Religious belief associated with being dumber?

_{Denyse O'Leary

May 18, 2014

News, Psychology}

Share: Facebook; Twitter; LinkedIn; Flipboard; Print; Email

A well-replicated finding in the psychological literature is the negative correlation between religiosity and intelligence. However, several studies also conclude that one form of religiosity, church attendance, is protective against later-life cognitive decline. No effects of religious belief per se on cognitive decline have been found, potentially due to the restricted measures of belief used in previous studies. Here, we examined the associations between religiosity, intelligence, and cognitive change in a cohort of individuals (initial n = 550) with high-quality measures of religious belief taken at age 83 and multiple cognitive measures taken in childhood and at four waves between age 79 and 90. We found that religious belief, but not attendance, was negatively related to intelligence. The effect size was smaller than in previous studies of younger participants. Longitudinal analyses showed no effect of either religious belief or attendance on cognitive change either from childhood to old age, or across the ninth decade of life. We discuss differences between our cohort and those in previous studies – including in age and location – that may have led to our non-replication of the association between religious attendance and cognitive decline. More.

One hopes the ability to actually get to a place of worship in old age will be taken into account.

Comments

tjguy 1 Corinthians 1:18-31 Revelation 22:21Dionisio_{May 22, 2014
May
05
May
22
22
2014
07:42 PM
7
07
42
PM
PDT}

arcartia, Natural selection is of course not a theory. Its an observation (well, its an imagined observation anyway) that not every life design reproduces with the same odds. That's not a theory of how organisms change or become.phoodoo_{May 20, 2014
May
05
May
20
20
2014
08:55 AM
8
08
55
AM
PDT}

And one more question, Bogart. Let's say for the sake of argument, that you are right. There is no God. We Christians are all deluded and believing in a lie. Here's my question: Why should we give up our belief? Give me your best argument. Can atheism produce any "shoulds"? Does truth exist and if so, how can we know it? Is it important to find the truth? If not, what is the problem of believing something that makes you feel good, gives you purpose in life, meets the needs of your heart, helps you find happiness, acceptance, forgiveness, support, and a loving community? You already mentioned that society does not do a good job in doing these things that the church does. So, do atheists do a better job of it? What do you think? What does atheism have to offer to counter what Jesus offers us and what we are experiencing in our life in God's family?tjguy_{May 20, 2014
May
05
May
20
20
2014
07:29 AM
7
07
29
AM
PDT}

It is not indifference to comfort or a disdain for it, bogart, that 'turns off' atheists from religion, but a hatred of the threat of extreme and eternal discomfort if they prefer to continue to live without moral constraints on their their sexual behaviour. Aldous Huxley admitted that had been his primary motivation, but it's surely a truism, anyway. Agnostics are a different kettle of fish, and likely to have more than a modicum of integrity.Axel_{May 20, 2014
May
05
May
20
20
2014
07:26 AM
7
07
26
AM
PDT}

Bogart says:
Religion, by its nature, provides comfort, and churches provide a safe have. To people of lower intelligence, who generally have a more difficult time and fewer opportunities, religion would be very attractive. And the promise of a paradise in the afterlife, only sweetens the pot.
It’s true that a relationship with God will provide a certain amount of comfort and that churches may offer a safe haven for people. If a person really is able to find forgiveness, experience God’s love, and enter a community of faith, these things would be expected. It is also true that this is not always the case because Christians are sinners also. Sometimes people have a bad experience at church. The promise of eternal life with God does sweeten the pot. I guess I basically agree with you here, but this has nothing at all to do with the truth or falsity of the belief. From a Christian point of view, this is evidence for the validity of the faith. From an atheistic point of view, this is seen simply as the reason that people are attracted to Christianity. It is the excuse they use to dismiss the positive things that Christianity brings to the table. Is Christianity for weaklings? Yes and no. In order to become a Christian, one has to humble himself and admit his sin. Not everyone can do this or wants to do this. In that sense, it takes guts face your sin honestly and be willing to follow Jesus. It is not an easy decision and requires a willingness to change as God works in our lives. In this sense, Christianity is not for wimps. But it is also true that many people come to faith as a result of some need in their life. Does that mean they are weak and ignorant? Not necessarily. In the sense that they have a need and can’t meet that need on their own, you could say they are weak. Perhaps some are so desperate for help that they would believe anything, I don’t know, but if their main goal is simply to get a particular need met, then they probably don’t have true faith. We might originally come with a need, but if that need doesn’t transform itself into genuine faith and an understanding of one’s sin and need for a Savior, then it is most likely they will fall away, having never been genuinely saved. All of us though, including you and all atheists, have needs that we can’t meet on our own from time to time. Some may have less needs than others, but we all have needs. And we all have different ways of seeking to meet those needs. Does the fact that one person seeks God’s help mean that they are weak? (Maybe it makes them smart!) If you think it makes them weak or ignorant, does the fact that atheists go somewhere else to seek help make them weak or ignorant? I don’t think so. Many atheists are too proud to admit they are sinners, too proud to admit they need a Savior, too proud to admit they need help. Does that make them strong people? Not necessarily. Maybe the opposite! Pride is a huge barrier for many people! I think that deep down, many atheists are simply afraid to face up to the fact of their sin or to their own weaknesses and needs. That may not be true of you, but generally speaking, I think there is an element of this in the mind of many atheists, even if it isn't the most important reason. ?
Bogarts says: “…people of lower intelligence will tend to have a more difficult time in life and have fewer opportunities. And that religions, by their nature, are attractive to people who have more stresses in their lives. The churches provide comfort and support to these people. This is more a criticism of the rest of society than it is of religion.”
Again, for the most part, I think I can agree with you on this, but again, that has nothing to do with the truth or falsity of Christianity. If they didn't do these things, you would criticize them, right? Perhaps part of the reason that many people believe is that they see how God has helped their friends. They do experience community in the church. They see that it works. Changed lives are a powerful testimony to the existence of God. We see changed lives in Scripture, but we still see lives changed today. Atheists just dismiss this as some time of subjective experience and claim that other religions can also provide subjective experiences –which is certainly true – but again, that doesn’t automatically make the experience of these people null and void. Again, the things you claim that “religion” and churches do are good things. You would expect this type of thing from churches if God really did exist, would you not? You choose to explain it all away by implying that it succeeds simply by appealing to weak ignorant people, but your conclusion does not logically follow from the things you have pointed out. Simply because it appeals to people with needs does not make if false. You didn't say that, but I hope you are not implying that.
Bogart: “The church offers space for those that are disadvantaged and ill treated. Those with lower intelligence are more likely to be disadvantaged and ill treated. Therefore, people with lower intelligence will be attracted to the church.
Again, basically true statements I think. But again, I hope you are not saying that as a result it is clear that Christianity is false. There is no logical relationship between these facts and the truth or falsity of Christianity. However, I'm afraid that these things you mention end up being a reason for many of them to view themselves as intellectually superior to most Christians who, in their eyes are weak and seemingly unintelligent. In post number one, Kairos Focus quoted a very important passage from the Bible that seemingly agrees with your observations about religion.
“26 Think about the circumstances of your call, brothers and sisters. Not many were wise by human standards, not many were powerful, not many were born to a privileged position. 27 But God chose what the world thinks foolish to shame the wise, and God chose what the world thinks weak to shame the strong. 28 God chose what is low and despised in the world, what is regarded as nothing, to set aside what is regarded as something, 29 so that no one can boast in his presence. 30 He is the reason you have a relationship with Christ Jesus, who became for us wisdom from God, and righteousness and sanctification and redemption, 31 so that, as it is written, “Let the one who boasts, boast in the Lord.”
You see, God has an issue with pride. He will bring the pride of man low in the end. He will exalt His Son Jesus and at some point in time, "every knee will bow and every tongue will confess that Jesus is Lord to the glory of God the Father." At another place, God says "I will not share my glory with another." So stealing God's glory and giving chance the credit for what He has done is very disrespectful and rude. It is wrong to treat Him like this, whether you believe in Him or not. Pride is perhaps one of our biggest sins and this causes so many problems in our world. I mentioned the problem of pride before. Proud arrogant people steal the glory that God deserves and think that they can live life without Him. And yet, we are all totally dependent on God for the air we breathe, the water we drink, and the environment we live in. He created it and sustains it so that we can live here. What follows is the Christian worldview based on the Bible: God created us to have a relationship with Him. He loves us and desires that we return that love. He wants to pour out His grace and love on us, but He won’t force Himself on anyone. He also hates sin and has no absolutely no obligation to forgive anyone or to save anyone or to make anyone happy. We chose the path of sin and rebellion and He would be totally justified just to let us go, but He has made it possible for all who choose to repent and believe to be forgiven, to know Him, and to have an eternal relationship with Him. His grace gives us the courage to honestly face our sin. If we don't know there is an answer to our sin, we tend to dismiss it, ignore it, or explain it away saying it isn't so bad. Not to be grateful to a God who gave His only Son to make it possible for me to be forgiven and to become one of His children is sinful! Not to acknowledge God as our Creator and/or to claim that God doesn’t even exist is a real affront to God and His goodness. It is true that we must throw out our pride, our reliance upon our own “goodness”, and on our own wisdom and abilities in order to become a Christian. He saves us. We don’t save ourselves and therefore, we rightfully need to honor and worship Him – which is why we were made to begin with. So, this long post is just to say that for the most part, I actually agree with what you wrote about Christianity and churches, but I disagree that therefore, Christianity is obviously false. Actually, one of the great things about Christianity is that you don’ t have to be an intellectual to be saved! And that's a good thing, wouldn't you say? Think about it! At the very least, all one has to understand is that they are a sinner in need of forgiveness, that God sent His Son, Jesus, to die for their sins so they could be saved, and that if they confess their sins and trust Jesus to save them, God will welcome them into His eternal family. You don’t need to be a genius to become a Christian. Since the vast majority of people in the world are not geniuses, this is a good thing and is also something you would expect to be true of genuine spiritual truth. You don’t have to be rich. You don’t have to be a genius. You don’t have to be strong or important. You can be these things, but you don’t have to. Here is what is important: that you humbly and sorrowfully recognize your sin, that believe that God loves you and sent His Son to pay for your sins, and that you are willing to follow Him, with His help. There is plenty of depth to Christianity for those who want to go deeper, but not everyone is able or has the chance to do that. Christianity is simple yet deep. It has something for both the rich and the poor, smart and less gifted, strong and weak, etc. Fortunately the ground in front of the cross is level. It is where all the hierarchies of society disappear. No matter who we are, what our social status is, and or how much money, wisdom, or ability we have, we are all sinners who must call on Jesus for salvation. Apologies for the length of this post!tjguy_{May 20, 2014
May
05
May
20
20
2014
07:09 AM
7
07
09
AM
PDT}

Judging by Isaac Newton's ideas quoted in the preceding comment, one could realize that the guy was most probably an ignorant uneducated creationist IDiot who didn't understand 'n-D evo' ;-) Right?Dionisio_{May 19, 2014
May
05
May
19
19
2014
02:33 PM
2
02
33
PM
PDT}

Religious belief associated with being dumber?
Yes, of course! That's obvious! Duh! There are many examples in history. But let's just mention one that leaves no room to doubt that the answer to the title question is a sound yes. This was a man whose name was Isaac Newton. Most people haven't heard his name, because he was not known beyond his own neighborhood, but he wrote a couple of totally irrelevant papers that accidentally got recorded in history (go figure how!). This person must have been very dumb in order to write such nonsense like the below statements, quoted from his insignificant papers:
This most beautiful system of the sun, planets, and comets, could only proceed from the counsel and dominion of an intelligent and powerful Being....This Being governs all things, not as the soul of the world, but as Lord over all; and on account of his dominion he is wont to be called Lord God "pantokrator," or Universal Ruler....
Newton, I. General Scholium. Translated by Motte, A. 1825. Newton's Principia: The Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy. New York: Daniel Adee, 501. The Greek word pantokrator is most often translated as "Almighty" in the King James Version.
Since every particle of space is always, and every indivisible moment of duration is every where, certainly the Maker and Lord of all things cannot be never and no where....God is the same God, always and every where. He is omnipresent not virtually only, but also substantially; for virtue cannot subsist without substance.…It is allowed by all that the Supreme God exists necessarily; and by the same necessity he exists always and every where....And thus much concerning God; to discourse of whom from the appearance of things, does certainly belong to Natural Philosophy.
Ibid, 505-506.
Blind metaphysical necessity, which is certainly the same always and every where, could produce no variety of things. All that diversity of natural things which we find suited to different times and places could arise from nothing but the ideas and will of a Being, necessarily existing.
Ibid, 506.

Dionisio_{May 19, 2014
May
05
May
19
19
2014
02:09 PM
2
02
09
PM
PDT}

http://treesforlunch.blogspot.com/2011/09/science-athiests-demonstrably-more.html "It's not just a figment of my imagination, it seems atheists truly are socially autistic by their own report. Asperger's Syndrome is a disorder described as "autistic psychopathy" by its discoverer, Dr. Hans Asperger. Those with the disorder tend to be intelligent, socially awkward and difficult to converse with. They are also likely to be male. Based on Wired Magazine's observation that atheists tend to be quarrelsome, socially challenged men, to say nothing of the unpleasant personalities of leading public atheists such as Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens and Michel Onfray, one could reasonably hypothesize that there is likely to be a strong correlation between Asperger's and atheism. it is interesting to note the coincidence that 59 of the virulent atheists over at Dr. PZ Myers place report an average score on the Asperger's Quotient test of 27.8. And this does not include the two individuals who actually have Asperger's but did not report any test results. The test notes that "Scores over 32 are generally taken to indicate Asperger's Syndrome or high-functioning autism". The average male score is 18, the average female score is 15. By way of comparison, I scored 14." like I said before it takes common sense and wisdom to interprete things and it seems like on the average atheists lack these 2 very important qualities.wallstreeter43_{May 19, 2014
May
05
May
19
19
2014
12:23 AM
12
12
23
AM
PDT}

Acartia_bogart ""Wallstreeter, I don’t think that an atheist will argue with you. Yes, atheists don’t think that there is an externally created “purpose” to life. That, more or less, is the definition of an atheist."" They dont need to argue with me, They definately have a hard time spotting purpose in the world where normally neurological people can spot it easily and without that much effort. Is it any wonder that atheists score so high on the asperger quotient syndrome test. This is not even discounting their irrational hidden anger at religion and God. What needs to be done is for teh medical community to help these people with better research for meds and therapy that can help them integrate into society again and help them learn to spot the purpose that 95% of the world sees in some fashion or another. When Humbled said atheists are insane I dont think he meant it as an insult but as a reality that atheists havent yet come to grips with.wallstreeter43_{May 19, 2014
May
05
May
19
19
2014
12:17 AM
12
12
17
AM
PDT}

Humbled you are correct, and I hope the medical community will one day find the right treatment for this disorder and therapy.wallstreeter43_{May 19, 2014
May
05
May
19
19
2014
12:12 AM
12
12
12
AM
PDT}

kairosfocus for the win! :-DBlue_Savannah_{May 18, 2014
May
05
May
18
18
2014
07:54 PM
7
07
54
PM
PDT}

Acartia_bogart, The atheism community definitely offers space to those who are of low intelligence. In fact at a lot of universities they even give them a big office and tenure. But again, can you expand on your idea that religious people have less opportunities then atheists? When I asked you what opportunities you were referring to, was it catching butterflies or wearing togas, you said this crazed rant(your words, that I am putting in your mouth!): "Are you seriously suggesting that financial opportunities are the only ones that are important? You don’t think that the opportunity to be accepted without prejudice is important? Or the opportunity to have your views taken seriously? Born again, atheists in most cases were raised by parents who were religious, or at least in a community strongly influenced by religion. I would be surprised if they weren’t affected by it. With regard to the research about chemists, physicists and other scientists have a belief in purpose, I note that they did not include biological scientists. As well, you must distinguish between a sense of awe and purposefulness. I am awed by crystal formation but it is a basic chemical/physical process with no purpose." So clearly the atheist community even welcomes people who can't even understand their own words. But hey that's not really a knock on you, because I don't think anyone could understand your words.phoodoo_{May 18, 2014
May
05
May
18
18
2014
06:29 PM
6
06
29
PM
PDT}

What about this is controversial or offensive? Did I say that intelligent people were not attracted to the church as well? Did I say that those with lower intelligence are not deserving of everyone’s respect? Did I say that you had to be of low intelligence to be attracted to religion? Your last statement was clearly implied by your syllogism: 1.The church offers space for those that are disadvantaged and ill treated. 2. Those with lower intelligence are more likely to be disadvantaged and ill treated. 3. Therefore, people with lower intelligence will be attracted to the church. You claim to be giving a compliment, but it's a back-handed one. Your arrogance does you no good.Barb_{May 18, 2014
May
05
May
18
18
2014
05:17 PM
5
05
17
PM
PDT}

I've come to the conclusion that atheists are insane. I don't see any way to sugar coat the issue. We shouldn't be engaging with them, we should be treating them for whatever cognitive or psychological disorder they are suffering from. Do it quickly too before it spreads and millions more die as a result.humbled_{May 18, 2014
May
05
May
18
18
2014
04:28 PM
4
04
28
PM
PDT}

correction ,,,since I have now met,,,bornagain77_{May 18, 2014
May
05
May
18
18
2014
02:05 PM
2
02
05
PM
PDT}

Meet my first atheist in the Air Force. Didn't know one before then. Rather curious fellow. He was socially crude and rude. The group that he worked with in our squad thought he was rather ignorant. My opinion of atheists has not changed since I have now meet the more 'intelligent' ones on the internet.bornagain77_{May 18, 2014
May
05
May
18
18
2014
02:04 PM
2
02
04
PM
PDT}

Phoodoo, again, you are putting words in my mouth. I will try to use small words so that you can understand them. The church offers space for those that are disadvantaged and ill treated. Those with lower intelligence are more likely to be disadvantaged and ill treated. Therefore, people with lower intelligence will be attracted to the church. What about this is controversial or offensive? Did I say that intelligent people were not attracted to the church as well? Did I say that those with lower intelligence are not deserving of everyone's respect? Did I say that you had to be of low intelligence to be attracted to religion? Again, I state, categorically, that the church is doing good by making sure that all people, regardless of intelligence, are welcomed and respected within the church, which is more than society in general can claim. So, why do you have a problem with this? Or is it simply that it is an atheist who is making this statement (compliment)?Acartia_bogart_{May 18, 2014
May
05
May
18
18
2014
01:57 PM
1
01
57
PM
PDT}

Why don't expand on that Arcatia, how do religious people have less opportunities for being accepted without prejudice?phoodoo_{May 18, 2014
May
05
May
18
18
2014
12:33 PM
12
12
33
PM
PDT}

Acartia_bogart, What makes you think I was defensive about this. Because I was pointing out how wrong your assumption surely is? Why wouldn't you just as easily assume, that people who have been given better opportunities in life are more grateful, and thus more likely to be thankful towards a higher being, whilst those less fortunate would say, there must not be a God, look at how crappy my life is. And more opportunities was referring to more opportunities to be accepted without prejudice?? Did you completely forget what you were trying to say? How can someone not chuckle at that. Pointing out that you were making no sense at all is hardly being defensive.phoodoo_{May 18, 2014
May
05
May
18
18
2014
12:27 PM
12
12
27
PM
PDT}

Correlation is not the same as causation.Acartia_bogart_{May 18, 2014
May
05
May
18
18
2014
12:22 PM
12
12
22
PM
PDT}

Phoodoo: "I think your argument has now officially gone completely off the rails. You initially suggested that religious people believe they way they do because they are of lower intelligence and so have a more difficult life with fewer opportunities, so they need the comfort of an afterlife." I don't know how you read that into my words. I said that religion would attract people who fall into this category, not that all religious people fell into this category. And in my mind, religions' ability to attract the marginalized in society is one of its greatest strengths. It is not a negative, it is a positive. Why should you be defensive over the fact that studies are demo starting this.Acartia_bogart_{May 18, 2014
May
05
May
18
18
2014
12:14 PM
12
12
14
PM
PDT}

Acartia_bogart @12 I think your argument has now officially gone completely off the rails. You initially suggested that religious people believe they way they do because they are of lower intelligence and so have a more difficult life with fewer opportunities, so they need the comfort of an afterlife. When I challenged you about them having fewer opportunities in life, you now come back with, well, they have fewer opportunities to accepted without prejudice? Or fewer opportunities to have their views taken seriously? What the heck? Your argument has now spun into slapstick. It has no meaning at all.phoodoo_{May 18, 2014
May
05
May
18
18
2014
09:35 AM
9
09
35
AM
PDT}

A Bogart: I do not mean to slam your theories, or deride you with my reply; however I have to point out that your replies to others' posts are just stories and personal anecdote. They are theses without backing. Your interlocutors are citing sources and peer reviewed material (for what peer review is worth). Your position looks weak on that comparison alone. Put your best forward, let the community tear into it as you tear into their best. Otherwise, you aren't progressing anywhere. One man's opinion.Bateman_{May 18, 2014
May
05
May
18
18
2014
09:32 AM
9
09
32
AM
PDT}

'I am awed by crystal formation but it is a basic chemical/physical process with no purpose.' Really??? it is funny that you cannot appeal to either physics or chemistry to back up your claim that crystal formation is without purpose. If truly there was no purpose in the universe then crystal formation would not behave in a predictable, repeatable pattern. Our monotheistic traditions reinforce the assumption that the universe is at root a unity, that is not governed by different legislation in different places. John D. Barrow The vastness, beauty, orderliness, of the heavenly bodies, the excellent structure of animals and plants; and the other phenomena of nature justly induce an intelligent and unprejudiced observer to conclude a supremely powerful, just, and good author. — Robert Boyle (1627 - 1691), father of experimental chemistry "As a man who has devoted his whole life to the most clear headed science, to the study of matter, I can tell you as a result of my research about atoms this much: There is no matter as such. All matter originates and exists only by virtue of a force which brings the particle of an atom to vibration and holds this most minute solar system of the atom together. We must assume behind this force the existence of a conscious and intelligent mind. This mind is the matrix of all matter." Max Planck - The Father Of Quantum Mechanics Chemical Cycles: Long term chemical balance is essential for life on earth. Complex symbiotic chemical cycles keep the amount of elements on the earth surface in relatively perfect balance and thus in steady supply to the higher life forms that depend on them to remain stable. This is absolutely essential for the higher life forms to exist on Earth for any extended period of time. http://www.uen.org/themepark/cycles/chemical.shtml The Place of Life and Man in Nature: Defending the Anthropocentric Thesis - Michael J. Denton - February 25, 2013 Summary (page 11) Many of the properties of the key members of Henderson’s vital ensemble —water, oxygen, CO2, HCO3 —are in several instances fit specifically for warm-blooded, air-breathing organisms such as ourselves. These include the thermal properties of water, its low viscosity, the gaseous nature of oxygen and CO2 at ambient temperatures, the inertness of oxygen at ambient temperatures, and the bicarbonate buffer, with its anomalous pKa value and the elegant means of acid-base regulation it provides for air-breathing organisms. Some of their properties are irrelevant to other classes of organisms or even maladaptive. It is very hard to believe there could be a similar suite of fitness for advanced carbon-based life forms. If carbon-based life is all there is, as seems likely, then the design of any active complex terrestrial being would have to closely resemble our own. Indeed the suite of properties of water, oxygen, and CO2 together impose such severe constraints on the design and functioning of the respiratory and cardiovascular systems that their design, even down to the details of capillary and alveolar structure can be inferred from first principles. For complex beings of high metabolic rate, the designs actualized in complex Terran forms are all that can be. There are no alternative physiological designs in the domain of carbon-based life that can achieve the high metabolic activity manifest in man and other higher organisms. http://bio-complexity.org/ojs/index.php/main/article/view/BIO-C.2013.1/BIO-C.2013.1 “If we modify the value of one of the fundamental constants, something invariably goes wrong, leading to a universe that is inhospitable to life as we know it. When we adjust a second constant in an attempt to fix the problem(s), the result, generally, is to create three new problems for every one that we “solve.” The conditions in our universe really do seem to be uniquely suitable for life forms like ourselves, and perhaps even for any form of organic complexity." Gribbin and Rees, “Cosmic Coincidences”, p. 269bornagain77_{May 18, 2014
May
05
May
18
18
2014
09:28 AM
9
09
28
AM
PDT}

Phoodoo: "You meant fewer opportunities to catch butterflies? Less opportunities to wear togas? Difficulties with gluten?" Are you seriously suggesting that financial opportunities are the only ones that are important? You don't think that the opportunity to be accepted without prejudice is important? Or the opportunity to have your views taken seriously? Born again, atheists in most cases were raised by parents who were religious, or at least in a community strongly influenced by religion. I would be surprised if they weren't affected by it. With regard to the research about chemists, physicists and other scientists have a belief in purpose, I note that they did not include biological scientists. As well, you must distinguish between a sense of awe and purposefulness. I am awed by crystal formation but it is a basic chemical/physical process with no purpose.Acartia_bogart_{May 18, 2014
May
05
May
18
18
2014
09:12 AM
9
09
12
AM
PDT}

Acartia_bogart you claim,,
atheists don’t think that there is an externally created “purpose” to life.
Yet,,
Design Thinking Is Hardwired in the Human Brain. How Come? - October 17, 2012 Excerpt: "Even Professional Scientists Are Compelled to See Purpose in Nature, Psychologists Find." The article describes a test by Boston University's psychology department, in which researchers found that "despite years of scientific training, even professional chemists, geologists, and physicists from major universities such as Harvard, MIT, and Yale cannot escape a deep-seated belief that natural phenomena exist for a purpose" ,,, Most interesting, though, are the questions begged by this research. One is whether it is even possible to purge teleology from explanation. http://www.evolutionnews.org/2012/10/design_thinking065381.html
i.e. It is not that Atheists do not see purpose in nature, it is that Atheists, for whatever severely misguided reason, live in denial of the purpose they see in nature. Moreover, there is the irrationality of atheists being hostile towards God whom they claim not to believe in:
When Atheists Are Angry at God - 2011 Excerpt: I’ve never been angry at unicorns. It’s unlikely you’ve ever been angry at unicorns either.,, The one social group that takes exception to this rule is atheists. They claim to believe that God does not exist and yet, according to empirical studies, tend to be the people most angry at him. http://www.firstthings.com/onthesquare/2011/01/when-atheists-are-angry-at-god
Another study that backs this 'living in denial' conclusion up is that Atheists sweat when they dare God:
Daring God Makes Atheists Sweat - 11/19/13 Excerpt: This research conducted by the University of Finland found that having atheists dare God to do terrible things causes them stress to the point of sweating. Conversely, the same individuals did not exhibit those same stress levels when simply wishing for awful things to happen. http://fixedpointfix.com/daring-god-makes-atheists-sweat/ Scientific Study Indicates Atheists know God Exists as Bible says! - video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0m_a1f9RHYA "For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:" (Romans 1:20, KJV)
Here is a humorous article, written by an atheist no less, on the true importance of that biased intelligence study:
Are atheists mentally ill? - August 14th, 2013 - Sean Thomas Excerpt: "Let’s dispense with the crude metric of IQ and look at the actual lives led by atheists, and believers, and see how they measure up. In other words: let’s see who is living more intelligently. And guess what: it’s the believers. A vast body of research, amassed over recent decades, shows that religious belief is physically and psychologically beneficial – to a remarkable degree.,,, [I hope this next part doesn't upset too many people, but...] the evidence today implies that atheism is a form of mental illness. And this is because science is showing that the human mind is hard-wired for faith... religious people have all their faculties intact, they are fully functioning humans. Therefore, being an atheist – lacking the vital faculty of faith – should be seen as an affliction, and a tragic deficiency: something akin to blindness. Which makes Richard Dawkins the intellectual equivalent of an amputee, furiously waving his stumps in the air, boasting that he has no hands." http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/seanthomas/100231060/are-atheists-mentally-ill/
bornagain77_{May 18, 2014
May
05
May
18
18
2014
08:47 AM
8
08
47
AM
PDT}

Acartia_bogart -When you said: "All I said was that people of lower intelligence will tend to have a more difficult time in life and have fewer opportunities..." then what opportunities were you talking about if not financial? You meant fewer opportunities to catch butterflies? Less opportunities to wear togas? Difficulties with gluten? How strange that someone would interpret you words as meaning having less financial opportunities, huh.phoodoo_{May 18, 2014
May
05
May
18
18
2014
08:41 AM
8
08
41
AM
PDT}

Wallstreeter, I don't think that an atheist will argue with you. Yes, atheists don't think that there is an externally created "purpose" to life. That, more or less, is the definition of an atheist. Phoodoo, I don't believe that I said anything about a person's income. Regardless of where you fall in the atheist-religious gradient, it will be populated by a wide variation of people (rich/poor, high intelligence/low intelligence, rich/poor, etc.). All I said was that people of lower intelligence will tend to have a more difficult time in life and have fewer opportunities. And that religions, by their nature, are attractive to people who have more stresses in their lives. The churches provide comfort and support to these people. This is more a criticism of the rest of society than it is of religion.Acartia_bogart_{May 18, 2014
May
05
May
18
18
2014
08:14 AM
8
08
14
AM
PDT}

Interesting Acartia_bogart, So by your theory atheists as a whole earn much more money than people who consider themselves to hold a religious belief? Would you like to bet on that?phoodoo_{May 18, 2014
May
05
May
18
18
2014
07:54 AM
7
07
54
AM
PDT}

Interesting post, wallstreeter. 'You can't teach wisdom!!!'Axel_{May 18, 2014
May
05
May
18
18
2014
07:43 AM
7
07
43
AM
PDT}

1 2 Next

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Leave a Reply