I wonder if the zealous have partners who would say religion is important to them and who attend with regularity. That would explain their passion—an ongoing dispute with a significant other.
I would imagine that for the youngest of the set (the 18-25s) it's a lot more likely that they still live with or are close to their *parents,* who expect regular attendance. That sort of coercion would explain a lot of rebellious zealousness.
Or broadening this out, some family or social situation that makes disengaging from religion too costly. The term "Reddit atheist" may be onto something - how much of the characteristically Zealous Atheist behavior is concentrated online? Ryan said that, "They need those ‘friction points’ to remind them why they are so opposed to religion," but I don't see anything in the data that says the causality even runs that direction. Why not that they're so opposed to religion because eliminating those friction points isn't a viable option?
What are the comparative numbers for zealous Christians?
Proselytizing (for or against) is something most Australians would never do, unless they belong to a church that demands it (JWs). I can only think of one Australian public figure who writes explicitly against religion, and he does so in such an avuncular fashion as to offend no-one
Zealous Atheists are probably still around and close to, even living with, practicing family members. I have relatives in the US who are Dones and a thing is that their closer family and friends there are mostly SBNRs and other Dones. That's why they're not even going for weddings and funerals in Church.
It would be very interesting to be able to ask question about related personal history. I was also a ZA for a few years in my mid 20s but my path was basically Done to ZA and then back to Done again. I was "radicalized" by the so-called New Atheist wave before realizing that finding people who agree on your core personal values is *far* more important that whether they happen to have a faith or not.
I think it's an interesting theory that people would move from a ZA category to a Dones category but the stats say that a good chunk (24%) started out that way. If we map the age splits by the population of the different Nones categories, what does that look like? Are there comparable numbers of Dones in the youngest ages that ZA vs Dones or is there actual evidence of a sizable migration. We already know that we're comparing the smallest subgroup (ZA) to the second-largest subgroup (Dones) so while it might be a migration, it might also be regression toward the (second-place) median.
I guess what I was getting at was that 44% of 11% of the Nones is only 5% (total 18-35 sample that is ZA) and 24% of 33% of the Nones is 8% (total 18-35 sample that is Dones). I had no delusions that we'd have a longitudinal study on this and the migration may well be real, but the impact is small as the young population of Dones is larger than the young population of ZA's.
Maybe one of those "If the Nones were 100 people" charts with age and type variables would be helpful.
I wonder if the zealous have partners who would say religion is important to them and who attend with regularity. That would explain their passion—an ongoing dispute with a significant other.
There's actually a post in the queue about marriage and family across the nones. I think it runs in December.
I would imagine that for the youngest of the set (the 18-25s) it's a lot more likely that they still live with or are close to their *parents,* who expect regular attendance. That sort of coercion would explain a lot of rebellious zealousness.
Or broadening this out, some family or social situation that makes disengaging from religion too costly. The term "Reddit atheist" may be onto something - how much of the characteristically Zealous Atheist behavior is concentrated online? Ryan said that, "They need those ‘friction points’ to remind them why they are so opposed to religion," but I don't see anything in the data that says the causality even runs that direction. Why not that they're so opposed to religion because eliminating those friction points isn't a viable option?
What are the comparative numbers for zealous Christians?
Proselytizing (for or against) is something most Australians would never do, unless they belong to a church that demands it (JWs). I can only think of one Australian public figure who writes explicitly against religion, and he does so in such an avuncular fashion as to offend no-one
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/17612232-adams-versus-god
Zealous Atheists are probably still around and close to, even living with, practicing family members. I have relatives in the US who are Dones and a thing is that their closer family and friends there are mostly SBNRs and other Dones. That's why they're not even going for weddings and funerals in Church.
It would be very interesting to be able to ask question about related personal history. I was also a ZA for a few years in my mid 20s but my path was basically Done to ZA and then back to Done again. I was "radicalized" by the so-called New Atheist wave before realizing that finding people who agree on your core personal values is *far* more important that whether they happen to have a faith or not.
I think it's an interesting theory that people would move from a ZA category to a Dones category but the stats say that a good chunk (24%) started out that way. If we map the age splits by the population of the different Nones categories, what does that look like? Are there comparable numbers of Dones in the youngest ages that ZA vs Dones or is there actual evidence of a sizable migration. We already know that we're comparing the smallest subgroup (ZA) to the second-largest subgroup (Dones) so while it might be a migration, it might also be regression toward the (second-place) median.
The migration thing is always the difficult process to conceptualize here.
If I had $100M I could run the best panel survey ever. Track people from 12 years old through death and tell us everything.
Alas.
I guess what I was getting at was that 44% of 11% of the Nones is only 5% (total 18-35 sample that is ZA) and 24% of 33% of the Nones is 8% (total 18-35 sample that is Dones). I had no delusions that we'd have a longitudinal study on this and the migration may well be real, but the impact is small as the young population of Dones is larger than the young population of ZA's.
Maybe one of those "If the Nones were 100 people" charts with age and type variables would be helpful.
The age variable fits. I was a ZA at age 14, then after more experience of reality dropped into SBNR.