5 Answers

  1. In this regard, there are only hypotheses, that is, assumptions. No science has gone so far as to fully explain the reasons for this or that worldview. Most of the available hypotheses, as a rule, are ideological in nature, that is, they say in favor of the fact that one worldview is better than another. But they have little in common with science.

    It seems to me that every person strives for the worldview that is most comfortable for him from a psychological point of view. Of course, the influence of the environment can also not be excluded, so the worldview is often imposed by the immediate environment.

    Each worldview also has its own psychological characteristics. For example, a non-religious worldview tends to have a more dramatic perception of what is happening, so it often resorts to irony as a defense mechanism, at least more often than a religious one. The midlife crisis is also more typical of a non-religious worldview. A religious worldview has a crisis of faith and other psychological difficulties. In short, one can hardly objectively say that one is better than the other.

    I don't write about the views of scientists specifically. См. https://nplus1.ru/news/2015/12/07/scientific-religion-relationship

  2. Atheism is a worldview concept based on the simple idea that the existence of God requires proof. In the meantime, and since there is no evidence, it is natural to assume that there is no God either.�

    The root cause of atheism is the desire to reason logically and not accept unfounded claims on faith.

  3. Leonardo Da Vinci once remarked: there are those who see, there are those who see when to show them, and there are those who do not see.

    and Brodsky added his own observations to this and expressed it in the following line::
    //..Disbelief is blindness, but more often – piggishness..//

    To summarize briefly, disbelief (atheism) has two reasons – not the desire to see and not the ability to see. Not the desire to see will not be analyzed here, but the inability to see the light in the dark so-called Middle Ages, when the church paradigm dominated in Europe unconditionally and at the same time was largely destructive and deceitful, corrupt and hypocritical – therefore, dissatisfaction with such a religion and such a paradigm accumulated in the bowels of society. And when Darwin proposed a different paradigm as a hypothesis-it was accepted with a bang by very many. A person avoiding vices sometimes falls into the opposite. Before Darwin, belief in a Creator God was something that was natural, almost a matter of course, for almost everyone in the Western world. After him, faith in Such a God became impossible for many, even inappropriate. Charles Darwin was at the origin of a radical revision of people's ideas about themselves and the universe. It happened when he was exploring the rocky Galapagos Islands and noticed finches with their funny beaks.
    Something similar happened in Russia with the adoption of Marxism – the people who call themselves Orthodox easily and simply abandoned their “faith” and adopted a completely materialistic teaching. Religion is sometimes guilty of atheism – when it is imposed by the sword, crusades, coercion, laws on insulting the feelings of believers, etc.

  4. Psychological? probably the reasons are in a healthy mind and motivation to maintain mental health as such. The need to understand yourself and the world around you is an inherent property of a person and his need. As a child, he breaks a toy out of a need to see what's inside. This is both a reason and a premise

  5. Uh-huh….. Can there be an adequate perception of reality? Having a critical mindset? Ability to compare facts? In general, take your psychological portrait of a sane modern person and get a portrait, if not an atheist, then an agnostic for sure.

Leave a Reply