So apparently religious people are dumber than atheists.

[StarryNightshade]

So here is an article in which there is a study that concludes atheists, on average, are more intelligent than religious people. Not on an individual basis, but in general.

Religious People Branded As Less Intelligent Than Atheists In Provocative New Study

Do you think this study has any real merit? What about other factors? Is one's belief (or lack thereof) a real correlation to one's intelligence?

Personally, we can talk about averages as much as we want, and averages may be great for statistics, but the truth is that there are dumb theists and intelligent atheists; conversely, there are intelligent theists and dumb atheists. People's intelligence (whatever that may be) have many attributing factors and are not just affected by one's beliefs (if one's beliefs can actually be a factor).

I just wonder why such a study was made? What does it prove? What does it do, besides create more divide between believers and non-believers? What will happen when Redditors get a hold of it? There will be chaos! *sarcasm*

 

[gzusfrk]

So here is an article in which there is a study that concludes atheists, on average, are more intelligent than religious people. Not on an individual basis, but in general.

Religious People Branded As Less Intelligent Than Atheists In Provocative New Study

Do you think this study has any real merit? What about other factors? Is one's belief (or lack thereof) a real correlation to one's intelligence?

Personally, we can talk about averages as much as we want, and averages may be great for statistics, but the truth is that there are dumb theists and intelligent atheists; conversely, there are intelligent theists and dumb atheists. People's intelligence (whatever that may be) have many attributing factors and are not just affected by one's beliefs (if one's beliefs can actually be a factor).

I just wonder why such a study was made? What does it prove? What does it do, besides create more divide between believers and non-believers? What will happen when Redditors get a hold of it? There will be chaos! *sarcasm*

It would make a little since, religious people try to be pleasing the Lord, worry less about material things, would not strive hard for money, so less education is needed, serving people does'nt take a lot of education. The Word says " he who makes friends with the world makes himself an enemy of God". Not saying getting an education is not a good thing, I have a son who works in the upper medical field. Reading and studying the New Testament does not usually make one more intelligent, other than the growth and knowledge of the Word. That must mean atheist are reading other stuff and getter smarter from it.

 

[sojourner]

I just wonder why such a study was made? What does it prove? What does it do, besides create more divide between believers and non-believers?

Obviously, someone has an axe to grind. It proves that someone is desperate to discredit theism. It's a waste of research, print, bandwidth, and time.

 

[gzusfrk]

I've ask about 10 doctors if they believe Jesus Christ is the Son of God, savior of mankind, they all said yes. I have'nt ask any lawyers.

 

[ron4711]

I've ask about 10 doctors if they believe Jesus Christ is the Son of God, savior of mankind, they all said yes. I have'nt ask any lawyers.

That is not a very scientific study as you pose a loaded question. If they did not believe what you assert, they may not tell you simply to avoid conflict or not to loose you as a patient.

To get a better response, you would have to provide them anonymity and not ask a leading question. Also you would have to make sure you have a varied enough pool of respondents, not just doctors from a specific area (such as the bible belt)

 

[DawudTalut]

Peace be on you. RELATED RESOURCES
1-- Is There a Difference between the Brain of an Atheist and the Brain of a Religious Person?
Source:Is There a Difference between the Brain of an Atheist and the Brain of a Religious Person?: Scientific American


2--There is not IQ only, there is EQ too.....
Intelligence (IQ) vs. Emotional Intelligence (EQ)
Source:Intelligence (IQ) vs. Emotional Intelligence (EQ)


3--Religiosity and intelligence
Source:Religiosity and intelligence - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


4--In this era of 1000 years (latter days) Many people are atheist first, then scientists or doctors etc latter......One reason of wide spread atheism is corruption in religions....Reformations is the answer.


5--Holy Quran: Four major duties of Holy Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be on him) are mentioned; they are under the four attributes of Allah.


[62:2] Whatever is in the heavens and whatever is in the earth glorifies Allah, the Sovereign, the Holy, the Mighty, the Wise.


[62:3] He it is Who has raised among the Unlettered people a Messenger from among themselves who recites unto them His Signs, and purifies them, and teaches them the Book and wisdom, although they had been, before, in manifest misguidance;


[62:4] And among others from among them who have not yet joined them. He is the Mighty, the Wise.


Holy Prophet s.a.w. explained the last verse as for one of his servant's coming to bring lost faith back from Pleiades (mataphor for lost, gone up)......This servant, according to Ahmadiyya Muslims is the person who is elsewhere, in sayings of Holy Prophet (s.a.w.) titled as Promised Messiah and Mahdi....Thus the (62:4) implies that Ahmadiyya Muslims has to excel in spiritual and physical wisdom.....By the grace of God, they are doing so under Ahmadiyya Muslim Khilafat.

For example:
Sir Muhammad Zafrulla khan, An Ex President of UN General assmebly and Ex President of International Court of Justice.....https://www.alislam.org/library/zafar.html

Professor Abdus Salam, Nobel Laureate Physics, 1979.....https://www.alislam.org/library/salam.html

 

[lewisnotmiller]

So here is an article in which there is a study that concludes atheists, on average, are more intelligent than religious people. Not on an individual basis, but in general.

Religious People Branded As Less Intelligent Than Atheists In Provocative New Study

Do you think this study has any real merit? What about other factors? Is one's belief (or lack thereof) a real correlation to one's intelligence?

Personally, we can talk about averages as much as we want, and averages may be great for statistics, but the truth is that there are dumb theists and intelligent atheists; conversely, there are intelligent theists and dumb atheists. People's intelligence (whatever that may be) have many attributing factors and are not just affected by one's beliefs (if one's beliefs can actually be a factor).

I just wonder why such a study was made? What does it prove? What does it do, besides create more divide between believers and non-believers? What will happen when Redditors get a hold of it? There will be chaos! *sarcasm*

Well...it wasn't a study. Not really. It's a meta study, looking at 63 studies previously performed, and trying to draw out conclusions based on them. So, whatever the reasoning, it's occurred 63 times, at least. 64 if you count the meta-study.

My best guess, without trying to look at the detail beneath the conclusions, is that this is of pretty limited use. But I would be interested in correllations between religiousosity (I'm just making words up here) and socio-economic and/or educational levels.

But my gut reaction with anything comparing intelligence is to be pretty cautious on how they're determining intelligence to start with. It is not simple, in any way shape or form, and our ideas of intelligence have changed a lot in a hundred years (the first study was 1928 or something...)

 

[ratikala]

So here is an article in which there is a study that concludes atheists, on average, are more intelligent than religious people. Not on an individual basis, but in general.

Religious People Branded As Less Intelligent Than Atheists In Provocative New Study

Do you think this study has any real merit? What about other factors? Is one's belief (or lack thereof) a real correlation to one's intelligence?

Personally, we can talk about averages as much as we want, and averages may be great for statistics, but the truth is that there are dumb theists and intelligent atheists; conversely, there are intelligent theists and dumb atheists. People's intelligence (whatever that may be) have many attributing factors and are not just affected by one's beliefs (if one's beliefs can actually be a factor).

I just wonder why such a study was made? What does it prove? What does it do, besides create more divide between believers and non-believers? What will happen when Redditors get a hold of it? There will be chaos! *sarcasm*

Oh , how sad , to think so calld inteligent people waste time and money on carying out such surveys ???

''a real correlation to one's intelligence?''
impossible as their notion of inteligence can only be based upon their own limited understanding

''Do you think this study has any real merit?''
none what so ever

''I just wonder why such a study was made?
I immagine as is ususl some highly inteligent person wanted to justify their existence and walk away with a pay cheque for doing so
''What does it prove? ''
it proves that the person or persons writing it were just about inteligent enough to find some facts and figures that backed up their arquement , but unfortunately they were not inteligent enough to see the limited nature of such an exercise .

of course you are right to say that there are as many highly inteligent theists as there are atheists , .....we must consider also that many they woild deem to be theists or men and woman of faith who come from simple backgrounds , often their religion and beleifs are culturaly based and have not had the opertunity of the education many in the west have been fortunate enough to receive . on the other hand there are many atheists who are equaly culturaly conditioned in their beleifs despite their higher levels of education .

from where I stand there are many atheists who do not look beyond their culturaly conditioned norm , which strikes me as rather uninteligent !

''Is one's belief (or lack thereof) a real correlation to one's intelligence?''

it would very much depend upon whos conception of inteligence we are measuring this by ?

 

[InformedIgnorance]

How does one measure 'dumbness'? Personally I would suggest that the use of an IQ score to establish such a measure of intelligence is limited indeed.

I would however note something about theism which may impede certain kinds of knowledge acquisition - many theists embrace fideism combined with a cyncicism of sources of knowledge that might seem at times even slightly inconsistent with theistic claims, leading to a rejection of scientific (or some philosophies etc) domains of knowledge. Rather than being 'dumber' those who think in such a way may be less informed about certain subjects, engage in cognitive compartmentalisation (or else are irrational) leading to limitations on critical examination and therefore be less likely to recognise fallacies that they may have unknowingly engaged in, such as confirmatory bias etc.

Additionally this effect is compounded by a society which is similarly predisposed; theistic interference over education for example is one of the clearest areas where it can be observed that the societal acceptance of fideistic principles may lead to a direct attempt to reduce or impede individual's access to other sources of information, where there is a perceived conflict with theistic claims. For an individual, it would be more difficult to remain ignorant of this domain of knowledge were they not enabled through societal controls to systematically mitigate that which appears in conflict with theistic claims.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

of course you are right to say that there are as many highly inteligent theists as there are atheists

Actually, I doubt that. There are too many theists as compared to atheists. Most likely there are more intelligent theists in the world than atheists. I think all StarryNS said was that there are both intelligent atheists and theists, and unintelligent atheists and theists. Which I would agree with.

, .....we must consider also that many they woild deem to be theists or men and woman of faith who come from simple backgrounds , often their religion and beleifs are culturaly based and have not had the opertunity of the education many in the west have been fortunate enough to receive

Good point

. on the other hand there are many atheists who are equaly culturaly conditioned in their beleifs despite their higher levels of education .
from where I stand there are many atheists who do not look beyond their culturaly conditioned norm , which strikes me as rather uninteligent !

Hmm...I'm not disagreeing at this point, since I'm not sure exactly what you mean. Could you explain?

But I think your summary about how intelligence is being measured, and who's version of intelligence this is is completely relevant.

 

[Galen.Iksnudnard]

Somehow I'm not surprised.

However I do have to say that the degree of religiosity matters. There's a huge difference between someone who lives in a Unabomber-style shack in the backwoods and who thinks the world is 6,000 years old and your average suburbanite churchgoer.

 

[LegionOnomaMoi]

Do you think this study has any real merit?

No.

Geoffrey Aguirre is one of the few who has not only done a lot neuroscience research, but has also contributed to the development of methods and criticism of methods used, mostly in the technical literature but also in one article for the public: "The Political Brain". It's on this kind of study, i.e., one which makes claims about conservatives using neuroimaging. He even links to some important articles also for the non-specialists such as "Mind Games: How not to mix politics and science" (Nature).

However, for those who are more visual learners, he also was part of a Upenn neuroethics collaborative, and his talk on the problems with neuroimaging and what researchers claim vs. what they actually can claim as well as how fMRI works is available on youtube:
[youtube]iSSiN5OrRig[/youtube]

Personally, we can talk about averages as much as we want, and averages may be great for statistics

Actually averages are easier to manipulate than the median. Averages are incredibly sensitive to outliers. If you were restricted to only 2 out of the 3 measures of central tendency, choose median and mode.

I just wonder why such a study was made?

For the same reason studies were made showing that people who weren't white and who didn't have a high SES were made. Real research is hard to get published. Sensationalist crap is much easier to create and slip through peer-review.

 

[The Etheric Adjustment]

I do not think it is about whether you are a theist or an atheist. It is more about if you are easily manipulated or not. Many religions use fear to attract followers. People that are easily manipulated will often fall into the trap. This does not mean that there are no independent and intelligent followers of religions like these.

 

[LegionOnomaMoi]

Somehow I'm not surprised.

Probably because you aren't keeping up with cognitive science and neuroscience research and research problems.

However I do have to say that the degree of religiosity matters

It doesn't.

There's a huge difference between someone who lives in a Unabomber-style shack in the backwoods and who thinks the world is 6,000 years old and your average suburbanite churchgoer.

The Unabomber himself was barely religious (spiritual would probably be a better descriptions, but the point is he was about as far from a fundamentalist religious viewpoint as one can be). Yet he was a fundamentalist. It's just that his fundamentalism isn't religiously-based, but was nonetheless ideological fundamentalism.

People with PhDs are just as easily proponents of theories that are based on dogma and ideology as high-school drop-outs who happen to be religious. These studies are just idiotic, flawed, and worthless.

 

[ChristineES]

Actually, I don't believe any these studies has much merit. For one thing, they don't test everyone, they wouldn't be able to. They can only test a limited amount of people. Another thing, what kinds of things are they testing them for: Mathematics, language, history, science, theology, etc? A scientist is going to know more about science. A theologian area of study would be theology.

I also agree there doesn't seem much reason to have such a study.

 

[FranklinMichaelV.3]

Wasn't it measuring the ability to reason? So where they doing it based off of IQ tests?

 

[ChristineES]

Wasn't it measuring the ability to reason? So where they doing it based off of IQ tests?

IQ tests have been under fire for many, many years. I don't take much stalk in the study (even more so) if they are using IQ tests.

 

[FranklinMichaelV.3]

IQ tests have been under fire for many, many years. I don't take much stalk in the study (even more so) if they are using IQ tests.

Well the issue with IQ tests taht I know of is that it does attribute for social inequalities.

However it still stands as a good way of measuring the ability to reason.

It does not cover all the possible other forms of intelligence, emotional, creative, etc.

I am interested in knowing how the defined religious though. Was it just belief in God or belief in all the doctrines attached?

 

[ChristineES]

Well the issue with IQ tests taht I know of is that it does attribute for social inequalities.

However it still stands as a good way of measuring the ability to reason.

It does not cover all the possible other forms of intelligence, emotional, creative, etc.

I am interested in knowing how the defined religious though. Was it just belief in God or belief in all the doctrines attached?

Another issue for me would be who did they test? They would have to have numerous studies with various people of various backgrounds, education, etc.

 

[FranklinMichaelV.3]

Another issue for me would be who did they test? They would have to have numerous studies with various people of various backgrounds, education, etc.

Well it appears that it was done reviewing other studies.

I can see this article working if it is addressing the religious who adhere to strict beliefs (YEC and the like), but I don't think it would apply to those who have a more liberal belief and even to some with more conservative beliefs.