"People who have faith . . . are not as smart as others"

[Skwim]

The "so what" is that those religious people were extremely intelligent. They were all religious, and we all know there names, and although they didn't write the text books, the text books are written around their ideas. And I could go on. We have MRIs because of a guy who is a Young Earth Creationist invented it. Galileo, Copernicus, Mendel, it's nothing more than a pile of horse **** to claim religious people aren't as intelligent. Even science itself came from people who were religious and believed that learning about the physical world, through our much celebrated process of science, was to glorify god. The "so what" is that those religious people made enormous and fundamental contributions to science, and many them, such as Einstein, were a helluva lot more intelligent than any of us on this forum are.

As I told lovesong, "And it's just possible that were it not for their faith they would be even smarter than they are/[were]."


.

 

[lovesong]

As I told lovesong, "And it's just possible that were it not for their faith they would be even smarter than they are/[were]."


.

I dunno, it feels kind of rude to say "hey I know you changed the course of scientific history by discovering/inventing gravity, electricity, MRIs, and astronomy, but you could have been even more spectacular without your stupid religion, just sayin'."

 

[Skwim]

If you read 'Zen and the art of motorcycle repair', this may be clearer to you.

I believe the title is "Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance," and I remember reading a little of it some time ago. But actually, nothing is unclear.


.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

As I told lovesong, "And it's just possible that were it not for their faith they would be even smarter than they are/[were]."


.

That's just laughably absurd saying Einstein may have been smarter had he not been a theist. And, as I pointed out, Stephen Hawking did not become smarter as he became an atheist.

 

[Sunstone]

"Conflict between science, religion lies in our brains

Clashes between the use of faith vs. scientific evidence to explain the world around us dates back centuries and is perhaps most visible today in the arguments between evolution and creationism.

To believe in a supernatural god or universal spirit, people appear to suppress the brain network used for analytical thinking and engage the empathetic network, the scientists say. When thinking analytically about the physical world, people appear to do the opposite.

"When there's a question of faith, from the analytic point of view, it may seem absurd," said Tony Jack, who led the research. "But, from what we understand about the brain, the leap of faith to belief in the supernatural amounts to pushing aside the critical/analytical way of thinking to help us achieve greater social and emotional insight."

"A stream of research in cognitive psychology has shown and claims that people who have faith (i.e., are religious or spiritual) are not as smart as others. They actually might claim they are less intelligent.," said Richard Boyatzis, distinguished university professor and professor of organizational behavior at Case Western Reserve, and a member of Jack's team.

"Our studies confirmed that statistical relationship, but at the same time showed that people with faith are more prosocial and empathic," he said."
source
​

I find this very surprising. I've always attributed the refusal of the faithful to consider the significance of science in explaining the world, to their need to hold fast to the security of religion. Not that it's an actual inability.



.

It might or might not be true that people of faith are statistically less intelligent that people without faith, however, to conclude from that information that people of faith are wrong would be an example of an ad hominem fallacy, for the possibility always exists that even a less intelligent person can be right about something.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

And, as I pointed out, I didn't magically become more intelligent when I stopped being Christian. Regardless the outcome, I'd still have the same IQ if I'd still be a Christian or not, but the only real what if that exists is if I would still be a Christian had I not been raised in such a literalist and Conservative faith that is only proven wrong when exposed to the outside world.

 

[Skwim]

I dunno, it feels kind of rude to say "hey I know you changed the course of scientific history by discovering/inventing gravity, electricity, MRIs, and astronomy, but you could have been even more spectacular without your stupid religion, just sayin'."

But I'm not saying it to them, and if they are truly as bright as we all believe they are, they would recognize that results are results, and unless one can dispute them they must be accepted for what they are, and not pout because they're uncomplimentary.


.

 

[Skwim]

It might or might not be true that people of faith are statistically less intelligent that people without faith, however, to conclude from that information that people of faith are wrong would be an example of an ad hominem fallacy, for the possibility always exists that even a less intelligent person can be right about something.

Conclude that people of faith are wrong about what?


.

 

[lovesong]

But I'm not saying it to them, and if they are truly as bright as we all believe they are, they would recognize that results are results, and unless one can dispute them they must be accepted for what they are, and not pout because they're uncomplimentary.
.

These "results" are taken out of context from a single study. A single study does not constitute absolute proof.
Either way I don't think it warrants religion-bashing and the declaration that all us theists are less intelligent than you.

 

[Serenity Now]

And, as I pointed out, I didn't magically become more intelligent when I stopped being Christian. Regardless the outcome, I'd still have the same IQ if I'd still be a Christian or not, but the only real what if that exists is if I would still be a Christian had I not been raised in such a literalist and Conservative faith that is only proven wrong when exposed to the outside world.

How exactly have Christians been proven wrong?

 

[Sunstone]

Conclude that people of faith are wrong about what?


.

Logically, about anything. The fact that someone is less intelligent than me does not mean that they are wrong about anything, just as the fact that someone is more intelligent than me does not mean that they are right about anything.

 

[Serenity Now]

Logically, about anything.

So you are faithless in this life? If true I feel sorry for you and hope you find something to believe in.

 

[PackJason]

So you are faithless in this life? If true I feel sorry for you and hope you find something to believe in.

Faith =/= belief

 

[Shadow Wolf]

How exactly have Christians been proven wrong?

The Earth is not 6,000 years old, I was lied to about history, about science, about quiet a bit actually. By the time I was done with my Christian home schooling, I didn't even know the difference between a hypothesis and a theory, I was taught America was made to be a Christian nation in law, that the entire Earth was once flooded, and they even taught me that Alexander the Great conquered the Earth to prepare it for Jesus' birth (without any regard to the facts that Alexander was not even Roman and his empire quickly crumbled shortly after his death).
As I said, it wasn't Christianity, but the literal and ultra-Conservative brand of Christianity that I was raised in and taught to be real. Had I been raised in a more liberal Christian environment, I'd still have the same IQ, but I may still be Christian because my beliefs would not have fallen under such a heavy scrutiny that left me in a position of having to abandon it or lie to myself.

 

[Sunstone]

So you are faithless in this life? If true I feel sorry for you and hope you find something to believe in.

No need to patronize me. Your religion remains false in my opinion no matter how much you patronize people.

 

[Serenity Now]

Faith =/= belief

Oh looky I've ticked you off and now you're following me. Very original

The Earth is not 6,000 years old, I was lied to about history, about science, about quiet a bit actually. By the time I was done with my Christian home schooling, I didn't even know the difference between a hypothesis and a theory, I was taught America was made to be a Christian nation in law, that the entire Earth was once flooded, and they even taught me that Alexander the Great conquered the Earth to prepare it for Jesus' birth (without any regard to the facts that Alexander was not even Roman and his empire quickly crumbled shortly after his death).
As I said, it was Christianity, but the literal and ultra-Conservative brand of Christianity that I was raised in and taught to be real. Had I been raised in a more liberal Christian environment, I'd still have the same IQ, but I may still be Christian because my beliefs would not have fallen under such a heavy scrutiny that left me in a position of having to abandon it or lie to myself.

Ok lets be honest here someone or multiple people messed you up and feed you a lot of BS. No doubt this has caused a resentment against everything those people believe in. However casting wide shotgun blast at all Christians because a few messed you up isn't the productive strategy.

 

[Skwim]

These "results" are taken out of context from a single study.

And you know this to be a fact because____________________fill in the blank___________________ .

A single study does not constitute absolute proof.

Of course it doesn't, and that's one reason the article says things like; "The conflict between science and religion may have its origins in the structure of our brains," and "When thinking analytically about the physical world, people appear to do the opposite." Small, but very important words put there for good reason.

Either way I don't think it warrants religion-bashing and the declaration that all us theists are less intelligent than you.

Sorry that you can't accept the results of science without taking them personally. and that you're driven to make unwarranted assumptions.


.

 

[Serenity Now]

No need to patronize me. Your religion remains false in my opinion no matter how much you patronize people.

So you have faith in the ability to patronize? Just trying to figure this out.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Ok lets be honest here someone or multiple people messed you up and feed you a lot of BS. No doubt this has caused a resentment against everything those people believe in. However casting wide shotgun blast at all Christians because a few messed you up isn't the productive strategy.

I'm not taking this shotgun blasts. In fact, I even specifically stated it was such an ultra-Conservative and literalist approach that was instilled to me.

 

[Sunstone]

So you have faith in the ability to patronize? Just trying to figure this out.

Your comment strikes me as just as ridiculous as your patronizing tone.