Channel 4 tonight

Tim Robbins

JimiTime wrote: »

Bloomin eck tim, put the red gloves away man. :eek:

I'd like to know what you mean by intellectual achievement myself?

Major intellectual achievement:
1. Won a nobel prize.
2. Invented something, nobody else could do.
3. Top of an academic field.
4. Solved some major problem no-one else could do.

Is your point that evangelical christianity makes you dumb? or that they are poorly educated? Or that they are not bothered with intellectual achievement? I'm not sure what your point is?

Intelligent people find it very hard to do Evangelical Christianity.
Because intelligent people doubt, question, wish to learn and usually think logically.

Stupid people believe things because their friends / families do or because it makes them feel better or because it's written down.

Tim Robbins

Dades wrote: »

*enforces group hug*

There's a discussion amongst all this. Let's drop the posturing and find it.
Starting with you, Tim!

Why? It was PDN's you are trolling even though you proofed my point which started it.

Dades

Tim Robbins wrote: »

Why? It was PDN's you are trolling even though you proofed my point which started it.

Let it go, man!

Tim Robbins

Dades wrote: »

Let it go, man!

Wraa!! Wraa!! Where's Michael McDowell when you need him??????

Zombrex

Dades wrote: »

Let it go, man!

I'm mad as hell and I'm not going to take it any more!

PDN

Tim Robbins wrote: »

It's factually correct.
I asked you to produce numbers of evangelicals in the US who had a reasonable education, if you compare that to the amount of Jewish people and compare achievements, you'll see what I mean.

OK, fair enough. I apologise for calling you a troll since you obviously actually believe that it is sensible debate to assert that an ethnic group kicks the asses of adherents to an ideology when it comes to intellectual achievement.

By the way, Romanians eat more salami than atheists.

Are you talking about Chinese intellectuals who are
1. Evangelical or non Evangelical
2. Have or have not at Evangelical only education.

I think it would be nigh well impossible for any native of mainland China under the age of 60 to have an Evangelical only education. Evangelicals have not been allowed to operate as missionaries in China for over 50 years. There are, to my knowledge, no Evangelical schools or Colleges in China.

There are large numbers of well educated young Chinese who are, in your own phraseology, kicking the asses of American College graduates when it comes to IT work and engineering. Hundreds of thousands of these young graduates are embracing Evangelical Christianity because they find it to be emotionally and intellectually satisfying. This is one of the reasons why Evangelicals are proportionately over-represented among intellectuals in China.

I haven't a clue

I plead the fifth. Any comment I might make would earn me an infraction.

Could you answer my question about the US? So we could try and bring some structure to this discussion. It make more sense to discuss the US first as it is easier to get information about that country.

Out of a population of 304 million, can you clarify?
1. How many you would describe as Evangelical?

That all depends on how you define 'Evangelical'. The Barna Research Group measures 8 main indicators of Evangelicalism. Apart from claiming to be 'born again' these include saying their faith is very important in their life today; contending that they have a personal responsibility to share their religious beliefs about Christ with non-Christians; stating that Satan exists; maintaining that eternal salvation is possible only through grace, not by being good or doing good deeds; asserting that Jesus Christ lived a sinless life on earth; saying that the Bible is totally accurate in all it teaches; and describing God as the all-knowing, all-powerful, perfect deity who created the universe and still rules it today. Only 7% of the US population fulfill all 8 criteria.

If you take the broadest indicator (those who claim to be born again) then the figure is 40%. This includes large numbers of Roman Catholics.

If you take membership of churches that are normally classified as Evangelical then the figure is probably around the 20% mark. Again, this is somewhat problematic as then we are, for example, counting Baptist Bill Clinton as an Evangelical but excluding United Methodist George Bush.

2. What percentage of these do not socio - economic means to achieve a 3rd level education?

I am assuming that your question is what percentage lack the economic means to achieve a 3rd level education. I would say 0%. I think any person of medium intelligence in the US, if they are motivated enough, can achieve a College degree. Of course that is not the kind of question that we address when we study sociological factors. What is significant is not whether people lack the means to gain an education, but whether they are impacted by factors that increase or decrease the likelihood of their obtaining such an education. It is, I believe, pretty well established that blacks and hispanics, for socio-economic reasons, are less likely to gain a 3rd level education. Therefore a religious group that is more heavily represented among blacks and hispanics than among whites should expect to display a related deficiency in this area.

However, hispanics kick the asses of Hindus when it comes to getting big money contracts in major league baseball! :pac:

Tim Robbins

PDN wrote: »

OK, fair enough. I apologise for calling you a troll since you obviously actually believe that it is sensible debate to assert that an ethnic group kicks the asses of adherents to an ideology when it comes to intellectual achievement.

Well it's factually accurate, the question is why?
Two things appear to stopping the progress of this discussion.
Firstly, agreeing the meaning of the term Evangelicals. Secondly, your reasoning is still muddled and confusing. For example: you say

I am assuming that your question is what percentage lack the economic means to achieve a 3rd level education. I would say 0%. I think any person of medium intelligence in the US, if they are motivated enough, can achieve a College degree.

But then you say:

It is, I believe, pretty well established that blacks and hispanics, for socio-economic reasons, are less likely to gain a 3rd level education. Therefore a religious group that is more heavily represented among blacks and hispanics than among whites should expect to display a related deficiency in this area.

Let's take the strictest definition of Evangelical. This 7% represents 21 Million people. How many of these would you say have a 3rd level education?

PDN

Tim Robbins wrote: »

Well it's factually accurate, the question is why?
Two things appear to stopping the progress of this discussion.
Firstly, agreeing the meaning of the term Evangelicals. Secondly, your reasoning is still muddled and confusing. For example: you say

Er, I'm waiting for the example, Tim. Nothing muddled or confusing whatsoever about the following two statements. They should be perfectly clear for anyone who possesses a basic vocabulary and reading ability.
1. Any person of average intelligence in the US should, if sufficiently motivated, be able to gain a College degree whatever their financial circumstances.
2. Socio-economic circumstances affect the likelihood of people gaining 3rd level education. Therefore a religious group which has more members in lower socio-economic groups should be expected to produce less graduates.

Would Tim, or indeed anyone else who wishes, explain to me where the confusion or muddle is in those two perfectly reasonable statements? Is this some kind of a game?

Let's take the strictest definition of Evangelical. This 7% represents 21 Million people. How many of these would you say have a 3rd level education?

I don't know. I would expect it to be slightly below the national average due to Evangelicalism's socio-economic breakdown, but I've not seen any statistics on it. You're the one who is presumably trying to make some kind of a point here - so can you tell me how many would have a 3rd level education?

Tim Robbins

PDN wrote: »

1. Any person of average intelligence in the US should, if sufficiently motivated, be able to gain a College degree whatever their financial circumstances.
2. Socio-economic circumstances affect the likelihood of people gaining 3rd level education. Therefore a religious group which has more members in lower socio-economic groups should be expected to produce less graduates.

Are you trying to say socio-economic circumstances and finaciallly circumstances are completly different things?

I don't know. I would expect it to be slightly below the national average due to Evangelicalism's socio-economic breakdown, but I've not seen any statistics on it. You're the one who is presumably trying to make some kind of a point here - so can you tell me how many would have a 3rd level education?

Well the point I was making was they have at least 3 times the population of the Jewish people in the US, which should offset the disadvantages that prevent them going to third level and they are still getting their buts kicked.

They just don't appear a very intelligent bunch.

Are they any good at Chess?

PDN

Tim Robbins wrote: »

Are you trying to say socio-economic circumstances and finaciallly circumstances are completly different things?

No, I'm not. What I am saying is that virtually no single person in the US will find it impossible to obtain a College degree due to financial circumstances. It doesn't matter if you are homeless and on skid row, if you have enough motivation you can still find a way to get educated. Therefore the correct answer to your question, "What percentage of these do not (have?) socio - economic means to achieve a 3rd level education?" the correct answer would be 0%.

However, reduced financial circumstances still make it less likely that a person will end up going to College, and also make it more likely that they will drop out of College without graduating. So, even though people from reduced financial circumstances do have the means to get educated, they are less likely to do so.

So, it is certainly possible for blacks and hispanics to obtain 3rd level education in the US, and many do so, but the percentage of them obtaining such education is significantly lower than among whites due to socio-economic conditions (or 'financial circumstances').

Well the point I was making was they have at least 3 times the population of the Jewish people in the US, which should offset the disadvantages that prevent them going to third level and they are still getting their buts kicked.

They just don't appear a very intelligent bunch.

Are they any good at Chess?

If we start talking about who we think appears to be intelligent or not then this thread will probably go downhill rapidly.

I think Chinese people are much better at chess than are Evangelicals. But Scottish people are better at golf than atheists.

pH

PDN wrote: »

If we start talking about who we think appears to be intelligent or not then this thread will probably go downhill rapidly.

too late.

Tim Robbins

PDN wrote: »

If we start talking about who we think appears to be intelligent or not then this thread will probably go downhill rapidly.

That was what I have been explictly trying to talk about for number of posts now. If you didn't want to discuss it you should have made that clear.

You've wasted a considerable amount of my time.

PDN

Tim Robbins wrote: »

That was what I have been explictly trying to talk about for number of posts now. If you didn't want to discuss it you should have made that clear.

You've wasted a considerable amount of my time.

Ah, my bad, I thought we were talking about education rather than intelligence.

Zombrex

*group hug*

(Wicknight places hand inappropriately on PDN bottom)

PDN

Wicknight wrote: »

*group hug*

(Wicknight places hand inappropriately on PDN bottom)

"No thanks, I need a man that will treat me with respect!"

(PDN marches back to Christianity forum with an appropriate air of indignation)

Tim Robbins

PDN wrote: »

Ah, my bad, I thought we were talking about education rather than intelligence.

They lack of intellectual achievements of Evangelical Christians. That would involve talking about education and intelligence.

PDN

Tim Robbins wrote: »

You've wasted a considerable amount of my time.

Really? I don't see how what you've posted could possibly have consumed a considerable amount of time.

Tim Robbins

PDN wrote: »

Really? I don't see how what you've posted could possibly have consumed a considerable amount of time.

I've a real job. Time is important.

robindch

PDN wrote: »

I don't see how what you've posted could possibly have consumed a considerable amount of time.

Very Lincolnesque

JimiTime

Tim Robbins wrote: »

I've a real job. .

Bloody hell Tim, I hope thats not a dig at PDN's pastoral role. bang out of order if it is.

Dades

Probably best ignored. Only reflects badly on the poster, imo.