New Atheism, dogmatism and Jonathon Haidt's study - Revision history

Conservative at 03:35, August 11, 2019

2019-08-11T03:35:29Z

Conservative at 03:35, August 11, 2019

2019-08-11T03:35:00Z

Conservative at 03:33, August 11, 2019

2019-08-11T03:33:41Z

Conservative at 18:10, August 10, 2019

2019-08-10T18:10:33Z

Conservative at 18:08, August 10, 2019

2019-08-10T18:08:31Z

Conservative at 17:53, August 10, 2019

2019-08-10T17:53:22Z

Conservative: Conservative moved page Atheism, dogmatism and Jonathon Haidt's study to New Atheism, dogmatism and Jonathon Haidt's study

2019-08-10T17:22:36Z

Conservative moved page Atheism, dogmatism and Jonathon Haidt's study to New Atheism, dogmatism and Jonathon Haidt's study

Conservative at 17:21, August 10, 2019

2019-08-10T17:21:35Z

Conservative: /* Atheism and dogmatism */

2019-08-10T17:19:21Z

‎Atheism and dogmatism

Conservative at 17:18, August 10, 2019

2019-08-10T17:18:07Z

@@ Line 4: / Line 4: @@
 [[New Atheism]] is a contemporary form of [[militant atheism]]. The new atheist [[Richard Dawkins]] said about New [[Atheism]], "[O]ur struggle is not so much an intellectual struggle, as a political one: What are we going to do about it?”.<ref>[http://secularismandnonreligion.org/articles/10.5334/snr.al/print/ Faithless: The politics of new atheism] by Steven Kettell</ref>
-Using special text analysis software, the social psychologist Jonathan Haidt found that new atheists very often wrote in dogmatic terms in their major works using words such as  “always,” “never,” “certainly,” “every,” and “undeniable.”<ref>[http://www.thisviewoflife.com/index.php/magazine/articles/why-sam-harris-is-unlikely-to-change-his-mind10 Why Sam Harris is Unlikely to Change his Mind] by JONATHAN HAIDT, February 3, 2014 8:36 pm</ref>  Of the 75,000 words in [[Sam Harris]]' ''The End of Faith'', 2.24% of them connote or are associated with certainty.<ref>[http://www.thisviewoflife.com/index.php/magazine/articles/why-sam-harris-is-unlikely-to-change-his-mind10 Why Sam Harris is Unlikely to Change his Mind] by JONATHAN HAIDT, February 3, 2014 8:36 pm</ref>
+Using special text analysis software, the social psychologist Jonathan Haidt found that new atheists very often wrote in dogmatic terms in their major works using words such as  “always,” “never,” “certainly,” “every,” and “undeniable.”<ref>[http://www.thisviewoflife.com/index.php/magazine/articles/why-sam-harris-is-unlikely-to-change-his-mind10 Why Sam Harris is Unlikely to Change his Mind] by JONATHAN HAIDT, February 3, 2014 8:36 pm</ref>  Of the 75,000 words in new atheist [[Sam Harris]]' ''The End of Faith'', 2.24% of them connote or are associated with certainty.<ref>[http://www.thisviewoflife.com/index.php/magazine/articles/why-sam-harris-is-unlikely-to-change-his-mind10 Why Sam Harris is Unlikely to Change his Mind] by JONATHAN HAIDT, February 3, 2014 8:36 pm</ref>
 Jonathon Haidt wrote in his article ''Why Sam Harris is Unlikely to Change his Mind'' which was posted at the [[Evolution]] Institute website:

@@ Line 4: / Line 4: @@
 [[New Atheism]] is a contemporary form of [[militant atheism]]. The new atheist [[Richard Dawkins]] said about New [[Atheism]], "[O]ur struggle is not so much an intellectual struggle, as a political one: What are we going to do about it?”.<ref>[http://secularismandnonreligion.org/articles/10.5334/snr.al/print/ Faithless: The politics of new atheism] by Steven Kettell</ref>
-Using special text analysis software, the social psychologist Jonathan Haidt found that new atheists very often wrote in dogmatic terms in their major works using words such as  “always,” “never,” “certainly,” “every,” and “undeniable.”<ref>[http://www.thisviewoflife.com/index.php/magazine/articles/why-sam-harris-is-unlikely-to-change-his-mind10 Why Sam Harris is Unlikely to Change his Mind] by JONATHAN HAIDT, February 3, 2014 8:36 pm</ref>  Of the 75,000 words in [[Sam Harris]]'s ''The End of Faith'', 2.24% of them connote or are associated with certainty.<ref>[http://www.thisviewoflife.com/index.php/magazine/articles/why-sam-harris-is-unlikely-to-change-his-mind10 Why Sam Harris is Unlikely to Change his Mind] by JONATHAN HAIDT, February 3, 2014 8:36 pm</ref>
+Using special text analysis software, the social psychologist Jonathan Haidt found that new atheists very often wrote in dogmatic terms in their major works using words such as  “always,” “never,” “certainly,” “every,” and “undeniable.”<ref>[http://www.thisviewoflife.com/index.php/magazine/articles/why-sam-harris-is-unlikely-to-change-his-mind10 Why Sam Harris is Unlikely to Change his Mind] by JONATHAN HAIDT, February 3, 2014 8:36 pm</ref>  Of the 75,000 words in [[Sam Harris]]' ''The End of Faith'', 2.24% of them connote or are associated with certainty.<ref>[http://www.thisviewoflife.com/index.php/magazine/articles/why-sam-harris-is-unlikely-to-change-his-mind10 Why Sam Harris is Unlikely to Change his Mind] by JONATHAN HAIDT, February 3, 2014 8:36 pm</ref>
 Jonathon Haidt wrote in his article ''Why Sam Harris is Unlikely to Change his Mind'' which was posted at the [[Evolution]] Institute website:

@@ Line 2: / Line 2: @@
 Research indicates that [[atheism|atheists]] are less open-minded (see: [[Atheism and open-mindedness]]).
-[[New Atheism]] is a contemporary form of [[militant atheism]]. Using special text analysis software, the social psychologist Jonathan Haidt found that new atheists very often wrote in dogmatic terms in their major works using words such as  “always,” “never,” “certainly,” “every,” and “undeniable.”<ref>[http://www.thisviewoflife.com/index.php/magazine/articles/why-sam-harris-is-unlikely-to-change-his-mind10 Why Sam Harris is Unlikely to Change his Mind] by JONATHAN HAIDT, February 3, 2014 8:36 pm</ref>  Of the 75,000 words in [[Sam Harris]]'s ''The End of Faith'', 2.24% of them connote or are associated with certainty.<ref>[http://www.thisviewoflife.com/index.php/magazine/articles/why-sam-harris-is-unlikely-to-change-his-mind10 Why Sam Harris is Unlikely to Change his Mind] by JONATHAN HAIDT, February 3, 2014 8:36 pm</ref>
+[[New Atheism]] is a contemporary form of [[militant atheism]]. The new atheist [[Richard Dawkins]] said about New [[Atheism]], "[O]ur struggle is not so much an intellectual struggle, as a political one: What are we going to do about it?”.<ref>[http://secularismandnonreligion.org/articles/10.5334/snr.al/print/ Faithless: The politics of new atheism] by Steven Kettell</ref>
 Jonathon Haidt wrote in his article ''Why Sam Harris is Unlikely to Change his Mind'' which was posted at the [[Evolution]] Institute website:

@@ Line 15: / Line 15: @@
 To provide an additional standard of comparison, I also analyzed books by three right wing radio and television stars whose reasoning style is not generally regarded as scientific. I analyzed [[Glenn Beck]]’s Common Sense, [[Sean Hannity]]’s Deliver Us from Evil, and [[Anne Coulter]]’s Treason. (I chose the book for each author that had received the most comments on Amazon.) The graph below shows the results. Harris appears to be the outlier.** Of the 75,000 words in The End of Faith, 2.24% of them connote or are associated with certainty. I also analyzed The Moral Landscape—it came out at 2.34%. (The graph shows no error bars because each bar represents an exact count of certainty-related words, divided by the total word count. There is no variance.)
-I am opposed to dogmatism. I am skeptical of each person’s individual powers of reasoning, and I’m even more skeptical of the reasoning of groups of activists, hyper-partisans, and other righteous reformers who would remake society according to their own reasoned (or revealed) vision."<ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20150618131552/https://evolution-institute.org/article/why-sam-harris-is-unlikely-to-change-his-mind10/?source=tvol ''Why Sam Harris is unlikely to change his mind''] by Jonathon Haidt, Evolution Institute website, archive</ref><ref>[https://evolution-institute.org/why-sam-harris-is-unlikely-to-change-his-mind10/ Sam Harris is unlikely to change his mind''] by Jonathon Haidt, Evolution Institute website</ref>}}
+...I am opposed to dogmatism. I am skeptical of each person’s individual powers of reasoning, and I’m even more skeptical of the reasoning of groups of activists, hyper-partisans, and other righteous reformers who would remake society according to their own reasoned (or revealed) vision."<ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20150618131552/https://evolution-institute.org/article/why-sam-harris-is-unlikely-to-change-his-mind10/?source=tvol ''Why Sam Harris is unlikely to change his mind''] by Jonathon Haidt, Evolution Institute website, archive</ref><ref>[https://evolution-institute.org/why-sam-harris-is-unlikely-to-change-his-mind10/ Sam Harris is unlikely to change his mind''] by Jonathon Haidt, Evolution Institute website</ref>}}
 [[File:Richard Dawkins at Global Atheism Convention.jpg|alt=Richard Dawkins|thumbnail|200px|right|According to Jonathon Haidt's study [[Richard Dawkins]] was found to be more dogmatic than [[Glenn Beck]].<ref>[https://creationtoday.org/new-study-exposes-atheist-dogma/New Study Exposes Atheist Dogma] by Eric Hovind</ref> ]]
 Commenting on Jonathon Haidt's work the article ''New Study Exposes Atheist Dogma'' states:

@@ Line 15: / Line 15: @@
 To provide an additional standard of comparison, I also analyzed books by three right wing radio and television stars whose reasoning style is not generally regarded as scientific. I analyzed [[Glenn Beck]]’s Common Sense, [[Sean Hannity]]’s Deliver Us from Evil, and [[Anne Coulter]]’s Treason. (I chose the book for each author that had received the most comments on Amazon.) The graph below shows the results. Harris appears to be the outlier.** Of the 75,000 words in The End of Faith, 2.24% of them connote or are associated with certainty. I also analyzed The Moral Landscape—it came out at 2.34%. (The graph shows no error bars because each bar represents an exact count of certainty-related words, divided by the total word count. There is no variance.)
-I am opposed to dogmatism. I am skeptical of each person’s individual powers of reasoning, and I’m even more skeptical of the reasoning of groups of activists, hyper-partisans, and other righteous reformers who would remake society according to their own reasoned (or revealed) vision."<ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20150618131552/https://evolution-institute.org/article/why-sam-harris-is-unlikely-to-change-his-mind10/?source=tvol ''Why Sam Harris is unlikely to change his mind''] by Jonathon Haidt, Evolution Institute website</ref>}}
+I am opposed to dogmatism. I am skeptical of each person’s individual powers of reasoning, and I’m even more skeptical of the reasoning of groups of activists, hyper-partisans, and other righteous reformers who would remake society according to their own reasoned (or revealed) vision."<ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20150618131552/https://evolution-institute.org/article/why-sam-harris-is-unlikely-to-change-his-mind10/?source=tvol ''Why Sam Harris is unlikely to change his mind''] by Jonathon Haidt, Evolution Institute website, archive</ref><ref>[https://evolution-institute.org/why-sam-harris-is-unlikely-to-change-his-mind10/ Sam Harris is unlikely to change his mind''] by Jonathon Haidt, Evolution Institute website</ref>}}
 [[File:Richard Dawkins at Global Atheism Convention.jpg|alt=Richard Dawkins|thumbnail|200px|right|According to Jonathon Haidt's study [[Richard Dawkins]] was found to be more dogmatic than [[Glenn Beck]].<ref>[https://creationtoday.org/new-study-exposes-atheist-dogma/New Study Exposes Atheist Dogma] by Eric Hovind</ref> ]]
 Commenting on Jonathon Haidt's work the article ''New Study Exposes Atheist Dogma'' states:

@@ Line 11: / Line 11: @@
 ...I read the New Atheist books carefully, and I noticed that several of them sounded angry. I also noticed that they used rhetorical structures suggesting certainty far more often than I was used to in scientific writing – words such as “always” and “never,” as well as phrases such as “there is no doubt that…” and “clearly we must…”
-To check my hunch, I took the full text of the three most important New Atheist books—Richard Dawkins’ The God Delusion, Sam Harris’s The End of Faith, and Daniel Dennett’s Breaking the Spell and I ran the files through a widely used text analysis program that counts words that have been shown to indicate certainty, including “always,” “never,” “certainly,” “every,” and “undeniable.” To provide a close standard of comparison, I also analyzed three recent books by other scientists who write about religion but are not considered New Atheists: Jesse Bering’s The Belief Instinct, Ara Norenzayan’s Big Gods, and my own book The Righteous Mind. ([https://web.archive.org/web/20150916035215/http://righteousmind.com/the-righteous-mind-challenge/ More details about the analysis can be found here].)
+To check my hunch, I took the full text of the three most important New Atheist books—[[Richard Dawkins]]’ The God Delusion, Sam Harris’s The End of Faith, and [[Daniel Dennett]]’s Breaking the Spell and I ran the files through a widely used text analysis program that counts words that have been shown to indicate certainty, including “always,” “never,” “certainly,” “every,” and “undeniable.” To provide a close standard of comparison, I also analyzed three recent books by other scientists who write about religion but are not considered New Atheists: Jesse Bering’s The Belief Instinct, Ara Norenzayan’s Big Gods, and my own book The Righteous Mind. ([https://web.archive.org/web/20150916035215/http://righteousmind.com/the-righteous-mind-challenge/ More details about the analysis can be found here].)
-To provide an additional standard of comparison, I also analyzed books by three right wing radio and television stars whose reasoning style is not generally regarded as scientific. I analyzed Glenn Beck’s Common Sense, Sean Hannity’s Deliver Us from Evil, and Anne Coulter’s Treason. (I chose the book for each author that had received the most comments on Amazon.) The graph below shows the results. Harris appears to be the outlier.** Of the 75,000 words in The End of Faith, 2.24% of them connote or are associated with certainty. I also analyzed The Moral Landscape—it came out at 2.34%. (The graph shows no error bars because each bar represents an exact count of certainty-related words, divided by the total word count. There is no variance.)
+To provide an additional standard of comparison, I also analyzed books by three right wing radio and television stars whose reasoning style is not generally regarded as scientific. I analyzed [[Glenn Beck]]’s Common Sense, [[Sean Hannity]]’s Deliver Us from Evil, and [[Anne Coulter]]’s Treason. (I chose the book for each author that had received the most comments on Amazon.) The graph below shows the results. Harris appears to be the outlier.** Of the 75,000 words in The End of Faith, 2.24% of them connote or are associated with certainty. I also analyzed The Moral Landscape—it came out at 2.34%. (The graph shows no error bars because each bar represents an exact count of certainty-related words, divided by the total word count. There is no variance.)
 I am opposed to dogmatism. I am skeptical of each person’s individual powers of reasoning, and I’m even more skeptical of the reasoning of groups of activists, hyper-partisans, and other righteous reformers who would remake society according to their own reasoned (or revealed) vision."<ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20150618131552/https://evolution-institute.org/article/why-sam-harris-is-unlikely-to-change-his-mind10/?source=tvol ''Why Sam Harris is unlikely to change his mind''] by Jonathon Haidt, Evolution Institute website</ref>}}

← Older revision	Revision as of 17:22, August 10, 2019
(No difference)

@@ Line 28: / Line 28: @@
 == Atheism and dogmatism ==
-See: [[Atheism and dogmatism]]
+*[[Atheism and dogmatism]]
 == See also ==

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:18, August 10, 2019
Line 25:		Line 25:

	In essence, this study proved the opposite of what atheists claim. The new atheists aren’t scientists trying to present every side of the truth and allow their audience to come to their own conclusions but rather they are pushing people to believe a predetermined conclusion.<ref>[https://creationtoday.org/new-study-exposes-atheist-dogma/New Study Exposes Atheist Dogma] by Eric Hovind</ref>}}		In essence, this study proved the opposite of what atheists claim. The new atheists aren’t scientists trying to present every side of the truth and allow their audience to come to their own conclusions but rather they are pushing people to believe a predetermined conclusion.<ref>[https://creationtoday.org/new-study-exposes-atheist-dogma/New Study Exposes Atheist Dogma] by Eric Hovind</ref>}}
		+
		+	== Atheism and dogmatism ==
		+
		+	See: [[Atheism and dogmatism]]

	== See also ==		== See also ==