Religion, Social Networks and Life Satisfaction

[garrethdsouza]

I had come across this article in hitchens portable atheist which has suggested that one of religion's major pros happens to be social networks, that and very little else.

https://scholar.google.co.in/scholar?cl ... 5&as_vis=1

"this study offers strong evidence for social and participatory mechanisms shaping religion’s impact on life satisfaction. Our findings suggest that religious people are more satisfied with their lives because they regularly attend religious services and build social networks in their congregations. The effect of within-congregation friendship is contingent, however, on the presence of a strong religious identity. We find little evidence that other private or subjective aspects of religiosity affect life satisfaction independent of attendance and congregational friendship."

What are peoples views on the social aspects of atheism/humanism and do people attend any atheist/vegan groups? Any community building?

[brimstoneSalad]

Social circles are very important to happiness.

Unfortunately, atheism and even veganism do not have very strong social circles. It's something that has to be improved.

There are secular social circles not inherently related to atheism, and only tangential to veganism.

For example, gaming social circles (board games, LARP, etc.), and activism circles.

[devil]

I actually am quite uncomfortable with the idea of an ideology based social groups. While forums for discussion are fine, a social group seems more like a church to me.

[brimstoneSalad]

I actually am quite uncomfortable with the idea of an ideology based social groups. While forums for discussion are fine, a social group seems more like a church to me.

What's wrong with churches, aside from them believing crazy things have having a destructive ideology?

Social networks themselves can be very healthy. And building them around good activism can help encourage activism at the same time.

[Anon0045]

For introverts, it's probably just a relief to not having to go to church or other social gatherings. I doubt they would be happier if they did. About 1/3 of the population is considered introverts according to Susan Cain.

[brimstoneSalad]

For introverts, it's probably just a relief to not having to go to church or other social gatherings. I doubt they would be happier if they did. About 1/3 of the population is considered introverts according to Susan Cain.

I think the social environment just has to be structured in such a way that people can avoid being bothered by busybodies if they don't want to be bothered. I don't think introverts inherently dislike social groups, but rather need to be able to have more control over exposure to feel comfortable -- if anything, social groups are more important for introverts, because it's harder for them to socialize outside of them.

[Anon0045]

I think the social environment just has to be structured in such a way that people can avoid being bothered by busybodies if they don't want to be bothered. I don't think introverts inherently dislike social groups, but rather need to be able to have more control over exposure to feel comfortable -- if anything, social groups are more important for introverts, because it's harder for them to socialize outside of them.

Yes of course, being social is very important, but in today's society, you can't really escape exposure. Everyone is forced to go to school, seek jobs, work, which involves means around people most of the day. I think for a lot of introverts, that's enough and more social events are just draining.

[devil]

What's wrong with churches, aside from them believing crazy things have having a destructive ideology?

I think the problem I have with churches and similar organisations is that the people there keep hearing their opinion, rather than discussing criticism, or alternative point of view. Any such framework, I think will devolve into irrational stuff.

Another thing about such gatherings (this is wrt support groups in general) that makes me uncomfortable is that they are very tribalistic, and one's individuality gets lost in there.

[brimstoneSalad]

Everyone is forced to go to school, seek jobs, work, which involves means around people most of the day. I think for a lot of introverts, that's enough and more social events are just draining.

I'm not sure where you get that idea.

I don't think just being around large numbers of people is equivalent to socialization. It can, actually, be very lonely in a crowd.
A large quantity of poor quality indifferent encounters doesn't stand in for quality socialization, even if it may be draining in its own way (look at the trouble young people are having in parts of East Asia).
That's like saying because you filled up on junk food, you don't need to eat any vegetables.

I think the problem I have with churches and similar organisations is that the people there keep hearing their opinion, rather than discussing criticism, or alternative point of view. Any such framework, I think will devolve into irrational stuff.

Those communities have to cut off criticism and critical thinking, because their beliefs are bat-shit crazy. If they indulged in reason, their whole belief system would come apart.

Atheists don't have to cut themselves off. Indeed, one of the most interesting things atheists can do together is bring up theistic arguments and debate.

We did see something of what you're talking about with Atheism+, and that's worthy of examination, but had nothing to do with cutting itself off from theistic ideas; it was more of a political rift.

Another thing about such gatherings (this is wrt support groups in general) that makes me uncomfortable is that they are very tribalistic, and one's individuality gets lost in there.

What is individuality?

[garrethdsouza]

What's wrong with churches, aside from them believing crazy things have having a destructive ideology?

I think the problem I have with churches and similar organisations is that the people there keep hearing their opinion, rather than discussing criticism, or alternative point of view. Any such framework, I think will devolve into irrational stuff.

There is no reason for the same model to be used, for eg they generally use a monologue approach of one person speaking from the pulpit without any communication with the rest whereas ft or vegan groups seldom do this. Maybe some groups may have adopted less open to criticism stances but this need not be for all groups.