Questions to answer about Vitz's book: Why didn't he publish the findings in a pier reviewed paper? How many atheists were surveyed and who did the survey? It seems that Vitz looks at "major" atheists - but does not cover the run of the mill people of today, given that - it seems that his findings would be selected to a very small number of people, making his conclusions unwarented. You wrote "He believes that many atheists have experienced a difficult childhood" in your description. Sure, he can believe anything, can he PROVE IT? "Dr. Vitz’s teaching and research is focused on the integration of Christian theology, especially Catholic anthropology, with psychology." Okay so we know that Vitz will have some major bias in his book.
First of all, faith doesn't enter into the psychology of an atheist. We take things by observation, not faith. So "Faith of the Fatherless" is a ridiculous title, but it sets up the reader for what lies ahead, conditioning them to what the author is going to say. "Oh, everybody believes in something" or even "Everyone knows there is a god." No, everybody doesn't. If the person had done any homework whatsoever, he'd know that many people who are atheists NOW were at one time devoted Christians who studied that book, who prayed to understand it, who sought "god". We didn't even want to leave. We didn't have "difficult" childhoods that contributed to our atheist position. The data shows that many people come to reject religion in their young adulthood more so than, say, Boomers do, which is easily observed by the gray heads in a church any Sunday morning and the research showing college age is the prime transition time. The author simply started with a verse and then built an argument around it to write a book about, but arguments aren't evidence. That's TOO many times the methodology of Christians, but inquiry and science work the exact other way around - by making observations, creating a hypothesis, testing that idea, and gathering the data that will either support or negate the hypothesis as a conclusion. This is basic 5th grade scientific method. But the Christians go exactly the other way around, form a conclusion and then find the data - usually a bible verse or three - that supports that conclusion. Your notes say "theory", but a theory isn't a guess. It's a framework to describe a phenomenon or phenomena based on observations and data.
Questions to answer about Vitz's book:
Why didn't he publish the findings in a pier reviewed paper?
How many atheists were surveyed and who did the survey?
It seems that Vitz looks at "major" atheists - but does not cover the run of the mill people of today, given that - it seems that his findings would be selected to a very small number of people, making his conclusions unwarented.
You wrote "He believes that many atheists have experienced a difficult childhood" in your description. Sure, he can believe anything, can he PROVE IT?
"Dr. Vitz’s teaching and research is focused on the integration of Christian theology, especially Catholic anthropology, with psychology."
Okay so we know that Vitz will have some major bias in his book.
First of all, faith doesn't enter into the psychology of an atheist. We take things by observation, not faith. So "Faith of the Fatherless" is a ridiculous title, but it sets up the reader for what lies ahead, conditioning them to what the author is going to say. "Oh, everybody believes in something" or even "Everyone knows there is a god." No, everybody doesn't. If the person had done any homework whatsoever, he'd know that many people who are atheists NOW were at one time devoted Christians who studied that book, who prayed to understand it, who sought "god". We didn't even want to leave. We didn't have "difficult" childhoods that contributed to our atheist position. The data shows that many people come to reject religion in their young adulthood more so than, say, Boomers do, which is easily observed by the gray heads in a church any Sunday morning and the research showing college age is the prime transition time.
The author simply started with a verse and then built an argument around it to write a book about, but arguments aren't evidence. That's TOO many times the methodology of Christians, but inquiry and science work the exact other way around - by making observations, creating a hypothesis, testing that idea, and gathering the data that will either support or negate the hypothesis as a conclusion. This is basic 5th grade scientific method. But the Christians go exactly the other way around, form a conclusion and then find the data - usually a bible verse or three - that supports that conclusion.
Your notes say "theory", but a theory isn't a guess. It's a framework to describe a phenomenon or phenomena based on observations and data.