Anti-atheist distrust stems from the belief that atheists lack supernatural accountability

Evidence

It is time now to bring together two insights that, in combination, demystify atheist distrust in religious societies. First, to fully understand prejudice toward a specific group of individuals, we must appreciate the specific threat that this group is perceived to pose. Second, we have seen that supernatural agents capable of monitoring human behavior are potent motivators of prosocial behavior. Religious commitment in turn serves as a signal of trust, as long as believers walk the walk, not just talk the talk. No doubt, believers are most trusting of those who worship the same deities as themselves. However, as the dilemma of the traveling salesman illustrates, trust can also be extended beyond the immediate religious community as long as outsiders are perceived to adhere to some kind of supernatural sanctioning that keeps them accountable. The logic underlying anti-atheist prejudice therefore becomes clear if we combine (1) belief in supernatural monitoring in prosocial religions, and (2) the belief that atheists do not see themselves to be accountable to such supernatural monitors. — Norenzayan, Ara, Big gods - how religion transformed…, 259

Categorization

• XREF: This is the exact Big God mechanism the reader is bridging to Silence: Rodrigues’ moral behavior is sustained by perceiving himself watched by God, and the fumi-e ritual is designed precisely to destroy the credibility of that accountability. Also economically relevant — trust extends to outsiders perceived to be under any supernatural sanctioning system.
• DEFINE: Compact statement of the accountability mechanism underlying anti-atheist prejudice: both components named.
• DEEPTHINKING: The traveling-salesman point cracks open the mechanism: the relevant variable is not shared worship but perceived membership in any accountability system, which is what makes apostasy (not mere foreignness) the real threat in Silence.