2007-03-29 20:25:10 · 10 answers · asked by Jacob S 3 in Social Science ➔ Anthropology
No, I don't think so at all...did you evr read about co-existance? Check out a book calle God, Darwin, and the Dinosaurs. I have a BS in Anthropology and I also have a very strong faith in God--I think it is very acceptable to understand both and try to discover how all of this works together.
2007-03-30 02:43:48 · answer #1 · answered by Hope S 1 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I am an anthropologist, and I prefer to be classified as non-religious. I choose not to practice any religion, and I do not believe in a higher being (I am willing, however, to hear other people's opinions on the matter, and if proof were ever to arise, I would be open to changing my mind). However, many of my colleagues are religious in some fashion. I find that more socio-cultural anthropologists are religious than biological anthropologists, but that just may be my experience, and not a world-wide occurrence.
2007-03-30 16:05:18 · answer #2 · answered by At Work 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Are you atheist? That is so like an athiest to try to find other atheists. Let me ask, what are your social structure rules? I bet you're looking for others who know the in-codes. Sorry, I don't. Except that I think what you're asking has something to do with the following cognitive bias, which I've linked to on Wikipedia.
2007-03-30 03:33:35 · answer #3 · answered by courage 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Now I'm no atheist, but I'm definitely not saying the bible tells the whole story. I tihnk many people feel this way. In my humble opinion, the bible was written by people about what they perceived, God had nothing to do with that, but who's to say he doesn't exist. And also, I think that other religions such as Hinduism, Shindo, and even Christianity (I'm Jewish) are just as likely to be right as I am.
2007-03-30 14:52:31 · answer #4 · answered by girismyfriend831 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I'm not an anthropologist but I have a theory that Adam and Eve were apes and we evolved from them. Hey, nobody said they weren't and that cleanly ties everything up.
2007-03-30 12:31:02 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
I do not grasp why one would think, or ask, that. My best guess at that is that could be creationist position thinking that one is exclusive of the other - but it wouldn't make logical sense.
I'd have to guess that the answer would be no - because that is logical, both philosophically and mathmatically. Most people are not atheist but all people have DNA.
2007-03-30 16:28:29 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I don't know the answer to your question but I have a BA in anthropology and the vast majority (perhaps all) of those I studies with or under were not atheists .
2007-03-30 13:14:57 · answer #7 · answered by jayelthefirst 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I call myself a skeptic. I like to see proof for everything, if there is no proof then it is just an idea. Some ideas have more merit than others, some have none. The God idea has no proof and little merit.
2007-03-30 13:21:19 · answer #8 · answered by ? 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
why thinking the convent as object and not some to pray to, brings life to it? Why can't there be another newer convent be built
2007-03-30 14:44:16 · answer #9 · answered by blackhawk V16 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Cannot speak for others, but I am not an atheist.
2007-03-30 08:24:25 · answer #10 · answered by WolverLini 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋