Does religion impair vital critical thinking skills?

[FunctionalAtheist]

They didn't do any such things. They created the five classifications; they NEVER asked whether a story should be classified as "impossibility". They had two separate response categories: one that reflected whether the child correctly classified a story as belonging to the researchers' 3 possible classes, and another in which the children's account/explanation for their interpretation (the 5-part schema, which doesn't have "3 valid responses and 2 invalid responses" nor anything remotely similar to such a description).


What the study shows is that non-religious children are more likely to classify a "religious" story as "reality" than religious children.

Evidently we read different studies. Cheers!

 

[Azihayya]

Hi Azihayya,

I'm first in line for finer-grained terminology, and I completely understand that there are a million variations on religion. The variations on religion that I was addressing are those in which a group of people claim to have a magic book that details exactly how humans are to behave, and that their magic book is the only "correct" magic book. Oh, and you can't just read their book, you need middle men to interpret it for you.

I absolutely allow that there are many variations that aren't like the variations I outlined above. If you have a name for the flavor I mentioned above, a name to make that flavor distinct, I'll be more than happy to use it from now on.

As for the rest of your post, well frankly it seems to be a collection of strawman arguments. So, if your style is to put words in other people's mouths, then I'm certain I'll tire of your posts as well.

On the other hand, feel free to ask for clarifications and perhaps we won't be a far apart as you imagine.

A collection of straw man arguments, aye? If that's so then your whole entire post is just one big straw man. You don't even need to think about anything that I say when you can just point at it and shout straw man.

 

[icehorse]

A collection of straw man arguments, aye? If that's so then your whole entire post is just one big straw man. You don't even need to think about anything that I say when you can just point at it and shout straw man.

About 75% of the way through your post, you said:

Your ideals of education and critical thinking for all I know may claim that miracles aren't real, that praying does nothing, and that wishes don't come true; as far as I am concerned you may as well be advocating indoctrination and a suppression of intuition and personal interpretation, and most certainly an embargo on our shared library of words and definitions. I can't say that I have any enthusiasm about reading anything that you've written.

That's what I was referring to when I mentioned strawmen. I didn't say any of the things you apply the words "you" and "your" to. Perhaps you misinterpreted an earlier post of mine, but those things you said I said, I didn't say, and I don't believe.

 

[Yerda]

I haven't seen any evidence. Is there any evidence presented in the thread? I don't want to trawl through the whole 22 pages.

aye

I would like to inform you that this is our word. It sounds wrong in any accent other than Scottish. Also "wee" as in a "a wee lie down", meaning small, is also our word. Like a protected regional product these words can only be produced by us.

 

[Sapiens]

I haven't seen any evidence. Is there any evidence presented in the thread? I don't want to trawl through the whole 22 pages.

I would like to inform you that this is our word. It sounds wrong in any accent other than Scottish. Also "wee" as in a "a wee lie down", meaning small, is also our word. Like a protected regional product these words can only be produced by us.

Har ... aye matey!

 

[Azihayya]

About 75% of the way through your post, you said:



That's what I was referring to when I mentioned strawmen. I didn't say any of the things you apply the words "you" and "your" to. Perhaps you misinterpreted an earlier post of mine, but those things you said I said, I didn't say, and I don't believe.

You may notice if you look at what you quoted, that I began the whole statement by saying, "for all I know" and "as far as I'm concerned" - the latter statement being more relevant to your idea that I'm presenting a "straw man argument"; however, here's a quote from your original post: "I have to think that religion overall (even moderate religion), works in opposition to increasing critical thinking." You've since then been generous enough to distinguish the "you know who I'm talking about" Religious from the "that other kind" of Religious person. You'll have to excuse me mate as I just don't think I can hold myself to the same high level of debate that you have such an affinity for with your comprehensive knowledge of logical fallacies and what not.

 

[icehorse]

Hi Azihayya,

I'm interested honest conversation. The OP was a claim that might be completely true, somewhat true or not true at all. The rest of the thread is the debate / discussion. I've learned some stuff and refined the OP. But we're in the debate forum. So if you criticize the OP in a way that I think is illogical, I'll say so. And if you think I'm defending it in a way that you think is illogical, you can call me on that as well.

 

[dchezik]

I'm trying to work out exactly what "critical thinking" is. Does anyone have a succinct definition?

I had a look here, but it seems to be defined in a number of different ways: Critical thinking - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia I quite liked the second definition:
"disciplined thinking that is clear, rational, open-minded, and informed by evidence"

This omits the "critical" component. "Critical" in critical thinking doesn't mean rational or any of those other things. It refers to criticizing thinking and finding fault with the thinking it addresses. In other words, "here's some thinking...what's wrong with this? Does it follow the rules of sound thinking? Does it contradict logic? Is it consistent with what is known? Is it consistent with what people of intellect think? Does it lead to absurd conclusions? Critical thinking is thinking that uses sound rules to give the greatest probability of reaching a conclusion that is most likely to be true!

 

[AstralProjectee]

From my perspective having been brain washed in the religion of christianity and having come out of it yet still holding a strong belief in Open-Source Religion. I would say religion definitely can constrict critical thinking. And I wasn't all that religious. I know there are many christians that hear this crap about tithing, you know giving 10 percent for prosperity, and claim they are this and that, and God will prosper them while they are poor and getting old. Believing that God will bless them at the end of life.

I think it all comes down to this. When a religious person is asked what their plan is for some of the biggest things in life if they go quoting scripture then their critical thinking has been messed up by religion. But if they don't quote scriptures and plan as if Scriptures don't have much bearing on their lives then critical thinking has stayed good enough.

All and all I tend to think most religions do mess up peoples ability to think critically. At the same time I think their is a spirituality that does work with critical thinking. But few people have found this equilibrium.

 

[Somkid]

What I think the world needs now is for people to be better educated and have better critical thinking skills. Populations that can think critically are harder to manipulate and control by oppressive leaders. Populations that can think critically are harder for big business and corrupt politicians* to hoodwink. Better educated people will make better choices in regards to being good stewards of the planet. And so on.

Cognitive scientists have learned that all cognitive activity uses the same supply of glucose. Everything you do with your brain, drains the same "fuel tank". Even something as simple as exercising willpower uses brain glucose.

As an anti-theist, I see the mental energy the "faithful" put into keeping their religion plausible. I have to think that religion overall (even moderate religion), works in opposition to increasing critical thinking.

Perhaps religion does have some benefits (I'm not convinced), but whatever benefits religion might claim, it strikes me that these benefits could be provided without the need for cognitively draining, supernatural explanations that fly in the face of an otherwise honest view of the world.

Since my religion is Buddhism and I am a Zen Buddhist I have no "belief" in anything that cannot not be weighed or measured thus reality and knowing are my guide even if I do not like the truth I accept it because it is the truth.

 

[icehorse]

Since my religion is Buddhism and I am a Zen Buddhist I have no "belief" in anything that cannot not be weighed or measured thus reality and knowing are my guide even if I do not like the truth I accept it because it is the truth.

I think the world would be in far better shape if Buddhism was the world's most popular religion

 

[LegionOnomaMoi]

Evidently we read different studies. Cheers!

You linked to this article:

Children Exposed To Religion Have Difficulty Distinguishing Fact From Fiction, Study Finds

That article referred to this study:

Corriveau, K. H., Chen, E. E., & Harris, P. L. (2014). Judgments About Fact and Fiction by Children From Religious and Nonreligious Backgrounds. Cognitive science.

Is this the study you read?