Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Correlation between increasing intelligence and atheism

Options
13567…10

Comments

  • Options
    #62
    Seachmall
    Registered Users Posts: 7,041 ✭✭✭Seachmall


    Naomi00 wrote: »
    Why science specifically?

    If anything it just gives a small group of people who need an exact answer for everything, which to be fair is their job.

    So obviously if they need a specific yes or no, they would find it difficult to believe something they can't actually see etc. So in general would be the most likely people to be atheist.

    Using scientists as a general rule against who is smart and who isn't just gives a very one sided arguement. If you used people across lots of different areas, who are generally considered intelligent (music composers, artists, writers, athletes, inventors etc) you would get a more balanced statistic.

    Because it's a scientists job to look at the world as objectively as possible and conclude on what they believe to be the most probable answer based on evidence. As God's existence doesn't qualify into the scientific method it is not considered good science, and thus a scientist would be less likely to accept it as plausible.

    For that reason I suspect non-scientists, unless scientific in their approach, are more likely to believe while scientists are far more likely to not believe.

    I'm not using them as an example of intelligence exclusively, but their approach to finding the truth.

    Of course the Savanna-IQ Interaction Hypothesis suggests those with higher IQ are less likely to conform to a neotenous approach in life (which is a scientific explanation as to why false belief is rampant amongst societies [although it deals with many other things]) which explains the apparent correlation between IQ and belief.

    My use of "False Belief" here isn't targeting a specific belief system so please no one take offense. Religious or not you must appreciate false beliefs are indeed common place.

    Also, before someone brings it up, yes; the Interaction Hypothesis is just that, a hypothesis. And has yet to be proven or disproven. However currently it appears to be functioning as expected (in making predictions about more intelligent/less intelligent individuals and explaining current statistical anomalies).


  • Options
    #63
    Ghost Buster
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 5,172 ✭✭✭Ghost Buster


    MagicMarker wrote: »
    I'm not saying you're stupid, your point was though. Are you going to address anything I actually said to you or are you going to just ignore it all and keep posting vast generalisations, throw away comments and cute little emoticons?

    For instance, how about telling us all how all atheists are trying to force their views on everyone else?

    Clearly you are doing so here on Boards which is THE WORLD!!!!!!!!
    or such!


  • Options
    #64
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Sisko wrote: »
    Ah yeah. Sure there's no need. We all know the religious excel at social skills , empathy and tact.

    Ah, but they're not true Christians...


  • Options
    #65
    ed2hands
    Closed Accounts Posts: 873 ✭✭✭ed2hands


    It's an interesting topic to some, the question of correlation between intelligence and atheism, but essentially it might be considered counter-productive to secularism and everyone getting on together.

    I gather it's not a small bit disrespectful to many theists and people of faith to dwell on such a question or try to "prove" it.
    Or for that matter advance it's veracity by citing some Canadian study or other (thereby supporting the huge generalisation of the OP) on one hand and then give out when they get a few generalisations thrown back at them to bring them down a peg or two.

    You see with people asking and trying to prove or advance slightly taboo subjects like these, you're going to get a pithy response from some who see it as arrogant. Just my two-cents.


  • Options
    #66
    Seachmall
    Registered Users Posts: 7,041 ✭✭✭Seachmall


    ed2hands wrote: »
    You see with people asking and trying to prove or advance slightly taboo subjects like these, you're going to get a pithy response from some who see it as arrogant. Just my two-cents.

    The science doesn't care about hurt feelings or controversy. It simply aims to explains the world irregardless of who it may offend.

    I don't think anyone would favour suppressing possible findings in favour of protecting feelings, furthering secularism or any other goal.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #67
    ArtSmart
    Registered Users Posts: 5,614 ✭✭✭ArtSmart


    But if God is like, all knowing n stuff, wouldn't that mean....


  • Options
    #68
    ed2hands
    Closed Accounts Posts: 873 ✭✭✭ed2hands


    Seachmall wrote: »
    The science doesn't care about hurt feelings or controversy. It simply aims to explains the world irregardless of who it may offend.

    I don't think anyone would favour suppressing possible findings in favour of protecting feelings, furthering secularism or any other goal.

    Eugenics was a popular realm of science once upon a time, and questions like those were rightly consigned to that of taboo subjects.


  • Options
    #69
    4leto
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,940 ✭✭✭4leto


    Absolutely not, speaking personally as an atheist I can be a thick as any religious guy.

    I always regard IQ as hugely over rated.


  • Options
    #70
    Seachmall
    Registered Users Posts: 7,041 ✭✭✭Seachmall


    ed2hands wrote: »
    Eugenics was a popular realm of science once upon a time, and questions like those were rightly consigned to that of taboo subjects.

    Eugenics was not science, it was an application of science.

    How science should be applied is a moral issue that doesn't fall within the realm of science.


  • Options
    #71
    ed2hands
    Closed Accounts Posts: 873 ✭✭✭ed2hands


    Seachmall wrote: »
    Eugenics was not science, it was an application of science.

    How science should be applied is a moral issue that doesn't fall within the realm of science.

    Couldn't agree more.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #72
    Irish Guitarist
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,736 ✭✭✭Irish Guitarist


    Usually when an atheist posts here about how much more intelligent they are than religious people they misspell every second word.

    Not that atheists are any less intelligent than religious people. I just find that smug people on the internet that think they're highly intelligent are usually no such thing.


  • Options
    #73
    pragmatic1
    Registered Users Posts: 5,573 ✭✭✭pragmatic1


    Sky King wrote: »
    Success is subjective, and different people have different priorities in life.

    For some people, success is rearing a healthy happy family. Is this any less valid than business or sporting success?
    Who says you can only be successful in one field. I'm sure many successful business people also have a good family life.


  • Options
    #74
    Darkginger
    Registered Users Posts: 695 ✭✭✭Darkginger


    I'm an atheist who is good at intelligence tests. I don't feel superior to religious people, I just can't believe what they believe, nor understand how they can believe it. The idea of having faith in something greater than ourselves is very appealing - but I've never been able to find that faith - I'm hounded by logic :( Religion would be a wonderful comfort, but it's one I just don't have access to, the way my mind works being the barrier. It's not a choice, I just can't believe in a god any more than I can in fairies. Possibly my loss!


  • Options
    #75
    Manach
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 9,703 Mod ✭✭✭✭Manach


    Being the plain and simple religious type, I'd usually expect a link to the OP's mentioned sites, or at least some academic article supporting his assertion.


  • Options
    #76
    Seachmall
    Registered Users Posts: 7,041 ✭✭✭Seachmall


    Manach wrote: »
    Being the plain and simple religious type, I'd usually expect a link to the OP's mentioned sites, or at least some academic article supporting his assertion.

    Why Liberals and Atheists Are More Intelligent

    IQ AND THE VALUES OF NATIONS


  • Options
    #77
    Kidchameleon
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,482 ✭✭✭Kidchameleon


    MagicMarker wrote: »
    Not being able to read is completely retarded, you should learn.

    In other words I made an excellent point to which you have no answer for so you resort to pointless slagging. Yes, very clever you are :rolleyes:


  • Options
    #78
    take everything
    Registered Users Posts: 9,805 ✭✭✭take everything


    Seachmall wrote: »
    The science doesn't care about hurt feelings or controversy. It simply aims to explains the world irregardless of who it may offend.

    :pac:


  • Options
    #79
    af_thefragile
    Registered Users Posts: 7,171 ✭✭✭af_thefragile


    I know intelligent people who believe in God,
    I know dumb people who believe in God.

    I know intelligent people who don't believe in God.
    I know dumb people who don't believe in God.


    One may think far more dumb people believe in God than intelligent people. Well, it depends on what scale you're using to measure intelligence. Not all intelligence is an IQ test score. Also most people in the world believe in God hence why you'll find more of each type of people believing in God.

    One may think its mostly the intelligent people who don't believe in God. Well, again it depends on how you measure intelligence. Unfortunately most people think they're intelligent and their actions and believes are a result of their sole intelligence, while in reality they're quite wrong. They're blindly following the word as much as the other.


    Bottom line is intelligence is subjective. Some people are good at maths while others are good at music. If you get a mathematician with no knowledge of music theory to sit an A level music exam, he'll very likely fail and similarly if you get a musician who hasn't studied much of higher maths, sit an A level maths exam, he'll quite likely fail as well. That doesn't make either a dumb person just because they're not good at something. Similarly some people have read a lot of literature and are very good at language while others haven't read much literature but have an excellent ability to use their imagination and create fantastic artworks. Doesn't make one more intelligent than the other.

    Hence intelligence is subjective and therefore can't be taken as a benchmark towards the validation of such arguments.


    Religion is the result of how a person interprets his reality. Some can see the reason in a higher being setting the cogs in motion of this incredible system we can never fully comprehend. Other see the systems to be self sufficient and in perpetual motion. Still doesn't make one's reason more valid than the others. It's all just theories and you follow what you see the light in.


  • Options
    #80
    Seachmall
    Registered Users Posts: 7,041 ✭✭✭Seachmall


    af_thefragile wrote: »
    I know intelligent people who believe in God,
    I know dumb people who believe in God.

    I know intelligent people who don't believe in God.
    I know dumb people who don't believe in God.
    [...]
    Also most people in the world believe in God hence why you'll find more of each type of people believing in God.

    One may think its mostly the intelligent people who don't believe in God. Well, again it depends on how you measure intelligence. Unfortunately most people think they're intelligent and their actions and believes are a result of their sole intelligence, while in reality they're quite wrong. They're blindly following the word as much as the other.
    Which is why statistics is used in favour of anecdotal evidence.

    I have an uncle with a degree is physics, maths, chemistry and pedagogy with a PhD in education, he also has an honorary degree from some Russian University and is a former member of Mensa. He lectures, writes books on education and has represented Ireland in chess tournaments. By all accounts he's a very intelligent man, he's also a very religious man. By far the most religious man I know.

    I also know an atheist who couldn't justify his position without butchering some Dawkins quote he misinterpreted once.

    That doesn't negate the statistical findings.
    Hence intelligence is subjective and therefore can't be taken as a benchmark towards the validation of such arguments.
    Intelligence may be subjective (I'm not sure about that one) but IQ is not and whilst it is far from covering all the bases of intelligence (creative, emotional etc.) it has been used successfully as a good indicator of general intelligence.


  • Options
    #81
    af_thefragile
    Registered Users Posts: 7,171 ✭✭✭af_thefragile


    Seachmall wrote: »
    Intelligence may be subjective (I'm not sure about that one) but IQ is not and whilst it is far from covering all the bases of intelligence (creative, emotional etc.) it has been used successfully as a good indicator of general intelligence.

    Same applies to IQ. Different benchmarks for different people.
    If you ask a kid in Mali who's never had the opportunity to go to school to be able to be able to correlate english phrases or deducing linear mathematical problems or even ask who were the Allies in the 2nd world war, he will quite likely fail. Doesn't mean he's a stupid kid for all one knows he may be more intelligent than many in what he does.

    Bush people have a remarkable ability to track animals by using the most faintest of traces that most people could never notice. Such a skill requires an excellent level of observation and logical deduction. They can be stated as very intelligent people in respect to what they do. Yet if a westerner listens to their tales of witches, demons and monsters, he'ld very quickly deduce the bush man to be someone of a lesser intelligence than himself who holds multiple degrees from some of the greatest universities of the developed world.

    Though to the Bush man, his ancestor's tales of witches, demons and monsters make perfect sense to the way he relates to the world and views life. Infact he might believe the westerner is dumb to not see the logical reasoning in the tales he believes in and how they relate to his present world.

    I'm currently reading "The Hero With a Thousand Faces" by Joseph Campbell. It very nicely highlights the logical reasoning and significance of most myths which most modern people have come to discern as inane fairly tales to keep people entertained, yet to the ancients it meant a lot more than just amusement stories but tools by which to relate to and measure the world.



    Hence again, intelligence is subjective. Different people see and perceive things in a different way. Doesn't make one less intelligent than the other. Its all based upon the abilities of the individual. There are some remarkably intelligent people who don't believe in the existence of God such as Stephen Hawkins. There have also been throughout history many highly intelligent individuals who believed in the concept of God and wrote much about their logical discourses towards their reasoning.

    Just because we're living in a time when there maybe more intellectuals talking about their disbelieve in God doesn't invalidate the great intellectuals of the past whose reasoning towards believing in a God still applies in this 21st century in many ways and will for the times to come.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #82
    Seachmall
    Registered Users Posts: 7,041 ✭✭✭Seachmall


    af_thefragile wrote: »
    Same applies to IQ.
    No it doesn't. IQ was designed as an objective measurement.
    There are some remarkably intelligent people who don't believe in the existence of God such as Stephen Hawkins. There have also been throughout history many highly intelligent individuals who believed in the concept of God and wrote much about their logical discourses towards their reasoning.

    Just because we're living in a time when there maybe more intellectuals talking about their disbelieve in God doesn't invalidate the great intellectuals of the past whose reasoning towards believing in a God still applies in this 21st century in many ways and will for the times to come.
    Once again that is all completely irrelevant.

    The rest of your post seemed to be discussing education.

    I won't use the word "intelligent" if you don't like it however recent findings have suggested there is a correlation between IQ and religious belief. That's all the discussion is about, take from "IQ" what you will.


  • Options
    #83
    Laisurg
    Registered Users Posts: 810 ✭✭✭Laisurg


    Not sure about other countries but certainly not the case in Ireland, I know loads of people who think they're some kind of intellectual purely because they're an atheist.


  • Options
    #84
    Logical Fallacy
    Registered Users Posts: 5,933 ✭✭✭Logical Fallacy


    Laisurg wrote: »
    Not sure about other countries but certainly not the case in Ireland, I know loads of people who think they're some kind of intellectual purely because they're an atheist.

    I bet they haven't even read Kafka.


  • Options
    #85
    CoolHat
    Closed Accounts Posts: 569 ✭✭✭CoolHat


    dilbert2 wrote: »
    There are a lot of websites on the internet indicating that atheism often increases with education and a rise in intelligence. For instance, countries with better education systems and higher IQ’s are usually secular with little religion. In secular nations such as Sweden there also seems to be a lot less bigotry, sexism etc. than what one would find in a more religious and superstitious society and this is surely a sign of intellectual maturity and intelligence.

    Do you agree that there is a correlation between atheism/ secularism, and a better educated, less superstitious populace?


    THIS IS WHAT I ABSOLUTELY HATE ABOUT YOUR AVERAGE ATHIEST! :mad:
    Its the whole "i'm better than you" mentality (with the "im right, you're wrong" mentality nicely as an undertone) :rolleyes: By saying athiests are more smart, "less" bigots, "less" sexists, they are saying people of faith are. (Aka, athiests are better than people of faith) ... live and let live!

    If someone wants to believe in a higher power. So be it. If someone wants to believe there is no higher power. So be it. Each to their own. Have respect. All I can say from my own experience is I've come into contact with more athiests who looked down upon people of faith than i have with religious people who look down upon athiests.

    I've seen the words "intelligence" used too much with athiests. And it sickens me. Im sorry if i am ranting but its really a trait i hate in people (that trait being bigging oneself up trying to prove ones own opinion by using a perticular unfounded notion)


  • Options
    #86
    noxqs
    Registered Users Posts: 413 ✭✭noxqs


    Atheists are better than theists. You don't see Atheists trying to enforce their views on other people via the law ? Banning alcohol, homosexuality, nudity on TV, and all the rest that is or was there on the books.

    Theists have caused untold pain and misery on millions of people.

    Atheists may be ass-holes but atleast their beliefs didnt harm anyone


  • Options
    #87
    CrazyRabbit
    Registered Users Posts: 8,659 ✭✭✭CrazyRabbit


    I more inclined to believe that religious people as a group, are generally more ignorant, but I don't believe intelligence plays a large role.

    I would also guess that wealth plays an big role as well in whether or not a person is religious/atheist. Poorer people need more 'hope' and religion/churches can provide this. (this would be evident in the decline of the Catholic church during Ireland's boom.)


  • Options
    #88
    k.p.h
    Registered Users Posts: 1,645 ✭✭✭k.p.h


    CoolHat wrote: »
    THIS IS WHAT I ABSOLUTELY HATE ABOUT YOUR AVERAGE ATHIEST! :mad:
    Its the whole "i'm better than you" mentality (with the "im right, you're wrong" mentality nicely as an undertone) :rolleyes: By saying athiests are more smart, "less" bigots, "less" sexists, they are saying people of faith are. (Aka, athiests are better than people of faith) ... live and let live!

    If someone wants to believe in a higher power. So be it. If someone wants to believe there is no higher power. So be it. Each to their own. Have respect. All I can say from my own experience is I've come into contact with more athiests who looked down upon people of faith than i have with religious people who look down upon athiests.

    I've seen the words "intelligence" used too much with athiests. And it sickens me. Im sorry if i am ranting but its really a trait i hate in people (that trait being bigging oneself up trying to prove ones own opinion by using a perticular unfounded notion)

    I think you completely miss the problem atheists have with religions as in the reason they are actively against religion. Its not a case of each to their own because if it was then atheists would be the first to say OK do what you want. Religious influence is entwined through every level of our society and also through a lot of decision processes.

    Muslim suicide bomber.. Each to their own
    Jews killing Palestinians .. Ah each to their own
    Jihad .. Each to their own
    Shahid vs Sunni .. Leave em at it
    Pope Benedict preventing the course of justice .. Leave him at it

    When you say "each to their own" you are of course right, thats the way it should be. But its not. people all around the world everyday are subjected to the brainwashing nonsense of religions, it has to stop for the good of everyone.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QGMuIyBK5P4


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6axdZAxyt2g


  • Options
    #89
    Seachmall
    Registered Users Posts: 7,041 ✭✭✭Seachmall


    CoolHat wrote: »
    THIS IS WHAT I ABSOLUTELY HATE ABOUT YOUR AVERAGE ATHIEST! :mad:
    Its the whole "i'm better than you" mentality (with the "im right, you're wrong" mentality nicely as an undertone) :rolleyes: By saying athiests are more smart, "less" bigots, "less" sexists, they are saying people of faith are. (Aka, athiests are better than people of faith) ... live and let live!

    If someone wants to believe in a higher power. So be it. If someone wants to believe there is no higher power. So be it. Each to their own. Have respect. All I can say from my own experience is I've come into contact with more athiests who looked down upon people of faith than i have with religious people who look down upon athiests.

    I've seen the words "intelligence" used too much with athiests. And it sickens me. Im sorry if i am ranting but its really a trait i hate in people (that trait being bigging oneself up trying to prove ones own opinion by using a perticular unfounded notion)

    You're suggesting Atheists are saying they're smarter than everyone else, which is wrong.


  • Options
    #90
    MagicMarker
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 32,865 ✭✭✭✭MagicMarker


    Kidchameleon wrote: »
    In other words I made an excellent point to which you have no answer for so you resort to pointless slagging. Yes, very clever you are :rolleyes:
    Actually, no. Your ''intelligent'' point consisted of completely misunderstanding pretty much what this thread is about, and then you provided a list of smart theists, which you fucked up anyway because they weren't all theists.

    Go back, read the thread, and try again.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #91
    nozzferrahhtoo
    Registered Users Posts: 9,340 ✭✭✭nozzferrahhtoo


    dilbert2 wrote: »
    There are a lot of websites on the internet indicating that atheism often increases with education and a rise in intelligence.

    Do you agree that there is a correlation between atheism/ secularism, and a better educated, less superstitious populace?

    I agree with it to a point. It would be dangerous however to read too much into the correlation. Very well educated and very intelligent people have been theists too. However an increase in education and intelligence does apparently correlate with a decrease generally in religiosity.

    So where comes the apparent contradiction?

    It comes from the fact that there are many reasons people subscribe to religion/god belief (not the same thing but for the purposes of this post they are close enough to make no difference).

    Fear of death, child hood indoctrination, ignorance, wishful thinking, personal unexplained experiences, delusion, pride, simple laziness, or even claiming to believe for reasons when one actually does not... one could list all day the reasons for such beliefs.

    So an increase in education standard will not wipe out religious beliefs as it only targets one of the many causes of such belief. Some of history's best minds had some of the weirdest delusional ideas. Look at Isaac Newton for example and some of the nutty ideas he subscribed to. No one would question his intelligence, yet he believed some entirely unsubstantiated things.
    Killer Pigeon wrote: »
    I think it's obvious that creationists have a very low IQ though.

    I am not so sure. Some of them are deluded and some of them liars. But there are many of them that are clearly not stupid people. Creationist Poster box Micheal Behe and Creationist fraud, liar and convicted criminal Kent Hovind for example display some keen intelligence at times.

    Though where there are stupid people there are intelligent people acting stupid in order to feed off the actual stupid ones.
    Irish Guitarist wrote: »
    Usually when an atheist posts here about how much more intelligent they are than religious people they misspell every second word.

    Typing ability is not really a reflection of intelligence though. I misspell a lot of words too. Not because I can not spell them, but due to time constraints I type much faster than I should and my posts are often riddled with errors.

    So I am afraid your source of mirth is likely not as relevant as you might want it to be.


Advertisement