1
3

[–] GumbyTM 1 point 3 points (+4|-1) ago 

Oh a study from Academia where they like religion about as much as the internet does. Honestly, as someone who just doesn't give a shit, the anti religion crowd needs to get over itself.

Anyone who has ever spent time with religious people vs the anti religion crowd knows who is more preferable.

One side is annoying because they want to share what makes them happy and the other side is annoying because they need to tear down what makes others happy, presumably so everyone is as miserable as they are or because their feelings are too fragile.

Which is worse?

0
1

[–] Drenki 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

I'm not a religious person in any way, but the headline doesn't support the "science" that was performed.

What was measured they called "altruism", not "meanness". Their definition of altruism is completely retarded. If I give away all of my shit to someone, it's called altruism. They would not factor in the burden I would place on my family to make up for my dumbass decision. In other words, they've used a term with one of the longest philosophical histories with a simple "good/bad" meaning. It didn't occur to them that people might have different concepts of what constitutes altruism.

People in the US have a tendency to think the UK publications are any better. They are not. This headline is direct proof they can't even communicate the basics truthfully.

I cannot even recommend that you wipe your ass with The Guardian or Cell (the Elsevier journal that published it) because they are made of shit.