Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

God Makes you stupid

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • God Makes you stupid

    Not my title.

    A psychology researcher has controversially claimed that stupidity is causally linked to how likely people are to believe in God.

    University of Ulster professor Richard Lynn will draw the conclusion in new research due to be published in the journal Intelligence, the Times Higher Education Supplement reports.

    Lynn and his two co-authors argue that average IQ is an excellent predictor of what proportion of the population are true believers, across 137 countries. They also cite surveys of the US Academy of Sciences and UK Royal Academy showing single-digit rates of religious belief among academics.

    That professional skeptics don't believe in a creator is perhaps not all that surprising. Lynn argues, however, that it is their intelligence that directly gives rise to the boffinated classes' non-God-bothering tendencies. He said: "Why should fewer academics believe in God than the general population? I believe it is simply a matter of the IQ. Academics have higher IQs than the general population."

    Lynn pointed out that most children do believe in God, but as their intelligence develops they tend to have doubts or reject religion. Similarly, as average IQ in Western societies increased through the 20th century, so did rates of atheism, he said.

    The researchers' claims of a direct causal link have drawn criticism from others in intelligence research, who argue their conclusions are too simplistic. London Metropolitan University's Dr David Hardman said: "It is very difficult to conduct true experiments that would explicate a causal relationship between IQ and religious belief. Nonetheless, there is evidence from other domains that higher levels of intelligence are associated with a greater ability - or perhaps willingness - to question and overturn strongly felt intuitions."
    Don't know how much more fratching appropriate this could be, but I wanted to see the reaction to this. I know what the reaction in the States would be.

  • #2
    I don't know if it's all about IQs, but I have to agree. It seems that a lot of people who exercise their brains actively, especially in academic pursuits, tend away from religion. It has often been said that religion is a crutch, and a lot of people who aren't very brainy (I don't wanna say dumb, but maybe ignorant is a good word) will turn to a god to make their life okay, to depend upon them to give meaning to their lives. Whereas "smarter" people have a harder time ignoring a lot of the dogma and inherent hypocrisy and logic gaps that are inherent in many religions.

    I won't say that religion makes you ignorant, but it definitely seems that the ignorant are the most fervently religious.

    Comment


    • #3
      Without being able to read the study itself, I can only critique the conclusions the researcher drew. It doesn't seem he adjusted for any outlying factors. "Why should fewer academics believe in God than the general population? I believe it is simply a matter of the IQ. Academics have higher IQs than the general population." There are many other things academics have, like a snooty attitude, more so than the general population; I don't think you can isolate IQ as the sole factor.


      That said, I do think there is some correlation between IQ and religion, especially uncritical religion. I have several intelligent friends who have examined their belief systems critically and rejected some of the tenets, while still maintaining a belief in a higher good. I myself will soon be converting to a religion for the moral concepts, while discarding most of the mystical stuff like the creation story and view of the afterlife. A higher IQ leads you to question things more, and makes it harder to uncritically accept religious tenets. My religious journey started with questioning certain doctrines of my church and never receiving a solid, theological answer for them, and I've seen that theme repeated throughout my adventures in ex-Christianity. I think most of the stereotypical religious people in America are not critical of their faith at all, and I would associate that with a lower intelligence.

      Comment


      • #4
        The researchers' claims of a direct causal link have drawn criticism from others in intelligence research, who argue their conclusions are too simplistic.
        Too simplistic by far.

        What is the criteria for determining quantity and/or quality of religious fervor? Are they using standard IQ tests to measure intelligence despite recent questions as to their value? What sort of research have they actually done?

        They also cite surveys of the US Academy of Sciences and UK Royal Academy showing single-digit rates of religious belief among academics.
        Let's follow their train of thought:

        We hold the following things to be true:
        - We are scientists.
        - We believe ourselves smart.
        - We don't believe in God.

        Ergo:
        - Smart people don't believe in God.

        Anyone familiar with logical fallacies understands the problem here.

        I'll withhold final judgment until their research is actually published, but unless it consists of more than just this kind of stuff, I'm afraid it's pseudo-science.

        Comment


        • #5
          What should also be taken into account is that IQ measurements are very western-oriented. A high IQ is not going to help you to survive in the amazon, for example. IQ is not the be all and end all of intelligence.

          Rapscallion
          Proud to be a W.A.N.K.E.R. - Womanless And No Kids - Exciting Rubbing!
          Reclaiming words is fun!

          Comment


          • #6
            Hear, hear!

            My mother is a MENSA member.

            She had been out of communication with them for some time, and her cousin, who is also a member, invited her to come to one of the meetings with his local group.

            One of the other members of that chapter happend to be a mutual aquaintance, and introduced my mother to several other members this way:

            "Hey everyone, this is Marjorie*. She still believe's in God." :::cue condecending laughter:::

            Mom suddenly remembered just exactly why she'd been out of communication with MENSA for so long. Most of her experiences with them had gone pretty much that way.

            I know they aren't all like that, but enough are that it gives the whole group a bad name.

            IQ is supposed to be a measurement of your POTENTIAL ability to process new information, and learn new things. Seems to me, if you're basing how "cool" you are on that alone, you're not living up to your potential.

            Plus, you're an ass.

            *not her real name.

            Comment


            • #7
              Veering slightly off topic here: I know how your mom feels. MENSA members have got to be the biggest douchebags I've ever met.

              As far as I can tell, my local chapter does nothing but sit around and talk about how smart they are. What's the point of being smart if you don't help others and your community? People who possess the tools to affect change and choose not to do so are utter failures as human beings, IMO.

              (Apologies to anyone who is currently a member of MENSA. I know not everyone can be painted with the same brush. And I'm sure there are better chapters out there; I'm just not familiar with them.)

              Back on topic: I have a feeling that these scientists are like those fervent atheists we've all come across. It's not enough that they don't believe in God; they need to feel intellectually superior about it. And they want you to know it.

              I'll bet they're a real hoot at cocktail parties.

              Comment


              • #8
                What I noticed about the bit pasted was the criss-cross back and forth between 'religion' and 'belief in God', as though the 2 are identical.

                It's quite possible to have a belief or faith in some sort of creator type being, without choosing to subscribe to any particular religion.

                If your IQ increases, you may be more likely to start asking questions that your religion isn't going to be able to answer effectively ("Hey Mr Priest - what are those dinosaur bones doing from 200 Million years ago, when the Earth is only 6000 years old??"). If that happens, and you can't come to a comfortable compatibility (myth vs science), then you may well reject the religion. But that doesn't mean that the whole idea of a god will just up and vanish in a puff of logical smoke. I suspect, therefore, that those high IQ people haven't quite drawn that distinction...


                As for the Mensa crowd... all you need to ask is "Prove it!" After all, if they're so damn smart, they should be able to (and then remind them... lack of evidence isn't proof against). But I'm a narky bastard


                Slyt
                ZOE: Preacher, don't the Bible got some pretty specific things to say about killing?

                SHEPHERD BOOK: Quite specific. It is, however, Somewhat fuzzier on the subject of kneecaps.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Slytovhand View Post
                  As for the Mensa crowd... all you need to ask is "Prove it!" After all, if they're so damn smart, they should be able to (and then remind them... lack of evidence isn't proof against). But I'm a narky bastard
                  They'd probably point out that logically speaking, the onus is on the person proving the positive, not the person proving the negative. Thus it is for you to prove the existence of god, not for them to prove the non-existence. Basic scientific method. And lack of evidence isn't proof FOR either.


                  Sorry, pet peeve, I hate that little circular logic fallacy.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    No, I wasn't being circular, I was being a pedantic little shit in the face of someone 'smarter' than me, because I choose to believe something for which they can't disprove, nor offer up decent arguments against either.

                    So, if they were going to ridicule someone for their 'faith', as they are supposedly atheistis, then they'd have to come up with convincing 'evidence' for their lack of faith. Not just some good reasons, nor good arguments - but convincing evidence. IF not, then they don't have much 'reason' to go belittling someone for believing something which still fits the bigger picture.

                    So, normally, yes, one should be 'proving' the positive. But in this case, they're trying to insult someone. Thus my comment on 'Prove it!'. If those believers (of whatever faith) were trying to go head for head with those Mensa people, then yes, the onus changes. Lyra's ""Hey everyone, this is Marjorie*. She still believe's in God." :::cue condecending laughter:::" wasn't an example of that, but a veiled insult.




                    Slyt
                    ZOE: Preacher, don't the Bible got some pretty specific things to say about killing?

                    SHEPHERD BOOK: Quite specific. It is, however, Somewhat fuzzier on the subject of kneecaps.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      I believe (ha!) that religion fulfills several basic needs of humanity, and that those needs do vary according to a combination of how intelligent one is, and how much intellectual work you want/choose to do in specific fields.

                      (NOTE: this is NOT 'how intellectually lazy' you are. A person whose intellectual time is spent on a different pursuit may not have brain-time to spend on something he or she considers less important.)

                      So. Needs that religion fulfills:

                      - Spiritual wholeness.
                      This is a really difficult one to describe, but many (maybe most) people who reach fairly high levels in Maslow's hierarchy of needs end up needing a kind of quasi-emotional, quasi-intellectual 'togetherness' of personality. Names for this include 'soul' and 'spirituality' and 'self-actualization'.
                      Religion is really good at filling this need. Some people can fill it with intellectual pursuits, some with abstract philosophies, but religions or spiritualities seem to be effective for more people than philosophies or intellectual pursuits are.

                      - Mental health.
                      Religious ministers/rabbis/pastors/shaman/wise-women were the original psychologists and psychiatrists, and for those mental health conditions which are not anatomical or physiological faults, religious practices can be extremely helpful. Religious practices are also excellent for normal 'abnormal' mental conditions, such as grieving.
                      For example, the Jewish tradition of Shiva is a very effective form of grief management. Another example is the use of the Catholic rosary or the mandalas of several Indian and Asian faiths in meditation; and the practice of meditation at all.

                      - Community.
                      Religion gives you a place to 'belong' and people to 'belong' with. This is extremely powerful - belonging to a group is a major human need.

                      - Rules/Ethics/Morals.
                      Children need firm rules - I don't think anyone here will disagree with that. Children grow best when they know what they are and aren't allowed to do. Don't cross the street without an adult. Don't pull on the cat's tail. Don't chop your brother's fingers off with the kitchen knife.
                      Teenagers need to rebel against rules, and have that rebellion curbed for some rules while others relax. But they still need some sort of guideline. They can cross the street now, but pulling the cat's tail of chopping their brother's fingers off are still forbidden.

                      Adults - well, some adults still need rules. Others are happier looking for the reasons behind rules, and making up their own rules or guidelines. Most are somewhere between the two. Religion gives rules to those adults who want or need some external authority to say 'this is what you do'.

                      Tevye, the main character in Fiddler on the Roof, exemplifies someone who is moving from 'obeying his religion in all things' to a more questioning form of life. If you look at him in the start of Fiddler, he's emotionally secure and happy - although occasionally resentful of his relative poverty - living the life that his religion dictates.

                      Defining your own rules is a lot of intellectual work! And just to make it even harder, the results are usually very similar to the rules of at least one of the major world religions anyway. So it can seem to be pointless work (though it can have 'self-actualisation' or 'spiritual' rewards).

                      However, many religions have a place for both types of people. In some religions, 'bible study' or its equivalent is a time and place for questioning the rules. Or particular people, or people in a particular stage of life, are designated as people to question the religion's rules.

                      Still, one way or the other, Religion provides a framework within which people can live their lives; and a thing to point to, to say 'See? I'm a good person.' Many people greatly value that.


                      If academics have a lower percentage of religious members than other sections of society, this may be because academia not just values, but requires, the kind of intellectual work that fills some of the same needs as religion does. And as for community: academia is itself a community.
                      Last edited by Seshat; 06-15-2008, 08:44 PM.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by anriana View Post
                        There are many other things academics have, like a snooty attitude, more so than the general population; I don't think you can isolate IQ as the sole factor.
                        Snooty? I could say that about the academic community, however, I can also say it about the religious community. If you ride around with a bumper sticker that says, "April 1st is national Atheist day" you're just as snooty.

                        I think that telling everyone that you "know" that they're going to hell because they aren't saved is snooty. No one knows what happens when you die. You can have faith in whatever you think it may be, but saying that you know for a fact(as so many of them do) is far snootier than any non-believer.

                        Not saying that you do any of this, but the "snooty" comment is not appreciated.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by the_std View Post
                          I won't say that religion makes you ignorant, but it definitely seems that the ignorant are the most fervently religious.
                          That is too true. My thing is that the Bible/Quran etc. tends to be taken way out of context. Those scriptures were made to enrich and enlighten your life in a good way, like being modest, honoring and cherishing your spouse and family and goodwill towards fellow man.
                          Last edited by tropicsgoddess; 07-17-2008, 11:15 PM.
                          There are no stupid questions, just stupid people...

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by the_std View Post
                            I won't say that religion makes you ignorant, but it definitely seems that the ignorant are the most fervently religious.
                            Reminds me of a saying I heard about conservatives...

                            "Not all conservatives are stupid, but stupid people tend to be conservative."

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              The topic might be a bit blunt, but there does seem to be a cause and effect where the more religious someone is, the more they turn their brains off and leave everything up to God/Allah/whatever instead of living their own lives.

                              All the things one can enjoy in life and in the world, yet the ones who claim to be closest to their chosen higher power tend to cut themselves off from most things because their holy books tell them so.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X