Religious people less intelligent than atheists?

[percysunshine]

In general, religious beliefs lack even simple logic, let alone philosophical or scientific coherence.

.

Yeah, It is completely irrational not to covet my neighbors wife...even if he does have a .357 Magnum ... wait...I am having an epiphany....

 

[daveman]

prem·ise
a basis, stated or assumed, on which reasoning proceeds.

I was going to suggest that many of the studies were biased in the first place, but your quote already admits it. So thanks for pointing it out and saving me the trouble of suggesting it and then having to "prove it."

Imagine that -- progressive "science" that starts out with the conclusion then finds data to fit it.

yes a huge number of those studies have problems with bias. one of the major problem is the assumption that religion is primitive superstition and thus any from of a more sophisticated or liberal theology is screened out. So liberal theology types can have off scale IQ and they wont count it as intelligent religious people.

another bias is how they defined non religious.

Thank you for illustrating that the studies are worthless, except as birdcage liner.

 

[daveman]

It is philosophically astute to doubt that the Sun will rise tomorrow, but for practical purposes such doubt would be superfluous and a waste of time.

Similarly here.

Sphaerus, the Stoic, said to Ptolemy Philopator, king of Egypt: "A wise man always knows. He never holds mere opinions and so is never misled." The king had waxen pomegranates made and placed them in a bowl at a banquet. When Sphaerus took one of them, the king pounced and cried, "Aha! You see, you have given your assent to a misleading presentation." "Not at all," said Sphaerus, unperturbed. "I did not assent to the proposition that they were real pomegranates, but to the proposition that there was a reasonable probability that they were real pomegranates."
---Diogenes Laertius

.

In other words, you're frantically backpedaling.

I'm curious...what is it about progressives that gives them a vastly overblown sense of self-worth? Most of you are too stupid to pour piss out of a boot -- after you've pissed in it.

Progressivism is the politics of the stupid and emotional. History proves this beyond all doubt.

But you can't be a progressive without completely ignoring history.

Ranting about politics in a thread on an empirical study is historical and emotional.

this thread needs focus. the IQ study has nothing to do with politics. calling people names becuase they agree with your politics is also hysterical and emotional.

In case you haven't noticed, you don't get to dictate thread content.

I'll give you a moment to deal with the shock.

 

[daveman]

atheists are not reading the study they are reading the head line and doing victory dances without understanding what the study really says.

...which ALSO proves the study is worthless.

 

[daveman]

conservatism is a mental disorder.

what is this thing about little negative phrases. "meatcrock jumps out of basement windows." why don't you jump out of a 12 story window?

"this thread needs focus. the IQ study has nothing to do with politics. calling people names becuase they agree with your politics is also hysterical and emotional."

Hypocrite.

 

[Metacrock]

Imagine that -- progressive "science" that starts out with the conclusion then finds data to fit it.

yes a huge number of those studies have problems with bias. one of the major problem is the assumption that religion is primitive superstition and thus any from of a more sophisticated or liberal theology is screened out. So liberal theology types can have off scale IQ and they wont count it as intelligent religious people.

another bias is how they defined non religious.

Thank you for illustrating that the studies are worthless, except as birdcage liner.

not all of them. most of the studies done between 1960 and 1999 were good, they found that there's no correlation between religion and intelligence. The reason we went back to bad studies is because certain people who were evangelists for the new atheist movement began doing meta analysis of other people's data and publishing it as studies. Those same people are connected to racist propaganda, and ideas like the bell curve.

The thing is there several good studies showing no correlation that are not used in the Zuckerman study.

 

[Metacrock]

In other words, you're frantically backpedaling.

I'm curious...what is it about progressives that gives them a vastly overblown sense of self-worth? Most of you are too stupid to pour piss out of a boot -- after you've pissed in it.

Progressivism is the politics of the stupid and emotional. History proves this beyond all doubt.

But you can't be a progressive without completely ignoring history.

Ranting about politics in a thread on an empirical study is historical and emotional.

this thread needs focus. the IQ study has nothing to do with politics. calling people names becuase they agree with your politics is also hysterical and emotional.

In case you haven't noticed, you don't get to dictate thread content.

I'll give you a moment to deal with the shock.

In case you haven't noticed it it's a public board and I'm taking part in the thread. The title of the thread dictates the subject matter. sorry you never learned about reading. that's the way it works. that's what titles are for.

 

[daveman]

yes a huge number of those studies have problems with bias. one of the major problem is the assumption that religion is primitive superstition and thus any from of a more sophisticated or liberal theology is screened out. So liberal theology types can have off scale IQ and they wont count it as intelligent religious people.

another bias is how they defined non religious.

Thank you for illustrating that the studies are worthless, except as birdcage liner.

not all of them. most of the studies done between 1960 and 1999 were good, they found that there's no correlation between religion and intelligence. The reason we went back to bad studies is because certain people who were evangelists for the new atheist movement began doing meta analysis of other people's data and publishing it as studies. Those same people are connected to racist propaganda, and ideas like the bell curve.

The thing is there several good studies showing no correlation that are not used in the Zuckerman study.

You last statement proves my original point: They started with the conclusion, then went looking for the data.

That's not science.

 

[daveman]

Ranting about politics in a thread on an empirical study is historical and emotional.

this thread needs focus. the IQ study has nothing to do with politics. calling people names becuase they agree with your politics is also hysterical and emotional.

In case you haven't noticed, you don't get to dictate thread content.

I'll give you a moment to deal with the shock.

In case you haven't noticed it it's a public board and I'm taking part in the thread. The title of the thread dictates the subject matter. sorry you never learned about reading. that's the way it works. that's what titles are for.

So, I see you've escalated from pouting to stamping your feet. Let me know how that works out for you.

 

[Metacrock]

My critique of Zuckerman's IQ study can be found here.


I urge those who care to read it.

 

[Metacrock]

In case you haven't noticed, you don't get to dictate thread content.

I'll give you a moment to deal with the shock.

In case you haven't noticed it it's a public board and I'm taking part in the thread. The title of the thread dictates the subject matter. sorry you never learned about reading. that's the way it works. that's what titles are for.

So, I see you've escalated from pouting to stamping your feet. Let me know how that works out for you.

sorry little man, using cleche's does not make you cleaver. you have to actualy make it fit the situation. when you learn to read and read some books give me a call. I can't give you the education you've missed just to hold a conversation.

 

[chikenwing]

Religious People Are Less Intelligent Than Atheists, Concludes New Study

A review of 63 scientific studies dating back to 1928 has concluded that religious people are less intelligent than non-believers.

Only 10 of the 63 studies showed a positive correlation between intelligence and religiosity.

The paper, entitled The Relation Between Intelligence and Religiosity: A Meta-Analysis and Some Proposed Explanations, was led by Professor Miron Zuckerman of the University of Rochester, and was published in the academic journal Personality and Social Psychology Review on 6 August. ...

... Zuckerman’s team studied decades worth of analysis, noting many atheism and intellect studies “share one central theme – the premise that religious beliefs are irrational, not anchored in science, not testable, and therefore unappealing to intelligent people who ‘know better’.”

...Religiosity is defined as involvement in some (or all) facets of religion, which includes belief in the supernatural, offering gifts to this supernatural, and performing rituals affirming their beliefs.

Before you use the lame excuse that it was published in HuffPo (as opposed to dredge, blaze, etc), note that it was first published in Sage:

Sign In

“Intelligent people typically spend more time in school—a form of self-regulation that may yield long-term benefits… More intelligent people get higher level jobs [which] may lead to higher self-esteem, and encourage personal control beliefs… more intelligent people are more likely to get and stay married… though for intelligent people, that too comes later in life. We therefore suggest that as intelligent people move from young adulthood to adulthood and then to middle age, the benefits of intelligence may continue to accrue.”

Whatever, it still seems a little too pat, too easy.

But, well worth reading the entire article.

Well your proof that this line of crap is just that a line of crap.

 

[editec]

Religious people less intelligent than atheists​

How TRULY intelligent is the person whose obvious purpose is merely to insult people that he imagines are dumber than him based on their religious beliefs?

 

[YWN666]

I would agree that atheists are more intelligent than extreme religious fanatics. How is "religious people" defined for this article?

 

[Metacrock]

I would agree that atheists are more intelligent than extreme religious fanatics. How is "religious people" defined for this article?

that's one of the problems I found with it. On the surface I think most would assume there's nothing wrong with it, basically says "people who believe in supernatural beings helping them." I contend that the real meaning of SN is "mystical experience" not magic and miracles and so on. I think that's what they are getting, miracles and magic. thus they might tend not to accept liberal theology and that would lead to exude the highest scoring IQ subjects in the religious column because they don't see liberal theology as religious.

 

[Metacrock]

Religious People Are Less Intelligent Than Atheists, Concludes New Study

A review of 63 scientific studies dating back to 1928 has concluded that religious people are less intelligent than non-believers.

Only 10 of the 63 studies showed a positive correlation between intelligence and religiosity.

The paper, entitled The Relation Between Intelligence and Religiosity: A Meta-Analysis and Some Proposed Explanations, was led by Professor Miron Zuckerman of the University of Rochester, and was published in the academic journal Personality and Social Psychology Review on 6 August. ...

... Zuckerman’s team studied decades worth of analysis, noting many atheism and intellect studies “share one central theme – the premise that religious beliefs are irrational, not anchored in science, not testable, and therefore unappealing to intelligent people who ‘know better’.”

...Religiosity is defined as involvement in some (or all) facets of religion, which includes belief in the supernatural, offering gifts to this supernatural, and performing rituals affirming their beliefs.

Before you use the lame excuse that it was published in HuffPo (as opposed to dredge, blaze, etc), note that it was first published in Sage:

Sign In

“Intelligent people typically spend more time in school—a form of self-regulation that may yield long-term benefits… More intelligent people get higher level jobs [which] may lead to higher self-esteem, and encourage personal control beliefs… more intelligent people are more likely to get and stay married… though for intelligent people, that too comes later in life. We therefore suggest that as intelligent people move from young adulthood to adulthood and then to middle age, the benefits of intelligence may continue to accrue.”

Whatever, it still seems a little too pat, too easy.

But, well worth reading the entire article.

Well your proof that this line of crap is just that a line of crap.

I prefer not to think in simplistic terms like "it's a pile of crap." That's unscientific. There's a lot wrong with the study. read my analysis on Atheistwatch. see part 2 on Wednesday.

 

[asterism]

Most Mensa members are religious.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/relig...re-in-mensa-most-mensa-members-religious.html

 

[L.K.Eder]

I think that's very rude to infer that Obama is not intelligent just because he's a Christian.

You're lying. You don't think its rude at all. But, ignoring your lame ass attempt at sarcasm ...

I have often written that, IMO, its horrifying that any, some, many, most world leaders are getting advice from an imaginary creature.

Yeah we know why you don't want there to be a God... HOMO... because when you die and find out there is, you're ass is going to get worse than rammed by your butt buddy, it's going to burn in HELL.

^great american

 

[Avatar4321]

Religious people less intelligent than atheists​

How TRULY intelligent is the person whose obvious purpose is merely to insult people that he imagines are dumber than him based on their religious beliefs?

I wonder if any of us are as intelligent as we would like to think we are.

We should all take a page from socrates: True wisdom comes in knowing that you know nothing.

Because the simple fact is that no matter how much we learn about the universe around us, there is so much that we just don't know. And often many things we think we know that we have completely wrong.

O that cunning plan of the evil one! O the vainness, and the frailties, and the foolishness of men! When they are learned they think they are wise, and they hearken not unto the counsel of God, for they set it aside, supposing they know of themselves, wherefore, their wisdom is foolishness and it profiteth them not. And they shall perish.

But to be learned is good if they hearken unto the counsels of God. (2 Nephi 9:28-29)

It's why I always encourage people to experiment on the Word so they may learn for themselves from God.

 

[Avatar4321]

I would agree that atheists are more intelligent than extreme religious fanatics. How is "religious people" defined for this article?

How is intelligence being defined? Some define it by looking at advanced degrees. As if pieces of paper delineate intelligence.