Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Sunday October 16 2016, @08:53PM   Printer-friendly
from the The-only-thing-we-have-to-fear-is... dept.

Chapman University recently completed its third annual Chapman University Survey of American Fears (2016). The survey asked respondents about 65 fears across a broad range of categories including fears about the government, crime, the environment, the future, technology, health, natural disasters, as well as fears of public speaking, spiders, heights, ghosts and many other personal anxieties.

In addition to the set of fears examined in previous waves, the survey team took a closer look at two fear related phenomena: Americans' beliefs in conspiracy theories and fear of Muslims, sometimes referred to as "Islamophobia."

In its third year, the annual Chapman University Survey of American Fears included more than 1,500 adult participants from across the nation and all walks of life. The 2016 survey data is organized into five basic categories: personal fears, conspiracy theories, terrorism, natural disasters, paranormal fears, and fear of Muslims.

The 2016 survey shows that the top 10 things Americans fear the most are:

  • Corruption of government officials (same top fear as 2015)
  • Terrorist attacks
  • Not having enough money for the future
  • Being a victim of terror
  • Government restrictions on firearms and ammunition (new)
  • People I love dying
  • Economic or financial collapse
  • Identity theft
  • People I love becoming seriously ill
  • The Affordable Health Care Act/"Obamacare"

http://phys.org/news/2016-10-americans-annual-survey-american.html

A comprehensive list of the all the fears is available from The Chapman Survey on American Fears 2016.

A video is also available at: https://youtu.be/Rr0XAFbe8b8

Previously:
What Americans Fear Most (2014)


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 3, Interesting) by jmorris on Monday October 17 2016, @02:44AM

    by jmorris (4844) on Monday October 17 2016, @02:44AM (#415063)

    There is an element of Truth in that. But you miss the bigger horror by attempting to, falsely, virtue signal your superiority.

    It is perfectly logical to view atheists with suspicion given that the 'godless communists' murdered more people in the last century than every other contender combined. Add in Islam and you have so close to a total count of mass slaughter for the last century anything else is mostly statistical noise.

    No, all atheists are not Communists and every Muslim isn't a monster. On the other hand it IS true that every mass murdering Communist is officially an atheist and every Islamic Terrorist is, by definition, Muslim. It is also true that as matters of official doctrine both Communists and Muslims are a lot more accepting of monsters than the rest of us should be comfortable with.

    I have also observed that as a general rule the 'godless', both atheist and agnostic, tend toward amorality with a shockingly high degree of correlation and that goes double for the converted. It really does seem that a threat of hellfire is somewhat effective, purely as a practical matter and especially if that threat is suddenly removed. It is kinda like the matrix, it is dangerous to free a mind beyond a certain age, apparently most simply can't adapt to being required to develop and adhere to a purely internally derived moral code.

    Finally, it is undeniably true that while those few atheists and agnostics who DO develop a coherent moral code can be as moral as any traditionally religious person, to date history records zero successful civilizations built upon a godless moral code. We lack any sort of reliable way to transmit the moral code from these few to a general population; something, just to pick one example, the Catholic Church manages to do generation after generation with high success even when monsters have held the Papacy. This is not to say it can't be done, but that it is likely to be extremely fatal for the next few attempts based on the flawless track record of horror to date.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +1  
       Interesting=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Interesting' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   3  
  • (Score: 4, Insightful) by NotSanguine on Monday October 17 2016, @02:56AM

    by NotSanguine (285) <NotSanguineNO@SPAMSoylentNews.Org> on Monday October 17 2016, @02:56AM (#415068) Homepage Journal

    I have also observed that as a general rule the 'godless', both atheist and agnostic, tend toward amorality with a shockingly high degree of correlation and that goes double for the converted. It really does seem that a threat of hellfire is somewhat effective, purely as a practical matter and especially if that threat is suddenly removed

    Where is the statistical evidence to support this?

    You aren't making any sort of argument that is (at least you have not provided any) supported by evidence.

    Which is why I suggested we look at the religious (non-)affiliations of convicted violent criminals. I would find that data to be both interesting and informative.

    You projecting your personal beliefs without any supporting evidence is just you projecting your personal beliefs without evidence -- that is, you spouting off.

    --
    No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
    • (Score: 2, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 17 2016, @03:12AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 17 2016, @03:12AM (#415073)

      No, all atheists are not Communists and every Muslim isn't a monster. On the other hand it IS true that every mass murdering Communist is officially an atheist and every Islamic Terrorist is, by definition, Muslim.

      Got yer evidentiaries right cher!

      "No, not all idiots are jmorris, but it is true that every jmorris is an idiot. By reputation, if not be definition."

    • (Score: 2) by jmorris on Monday October 17 2016, @03:20PM

      by jmorris (4844) on Monday October 17 2016, @03:20PM (#415213)

      Where is the statistical evidence to support this?

      Have you even seen a history book? Is your Internet connection sufficient to reach Google and Wikipedia? Communism alone scored a body count greater than a hundred million even if you accept their own version of history, i.e. the official version. Surely there isn't anyone posting here so historically ignorant that they would question the fact as anything other than a 'citation needed' troll and that joke is stale these days.

      Which is why I suggested we look at the religious (non-)affiliations of convicted violent criminals

      Apples and oranges.What people do as individuals is mostly regulated by the societal pressures around them. And doesn't get to my bigger point that a society can survive a limited quantity of the godless among it but every single society that has organized around that principle has been a horror. History records zero counter examples so no citation is possible.

      The problem seems to be rejecting the religion of a civilization also implies rejecting the moral code that is bundled with it. Most stop there, with no religion and no moral code beyond avoiding punishment by society instead of avoiding punishment by God, Which is, by definition, dangerous. Those few who succeed in building a moral code from scratch have demonstrated little ability to transmit it to those less intellectually advanced so if those few smart atheists are so unwise as to encourage mass rejection of the society's religion they wind up in an amoral hellhole. Again, you will cite zero counter examples because there are none. This is not to say there will never be one, only that it implies the odds of success for the next attempt currently underway in the West will likely end in mass graves.

      And yes it is a bundle deal. You can't even keep the U.S. Constitution if you unbundle the religious and moral code implied within it. "We hold these Truths to be self evident: that they are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable Rights; that among these are....." See the problem? Whole thing is an Appeal to Authority fallacy without the religious element. With it those 'inalienable rights' are beyond any human legislature's lawful authority. Progressivism is godless and sure enough, it was no time before they asserted that our Rights are a gift from the State, revokable at the need of 'the greater good' i.e. their whim. And as sure as night follows day bad things have been coming our way ever since. I'm willing to entertain proposed patches to solve it but none have even been proposed.

      So my bottom line is that until our civilizational technology increases greatly the masses must remain religious if we are to retain a civilization because they can't be governed any other way. Throne and Altar works. A religious and moral people could keep a Republic until they were seduced into ceasing to be such.

      • (Score: 2) by NotSanguine on Monday October 17 2016, @04:05PM

        by NotSanguine (285) <NotSanguineNO@SPAMSoylentNews.Org> on Monday October 17 2016, @04:05PM (#415236) Homepage Journal

        Have you even seen a history book? Is your Internet connection sufficient to reach Google and Wikipedia? Communism alone scored a body count greater than a hundred million even if you accept their own version of history, i.e. the official version. Surely there isn't anyone posting here so historically ignorant that they would question the fact as anything other than a 'citation needed' troll and that joke is stale these days.

        Your conflation of atheism with brutal totalitarian dictatorships is as amusing as it is flawed. Apparently you're unfamiliar with simple logic. I'll explain, and I'll use small words so you'll be sure to understand: Just because some atheists were/are bloodthirsty, murderous thugs, that does not mean that *all* atheists are bloodthirsty, murderous thugs.

        And so you confirm the suspicion of the AC who pointed this out [soylentnews.org]:

        "No, not all idiots are jmorris, but it is true that every jmorris is an idiot. By reputation, if not be definition."

        By your "logic", since the Spanish Inquisition maimed, tortured and murdered thousands, all Catholics are also murderous thugs who will happily perform such acts, yes?

        The problem seems to be rejecting the religion of a civilization also implies rejecting the moral code that is bundled with it. Most stop there, with no religion and no moral code beyond avoiding punishment by society instead of avoiding punishment by God, Which is, by definition, dangerous.

        Again, you are incorrectly conflating concepts. You claim that ethical behavior is only possible in a religious society, because only those who are frightened of being punished by some omnipotent/omniscient/omnipresent fantasy figure will act in ethical ways. I find your blind reliance on demonstrably false belief systems to be both pitiable and rather humorous.

        While a fear of "divine punishment" may be how you, and those with you down at the shallow end of the gene pool, are kept from committing heinous acts, that's not the case for many of us.

        What's more, there is no such thing as a "societal" or group morality. Those who share a similar culture may also share similar ideas about ethics and morality, and they may even publicly espouse similar ideas about such things. However, moral choices are always individual choices. Each time someone is faced with a moral/ethical question/quandary/dilemma, they must choose what action they will take. That is inherently an individual choice. Such a choice may be informed or constrained by the culture in which they are embedded, but the choice will be an individual one.

        --
        No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
        • (Score: 2) by jmorris on Tuesday October 18 2016, @01:55AM

          by jmorris (4844) on Tuesday October 18 2016, @01:55AM (#415492)

          Just because some atheists were/are bloodthirsty, murderous thugs, that does not mean that *all* atheists are bloodthirsty, murderous thugs.

          I said no citation was needed or possible, I stand by that. Provide ONE example of a society ruled by an open atheist, without a large religious element to moderate State behavior, that you don't consider one 'run by bloodthirsty murderous thugs'.

          those with you down at the shallow end of the gene pool

          Nice elevated debate skills ya got there. I have been openly declared as an agnostic since my earliest posts though I tend to consider the religious better allies than most of the godless. Just a reality. But you are intentionally missing my point. Unless you are planning a 'final solution' for the bottom 75% of the population you really should be thinking of some sort of way to keep them in a civilized state. Religions work. Again that is a reality. One I seriously doubt you even intend to challenge.

          Those who share a similar culture may also share similar ideas about ethics and morality, and they may even publicly espouse similar ideas about such things.

          Try replacing 'may' with 'do' because soon after you lose consensus on ethics and morality you cease having a single civilization and have several, usually followed by a war to settle the new boundaries.

  • (Score: 3, Insightful) by tibman on Monday October 17 2016, @02:41PM

    by tibman (134) Subscriber Badge on Monday October 17 2016, @02:41PM (#415204)

    I am agnostic. Religious belief doesn't decide government preference. Any possibility that a god exists died for me during my time in the army. No benevolent god would permit the things i saw. A god that does permit such things (even to His believers) is cruel or psychopathic and should be the enemy of good people.

    --
    SN won't survive on lurkers alone. Write comments.
  • (Score: 2) by turgid on Monday October 17 2016, @08:09PM

    by turgid (4318) Subscriber Badge on Monday October 17 2016, @08:09PM (#415360) Journal

    But you miss the bigger horror by attempting to, falsely, virtue signal your superiority.

    There needs to be a special downmod option for posts using the terms "virtue signal" and "SJW."