Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The World's Newest Major Religion: No Religion

news.nationalgeographic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 31 posts

Re: The World's Newest Major Religion: No Religion

#21

Post by CaptSpify »

slazaro wrote: post #12
Amorymeltzer wrote: post #8

For those curious, they're using a Dymaxion map, also known as the Fuller projection[1]. It's named for Buckminster Fuller, and the goal is to reduce skew of shape and size. Notice, for example, the sizes of Greenland and Africa as compared to their heavily-skewed sizes on the Mercator projection. 1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dymaxion_map

I assume they think this is a good choice, but I disagree. It's just confusing. Why add such friction to data display?

It was confusing to me too. Maybe they should list the reason they used that map in the caption

Re: The World's Newest Major Religion: No Religion

#22

Post by [deleted] »

dominotw wrote: post #6
TazeTSchnitzel wrote: post #3

This is, arguably, good news. Though I lament the rise of the people who centre their identity around their lack of religion and go on the offensive against believers. They're not much better than the religious. Religion is not the source of all evil.

Its a little hypocritical to hate religion when you yourself are part of many religious cults. religion of family, cult of love, religion of shopping, cult of money and success, religion of beauty and youth.

[deleted]

Re: The World's Newest Major Religion: No Religion

#23

Post by coldtea »

bostik wrote: post #20

About time. Because religion often enjoys legal protection, in my eyes proclaiming to be religious does not differ much from stating: "I am legally delusional!" In the same vein, one can hope that eventually nations also realise that churches do not deserve tax exemptions. They are businesses, and to be more precise, they are in the protection racket business .[0] The logical difference to mafia is miniscule.[1] 0: "…

That's a rather naive, if popular, view of religion.

Probably made even more popular by the fact that in the US any kind of fringe BS can pass as a religion, from Scientology to what have you.

And by fringe I don't mean less true in the "god exists" way (well, he doesn't exist, at least not in any religious guise), but less historically established and having served an important societal role.

Because religions were an early cultural framework for formulation of a code of ethics, building ideas about society, life, etc. That we today deem some of those ideas bad doesn't mean they were bad when they formed (or even now), or that they didn't play an important (positive I mean) role in society's development.

(The inverse idea is usually based on two naive beliefs: religious people were just dupes manipulated by priests, and religion is useless since its myths don't correspond to objective truth).

Heck, there are even evolutionary studies on the benefit of religion to human development...

Re: The World's Newest Major Religion: No Religion

#24

Post by coldtea »

fullshark wrote: post #4
TazeTSchnitzel wrote: post #3

This is, arguably, good news. Though I lament the rise of the people who centre their identity around their lack of religion and go on the offensive against believers. They're not much better than the religious. Religion is not the source of all evil.

Those people are just annoying. The most extreme religious people can be actively harmful to society/their children.

The same can be sad for the most extreme atheist people -- communists for example were not particularly religious, nor were the Nazis.

Re: The World's Newest Major Religion: No Religion

#25

Post by coldtea »

akshatpradhan wrote: post #18
TazeTSchnitzel wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not a property exclusive to the religious.

It is definitely a property exclusive to religion. Religion has immense power to instill core beliefs in a person. And core beliefs are the absolute center of our thinking.

Seems like this is a core belief of yours...

Re: The World's Newest Major Religion: No Religion

#26

Post by throwaway2016a »

coldtea wrote: post #24
fullshark wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those people are just annoying. The most extreme religious people can be actively harmful to society/their children.

The same can be sad for the most extreme atheist people -- communists for example were not particularly religious, nor were the Nazis.

I always thought the Nazis were actually strongly Christian. That might not be your best example.

Edit: it appears I am partially right. After reading a few pages of the apparently thousands of pages on the subject I've concluded religion and the Nazis is a very nuanced and complicated topic and one which I am not qualified to speak to.

Re: The World's Newest Major Religion: No Religion

#27

Post by throwaway2016a »

Anecdotally, these stats are probably understated. For example, when asked I answer Catholic. In reality I am a "none" but we would skew the numbers for Catholic in this study because I want my child to grow up knowing her grandparents and they would disown me if I came out as Atheist. I imagine a lot of people are in the same boat as me.

Re: The World's Newest Major Religion: No Religion

#28

Post by rapha22_1 »

dominotw wrote: post #6
TazeTSchnitzel wrote: post #3

This is, arguably, good news. Though I lament the rise of the people who centre their identity around their lack of religion and go on the offensive against believers. They're not much better than the religious. Religion is not the source of all evil.

Its a little hypocritical to hate religion when you yourself are part of many religious cults. religion of family, cult of love, religion of shopping, cult of money and success, religion of beauty and youth.

What do you mean by "cult of love"?

Re: The World's Newest Major Religion: No Religion

#29

Post by coldtea »

throwaway2016a wrote: post #26
coldtea wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The same can be sad for the most extreme atheist people -- communists for example were not particularly religious, nor were the Nazis.

I always thought the Nazis were actually strongly Christian. That might not be your best example. Edit: it appears I am partially right. After reading a few pages of the apparently thousands of pages on the subject I've concluded religion and the Nazis is a very nuanced and complicated topic and one which I am not qualified to speak to.

>I always thought the Nazis were actually strongly Christian. That might not be your best example.

They never had any strong affiliation with any religion.

Post reply on HN