Oxford Claim Form Atlanta: Fill & Download for Free

What is a belief?Dictionary result for belief/bəˈlēf/nounnoun: belief; plural noun: beliefsan acceptance that a statement is true; a firmly held opinion or conviction.trust, faith, or confidence in someone or something.Belief - Wikipedia:In the context of Ancient Greek thought, two related concepts were identified with regards to the concept of belief: pistis and doxa. Simplified, we may say that pistis refers to "trust" and "confidence" while doxa refers to "opinion" and "acceptance".A belief, in the absolute broadest sense of the term, is simply a mental concept we have regarding what we think is true concerning some aspect of our reality.In what way does atheism not correspond to the definition of belief?Edit: Some have answered this question saying atheism is not the positive thesis that God does not exist, but is the neutral claim that an atheist is one who simply lacks belief in God. This is a semantic error. There are, ultimately, only three positions one can take with regard to a particular proposition such as “God exists.” One can (1) Affirm (2) Deny or (3) Withhold judgment. Those are the only choices—unless you’re a politician of course—then you can claim them all at once.At best, this definition of absence of belief is agnosticism. For example, there are millions of people on this planet who hold no belief about the Los Angeles Lakers. But it would be quite a stretch to conclude from that empirical fact that the Lakers therefore do not exist. An absence of belief can lead to no conclusions about belief.The word "atheist" is from the Greek word "Theos" which means "God", and the "a" is a negation taken to mean "without" so "atheism" simply means "without God". It does not mean "without belief". There is no concept of "belief" in the etymology of the word atheism – the word simply means the universe is without God, which is another way of saying that God does not exist.Thus J. J. C. Smart states matter-of-factly, “Atheism' means the ‘negation of theism’, the denial of the existence of God.”How is an atheistic worldview formed?The formation of any belief is a cognitive process. Individuals are motivated to form beliefs by an ‘effort after meaning’. We want to understand our world; we need to. A belief is something that happens to us as information we think is credible exerts some influence on our mind; that information gets processed (thought about), produces inferences, and we become persuaded about the nature of some part of reality about which we have some knowledge. We reach conclusions. Once this happens, our mental disposition now includes what we call a belief.While the human brain responds very differently to religious and nonreligious propositions, the process of believing or disbelieving a statement, whether religious or not, seems to be governed by the same areas in the brain. Where Religious Belief And Disbelief Meet.Sacred and secular ideas engage identical areas of the brain https://www.scientificamerican.c...Beliefs require information, as beliefs are always about something or someone. Information is gained:(1) by observation;One way we commonly take in information is through our own observations, our personal experiences, our senses. We see a table, we touch the table, we believe it’s a table. The first form of empiricism is personal experience; people generally do not believe anything that is contrary to their understanding of their own personal experience.(2) by receiving information from others (including school teachers and the mass media, etc.), including socialization.A belief results from data that, in some way, presents a compelling or non-compelling influence on us. Our response can include the rejection of data based on reaction formation, or acceptance of the belief based on other aspects of socialization. (I reject this because my parents are pushing me; I accept this because all my friends do. I believe this is a good product to try because I believed the ad about it.)(3) by inferences that go beyond direct observation in using inductive strategies;(4) and/or by deduction from other beliefs;Both induction and deduction use the conditional inference process (if ... then); it is one of several types of reasoning that may underlie social judgments like beliefs. ‘If ... then’ statements play a critical role in reasoning, allowing people to derive conclusions from a combination of conditional (If A, then B) and categorical premises (A). Analogism also plays a role in the process of making inferences.(5) by adapting beliefs to fit desires (e.g. wishful thinking);Our desires are not always at our command. I can believe I need to do something—like exercise—and not want to. I can (perhaps) make myself do it anyway—but I can’t make myself desire to do it. In that way beliefs and desires are beyond direct control but will sometimes adapt themselves based on powerful connected emotions.(6) by dissonance-reducing mechanisms, such as when beliefs are modified or rationalized to bring them into line with one’s action or other beliefs (see Fishbein and Ajzen 1975; Holland et al. 1986: 22; Elster 1979, 1983b; Bar-Tal 1990; Festinger 1957).When personal experience and understanding, belief, world-view, thoughts, feelings, needs, and/or volition don’t seem to line up with one or the other, it causes internal “dissonance.” That has to be worked through in our minds and that can often produce a belief change.Where we end up with our beliefs is quite often influenced by where we begin. Our will, our biases, our memories, all perform a kind of “information screening process.” We do not take the time to evaluate every new claim. There is an a priori aspect to handling any information that might challenge existing beliefs and cause internal dissonance.Often, beliefs are formed by combinations of these mechanisms.[1][1][1][1][2][2][2][2]In what way does atheism not correspond to any of these?Beliefs are our brain’s way of making sense of and navigating our complex world. They are mental representations of the ways our brains expect things in our environment to behave, and how things should be related to each other—the patterns our brain expects the world to conform to. What Actually Is a Belief? And Why Is It So Hard to Change?Beliefs are like cakes, they require several ingredients, combined under several different processes (mixing, heating, kneading, etc). One can have a thought by itself or even a feeling, but a belief requires more than just one operation of the mind.In what way is this not true for atheism?If atheism is not a truth claim about the universe and reality itself—what is it? Atheism defined as an ‘absence’ is a psychological condition, not a cognitive thesis. Conduct a quick search on the Internet, and you will even find atheists who claim that babies are atheists because they lack belief in God. But, as some philosophers have pointed out, that is not a flattering state of affairs for the atheist, for, strictly speaking, a cow, by that definition, is also an atheist.If the absence of belief in God is not actually a cognitive claim then it is neither true nor false because, logically, only actual claims can be true or false. It makes perfect sense to ask whether a claim like "It is raining today" or "The Atlanta Braves lost again" is true or false. On the other hand, it is meaningless to ask whether the color blue, or the word 'Wibble' are true—they are not claims and so cannot possess a truth value.If atheism is not a claim, then it is meaningless—it’s a ‘wibble’ kind of statement—which most atheists would object to. If the atheist wishes to claim that atheism is an accurate representation of reality, then it’s a truth claim, and that puts it on the same level as any religious claim. And therein lies the reason for the insistence atheism is not a belief. Beliefs must be defended.Footnotes[1] Beliefs - Oxford Handbooks[1] Beliefs - Oxford Handbooks[1] Beliefs - Oxford Handbooks[1] Beliefs - Oxford Handbooks[2] The biochemistry of belief[2] The biochemistry of belief[2] The biochemistry of belief[2] The biochemistry of belief

No, they don't (regardless of their level), and if they do it's not because of the language they speak. Language gives access to culture, but is not culture.If language was culture one might assume that "the more languages, the more cultures". But people in the Philippines speak around 4-5 languages while their culture is more or less homogeneous (the same applies to other countries).Also, the period of greatest linguistic diversity, the Paleolithic, probably had the least cultural diversity, owing to the simplicity of culture itself: basic tools, ornaments, etc.If language "was" culture, one might expect that Canada, the US, Britain, South Africa, Nigeria, India or other countries where English is spoken would share the same ideology. I don't see how much culture is shared by a Catholic English speaker from Atlanta with a Muslim English speaker from Pakistan. It seems more reasonable to assume that each culture uses the language to match their interests.The same goes for people who claim to "be a different person" when speaking a different language. The language itself does not make you think in a determined way; it's the assumptions that you have about the culture of that language.People who claim that when they speak language X they feel "different" are people who learned the target language as adults (McWhorter, 2014).How would you feel if you were learning a language whose culture you knew nothing about?Related answer:How do you think language affects your identity, personality, and behavior?SourcesMcWhorter, J. (2014). The Language Hoax. Why the World Looks the Same in Any Language. New York: Oxford University Press.

There is increasing evidence that regular aspirin users have a lower risk of getting a number of cancers. These studies are typically retrospective analysis of low dose aspirin (70–81 mg depending on country) studies looking at reduction in heart attack and stroke risk. These kinds of retrospective studies are not considered proof of effectiveness but rather suggestive of a protective effect.Proof would be a prospective and randomized study where patients are assigned randomly by computer to take aspirin or a placebo and then followed for many years. It’s a difficult study to perform because low dose aspirin is commonly available today and many patients on study might decide they want to take aspirin for other reasons which would contaminate the data randomization. (This is similar to PSA studies for prostate cancer where a number men in the control groups just decided to get their PSAs checked by their primary care doctors off study protocol.)Taking a low dose of aspirin every day may reduce the risk of cancer and slow the spread of the disease, according to a study that followed the health of more than 100,000 patients.Research by a team at the American Cancer Society in Atlanta found the overall risk of dying from cancer was 16% lower among people who took a daily aspirin pill for up to 11 years, with deaths from gastrointestinal cancers, such as oesophageal, stomach and colorectal cancers, falling by around 40%. Deaths from other cancers fell by 12% on average.The findings, based on 100,139 men and women with no prior history of cancer, support previous claims that aspirin can protect against some forms of the disease, but suggest the effect is not as strong as those earlier studies found.In research published in March, Peter Rothwell at Oxford University reported that the risk of dying from cancer was around 37% lower for people who took aspirin for more than five years. Those who had a daily dose of the drug for three years reduced their risk of cancer by about a quarter, his study found.The latest work, led by cancer scientist Eric Jacobs, points to a more modest protective effect from aspirin, though the authors concede that the design of the study may have led them to over- or underestimate the drug's anti-cancer properties."Even a relatively modest benefit with respect to overall cancer mortality could still meaningfully influence the balances of risk and benefits of prophylactic aspirin use," the authors write in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute. Aspirin did not reduce lung cancer among smokers, suggesting that cigarette smoking negated its benefits.Scientists are unsure how aspirin prevents cancer, but it may act by damping down inflammation in the body, or slowing the buildup of mutations in cells that ultimately turn cancerous. The drug appears to slow the spread of cancer around the body by preventing cancer cells from sticking to blood platelets. Daily aspirin reduces cancer risk and slows its spread, study confirmsAspirin to Reduce Cancer Risk