Does Peer Pressure stifle the acceptance of the obvious?

I thought the two were very closely related.Shows what i know then.

Message 17: Message 22: I think that your dislike of psychology may simply stem from a misunderstanding of the field, then, if these quotes are any indication of what you really think it is. Unfortunately it seems to be a common misconception - a common lament among psychologists I've known is that whenever they mention their profession to anyone, almost without fail the person responds with some offhand comment about their feelings on Freud. :smacks forehead:In modern psychology Freud essentially means nothing (except for being the stereotype for the field). At best, the portrayal of his ideas and the methods with which he came to his conclusions is that they were unscientific, being mostly conjecture. Due to the rise of behaviorism and an increased emphasis on empiricism since then, psychology has evolved from the more philosophical and introspective way of thinking - attributed to Wundt, Freud, and the other early psychologists and unfortunately a surviving schema - into a science.I suggest just thumbing through a college intro psychology textbook sometime - you might be surprised at what a rich and interesting field it is, and how much real research has come out of it. Much of what we now know about learning, perception and sensation, emotion, disorders, cognition, social behavior, how we know and learn language, human memory and its shortcomings (of particular importance to the courtroom), and so on are discussed with respect to the actual behavior and the biology and neurology behind it. And, perhaps unsurprisingly, "common sense" explanations often fail to accurately depict how the mind really works when tested, so many find themselves surprised by how much of the field isn't nearly as intuitive as one might expect.***Anyway, just to clarify further, Solomon Asch's studies were performed in a much different context than the website mike referenced. In each trial of the original study, he asked a group of participants to judge the lengths of lines. However, in each trial only one participant was an actual subject - the rest were working for him. They were placed into a room together and asked to announce their judgment of the lengths of several lines (one at a time, with respect to three other lines). Those who were working for him were prepared ahead of time with incorrect answers to the test. 33% of the actual subjects conformed to these incorrect answers, even if there were several inches of difference between the lines.Stanley Milgram later conducted a similar experiment that tested not the pressure to conform, but the pressure caused by those in positions of authority - I think it might be of some relevance to this discussion, as well. You can find a short description of it at Wikipedia here. As a matter of fact, anything on the subject of crowd behavior (groupthink, deindividuation, or group polarization in particular) might help illuminate the issue.I think that it is clear that peer pressure can stifle the acceptance of the obvious. I would be cautious in drawing any quick conclusions, though - in most cases, I think, especially with regards to younger audiences, peer pressure comes from both sides.

Are you suggesting that my sheltered world is not a good place to be?I admit I do shelter myself from Jehovah's Witnesses. When they knock on the door, I don't answer. I hide away in my study.

First of all, I want to be really careful. I'm not trying to judge crash, and I'm really saying these things tentatively. But I did want to try and use a concrete example that we all might share. This is all hypothetical. What I am saying is not that crash exerts peer pressure on religious-types. I am saying I view his attitude towards those who he feels have shown him an inability to "deal with the facts" is very harsh and very strong. I think these are exactly the kinds of attitudes that lead to peer pressure.So, if atheists actually increased and got a group identity, I believe such harsh, strong attitudes might keep some people from exploring ideas which they were curious about, which they didn't feel were addressed completely, but which were put down in such a harsh, strong manner.It has nothing to do with intent; it simply has to do with group dynamics and how individuals react to others thoughts and expressions. First of all, just to be correct, I believe atheism is the belief that there is no God. Agnosticism is the lack of belief. Unless I've got this mixed up.But it doesn't really matter; group identity doesn't have to be based on any such belief. Even a label can provide a means for people to congregate, to discuss their ideas. Especially with the internet, it's really easy to get people "together" these days.It doesn't take a dogma or set of beliefs to make a group identity, to exert peer pressure, or to have an inside/outside view. I tried to demonstrate that with numerous examples in my previous post. Atheism may not have a group identity now, but I see no logical reason why atheists couldn't have a group identity in the future. I agree. I don't claim that atheists have a group identity now--just that in my view, it's only current circumstance that makes that fact so. I don't see why atheists wouldn't congregate, hold inside/outside views, exert peer pressure, and have the same types of group dynamics that every group I've ever encountered in this world does.And because of that, I really question some of the statements made in the opening post.Hope that clarifies my thoughts a bit.Ben

I already knew that I would recieve an untruthful answer from someone like you.It's ok, you can kid youself all you want. You can either be happy for yourself because you feel free and void of any religious pressure in your life, or you can feel upset because your mind is so full of athiestic pressure, that you can not hear from God.Obviously if you are eating chicken salad, then you are not concentrating on any answer from God. Funny, I just got a vision of schraf standing at the pearly gates, and there is Jesus, with the biggest bowl of most delicious tasting chicken salad in his hands, and he is saying, you'll have to go through me, so start eating this, but only the bowl doesn't ever get empty. At first Schraf is like, hey this is great, but then after a few measly hours of eating the best chicken salad in her life, she gets tired of it, and realizes she no longer wants it. Suddenly there is a feeling of emptyness. Then she has to face Jesus, but Jesus says, its ok, come on in, laughing.

I can't really judge if living in a sheltered world is a good place for you or not. I do not know you, and even if I did, I would not know you like God knows you, so he is the only one who could answer that. You can ask him yourself, and you will recieve that answer.But my intial impression when I read the words "Are you suggesting that my sheltered world is not a good place to be?" was that you are person full of love, and it would be a shame to keep that from others in this world. That there is much to offer humanity, and there is a purpose in your life that you were designed for, and it's waiting to be fulfilled. That would involve shedding whatever it is that is keeping you sheltered, and being freed from that. I also realize that you may not in fact feel sheltered at all, and you were just kidding around. But who's to say we are sheltered, or not?I used to hide from Jehovah's witness also. I know answer the door, and say, if I am going to listen to you about your religion, then you will have to give me equal time and listen about mine. That right there usually sends them running.I feel they are afraid to hear the truth, so they avoid it, to go back into the sheltered world they have created for themselves. And they are sheltered, because if they weren't, they wouldn't have to run from my religion, or my thoughts about God. God is either truth, or he's not. The only way you find out is by putting your beliefs to the test every chance you get. If they don't hold up, then its time to re-evaluate.Logically I feel that if God designed us, then he designed us knowing right from wrong. But our experiences can bury that truth, so that we are no longer in touch with it. The bible even says that he wrote his laws on the minds and hearts of everyone. To succum to peer pressure is to bury those truths even further in you, and not follow your gut instincts. God created us to be leaders, and torch bearers of the light, and the truth, not followers, of darkness and lies.

I like your comment. Thanks.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Rob, you chicken, confront your fears. JW`s are just people (o.k. so we haven`t got all the tests back). Ask them if they have anything on pedophile priests in the Catholic Church.While they are scurrying to find the latest diatribe in their literature, casually ask them 'How are the 24,000 sexual abuse cases going in the W.T.S.'? I doubt you`ll be bothered again.Edited for punc.This message has been edited by Nighttrain, 11-04-2005 01:28 AM

But the topic here is not about suppressing the ”truth about god’ to ourselves in the glare of peer pressure to go to the dark side that is atheism, but the hesitation and fear ( however subconscious) at overcoming the peer pressure against publicly denouncing any particular idea in your religion’s doctrine.It’s about overcoming the pressure and anxiety over publicly denouncing your belief in something that used to believe was true.You have failed to grasp that I’m not talking about every religious person, and seem to have read that I have implied that all those of religion feel this fear, and would discard their religion in an instant if they could overcome the peer pressure and fear of peer reprisals.There are those who doubt their religion, there are those who don’t speak up because of the effect this would have to their peer standing. There are those who have weighed up everything and realise that they don’t believe any more. Is it right that they should keep quiet simply because of the reaction they fear they are likely to receive should that declare such?You can proclaim Gods love for us all you want. You can claim all you like that we would see God if we opened our minds to him. You can claim that we are in pain, regret and sorrow because we are missing God till the cows come home, but this does not answer the question at hand: and is just preaching to un-converted.Please try and understand that your preaching is a good example of the serious, low grade pressure that gets constantly piled from all sides into the thoughts, fears, and doubts of confused believers who realise that they don’t believe anymore. ABE- or at least are trying to come to terms with that posibility- ABEHow can anyone religious who wishes to say I believe the theory of Evolution is correct, do so with full confidence in that assertion with many, many voices around him whispering, “god loves you, god created every thing. God will not love you, and will send you to hell for believing in Evilution. Evilution is wrong. God made everything. If you say he didn’t you are going to hell . . .. “ ad infenitum . This message has been edited by ohnhai, 04-11-2005 07:00 PM

That's ugly. I try to stay away from ugliness. "I have my books and my poetry to protect me."--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

quote:

---

This would be a coincidental similarity. But thinking that religion is the opium of the people is not a coincidental feature of a group of atheistic communists.

---

So now all athiests are communists? Wow, how shocking to discover that I am suddenly a communist AND follow a dogma. So if two atheists are in a room it is a communist conspiracy but if two short people are in a room it is chance...good to know.It seems your peers have pressured you to believe a pure caricature of non-believers. Also, interesting given the topic of the thread that those who do not share your beliefs are portrayed negatively i.e. peer pressure to stifle the acceptance of the obvious, in this case that atheists do not follow a proscribed set of religious rules and that counter to your beliefs, not all are communists.

quote:

---

This is all hypothetical. What I am saying is not that crash exerts peer pressure on religious-types. I am saying I view his attitude towards those who he feels have shown him an inability to "deal with the facts" is very harsh and very strong. I think these are exactly the kinds of attitudes that lead to peer pressure.

​

So, if atheists actually increased and got a group identity, I believe such harsh, strong attitudes might keep some people from exploring ideas which they were curious about, which they didn't feel were addressed completely, but which were put down in such a harsh, strong manner.

​

It has nothing to do with intent; it simply has to do with group dynamics and how individuals react to others thoughts and expressions.

---

Hi Ben, I know you are not singling out crashfrog. My experience is he does not like sloppy thinking or failure to support arguments. And this is not restricted to religious types...look at his conflicts with holmes and others. In any case, whether harsh or not, I am not sure that he prevents others from exploring. If someone makes an unsupported statement and is called upon to support it and refused, they may be met with a harsh response or at the very least, a refusal by others to take their word for it. This does not mean they are dissuaded necessarily from having their beliefs. I have yet to see anyone get slammed for asking a question in a science topic for example. But you can bet that someone will get slammed for saying "evolutionists think dogs give birth to cats which falsifies the ToE". But I am still unclear which peer group he would belong to in this case. Brian for example is not a biologist or arguing science. Yet he holds many of the same standards when arguing theological issues. Maybe the peer group is scholars but that is a rather undefined term.

quote:

---

I agree. I don't claim that atheists have a group identity now--just that in my view, it's only current circumstance that makes that fact so. I don't see why atheists wouldn't congregate, hold inside/outside views, exert peer pressure, and have the same types of group dynamics that every group I've ever encountered in this world does.

---

I am still not sure. I don't see people who don't believe in Santa Claus forming societies or congregating based on a lack of belief in Santa. Not believing in something is not really a basis for a shared interest. I don't see groups forming based on common disinterest. I think, like myself, I belong to groups but they are not based on anything religious in nature. Peer pressure does occur (particularly scientific societies). If athiests were to form a group based on athiesm, you are probably right that there would be peer pressure...especially if someone suddenly became a believer. But I don't know of an example of a group whose central shared interest is atheism. does not mean they don't exist..but I am not a member and am unaware of it...regardless of other's attempts to caricature my position as atheistic dogmatic communist.I do understand you position and am not trying to claim that atheists are incapable of exerting peer pressure. My point is that this is a hypothetical case, even if a highly likely outcome given that counter to popular belief, atheists are human beings to. Whereas, the thread topic is asking for examples of known cases..at least as I understand it. This is easier because one can then use real world examples and experiences. Does that make any sense?

Hi, Ohnhai. First up, could I say there seems to be a mistaken belief among religionists that Atheism is the end of the line. In that you become an atheist and no more. Can`t speak for all atheists, but those I have met, and myself, regarded it as the first step on a journey. Discarding religious trappings gave us a different slant on the world and we saw problems and solutions in a new way. No longer necessary to check with the Big Guy and His Book to see if it was verboten or acceptable, we could read and judge the ways of the world almost like an outsider. And we built our lives on what we decided was a wholesome world-view. Now, there might have been occasions for peer pressure to cause friction between approaches, but no way did we ever tell each other that we were going to atheist hell.Or shun. Or stone or torture or burn at the stake. So I guess atheist peer pressure must be lacking in some respect. However, atheists can violently disagree with choice of politics or footy team, so we still have a way to travel.:-p

Just for clarity, I do not feel that the darkside is atheism. I would be putting peer pressure on people if I subscribed to that. Everyone is where they need to be. The darkside is when people say and do things to you, to make you do what you really don't want to do. And in my belief, what God doesn't want you to do, church included. Church is full of judgemental people setting standards, and claiming who's going to get into heaven or not. Yes, absolutly that goes on in religion, and in every facet of life. It's our natural desire to be wanted, and accepted somewhere.But the problem is when you start comprimising yourself to be accepted. Lets make a facticsiuous story so I can help explain what I see in life. I am going to make it Godly, but you can apply the moral even if you don't believe.There once once a girl named.....schrafinator.... and she was a faithful church goer. She went because she believed in God by faith, and was trying to learn more about God. Shrafinator was a beatiful person inside with many things to offer the world, because she is a smart person, and is in a position to help those in need, friends, family, and strangers, a true calling from God. She doesn't even expect anything in return for her deeds. So one day after faithfully attending church for years, and giving money to said church, she decides she wants to take that gift that which is from God, and to use it to help people in the church, and outside the church. But she wants to set it up through the church leadership, and make it a "church thing". For what ever reason, the leadership doesn't think she is qualified to do it, or are not letting her do it for their own personal reasons, and tell her no. They don't even give her a logical reason why they won't let her do it.
Wham the harm is done. She should probably leave the church, but she has been programed for so many years that would be the wrong thing to do, and everyone she knows might not accept her anymore. So she buries her problems inside of her, and keeps going to church, because she doesn't want to upset God, or the community. Peer pressure. However when a problem like this goes unresolved, it doesn't go away, it goes deeper in you, and that exponetially adds itself to other problems in her life, until she can no longer stand it anymore, and then leaves the church, and leaves God. She now hates God, and the church, and has what we would call a mean streak in her, and is now unaproachable.What should have happened, is the church should have reconized her gifts from the Lord, and helped train her to use them to the greatest potential, so that the Lord may be gloryfied, and the kingdom of God could be further built up here on earth. Many people who would have been blessed by the works of scrafhinator, are now going to miss out, all because of peer pressure.Does peer pressure exist in the church? You bet. It's just like the rest of life, and peer pressure outside the church. Peer pressure changes who are, who your supposed to be.That is why we should only be listening to one person, and that is God. God would never make us do anything that we weren't designed to do. So right about now, you are thinnking of all the bad things that has happened in the name of the Lord, and all the religious wars that have happened. I say, just because it was claimed in the Lords name, doesn't make it from the Lord, when clearly it goes against everything Jesus tries to teach us. It's one way we find him, through his teachings. We aren't doing a ggod job of representing that in our churches, so we aren't finding God. I agree 100%. I feel its the churches job to accept people exactly they way they are. Love God, love others. We don't do that, it's very rare. We will never be truely free until that happens. Thats why I am here, to spread the news, and share what I have learned, and have some good discussion, and to learn from people like you. Almost, but there is a flaw in that reasoning. And that is, I am not requiring you to do anything. There is no condition for what I am trying to get across to people. I accept everyone just the way they are, I would be a hypocrite if I didn't. I don't see people as being on different levels, I see people as all being on the same level, no matter what they believe or do. I will say it's ok to not believe, because I understand what it takes to be an unbeliever. I believe God will judge us based on what we went through. I cannot possibly know what a person goes through in life, only myself, so I cannot judge them, or put them down, or make them feel like I am putting them down, just because they don't believe. The church I go to, feels the same way.
You do not show people God by pressuing them. If you are in a church and feel pressured, then get out. You can only show God to people by loving them. If you have God in you, and you have the light, and know the truth and the way, then God's love will be expressed through you, and people will see and feel that, then come to know the Lord in their own personal way. It's almost like magic, I witness it on a weekly basis.No peer pressure is low grade, its all bad. Love is the only thing we should be imposing on people in life. That's exactly what I am saying, again, I agree 100%.
No one on this earth has a right to say who's going to hell or not.

And that is why I say you are forgiven.