Atheists are more respectful of believers than the other way around

Rousseau said that there are several types of religion, among which is a "private" and individual version of the belief in the transcendent and the divine, and another that is of a collective nature, based on public rituals and dogmas and symbols shared. In practice, said this philosopher, the first variant is undesirable, because it does not work to make societies unite.

Time has passed and with it societies too; now, unlike three centuries ago, we must satisfy a need that did not exist before. This new need is to create an inclusive culture in which no one is left out due to issues related to their beliefs or lack thereof. And, although the history of religions is full of violent conflicts between confessions, the relationship they have with atheism has not been much better.

Today, in fact, A study shows that in a world where freedom of thought and belief is increasingly defended, atheism continues to be stigmatized.

• You may be interested in: "Can you be a psychologist and believe in God?"

Atheists' respect for believers is unrequited

A team of researchers from Ohio University has shown that atheists are more respectful of believers than vice versa, something for which they offer various explanations.

The research team, led by Colleen Cowgill, used an economics-based game to find out how the personal beliefs of each one influence the way in which we identify with the rest or on the contrary if he distances us from them. Specifically, we wanted to see if the fact of being a believer or an atheist makes us act giving high priority to those who share these beliefs or if this priority tends not to exist.

For this, a simple exercise known as the dictator game was chosen, in which a person must decide if he wants to share his money, and how much he should give up. In this way, couples are created in which one person is an atheist and the other is a believer, and one of them is assigned a role of dominance so that they can decide if they want to distribute an amount of money.

The result showed that, knowing the beliefs of each one, the Christians distributed more money to the rest Christians than atheists, while atheists did not treat any of the collective, giving on average the same amount to believers and non-believers. This stopped happening at the moment in which the religious beliefs of each person, or the absence of them, stopped being revealed.

• Related article: "Types of religion (and their differences in beliefs and ideas)"

The stigma could be behind it

Colleen and her team come up with an explanation for why atheists tend to be more kind to believers than they receive in return from believers, at least according to this study. What could be behind this phenomenon is a compensation strategy on the part of atheists, to avoid receiving negative consequences related to prejudice and stigma about atheism in general.

And it is necessary to take into account that for a long time religion and morality have been practically synonymous: ethics arose from belief in a higher order It tells us what we should do. The absence of belief in the divine, according to this logic, is a threat, because there is nothing that guarantees that an atheist will not go to commit the most atrocious acts if we think that the only thing that prevents us from behaving badly is our union with one or more gods.

On the other hand, even today there is little contact with atheism (today there is no country in which the majority of the population is atheist), so that it is reasonable that someone who does not believe in any religion fear receiving unfavorable treatment if he offers the slightest opportunity to be seen as the enemy.

• You may be interested in: "The more intelligent, the less religious?"

Full integration has not yet been achieved

This study shows that the most private beliefs continue to be something that divides society, to the point where a simple label is capable of making us treat ourselves differently. Tending to give privileged treatment to those who are most like oneself is still a way of creating an unnecessary division without there being a real reason for conflict.

Thus, atheists, being aware of the stereotypes that still persist, do everything possible to "compensate" the rest, since they start from a disadvantageous situation. In this sense, it would still be necessary to carry out investigations similar to these to see if something similar happens with religious minorities in countries where there is a high degree of fanaticism.