Atheist Discussion

An international team of researchers has found evidence that suggests the degree of
moral vitalism—believing in forces of good and evil—in a given society may be related
to its pathogen history. In their paper published in Proceedings of the Royal Society B,
the group describes their study of data from two prior research efforts and from their
own survey, and what they learned from it.

An international team of researchers has found evidence that suggests the
degree of moral vitalism—believing in forces of good and evil—in a given
society may be related to its pathogen history.

And they further suggest that it [moral vitalism] appears to confer an evolutionary
advantage. Someone who believes the devil is responsible for making someone sick,
for example, will likely take action to avoid being around that person, keeping them safe.

Dunno... sounds a bit woo to me, considering that a pathogen can be one of any/all
disease-producing agents, particularly a virus, bacterium, or other microorganism. Thus,
if one community member contracts it, then it'll inevitably spread contagiously across
part of community by virtue of droplet infection, ingestion or inhalation, or contact etc.

This year in Australia, nearly 217,000 people were diagnosed with influenza, but "only"
84 sufferers, or 0.039% were confirmed as dying.   If the devil had  been at work, the
death toll would've been much higher—but once again modern drugs outsmarted him.

In Australia, 37% of Christians believe in the devil, according to a McNair Anderson poll,
as do 57% of Christian Americans, according to a YouGov poll.

Hard to believe this, in the 21st century.    

Take a piece of paper, cut a small hole in it, run the paper over the numbers. When the ones you like appear in the hole...

Well, it was probably like that during the plague, yellow fever, small pox and with other epidemics.

Come to think of it, when the first cases of AIDS came about in the US, people with aids were "avoided like the plague".

I don't know whether they mean that sort of thing in that article, but these were diseases that made people avoid those who were exposed like they were some evil thing...

(11-28-2019, 07:38 PM)SYZ Wrote: [ -> ]An international team of researchers has found evidence that suggests the degree of
moral vitalism—believing in forces of good and evil—in a given society may be related
to its pathogen history. In their paper published in Proceedings of the Royal Society B,
the group describes their study of data from two prior research efforts and from their
own survey, and what they learned from it.

An international team of researchers has found evidence that suggests the
degree of moral vitalism—believing in forces of good and evil—in a given
society may be related to its pathogen history.

And they further suggest that it [moral vitalism] appears to confer an evolutionary
advantage. Someone who believes the devil is responsible for making someone sick,
for example, will likely take action to avoid being around that person, keeping them safe.

Dunno... sounds a bit woo to me, considering that a pathogen can be one of any/all
disease-producing agents, particularly a virus, bacterium, or other microorganism. Thus,
if one community member contracts it, then it'll inevitably spread contagiously across
part of community by virtue of droplet infection, ingestion or inhalation, or contact etc.

This year in Australia, nearly 217,000 people were diagnosed with influenza, but "only"
84 sufferers, or 0.039% were confirmed as dying.   If the devil had  been at work, the
death toll would've been much higher—but once again modern drugs outsmarted him.

In Australia, 37% of Christians believe in the devil, according to a McNair Anderson poll,
as do 57% of Christian Americans, according to a YouGov poll.

Hard to believe this, in the 21st century.    

Total nonsense. Superstitious people are the least likely to accept modern vaccines and such. So, they get diseases they could avoid otherwise.

During the Black Death doctors dressed up so as to be scary to whatever was causing the disease.

(11-29-2019, 02:55 PM)Gawdzilla Sama Wrote: [ -> ]During the Black Death doctors dressed up so as to be scary to whatever was causing the disease.

During The Black Death, there were no doctors. The few medical-treating types who survived were (like me) immune to it. Europeans today are nearly immune to it. We are mostly descents of the immune. Works for some other diseases too.

Quibble noted.

(11-29-2019, 03:04 PM)Gawdzilla Sama Wrote: [ -> ]Quibble noted.

And accepted. I probably come from a long line of people immune to some historical diseases. But if I was exposed to malaria, I would likely fall like a chopped tree.

Just remember what McCoy said about dialysis.

I am skeptical of the conclusions.

First: association is not cause.

Second: association can be, and often is, coincidental. They are just measuring one attitude, not its interaction with a thousand others.

A good example is asthma sufferers. They have these terrifying experiences of being unable to breathe, they know people can die from it. They naturally become hyper-aware of potential asthma triggers, to an often excessive degree, in an effort to avoid repeating the experience. Does this then justify someone coming along and declaring or implying a causal connection between anxiety and asthma, or threat paranoia and asthma?

Finally ... why the assertion that belief in "the Devil" leads to one being more proactive in avoiding disease and enjoying a resulting evolutionary advantage? Could it not just as easily lead to one being passive? I can't count the number of times people shrugged in the face of adversity and said sadly and sagely, "well, we live in a fallen world". If Satan is a given, sure one reaction might be to avoid him or those he influences; another could equally be, to accept his agency as unavoidable. I've seen both reactions.

That was obvious from the OP. Fun to watch them flail about, however.

(11-28-2019, 07:38 PM)SYZ Wrote: [ -> ]An international team of researchers has found evidence that suggests the degree of
moral vitalism—believing in forces of good and evil—in a given society may be related
to its pathogen history. In their paper published in Proceedings of the Royal Society B,
the group describes their study of data from two prior research efforts and from their
own survey, and what they learned from it.

An international team of researchers has found evidence that suggests the
degree of moral vitalism—believing in forces of good and evil—in a given
society may be related to its pathogen history.

And they further suggest that it [moral vitalism] appears to confer an evolutionary
advantage. Someone who believes the devil is responsible for making someone sick,
for example, will likely take action to avoid being around that person, keeping them safe.

Yeah, because drowning the cats worked so well at preventing the black plague and spiking your wine with arsenic keeps the doctor away.

(11-29-2019, 03:10 PM)Cavebear Wrote: [ -> ]

(11-29-2019, 03:04 PM)Gawdzilla Sama Wrote: [ -> ]Quibble noted.

And accepted.  I probably come from a long line of people immune to some historical diseases.  But if I was exposed to malaria, I would likely fall like a chopped tree.

How do you know you're immune to some diseases and what diseases are you immune to? Have you been exposed to the diseases and/ or genetically tested for the disease immunity? I'm curious. My kid is in a science competition and one of the events is Diseases.

-Teresa

The endemic diseases are well known.