Religious vs. Nonreligious - Who is More Trustworthy?

[Milton Platt]

Are you including counselors that advise clients to get Gay Conversion Therapy?

If it is based upon religious beliefs and not empirical data, it falls in the same category.

 

[Sand Dancer]

When it comes to trustworthiness, who wins the prize? The religious? The nonreligious?

According to a recent survey done by the PEW Research group, roughly two-thirds of Americans would respond with: neither!

Source: Americans trust both religious, nonreligious people​

This is great, considering how little the category of "religious" and "nonreligious" really means given the heterogeneity of both groups. Drilling down into the data, though, we see some expected in-group and out-group biases. What I find pretty funny about these biases is that given the heterogeneity of these groups, should I really take from this that Evangelicals would consider a Pagan like me more trustworthy simply for being religious? I doubt it. While surveys like these are interesting, they certainly have their limitations.

What do you think of these findings? What are your thoughts on the trustworthiness of "religious" and "nonreligious" people? What do those categories mean to you?

Religion doesn't change your morals or personality, just your perspective. A jerk atheist will be a jerk Christian, a jerk Jew, etc. A nice Christian will be a nice atheist, Jew, etc.

 

[ecco]

I said no such thing. My mom is a Christian and my dad is a Deist who flips between that and agnosticism. This has nothing to do with my beliefs. I have been a Zoroastrian, a Pagan and an atheist before now.

The concept of beliefs into Western gods was instilled in you at a young age. You explored - not unusual. Yet you are today closer to being a Christian than to being a Muslim or a Hindu. Am I right?

 

[Hockeycowboy]

J. J. Luna is the author of a book entitled “How to be invisible.” In it, he encourages employers looking for cleaning help (dealing w/ sensitive documents), to ask for Jehovah’s Witnesses.... he states (on pgs. 81, 82 or 89): “In actual practice we usually end up with [Jehovah’s] Witnesses.” One reason he gives is that they are well-known for being honest. Another reason, is that ‘they feel they are being watched by their Creator Jehovah, and would rather die than steal.’

We do take Scripture seriously, which includes the counsel at 1 Corinthians 10:31 & Colossians 3:23

 

[ecco]

J. J. Luna is the author of a book entitled “How to be invisible.” In it, he encourages employers looking for cleaning help (dealing w/ sensitive documents), to ask for Jehovah’s Witnesses.... he states (on pgs. 81, 82 or 89): “In actual practice we usually end up with [Jehovah’s] Witnesses.” One reason he gives is that they are well-known for being honest. Another reason, is that ‘they feel they are being watched by their Creator Jehovah, and would rather die than steal.’

I guess that would depend on what needed cleaning. Would JW's report suspicious looking documents to the FBI?


Does ‘they feel they are being watched by their Creator Jehovah, and would rather die than steal" also mean that "‘they feel they are being watched by their Creator Jehovah, and would rather die than lie"?

 

[atanu]

Indeed... it's why I mention in-group and out-group bias in the OP. That kind of pattern is reflective of this - we're going to rate "like us" people more trustworthy than "not like us" people.

In the RF poll atleast, the non religious seem to have voted overwhelmingly in their own favour. What may be their data? And what does it say about trustworthiness?

I have been a non religious atheist in the past. At 40-45 age I changed to being a spiritual-religious. I can speak on the OP from my kind of 'religious' point of view.

I think, many ‘religious of my kind’ became religious when their ego actions began to boomerang and began to torment them too much. At this stage, it would apparently seem that the religious were not trustworthy. But once the idea that ego self is not its own master sets in trustworthiness may tend to increase. The idea of 'karma' begins to take root. The idea that if I spit into the sky it will fall on me takes root.

YMMV.

 

[danieldemol]

J. J. Luna is the author of a book entitled “How to be invisible.” In it, he encourages employers looking for cleaning help (dealing w/ sensitive documents), to ask for Jehovah’s Witnesses.... he states (on pgs. 81, 82 or 89): “In actual practice we usually end up with [Jehovah’s] Witnesses.” One reason he gives is that they are well-known for being honest. Another reason, is that ‘they feel they are being watched by their Creator Jehovah, and would rather die than steal.’

We do take Scripture seriously, which includes the counsel at 1 Corinthians 10:31 & Colossians 3:23

So a marketing man who may possibly be JW himself gives his personal opinion in a book without any scientific research to back his anecdotal claim.

Big deal

 

[danieldemol]

In the RF poll atleast, the non religious seem to have voted overwhelmingly in their own favour. What may be their data? And what does it say about trustworthiness?

Actually the vote was overwhelmingly that religious and non religious are equally trustworthy.

 

[atanu]

Actually the vote was overwhelmingly that religious and non religious are equally trustworthy.

That is a neutral point — common for the religious and the non religious.

But compare results for first and second options. What kind of trustworthy data supports this kind of skewed response in favour of the second option?

 

[Hockeycowboy]

So a marketing man who may possibly be JW himself gives his personal opinion in a book without any scientific research to back his anecdotal claim.

Big deal

Where did you get this? “Possibly “?

And why would a person need “scientific research” to discover a group’s reputation?

 

[Hockeycowboy]

So a marketing man who may possibly be JW himself gives his personal opinion in a book without any scientific research to back his anecdotal claim.

Big deal

Just some other quotes (by non-JW’s):

“When they read in the Bible, they believe God is talking to them. Whenever problems appear in their lives, they take God’s Word and search in it for a solution. . . . For them, God’s Word is still alive.”—Catholic clergyman Benjamin Cherayath, Münsterländische Volkszeitung newspaper, Germany

“People who have Jehovah’s Witnesses as workmates describe them as honest workers, so convinced of their faith that they may appear obsessed by it; nevertheless, they command respect for their moral integrity.” — Il Tempo (a daily newspaper), Rome, Italy

“They [JW’s] pay their taxes. They are some of the most honest citizens in the Republic.” —The Post, Palm Beach, Florida, U.S.A.
The Palm Beach Post from West Palm Beach, Florida on December 19, 1979 · Page 103

“Jehovah’s Witnesses have proved through the years to be hardworking, sober, thrifty, and God-fearing citizens.”
—The Herald of Buenos Aires, Argentina


“Jehovah’s Witnesses are known throughout the world as impeccably law-abiding people and particularly for their scrupulous attitude toward paying taxes.” —Russian scholar Sergei Ivanenko



Etc.

 

[danieldemol]

Where did you get this? “Possibly “?

And why would a person need “scientific research” to discover a group’s reputation?

Since his religion is unknown he may possibly be JW.

One needs scientific research to determine that people are more trustworthy, and that the reputation is not caused by confirmation bias.

 

[ecco]

Actually the vote was overwhelmingly that religious and non religious are equally trustworthy.

Only 5% voted that religious people were more trustworthy. Considering that roughly half of posters in this thread are religious, that says a lot.

 

[Watchmen]

When it comes to trustworthiness, who wins the prize? The religious? The nonreligious?

According to a recent survey done by the PEW Research group, roughly two-thirds of Americans would respond with: neither!

Source: Americans trust both religious, nonreligious people​

This is great, considering how little the category of "religious" and "nonreligious" really means given the heterogeneity of both groups. Drilling down into the data, though, we see some expected in-group and out-group biases. What I find pretty funny about these biases is that given the heterogeneity of these groups, should I really take from this that Evangelicals would consider a Pagan like me more trustworthy simply for being religious? I doubt it. While surveys like these are interesting, they certainly have their limitations.

What do you think of these findings? What are your thoughts on the trustworthiness of "religious" and "nonreligious" people? What do those categories mean to you?

I generally don’t make assumptions about such categories of people. It’s akin to asking who is more trustworthy: people of color or caucasians?

 

[Hockeycowboy]

Since his religion is unknown he may possibly be JW.

One needs scientific research to determine that people are more trustworthy, and that the reputation is not caused by confirmation bias.

And I...just posted, #111 — previous to your response here — observations and experiences of those who are not JW’s. The essence of empirical science!

 

[danieldemol]

And I...just posted, #111 — previous to your response here — observations and experiences of those who are not JW’s. The essence of empirical science!

1. The authors of all the articles bar the quote from the Catholic clergyman are unknown to me, and could all be JWs

2. Even if they are not JWs they are still anecdotal and subject to confirmation bias and are therefore not empirical science.

For an example of a real empirical study try Who is more criminally dangerous: the theist or the atheist?
In particular https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/01639625.2017.1286183?journalCode=udbh20&

It shows that it is religious people with doubts and neither the commited believer nor the commited agnostic/atheist who commit the most crimes.

Although results have not been given comparing individual sects, there is no reason to expect JWs to do better than other firm believers or even agnostics/atheists in the absence of such a study.

 

[sojourner]

People are people. I almost voted that nonreligious are more trustworthy, because at least where many Christians are concerned, entitlement is an issue, because Christians are in the majority. And entitlement can bring with it a sort of justification for one’s dishonesty. I’ve seen it time and time again in my ministry.

But in the end, people can be crappy and wonderful across the board. Religion seems to have little to do with a moral center. And, the term “religious” needs to be defined.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Just some other quotes (by non-JW’s):

“When they read in the Bible, they believe God is talking to them. Whenever problems appear in their lives, they take God’s Word and search in it for a solution. . . . For them, God’s Word is still alive.”—Catholic clergyman Benjamin Cherayath, Münsterländische Volkszeitung newspaper, Germany

“People who have Jehovah’s Witnesses as workmates describe them as honest workers, so convinced of their faith that they may appear obsessed by it; nevertheless, they command respect for their moral integrity.” — Il Tempo (a daily newspaper), Rome, Italy

“They [JW’s] pay their taxes. They are some of the most honest citizens in the Republic.” —The Post, Palm Beach, Florida, U.S.A.
The Palm Beach Post from West Palm Beach, Florida on December 19, 1979 · Page 103

“Jehovah’s Witnesses have proved through the years to be hardworking, sober, thrifty, and God-fearing citizens.”
—The Herald of Buenos Aires, Argentina


“Jehovah’s Witnesses are known throughout the world as impeccably law-abiding people and particularly for their scrupulous attitude toward paying taxes.” —Russian scholar Sergei Ivanenko



Etc.

I'm guessing that these are all quotes from some Watchtower article that have been gathered over decades, right?

I don't find them personally compelling. You can find a handful of descriptions like that for any group if you look long and hard enough. And I have a sneaking suspicion that some of those quotes attributed to just a newspaper are from letters to the editor, possibly by JWs themselves.

The JWs I've dealt with in real life have been fine, though we don't tend to talk religion. The ones I encounter online - and talk about JW doctrine with - have often left me with the impression that they're misrepresenting things... or perhaps faithfully repeating misrepresentations that their church has handed them. In that respect, I don't find JWs to be especially trustworthy.

... though I hesitate to tar the entire membership of a religion based on my experience with a few JWs here on RF.

 

[sooda]

There are also atheist fundamentalists who would make strategies to force churches to close down. Some of them would go on widespread rampages of vandalizing nativity scenes.

I doubt that.

 

[firedragon]

Personally I feel religious belief is irrelevant to ones trustworthiness. Rather silly to think that religious belief is any kind of indicator as to who might be trustworthy.

Another question should be who is religious? Just because you call yourself religious, or you belong to some so called "religion" are you religious?