Religion
Related: About this forumStudy: Religious beliefs linked to poor understanding of physical world
https://ascienceenthusiast.com/study-religious-beliefs-linked-poor-understanding-physical-world/?fbclid=IwAR2FCP83E4CUPfG5s34TGhgHGR8pFqAmDVb270mNRB6eWzi_ZgQQhrFykK4
Study: Religious beliefs linked to poor understanding of physical world
by Dan Broadbent
I suppose you can file this under things we already knew but now we have actual data that supports it. A study published in Applied Cognitive Psychology found a link between religious beliefs and a poor understanding of the physical world around us. This is consistent with what we would expect to see. In the past, when a phenomenon that couldnt explained using known science at the time was observed, it was called a miracle or an act of god. As our knowledge of natural phenomenon grew, fewer and fewer things were attributed to the acts of a god, as we now had explanations for things that previously seemed to be supernatural.
(snip)The results showed that supernatural beliefs correlated with all variables that were included, namely, with low systemizing, poor intuitive physics skills, poor mechanical ability, poor mental rotation, low school grades in mathematics and physics, poor common knowledge about physical and biological phenomena, intuitive and analytical thinking styles, and in particular, with assigning mentality to non‐mental phenomena. Regression analyses indicated that the strongest predictors of the beliefs were overall physical capability (a factor representing most physical skills, interests, and knowledge) and intuitive thinking style.
So, in other news: Water is wet. The sky is blue. The Earth is an oblate spheroid. The pope helps priests rape children. And the less you understand about the natural world, the more likely you are to believe in a god.
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/acp.3248
As Neil deGrasse Tyson eloquently explained back in 2011:
Does it mean, if you dont understand something, and the community of physicists dont understand it, that means God did it? Is that how you want to play this game? Because if it is, heres a list of things in the past that the physicists at the time didnt understand [and now we do understand] [ ]. If thats how you want to invoke your evidence for God, then God is an ever-receding pocket of scientific ignorance thats getting smaller and smaller and smaller as time moves on so just be ready for that to happen, if thats how you want to come at the problem.
RKP5637
(67,112 posts)no_hypocrisy
(48,582 posts)contrary evidence. This is why the evangelicals and other fundamentalists are opposed to education.
How else can "believers" accept the parting of the Red Sea, and Noah's Great Flood when it's never happened again or can be explained by science?
MineralMan
(147,334 posts)So, there's that. Physics, chemistry, biology, and the other sciences are hard classes. Only the smart kids take them. You have to study, and stuff like that.
But, since God did it all, you can skip that stuff. Much better.
zipplewrath
(16,685 posts)The Jesuit China missions of the 16th and 17th centuries introduced Western science and astronomy. One modern historian writes that in late Ming courts, the Jesuits were "regarded as impressive especially for their knowledge of astronomy, calendar-making, mathematics, hydraulics, and geography."[160] The Society of Jesus introduced, according to Thomas Woods, "a substantial body of scientific knowledge and a vast array of mental tools for understanding the physical universe, including the Euclidean geometry that made planetary motion comprehensible."[161] Another expert quoted by Woods said the scientific revolution brought by the Jesuits coincided with a time when science was at a very low level in China.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Society_of_Jesus
NeoGreen
(4,033 posts)...what portion of 'believers' are jesuits?
Their scientific understanding does not measurably move the metaphorical believer scientific understanding needle.
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)to pursue it with the other hand, I'm not sure you deserve any accolades for the advancements found by the unfettered group you favored.
I mean, they kicked off the 17th century with the Inquisition of Galileo Galilei
The Jesuits were allowed certain leeway, and even resources and education commensurate of their (church related) political position. Some of which they would not have had access to otherwise.
But they wouldn't have had access, largely because of the RCC.
zipplewrath
(16,685 posts)The OP was about some supposed "link" between ignorance and belief. I'm dubious there is a link. Too many very intelligent scientists over history that had strong religious beliefs of one sort or another. Correlation is not causation.
NeoGreen
(4,033 posts)
Dysrationalia
Dysrationalia is defined as the inability to think and behave rationally despite adequate intelligence. It is a concept in educational psychology and is not a clinical disorder such as a thought disorder. Dysrationalia can be a resource to help explain why smart people fall for Ponzi schemes and other fraudulent encounters.
(snip)
Examples
One example that can be related to dysrationalia centers on two former Illinois schoolteachers who pulled their children from the local public school in the area because discussions of the Holocaust are a part of the history curriculum. These parents, who are presumably competent due to their college education, believe that the Holocaust is a myth and should not be taught to their children. This is an example of a problem in belief formation regardless of intelligence.
A survey was given to Canadian Mensa club members on the topic of paranormal belief. Mensa members are provided membership strictly because of their high-IQ scores. The survey results show that 44% of the members believed in astrology, 51% believed in biorhythms, and 56% believed in the existence of extraterrestrial visitors. All these beliefs have no valid evidence.
There are many examples of people who are famous because of their intelligence, but often display irrational behavior. Martin Heidegger, a renowned philosopher, was also a Nazi apologist and used the most fallacious arguments to justify his beliefs. William Crookes, a famous scientist who discovered the element thallium and a Fellow of the Royal Society, was continually duped by spiritual mediums yet never gave up his spiritualist beliefs. Kary Mullis, an American biochemist and 1993 Nobel Prize winner, is also an astrology supporter and a global warming and HIV/AIDS denier.
NeoGreen
(4,033 posts)...it doesn't claim 'causation'.
The results showed that supernatural beliefs correlated with all variables
Your attempt (reliance?) upon a 'Strawman' is noted.
zipplewrath
(16,685 posts)noun
1. a relationship between two things or situations, especially where one thing affects the other.
"investigating a link between pollution and forest decline"
NeoGreen
(4,033 posts)...
The OP was about some supposed "link" between ignorance and belief. I'm dubious there is a link. Too many very intelligent scientists over history that had strong religious beliefs of one sort or another. Correlation is not causation.
...which you seem to be doubling down on.
Deflect on bro'.
muriel_volestrangler
(102,372 posts)Explore 'correlation' in the dictionary
(noun) in the sense of correspondence
There is a correlation between smoking and lung cancer.
Synonyms
correspondence , link , relation , connection , equivalence , interrelationship
https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english-thesaurus/correlation
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)Possibly the world could have done better, overall, than the Jesuits without the religious suppression of scientific inquiry.
Possibly the Jesuits themselves, could have done better than they did, in a non-religious university type setting.
On the other hand, at the time, the concentration of resources into the hands of the Jesuits allowed them to research in ways that might not have been otherwise funded at the time. So it may have been a net benefit.
Not knowing the answers to these questions (and more that I have perhaps not thought of yet), I don't think we can assume the 'head start' the Jesuits got (and even the contributions they did make) disprove the study in any way.
NeoGreen
(4,033 posts)...Atheists due to their pursuit of science, as even expressed in some common literature...
...No. I mean because of the feeling against them in England. You remember the Gordon riots, and all the tales about the Jesuits being behind the King's madness and many other things. By the way, Stephen, those Fathers were not Jesuits, I suppose? I did not like to ask straight out.'
'Of course not, Jack. They were suppressed long ago. Clement XIV put them down in the seventies, and a very good day's work he did. Sure, they have been trying to creep back on one legalistic pretext or another and I dare say they will soon make a sad nuisance of themselves again, turning out atheists from their schools by the score; but these gentlemen had nothing to do with them, near or far.'
The Reverse of the Medal, by Patrick O'Brian
Cartoonist
(7,507 posts)Where is their research on the existence of god? Did they even ask themselves the question?
Act_of_Reparation
(9,116 posts)Voltaire2
(14,632 posts)and rhetoric and wouldnt make this sort of clumsy mistake.
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)Duppers
(28,235 posts)Voltaire2
(14,632 posts)all people of faith as snot eating imbeciles.