I've never posted another person's work: today is a first. I read an essay that rings true with me. I feel it. As I was reading the essay, I wanted to jump up and down, shouting "That's me! That's me!".
The essay is about why geeks are most often atheists. However, the best part for me is not why we're mostly atheist, but who we are, what makes us a "geek", and why we always seem or feel different from the rest of the world.
This is the best explanation of how I see the world around me I've ever seen. These people nailed the definition of geek.
Slightly edited to fit within MatchDoctor's character limit. The original work can be found here.
If God did not exist, it would be necessary to invent him. - Voltaire
‘Geek’ brings to mind a long list of traits: Glasses, obsession with science, high IQ. Recently, however, a new trait has come to light to add to the long, esteemed list: Atheism. Despite being widely known, there is very little explanation for this.
Although this trend is obvious to most people who have visited Digg or other similar sites, perhaps we should have a look at some of the statistics. On a Digg religion poll, out of a base of over four thousand votes taken, 45.56 percent are reported to be atheists. This makes them the single largest religious group on Digg, followed by Christianity, at 29.08 percent. Likewise, on Shuzak, a statistical examination of the 271 users who actually declared their religion showed the percentage of Atheists to be close to 70%. Both polls are at least fairly accurate given that they are most used by those who have strong opinions about their religion. Now that we have shown that it is, in fact, a trend, all that remains is to ask 'Why?'.
To attempt to formulate a theory on this topic, it becomes vital to define geek in the first place, not an easy task. So, we now ask the question, 'What is a Geek?'. There can be many kinds, Art Geeks, Music Geeks, Computer Geeks, Math Geeks, you name it. Geeks are the people you want to talk to when you need to know something but perhaps don't always want to invite to your parties. They are the people that collect information almost compulsively and nurture deep understandings of very obscure branches of knowledge. Geeks are people that live by their wits and believe in meritocracies and recognition not privilege or nepotism. They value our knowledge and appreciate those who can appreciate that and more importantly, add to it. They find great joy in learning a new thing, to extending our knowledge and sharing knowledge with another that can appreciate it. We are diverse, we are everywhere, we are different.
This leads at a cursory glance to the simple explanation of 'geeks tend to be different, so they look beyond the mainstream religious explanations'. However, several other explanations have been proposed as well, one of them being that given the social aspects of religion, a person who does not particularly care about socialization, or interpersonal interactions might find some of the allure gone.
Another explanation that has been proposed is that geeks tend to be interested in how the universe works. Upon looking into it, many find the complexity of the universe to be astounding. From the delicate and intricate dance of subatomic particles to the raging of stars thousands of times larger than our earth, the complexity and beauty of the universe awe many of those geeks who have looked deeply into physics. It might make sense to think that many such geeks simply find something as simple as a creator an overly simplistic explanation for something so elegant.
Yet another idea is that scientists (and geeks) tend to think in terms of logic. Because they are intelligent, they believe that their approach to problems is right. Religion has no place in science. Most of what we know is gathered from reading, watching and hearing various mediums. Since we choose what to read, watch, or hear, all three of these faculties are fundamentally biased. Since geeks have a strong bias towards logic, the end result is a disbelief in a higher power, which relies on faith.
A second aspect of intelligence is that a person who has grown up with the notion that he or she is more intelligent than those around (possibly a correct view) wants to get the most satisfaction from that intelligence. The quickest and most reliable way to be rewarded for intelligence is to prove someone else wrong (critical thinking). Such a strategy gives you an immediate result and also establishes a sense of superior intelligence. Being constructive is much less rewarding. So it is obvious that being critical and taking down other arguments is a much more appealing use of This leads many intelligent people to spend time attempting to disprove many established ideas that do not make sense to them.
The absence of proof does not mean no proof at all, but it does give reason to doubt. Geeks condition themselves to think logically, just as the religious have been conditioned to replace logic with trust in what they are told. What can be extracted from this is that geeks are not atheists simply because they may know "more" but also because they choose to think differently (whether or not they think superiorly is a question for another debate).
Copy & paste to friend: (Click inside box; Ctrl + C to copy; Ctrl + V to paste)
|
|
read more blogs!
Blogs by koyaanisqatsi:
| Why Are Geeks Often Atheist? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
iam7545

|
Sep 30 @ 12:37PM
|
|
|
koy - to support this essay I read that most Psychiatrists are atheist and not religious.
|
|
LipGlossQueen9

|
Sep 30 @ 12:38PM
|
|
A lot of geeks are more logical, aren't they? They can probably come up with a million theories to explain "God".
Me, I'm just a nerd.
Atheist, also, though.
|
|
kjac

|
Sep 30 @ 12:38PM
|
|
I don't mind being called a geek because of my beliefs. At least you're not accusing me of being a pedophile or a terrorist.
|
|
eastham

|
Sep 30 @ 12:41PM
|
|
|
And of the nearly 30% who self-identify as religious, I would venture to guess that many of them may be, as I am, attracted to faith for how it makes them think rather than whether it makes them feel good. In all likelihood they are mainstream Protestants and non-charismatic, Jesuit educated Catholics.
|
|
gmichael52

|
Sep 30 @ 12:50PM
|
|
|
I would consider myself to be a geek, but hardly not an atheist. I see it as a stereotype. If people were to simply look at me, I'm sure some would have certain stereotypes- and those stereotypes are dead wrong. I would think we as a society would have moved beyond this, because it's a very dangerous view to hold.
|
|
iglooo101

|
Sep 30 @ 12:58PM
|
|
someone being geek is a journey. hyppies of the 60s had their journey. Ibraham the patriarch what was he before becoming the patriarch? it is a journey and life is a journey. the smart ones really that benefit from the journey and not look into the eyes of the hydra.
|
|
koyaanisqatsi

|
Sep 30 @ 12:59PM
|
|
gmichael, if you were truly a geek, I think you would've read the essay a little better.
The authors were very careful to use words like "most", and "many". They very explicitly did not say "all".
Also, if you were truly a geek, you'd understand the nature of characterization. All of science is based on this. When you perform an experiment, and you find that 70% of everyone polled does "X", then there has to be an explanation for why your demographic does "X".
That's not called a stereotype.
That is called "science".
|
|
KUPUNA

|
Sep 30 @ 1:10PM
|
|
Si it's safe to come out of the closet?
|
|
koyaanisqatsi

|
Sep 30 @ 1:10PM
|
|
|
A lot of geeks are more logical, aren't they? They can probably come up with a million theories to explain "God". Yeah, maybe they could. However, that's not logic, so most of them wouldn't. Actually, that's the whole point of being a geek.
A geek would only explain something that needs explanation: some observed phenomenon.
A geek would never explain something that's not observed, because logically, something that isn't observed needs no explanation.
And that is the viewpoint of many geeks.
|
|
iam7545

|
Sep 30 @ 1:17PM
|
|
|
Yeah, maybe they could. However, that's not logic, so most of them wouldn't. Actually, that's the whole point of being a geek.
A geek would only explain something that needs explanation: some observed phenomenon.
A geek would never explain something that's not observed, because logically, something that isn't observed needs no explanation.
And that is the viewpoint of many geeks. Koy - that is a great answer! I can see a GEEK answering the question to prove God with - "but why" lol. What I do not understand about the so called "Atheist movement" is that it seems to exist to disprove the idea of God. If you google atheist all you will see are arguments against God and religion. I can understand the idea that one is an Atheist - I cannot understand the hatred of something they do not think exists!
|
|
madamegeek

|
Sep 30 @ 1:34PM
|
|
"Since geeks have a strong bias towards logic, the end result is a disbelief in a higher power, which relies on faith."
I think that rather than a disbelief "in" a higher power, the result is an alternate belief in the source or location of that higher power; it is in oneself and available for tapping. (Don't mind the noise you hear; it's the sound of my new heels..tapping along.)
|
|
misschoos

|
Sep 30 @ 1:41PM
|
|
I would invite you to all my parties.
Kudos
|
|
Mmmmmmmmm

|
Sep 30 @ 2:12PM
|
|
This article makes perfect sense because the life of the average geek revolves around thinking. The vast majority of people are also constantly thinking, but concentrated on feelings about the past or expectations of the future. Geeks take that ego energy and use it to focus on problem solving, using the scientific method, for example.
God or Oneness or the Divine or whatever you want to call it cannot be felt/captured/experienced through the thought process. It would entail the very opposite of Geekiness, which is to stop thinking, to be still, to be fully present in the moment without thought or expectation or judgment or projection or any thought whatsoever.
I've experienced a few minutes of this in my entire lifetime and it was enough "proof" for me though there is no mind in it.
|
|
koyaanisqatsi

|
Sep 30 @ 2:27PM
|
|
Thanks, Iam. :)
I think the main reason for that is political. If we set aside foreign policy issues for a moment, many policies (like promoting abstinence to the exclusion of birth control, refutation of what's considered to be scientific consensus, denying gays the right of secular matrimony, the addition of God in the Pledge of Allegiance in the 50's etc) appear to be religious by nature.
Evolution is a perfect example. Despite what anybody may claim on MD, evolution is one of the most revered and highly regarded theories in science. That's just fact.
That's not to say that there ARE scientists who believe otherwise, but then again, there are good physicists out there who don't believe in quantum mechanics. Even the best physicist of the 20th century, Albert Einstein, thought that QM is simply a good approximation to a more fundamental process. Actually, I share that opinion. :)
But the point is, you won't find 100% consensus in the scientific community about anything other than the most trivial of theories, like Newton's Laws or much of classical statistical mechanics.
However, there is a loosely defined, nebulous "scientific consensus". It can't be nailed down. It's a very unscientific thing, but scientists just know it. Quantum mechanics is true by scientific consensus. And evolution is true by scientific consensus (global warming falls under this category too, although perhaps less so than evolution).
The attempts to expel evolution, or teach it side-by-side with ID, is perceived as an attack to science. And that is a perfect example of why many atheists are wary of religion. They see it as encroaching on things it shouldn't be. That's part of the meritocracy. ID has no merit, by scientific consensus. And creationism certainly doesn't either.
The natural thing to do when someone is passing laws or enforcing teachings that are contrary to your belief system is to prove to them why they are wrong.
In this case, the way you prove someone wrong is by trying to tell them why God doesn't exist. To continue with my example (but there are many examples to choose from), the logical conclusion to "God doesn't exist" is "evolution is the best theory we have for the origins of mankind".
That's not to say there are deists who believe in evolution. Many do. Perhaps most do, if you push them to commit to an answer. However, in the current political climate in the USA, it's often hard to see that.
The flaw of this, of course, is that people are not going to simply read a list of reasons and say "Oh, I guess God really doesn't exist" any more than I can read a list of reasons for why God does exist and say "Oh, I guess God really does exist!"
That's why I don't go into the politics or religious forums. Anyone who truly believes they're going to convince a deist to become an atheist, or an atheist to become a deist, has a few screws loose. It's a total waste of time. I'm not about to convince Eastham that God doesn't exist any more than she's going to convince me of the opposite. But I certainly respect her belief just as she respects my belief, and that's why we're friends.
It seems to me that people in the religion forum should concentrate on finding commonality, not debating differences. That would pull people together, not push them apart. I'm afraid there's probably no hope for the politics forum - that's going to be a warzone no matter what. :-)
One of my favorite movies is "Angelheart" -- there's a Robert De Niro quote that I absolutely adore: "They say there's just enough religion in the world to make men hate each other and not enough to make them love." I don't want to spoil the movie by saying who said this -- I'll just say it's fairly ironic. :-)
But once someone institutes government policy that doesn't make sense to me, like cutting off funding for any organization that doesn't preach abstinence rather than safe sex, or talk about amending the Constitution to define secular marriage, that's an encroachment of my life, and my initial reaction is to prevent that.
And that is why there are "here are the reasons why God doesn't exist" websites.
It's like prostylization(sp?), only in reverse.
|
|
Hansumm

|
Sep 30 @ 4:14PM
|
|
I always though those that might have been neglected parentelly, only relied on what they could feel or touch since faith at an early age proved futile as a result of that parent neglect. Consequently faith migh have been lost and thus only believed in what they could touch or feel. Just a theory. I also thought psychiatrist became psychiatrist because common sense baffeled and amazed them.
OH...I have a hydra as a pet too !
|
|
iam7545

|
Sep 30 @ 4:30PM
|
|
good answer koy - thx. That still does not explain the venomous attacks that can be seen in the religious forums and on some of the Atheist websites. It is not done in a political vein and has no purpose other than to be degrading. It is a safe position to take because religious people cannot attack an Atheist as they hold to no universal belief! The political aspect you describe seems real in some cases but not in others. EX - God in the pledge. Why is it a problem? What does it really infringe on? Likewise symbols of religion like a Christmas tree. I understand it if a law is passed that infringes on a lifestyle. I just do not understand the venomous hate.
I am a Jew - many Jews are Buddhist and Atheist. I respect that. Generally they do not attack others the ways factions of Judaism attacks each other! Jews certainly do not attack Christians. Jews feel no need to attack others to prove our belief. I understand that some Christians do - but it seems to be the core of Atheism.
|
|
koyaanisqatsi

|
Sep 30 @ 4:59PM
|
|
I really must put down MD and get to work. Cripes. Iam, let me get to that on another day.
Hansumm, I come from a very typical New York Jewish family. I assure you that I was the farthest thing from neglected. If anything, it was quite the opposite! Very much so!
I had an intense Jewish upbringing: I know Hebrew and studied the bible daily for 3 hours a day in addition to the normal curriculum. In the original Hebrew, no less (I am fluent).
I have no idea what made me "me". I have thought of it, I just haven't come up with any answers.
I wish there were a way to lock myself out of MD until tomorrow.
|
|
Hansumm

|
Sep 30 @ 6:24PM
|
|
I want to apologize to all of you, I was just messing around and it was in poor taste. Your blog was a rather happy blog and I admit in being selfish in indulging myself in a tasteless in poor humor comment.
|
|
iam7545

|
Sep 30 @ 7:18PM
|
|
koy - thanks for your openness. I appreciate it when other share pieces of themselves. I also understand your position. I have many friends that went to Yeshiva with similar results. I saw a few of them at Kol Nidre and Yiskor! They still feel certain responsibilities by guilt I guess!
GET TO WORK!!!
|
|
jentoblues101

|
Sep 30 @ 10:44PM
|
|
Uhmmm. Pete? Am I a geek?
I kinda hope so.
|
|
redtigr

|
Sep 30 @ 11:38PM
|
|
There are Art geeks? Wow.. That's gotta be me. And if one can be a cat geek, that'd be me as well...
But I'm very social - love parties - and I'm quite the dancer...
... and I'm just disinterested in religions and the question of the existence of God.
so as usual...
I can't even fit in with those who don't fit in...
Interesting questions, though...
|
|
hammertime

|
Sep 30 @ 11:56PM
|
|
Koy, I think we're at a major turning point in the minds of people globally with regards to religion and the resulting backlash against it. Its hard to sum up 3000 years of history in a post but religious history is filled with bloodshed. There is just too much documentation on this subject and unfortunately its history is still being written. In an era where nuclear weapons can be made by almost anyone we need to view religion as a threatening motivational force. 9/11 is an example of such a threat where a group of religious lunatics happily committed suicide and murdered over 3000 people. They all believed 70 virgins were waiting for them in paradise. In America, we have extremist Fundamentalist Christians who have gained way too much political power and have ruined lives as a result. GWB is one example. Some of those religious leaders have used their influence in the Middle East for their own purely religious agenda to create more tension and death. Falwell, Robertson, Hagee, and other are all part of that dark force. We should include Brooklyn's Rabbi Mordechai Friedman who wants Israel to become a theocracy. That will certainly bring Armageddon much closer to reality.
This is the only time in the history of the world where we can literally wipe out all life, at least most of it, with existing technology. We have one major Christian leader, John Hagee calling for a nuke attack on Iran and he's got the support of folks like Tom DeLay, Joe Leiberman and others. They're looking forward to Armageddon. We're seeing a creeping wave of extreme religiosity in America. Some have taken notice and people like Christopher Hitchens, Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, and many others are speaking out and taking a stand. Hitchens got on the Muslim hit list because he invited Salmon Rushdie over for dinner. Now he has a bodyguard. All because a couple of authors where hungry and ate dinner together.
Its not about Atheism looking for converts. Its about exposing religion with far better scrutiny than we had before. Religion's influence is pervasive and it affects everyone. The issues affected are numerous. From Evolution, Stem Cell research, the HPV vaccine to an innocent Long Island public school teacher getting fired by her born again Principal for teaching what he called witchcraft. Apparently Shakespeare, Goosebumps, and Harry Potter are works of evil. Religious thinking is dangerous.
It might sound funny that schools like Liberty University claim to have dinosaur fossils that are 3000 years old but what's not so funny is tens of thousands of students are graduating from those schools with advanced degrees all believing man and dinosaur lived together just like Dino and Fred Flintstone. They're also producing lawyers whose true purpose is to enter government to bring America closer to a theocracy. Its hardly noticeable but some are taking it seriously. Can you imagine America as a theocracy? You think the news and television is censored now? Imagine if we not only had a president but a supreme leader. Blue laws will come back. Swearing in public will be a misdemeanor. Only Disney movies will be shown in theaters. No more dirty magazines like Cosmopolitan or Popular Science. All public schools will not only have school prayer but books on evolution will be put in the mythology section of the library.
We had our Dark Ages, Inquisitions, Witch burnings and today we have Religion Gone Wild. What hope do we have for peace if religious theology states that the Antichrist will be a man of peace? This laughable bizarre absurdity could make us humans become an endangered species. Perhaps our real hope lies with the Geeks of the world. If we have enough Geeks entering the clergy we could debug religion or just write a trojan horse that will format the hard drive.
|
|
iglooo101

|
Oct 1 @ 12:30AM
|
|
***"but religious history is filled with bloodshed"*** if we read the text in the book it is one thing while if we watch the interpretation it would be another. so basically it is the humans and their misinterpretation that lead to the above! i can say it is the ignorance of the text that can lead to such miserable and unholy results.
|
|
hammertime

|
Oct 1 @ 12:56AM
|
|
igloo, if we read what text in what book?
|
|
|