Are atheists the most easily indoctrinated people? Why?

[Hurdergaryp]

But to most, atheism itself is a religion. Therefore, are atheists not the most easily indoctrinated? Atheism is a cult now, maybe once it could be for the cynical (of which, a trait I despise in a person), but now it's nothing more than political power and selfish gain. It has turned into a abomination set on freedom from religion, not freedom of religion. This sad transformation now leaves atheism as a political cult set on destroying Christians for "privilege," and "secularism." It has no purpose of today than to promote feminism, "progressiveness," and freedom from religion. It's unconstitutional in America and is a violation of one's inherent rights as a human being everywhere else.

I don't think there's a single thing in that paragraph I don't disagree with

It's the kind of logic you would expect from the Ministry of Truth. Unfortunately some people seem to view 1984 as an instruction manual instead of a cautionary tale.

[Mattopilos]

I'd disagree and state that the religious are more easily indoctrinated as there's a large God influencing them into the indoctrination.

But to most, atheism itself is a religion. Therefore, are atheists not the most easily indoctrinated? Atheism is a cult now, maybe once it could be for the cynical (of which, a trait I despise in a person), but now it's nothing more than political power and selfish gain. It has turned into a abomination set on freedom from religion, not freedom of religion. This sad transformation now leaves atheism as a political cult set on destroying Christians for "privilege," and "secularism." It has no purpose of today than to promote feminism, "progressiveness," and freedom from religion. It's unconstitutional in America and is a violation of one's inherent rights as a human being everywhere else.

Everything you just said hurt me from the pure concentrated ignorance.

[Minzerland II]

I'd disagree and state that the religious are more easily indoctrinated as there's a large God influencing them into the indoctrination.

But to most, atheism itself is a religion. Therefore, are atheists not the most easily indoctrinated? Atheism is a cult now, maybe once it could be for the cynical (of which, a trait I despise in a person), but now it's nothing more than political power and selfish gain. It has turned into a abomination set on freedom from religion, not freedom of religion. This sad transformation now leaves atheism as a political cult set on destroying Christians for "privilege," and "secularism." It has no purpose of today than to promote feminism, "progressiveness," and freedom from religion. It's unconstitutional in America and is a violation of one's inherent rights as a human being everywhere else.

What? This is utter fucking hogwash.

[Hurdergaryp]

But to most, atheism itself is a religion. Therefore, are atheists not the most easily indoctrinated? Atheism is a cult now, maybe once it could be for the cynical (of which, a trait I despise in a person), but now it's nothing more than political power and selfish gain. It has turned into a abomination set on freedom from religion, not freedom of religion. This sad transformation now leaves atheism as a political cult set on destroying Christians for "privilege," and "secularism." It has no purpose of today than to promote feminism, "progressiveness," and freedom from religion. It's unconstitutional in America and is a violation of one's inherent rights as a human being everywhere else.

Everything you just said hurt me from the pure concentrated ignorance.

It's probably not even that. There are a multitude of conservative websites from which you can copy & paste such puerile propaganda statements.

[Mattopilos]

Everything you just said hurt me from the pure concentrated ignorance.

It's probably not even that. There are a multitude of conservative websites from which you can copy & paste such puerile propaganda statements.

That... wouldn't surprise me.

[Genivaria]

But to most, atheism itself is a religion. Therefore, are atheists not the most easily indoctrinated? Atheism is a cult now, maybe once it could be for the cynical (of which, a trait I despise in a person), but now it's nothing more than political power and selfish gain. It has turned into a abomination set on freedom from religion, not freedom of religion. This sad transformation now leaves atheism as a political cult set on destroying Christians for "privilege," and "secularism." It has no purpose of today than to promote feminism, "progressiveness," and freedom from religion. It's unconstitutional in America and is a violation of one's inherent rights as a human being everywhere else.

What? This is utter fucking hogwash.

That sums up this thread perfectly.

[CITY18]

But to most, atheism itself is a religion. Therefore, are atheists not the most easily indoctrinated? Atheism is a cult now, maybe once it could be for the cynical (of which, a trait I despise in a person), but now it's nothing more than political power and selfish gain. It has turned into a abomination set on freedom from religion, not freedom of religion. This sad transformation now leaves atheism as a political cult set on destroying Christians for "privilege," and "secularism." It has no purpose of today than to promote feminism, "progressiveness," and freedom from religion. It's unconstitutional in America and is a violation of one's inherent rights as a human being everywhere else.

What? This is utter fucking hogwash.

He lost all credibility when he brought up how atheism was a cult for political gain.

[Prosocial]

1. It's nothing so complicated as that, just the fact that it happens to be popular right now and every movement has its band wagoners.
2. This was condescending and generally shitty. Religious people shouldn't be shitty to non religious people, we should do the opposite of that.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

The belief that there is no God is equally irrefutable and irrational to the belief that there is one. Atheism is thus just another form of faith based in belief rather than proof, and atheists, especially of the militant variety, are just as likely as religious believers to be receptive to ideological indoctrination.

That this is true is attested by the fact that some of the most fanatical regimes in history have been avowedly-atheist, and these regimes were no small extremist groups but managed to muster the fully-willing support of millions.

Something something lack of belief.
Theism and Atheism aren't equally logically valid in the face of no evidence, when there is a lack of evidence ofr the positive claim, the logical position is to assume the negative.

Well, gnostic atheism is as logically valid.

However, I am sure you mean more of the "soft" atheism who simply don't believe due to a lack of evidence and don't make a statement of knowledge.

That is, quite frankly, the only position an atheist can adopt and be logically impervious to challenge.

[Risottia]

It is no mystery to anyone that the current values in "Western" society, both via public education or via media or political discourse are very material/physical oriented, to the point that metaphysical concerns have been entirely erased from the collective psyche.

1.Looks like you're using "metaphysical" but mean "supernatural". Metaphysics is still studied in the West: we have philosophy courses in high schools and universities - included university courses about the metaphysical interpretation of quantum mechanics. Supernatural stuff has been receding, but it has not been wiped out, not even from universities - we have still Theology courses (which is rather silly, but humanity is too, so, there you go).
2.There's no such thing as a "collective psyche".

[Risottia]

I'd disagree and state that the religious are more easily indoctrinated as there's a large God influencing them into the indoctrination.

But to most, atheism itself is a religion. Therefore, are atheists not the most easily indoctrinated? Atheism is a cult now, maybe once it could be for the cynical (of which, a trait I despise in a person), but now it's nothing more than political power and selfish gain. It has turned into a abomination set on freedom from religion, not freedom of religion. This sad transformation now leaves atheism as a political cult set on destroying Christians for "privilege," and "secularism." It has no purpose of today than to promote feminism, "progressiveness," and freedom from religion. It's unconstitutional in America and is a violation of one's inherent rights as a human being everywhere else.

...


Wait, it wasn't satyre?

[The Huskar Social Union]

I'd disagree and state that the religious are more easily indoctrinated as there's a large God influencing them into the indoctrination.

But to most, atheism itself is a religion. Therefore, are atheists not the most easily indoctrinated? Atheism is a cult now, maybe once it could be for the cynical (of which, a trait I despise in a person), but now it's nothing more than political power and selfish gain. It has turned into a abomination set on freedom from religion, not freedom of religion. This sad transformation now leaves atheism as a political cult set on destroying Christians for "privilege," and "secularism." It has no purpose of today than to promote feminism, "progressiveness," and freedom from religion. It's unconstitutional in America and is a violation of one's inherent rights as a human being everywhere else.

Well thats some royal unadulterated bullshit you have right there.

[FelrikTheDeleted]

But to most, atheism itself is a religion. Therefore, are atheists not the most easily indoctrinated? Atheism is a cult now, maybe once it could be for the cynical (of which, a trait I despise in a person), but now it's nothing more than political power and selfish gain. It has turned into a abomination set on freedom from religion, not freedom of religion. This sad transformation now leaves atheism as a political cult set on destroying Christians for "privilege," and "secularism." It has no purpose of today than to promote feminism, "progressiveness," and freedom from religion. It's unconstitutional in America and is a violation of one's inherent rights as a human being everywhere else.

...


Wait, it wasn't satyre?

I believe he was nothing but serious.

[Lady Scylla]

I posit that it might be related to the fact people who are interested in expanding their minds and spirits to include questions beyond our immediate worldly concerns, may also develop the capacity to see propaganda, slogans and official tales more in depth and with more attention to detail to the more linear approach atheists have? Would you agree with this assessment?

Absolutely not. I think your whole post is narrow-minded swill and the height of hypocrisy. Your inability to recognize the ideological diversity among the atheist population shows a remarkable lack of attention to detail.

Pretty much this.

I'd disagree and state that the religious are more easily indoctrinated as there's a large God influencing them into the indoctrination.

But to most, atheism itself is a religion. Therefore, are atheists not the most easily indoctrinated? Atheism is a cult now, maybe once it could be for the cynical (of which, a trait I despise in a person), but now it's nothing more than political power and selfish gain. It has turned into a abomination set on freedom from religion, not freedom of religion. This sad transformation now leaves atheism as a political cult set on destroying Christians for "privilege," and "secularism." It has no purpose of today than to promote feminism, "progressiveness," and freedom from religion. It's unconstitutional in America and is a violation of one's inherent rights as a human being everywhere else.

Not even my bottle of whisky could kill as many brain cells as that did.

[Hurdergaryp]

It's probably not even that. There are a multitude of conservative websites from which you can copy & paste such puerile propaganda statements.

That... wouldn't surprise me.

Many people in NationStates General with strong opinions tend to be regurgitators. You could probably write scripts for it and automate the whole process.

[Victoria and Vacuna]

That... wouldn't surprise me.

Many people in NationStates General with strong opinions tend to be regurgitators. You could probably write scripts for it and automate the whole process.

That's probably true. Script me up, Hurde!

[Minoa]

The challenges that I face to staying non-religious mostly involve conspiracy theories and economic crisis predictions, often combined with religion to create great confusion.

[Hurdergaryp]

Many people in NationStates General with strong opinions tend to be regurgitators. You could probably write scripts for it and automate the whole process.

That's probably true. Script me up, Hurde!

If only I would have been a proper code monkey...

[Anywhere Else But Here]

1. It's nothing so complicated as that, just the fact that it happens to be popular right now and every movement has its band wagoners.
2. This was condescending and generally shitty. Religious people shouldn't be shitty to non religious people, we should do the opposite of that.

>Calls atheists "band wagoners"
>Says religious people shouldn't be condescending
>Disappears in a puff of irony

[Risottia]

I believe he was nothing but serious.

[Ostroeuropa]

Alright i'll entertain the premise.

An atheist who is an atheist as a result of a lack of a doctrine rather than skeptical inquiry may be easier to indoctrinate because...
well, religious people are already doctrinated. They have a doctrine.

You would need to get rid of that before indoctrination, requiring an extra step. Religious people are, by definition, indoctrinated, unless they do not believe in a religion taught in churches.

So it depends on how you're asking the question.

1. Who is easiest to bring from a state of non-indoctrinated to indoctrinated? - Religious people are already indoctrinated, making them either impossible to cause this change in if you define it as moving from one state to another, or infinitely easier, as you have suceeded the moment the endeavor starts.

2. Who is easiest to indoctrinate into a specific doctrine?
I'll say it could be atheists, provided they aren't also skeptics, sure, I can see that. No proof ofcourse, but sure.

For the record, doctrine:

a belief or set of beliefs held and taught by a Church, political party, or other group.

[Anadarsia]

Alright i'll entertain the premise.

An atheist who is an atheist as a result of a lack of a doctrine rather than skeptical inquiry may be easier to indoctrinate because...
well, religious people are already doctrinated. They have a doctrine.

You would need to get rid of that before indoctrination, requiring an extra step. Religious people are, by definition, indoctrinated, unless they do not believe in a religion taught in churches.

So it depends on how you're asking the question.

1. Who is easiest to bring from a state of non-indoctrinated to indoctrinated? - Religious people are already indoctrinated, making them either impossible to cause this change in if you define it as moving from one state to another, or infinitely easier, as you have suceeded the moment the endeavor starts.

2. Who is easiest to indoctrinate into a specific doctrine?
I'll say it could be atheists, provided they aren't also skeptics, sure, I can see that. No proof ofcourse, but sure.

For the record, doctrine:

a belief or set of beliefs held and taught by a Church, political party, or other group.

Full agreement with you.
A substantial amount of people regardless of denomination can be taught to agree with the systemic values regardless of their metaphysical value, but I think that by a certain degree, those who are religious might withstand the propaganda a bit better since they already have their faith located somewhere, while in the average atheist, they're just waiting for the next thing to come to attach themselves to it.

An excellent post that potentially explains my thread better than I did.

[Alvecia]

An atheist who is an atheist as a result of a lack of a doctrine rather than skeptical inquiry may be easier to indoctrinate because...
well, religious people are already doctrinated. They have a doctrine.

Good point

[PaNTuXIa]

No, quite the contrary. Atheists are naturally skeptical, while religious people are taught to obey without question.

[Anadarsia]

No, quite the contrary. Atheists are naturally skeptical, while religious people are taught to obey without question.

A good deal of self-described atheists are uninterested in the topic as it was not taught to them in school, or in their families, or because it never really comes around in society. It's simply expected to have little religiosity nowadays, the reason why people abandon their previously held convictions when attending universities, where they meet the status quo values.