IQ and Religiosity

[JBeukema]

There are plenty of Religion vs IQ by country statistics out there. Unfortunately its easy to poke holes in IQ tests when administered across cultures. To add something new to the evidence:

Congratulations Mississippi, you're the least intelligent AND most religious state!

State IQ compared with % answering Yes to "Is religion an important part of your daily life?":



State IQ statistics from McDaniel Estimating State IQ
Religious importance statistics from Gallop - State of the States:

 

[JBeukema]

Conclusion

The consensus here is clear: more intelligent people tend not to believe in religion. And this observation is given added force when you consider that the above studies span a broad range of time, subjects and methodologies, and yet arrive at the same conclusion.

This is the result even when the researchers are Christian conservatives themselves. One such researcher is George Gallup. Here are the results of a Fall 1995 Gallup poll: Percentage of respondents who agreed with the following statements:

Religion is Religion can
"very important "answer all or most
Respondents in their life" of today's problems"
------------------------------------------------------------
Attended college 53 percent 58 percent
No college 63 65

Income over $50,000 48 56
$30,000 - $50,000 56 62
$20,000 - $30,000 56 60
Under $20,000 66 66 Why does this correlation exist? The first answer that comes to mind is that religious beliefs tend to be more illogical or incoherent than secular beliefs, and intelligent people tend to recognize that more quickly. But this explanation will surely be rejected by religious people, who will seek other explanations and rationalizations.

A possible counter-argument is that intelligent people tend to be more successful than others. The lure of worldly success and materialism draws many of these intellectually gifted individuals away from God. After all, who needs God when you (apparently) are making it on your own?

However, this argument does not withstand closer scrutiny. Most of the studies outlined above describe the religious attitudes of students, who have yet to enter the working world, much less succeed in it. Some might then argue that the most intelligent students are nonetheless succeeding in school. But "success" in school (for those who may have forgotten!) is more measured in terms of popularity, sports, physical attractiveness, personality, clothes, etc. Grades are but one of many measures of success in a young person's life -- one that is increasingly becoming less important, as many social critics point out.

The simplest and most parsimonious explanation is that religion is a set of logical and factual claims, and those with the most logic and facts at their disposal are rejecting it largely on those grounds.

Intelligent people tend to be more religious.

 

[editec]

At least as interesting is the obvious NORTH SOUTH difference in IQ and religiosity outcomes, too.

The correlation isn't quite so pronounced but it's fairly obvious, isn't it?

I'd love to see this done as an median IQ to median latitude graph.

 

[sidneyworld]

Conclusion

The consensus here is clear: more intelligent people tend not to believe in religion. And this observation is given added force when you consider that the above studies span a broad range of time, subjects and methodologies, and yet arrive at the same conclusion.

This is the result even when the researchers are Christian conservatives themselves. One such researcher is George Gallup. Here are the results of a Fall 1995 Gallup poll: Percentage of respondents who agreed with the following statements:

Religion is Religion can
"very important "answer all or most
Respondents in their life" of today's problems"
------------------------------------------------------------
Attended college 53 percent 58 percent
No college 63 65

Income over $50,000 48 56
$30,000 - $50,000 56 62
$20,000 - $30,000 56 60
Under $20,000 66 66 Why does this correlation exist? The first answer that comes to mind is that religious beliefs tend to be more illogical or incoherent than secular beliefs, and intelligent people tend to recognize that more quickly. But this explanation will surely be rejected by religious people, who will seek other explanations and rationalizations.

A possible counter-argument is that intelligent people tend to be more successful than others. The lure of worldly success and materialism draws many of these intellectually gifted individuals away from God. After all, who needs God when you (apparently) are making it on your own?

However, this argument does not withstand closer scrutiny. Most of the studies outlined above describe the religious attitudes of students, who have yet to enter the working world, much less succeed in it. Some might then argue that the most intelligent students are nonetheless succeeding in school. But "success" in school (for those who may have forgotten!) is more measured in terms of popularity, sports, physical attractiveness, personality, clothes, etc. Grades are but one of many measures of success in a young person's life -- one that is increasingly becoming less important, as many social critics point out.

The simplest and most parsimonious explanation is that religion is a set of logical and factual claims, and those with the most logic and facts at their disposal are rejecting it largely on those grounds.

Intelligent people tend to be more religious.

True faith is a very private matter. Religion is a very public practice. This is what separates the follower from the leader. Not to say that those who practice religion and keep to its cannons and observances are insincere or ignorant, but many people can be pursuaded to allow others to think for them. At some point they begin to understand what they are being motivated to believe and it's at that point, hopefully, where an assessment can be made as to the legitimacy and viability of such a practice.

I actually agree that the more well rounded, educated person is not easily drawn into endorsing various ideologies, no less completely embracing them. Especially on matters of blind faith and religion. But intelligence has less to do with this than experience. To understand religion and faith you have to understand human nature and have questioned your own existence which is likely that 90% of the entire population of the planet has done at some point in their lives. This is where mankind reaches beyond conventional intelligence.

It is completely illogical to discount the spiritual realm of our existence. It is far more ignorant to conclude that there is no life on other planets, or that the Bible is a complete fabrication, or even that we evolved from apes, or that life began by a big bang theory because none of this can be positively evidenced. And like everything else, the burden of proof lies on the doubter, the skeptic, not the believer.

The bottom line here is that there is a greater value in believing in the possibility of something, than to completely discount things which are difficult if not impossible to explain no matter how advanced science believes it has become. This perspective on life is far more intelligent than placing theories in a box essentially grounding mankind to potentially greater discovery.

Anne Marie

 

[JBeukema]

I actually agree that the more well rounded, educated person is not easily drawn into endorsing... blind faith and religion.

For once, you have said something smart

It is completely illogical to discount the spiritual realm of our existence

Incorrect. It is logical to deny any such thing exists, based on the lack of conclusive evidence supporting the hypothesis thtany such thing exists.

. It is far more ignorant to conclude that there is no life on other planets,

It is perfectly logical to conclude that there is no conclusive evidence for life currently living on another planet

or that the Bible is a complete fabrication,

Hitorical fiction, actually

or even that we evolved from apes,

Humans didn't evolve from apes. Human are apes. In fact, we're great apes.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GpNeGuuuvTY&feature=PlayList&p=019F146277A3EDFD&index=0&playnext=1"]Here, Don will gonover the basics for you[/ame]

or that life began by a big bang theory

Noone said that a theory caused life

Nor does TBBT address the beginnings of life

Big Bang - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

because none of this can be positively evidenced.

All available evidence supports these models

And like everything else, the burden of proof lies on the doubter, the skeptic, not the believer.

Wrong. Like everything else, the burden of proof rests with the person making the assertion or contradicting established scientific principles. This is a very basic principle when it comes to logical, intelligent discussion.

 

[ABikerSailor]

Actually, I kinda think that because humans are herd animals, the reason that the scores are so low, is because the education system in the lower areas SUCKS. What I'd learned in 6th grade in Montana, my ex wife learned in 11th in Tennessee.

And........because we're herd animals, as well as the fact that we always also look for the easier way, that is how the religion sucks you in.

Me? I've got a decent education, and a fairly high IQ, but.......I still believe in God.

 

[Big Black Dog]

I'm not sure that I agree with your research (sic). Way back when I was just getting by making $77.00 every two weeks in the military I believed in God. Today, I am retired, college educated, and still have an income of close to $200,000 a year and my belief in God remains. I must be the exception, huh?

 

[sidneyworld]

I actually agree that the more well rounded, educated person is not easily drawn into endorsing... blind faith and religion.

For once, you have said something smart

Quote:
It is completely illogical to discount the spiritual realm of our existence
Incorrect. It is logical to deny any such thing exists, based on the lack of conclusive evidence supporting the hypothesis that such thing exists.


JB,

Criminals have gotten away with murder, in fact, mass murder for lack of "conclusive evidence." as a matter of law, until such time that they made a mistake in covereing their tracks. Countless serial killers were questioned and released at some point earlier in their respective careers (lol).

But in the legal system, JB, I agree that a due process cannot be compromised because the element of falibility all to often is high in determining the guilt or innocence of an individual based on circumstantial evidence.

But this is not about assessing the viability of criminal activity. It's about searching beyond the box in terms our existence. One could easily argue that folks have been brainwashed into believing the head of a congregation to their deaths, (Jim Jones) But usually these are not common events in history. The Crusades were demonstration of ultimate power and tyranny, not God. The Inquisition, the Salem Slaughter, which by the way started in Europe over the same issue of presumed satanic possession of completely innocent people. All these things would certainly bonefie the circumvention of the practice of genuine faith to the recruitment and exercise of pure evil and ignorance, in the name of God. But God had nothing to do with this. Only the man made imposition of power at whatever cost, hiding being a cloak of piety. It's complete bullshit.

Anne Marie

 

[JBeukema]

JB,

Criminals have gotten away with murder, in fact, mass murder for lack of "conclusive evidence." as a matter of law,

And innumerable people have been spared wrongful persecution because evidence was demanded

But this is not about assessing the viability of criminal activity

Why are you babbling about the legal system?

. It's about searching beyond the box in terms our existence. One could easily argue that folks have been brainwashed into believing the head of a congregation to their deaths, (Jim Jones) But usually these are not common events in history.

I cite every religion as evidence against your claim

The Crusades were demonstration of ultimate power and tyranny, not God.

Your god is power and tyranny

The Inquisition, the Salem Slaughter, which by the way started in Europe over the same issue of presumed satanic possession of completely innocent people.

thanks to ignorance and religion

If there's a point to your rambling, it's hidden pretty well.

 

[ABikerSailor]

You know Butt Sniffer, you are as adamant that God doesn't exist as the Christians are that He does!

Whodathunkit? A radical atheist spreading the word of science!

If we believe in God, does that mean that you'll try to have us executed like the Muslims do with the gays?

 

[sidneyworld]

JB,

Criminals have gotten away with murder, in fact, mass murder for lack of "conclusive evidence." as a matter of law,

And innumerable people have been spared wrongful persecution because evidence was demanded

But this is not about assessing the viability of criminal activity

Why are you babbling about the legal system?



I cite every religion as evidence against your claim

The Crusades were demonstration of ultimate power and tyranny, not God.

Your god is power and tyranny

The Inquisition, the Salem Slaughter, which by the way started in Europe over the same issue of presumed satanic possession of completely innocent people.

thanks to ignorance and religion

If there's a point to your rambling, it's hidden pretty well.

Again, you are only partially quoting me.

This is what I said in total: "Criminals have gotten away with murder, in fact, mass murder for lack of "conclusive evidence." as a matter of law, until such time that they made a mistake in covereing their tracks. Countless serial killers were questioned and released at some point earlier in their respective careers (lol).

But in the legal system, JB, I agree that a due process cannot be compromised because the element of falibility all to often is high in determining the guilt or innocence of an individual based on circumstantial evidence."

Due process is an important aspect of any criminal trial because without this, innocent people can also be successfully prosecuted. Hard evidence is absolutely essential in these cases. But it does not apply to matters of spirituality. I am bringing up the process of law because you did when you said "... conclusive evidence."

Anne Marie

 

[JBeukema]

It's not 'due process', you twit. It's logic and reasoning.

 

[sidneyworld]

It's not 'due process', you twit. It's logic and reasoning.

Oh brother, I don't think we'll ever be on the same page in the same book, ever.

Have a great night, JB.

Anne Marie

 

[Avatar4321]

I have to ask, how do you determine how religious a place is? All religions are different. There would be no single standard to judge them all.

Are people religious because they go to church? or do you measure it by whether they actually live their faith? I know tons of people who go to Church who arent religious in the least. I know tons of religious people who dont go to Church.

I also am not convinced that IQ is a really good measurement of Intelligence. I know alot of people who have high IQs who are totally stupid on a number of important matters. Ive got a high IQ. It means absolutely nothing to me because I am more than aware of what I am stupid on. I know where my strengths are. I remember random facts from history, does that make me intelligent? No. (Not saying Im not intelligent, just saying I dont believe passing or failing a test makes you intelligent or stupid). And what kind of intelligence are we talking about? Some people are intelligent analytically but are stupid socially. Some are the opposite. Some people have great memories, but no clue how to apply them. Some people know alot about things that simply arent true.

I think accepting this graph with the premises at face value is simply a way to poison the well and attack people who have faith without ever bothering to get down to the facts of individual faith. You can generalize religion all you want. But until you understand what someone believes and why they believe it, you are really in no position to judge their belief as invalid or stupid. Maybe you want to justify your own disbelief. If this does it for you fine, but I think using this as an excuse not to believe seems rather silly.

 

[JBeukema]

I have to ask, how do you determine how religious a place is?

They asked them to describe how important religion is to them and how certain they are that deity does or does not exist, using a standard gradient scale

I also am not convinced that IQ is a really good measurement of Intelligence. I know alot of people who have high IQs who are totally stupid on a number of important matters.

IQ measures neither education nor 'wisdom'. When discussing IQ, it is usually the G Factor being discussed.

 

[KittenKoder]

The truly odd thing is that people actually think you can "learn" IQ ... LOL ... no, schooling has little effect on IQ but a high IQ can help once out of school. IQ isn't knowledge, it's knowing how to use knowledge once you have it. Schools give you only knowledge, IQ is learned by real world experience not books. Culture can have a huge influence on IQ, and often, as Sydney said I believe, those who have personal religious beliefs tend to also have higher IQs because they are not blindly following what someone else offers, same with science, those who simply state and recite facts have low IQs while those who look beyond the facts and information to come to their own conclusions like Einstein have higher IQs.

 

[JBeukema]

The truly odd thing is that people actually think you can "learn" IQ ... LOL ... no, schooling has little effect on IQ but a high IQ can help once out of school. IQ isn't knowledge, it's knowing how to use knowledge once you have it.

IQ also concerns the ability to learn and develop new solutions to problems given.

Schools give you only knowledge, IQ is learned by real world experience not books.

You're confusing IQ with wisdom

those who have personal religious beliefs tend to also have higher IQs

Your evidence? I have cited evidence to the contrary from multiple studies across this board. You cannot refute that with merely your wishful thinking.

because they are not blindly following what someone else offer

You have that backwards, KK

You reach your won conclusions by ignoring the evidence because you are a fool.

 

[KittenKoder]

The truly odd thing is that people actually think you can "learn" IQ ... LOL ... no, schooling has little effect on IQ but a high IQ can help once out of school. IQ isn't knowledge, it's knowing how to use knowledge once you have it.

IQ also concerns the ability to learn and develop new solutions to problems given.

Schools give you only knowledge, IQ is learned by real world experience not books.

You're confusing IQ with wisdom

those who have personal religious beliefs tend to also have higher IQs

Your evidence? I have cited evidence to the contrary from multiple studies across this board. You cannot refute that with merely your wishful thinking.

because they are not blindly following what someone else offer

You have that backwards, KK

You reach your won conclusions by ignoring the evidence because you are a fool.

Your IQ is pretty low isn't it? ... maybe 150 at most, average I know, but very low IMO.

Basically you are making the assertion that those who follow what is told them by others blindly and without question have higher IQs ... which is pretty stupid.

 

[JBeukema]

Actually, that's what you are asserting by claiming that religiosity has a positive correlation with IQ- something easily refuted by referring you back to the OP.

Those w/ high IQs are better able to realize that a given dogma (including religion) is bullshit. Thus, they tend to reject it. I have shown this in several threads. Either cite research producing refuting evidence or stfu.

 

[KittenKoder]

Actually, that's what you are asserting by claiming that religiosity has a positive correlation with IQ- something easily refuted by referring you back to the OP.

Those w/ high IQs are better able to realize that a given dogma (including religion) is bullshit. Thus, they tend to reject it. I have shown this in several threads. Either cite research producing refuting evidence or stfu.

Actually ... just because the "facts" agree with you doesn't make them fact ...

Fact is, people with higher IQs do not follow the crowd, period, whether speaking religiously or scientifically. It's contradictory to thinking. You are no better than those idiots who go to a church all the time and just recite what their preachers tell them, your preachers are just scientists. Until you learn to think beyond the box (use the rainbow to life analogy that went WAY over your head for a great example of not being able to) your "true IQ" is actually much lower than you think. Memorizing information and "facts" does not make you smart, it makes you an encyclopedia and nothing more.