptember 26, 2014 at 9:13 AM
The idea that Atheism is a maladaptation because we breed less than the religious is completely unscientific, especially when you consider that a lot of religions ban the use of contraception.
If you read my post again you'll see that I make a far stronger case to reject the idea that religion is an evolutionary adaptation because the idea makes no sense. It's prominent atheists such as Dawkins and Dennett, Pinker and so many others who insist on that bizarre idea for ideological reasons. Ideological reasons masked in a lab coat, as it were.
Actually, relatively few religions ban the use of contraception and, no matter what the authorities say about it, when they have contraceptives available, members of those religions often use them anyway in the same numbers as people whose religions don't ban their use. Catholics in the United States and in Europe are proof of that in real life, what is supposed to be the real test of scientific ideas.