IQ vs. Religiosity

[PuppyChow]

My English teacher told me religion is a way that human deals with their fear of the unknown. So, base on that, people who knows less would be more in need of this method to deal with unknown than more intelligent people who find answers to deal with the unknown. Just my opinion, I'm sure it's not brilliant.

This is a quote from my dad (a science teacher): "High school teachers are stupid. Sure, some are smart, but really, most of them aren't that smart." I can attest to that with almost all of my teachers.

Oh and that isn't your opinion. That's your English teacher's .

[Boingo]

What the study shows are facts. How your interpret them is another thing.

It's actually more subtle than that.  A study "shows" its findings, not facts.  You have to interpret those findings within the context of the study methods, the population studied and the measures the investigators used to limit their own biases (among other factors as well.)  In this way, 2 studies on similar topics could have conflicting findings--but certainly not conflicting facts.

A fact is something incontrovertible and not that interesting to report since nobody could (or reasonably would) disagree with it.  An example: Bowling balls weigh more than golf balls.  Was that even in question? No.  Will it make headlines? Let's hope not.

A finding is an attempt to shed light on an area of uncertainty by taking measurements and weaving together a story to either support or refute an a priori hypothesis.  In the case of this study, the hypothesis may have been something like: Populations with higher IQs place less value on religion in their personal lives than people with lower IQs do.  That gives something testable, so they went out and measured people's IQs and measured the value people put on religion and then analyzed the results.  But another investigator group could employ different techniques to measure IQ or measure religious value or even repeat the same measures in different populations and come to different conclusions--that is, their findings could conflict with the first group's findings.  That is why it is important for different groups of researchers to reproducibly come up with similar findings before getting all excited about it.

[Belthus]

I would say that economic development drives both of the factors. As countries develop, they become less religious. As countries develop, people also have better nutrition and environmental conditions. Lead paint does wonders for brain development.  I don't think there is any reason to believe there is any permanent difference in intelligence among countries.

[jalambut]

Christianity has an answer to this

1 Corinthians 1:26-  Brothers, think of what you were when you were called. Not many of you were wise
by human standards; not many were influential; not many were of noble birth.

and Jesus himself said:

 At that time Jesus said, "I praise you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because you have hidden these things from the wise and learned, and revealed them to little children. Yes, Father, for this was your good pleasure.

 "All things have been committed to me by my Father. No one knows the Son except the Father, and no one knows the Father except the Son and those to whom the Son chooses to reveal him.

 "Come to me, all you who are weary and burdened, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you and learn from me, for I am gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. For my yoke is easy and my burden is light."
- Matthew 11:25-30

Of course the above only applies to Christians, for the religious in general, consider the correlation of Intelligence/Education and Wealth, and then remember Matthew 19,

'When the young man heard this, he went away sad, because he had great wealth.

 23Then Jesus said to his disciples, "I tell you the truth, it is hard for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven. 24Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God."

Why is it hard?  Rich people don't need God, they trust their education, money, houses, and health insurance, and say God is for those poor, pathetic people... I think, however, that God sees things a little bit differently.

John

[Artois]

On a tangent....

I read a story a while back regarding one of the top poker players, who was willing to wager his own money ($100,000 I believe) to any fundamental christian who could beat him in an advanced mathematical test.

His money was safe, because a mind capable of accepting illogical and unsubstantiated 'truths' would not be very successful in advanced mathematics.

[PuppyChow]

On a tangent....

I read a story a while back regarding one of the top poker players, who was willing to wager his own money ($100,000 I believe) to any fundamental christian who could beat him in an advanced mathematical test.

His money was safe, because a mind capable of accepting illogical and unsubstantiated 'truths' would not be very successful in advanced mathematics.

Yes. That's why I'm (currently) valedictorian of my class (one of the top high schools in Missouri) with an H (97% or above) in +Algebra 2 Trig, +Chemistry, and +Biology. And I plan on going to a college like Duke, Michigan, or Stanford. I'm not sure what you consider advanced mathematics, but if you mean Calculus I'm going to get at least an A in AP Calculus BC when I take it.

AKA, I'm really good at math and science. And I'm religious. Go figure.

(Re-reading it, I see you said fundamentalist. Which I'm not, but the point still stands. You can be both smart and religious.)

[acelink]

On a tangent....

I read a story a while back regarding one of the top poker players, who was willing to wager his own money ($100,000 I believe) to any fundamental christian who could beat him in an advanced mathematical test.

His money was safe, because a mind capable of accepting illogical and unsubstantiated 'truths' would not be very successful in advanced mathematics.

Yes. That's why I'm (currently) valedictorian of my class (one of the top high schools in Missouri) with an H (97% or above) in +Algebra 2 Trig, +Chemistry, and +Biology. And I plan on going to a college like Duke, Michigan, or Stanford. I'm not sure what you consider advanced mathematics, but if you mean Calculus I'm going to get at least an A in AP Calculus BC when I take it.

AKA, I'm really good at math and science. And I'm religious. Go figure.

(Re-reading it, I see you said fundamentalist. Which I'm not, but the point still stands. You can be both smart and religious.)

It is possible to have a 'smart' religious person.  I wouldn't say it is probable to have a 'well rounded' one.

Are religious people stupid? No.  That's not what I'm saying...   A lot of religious people apparently lose their incentive to the sciences.  "Evolution, NONSENSE!  God put us here"  I really do not care for that argument.  It is useless and adds nothing.

That view is changing.  Some of the new denominations of Christianity that are more accepting of science.  Puppy I believe you fall in this category.  I have no problem with these new denominations although I am a bit skeptic...  Why?  The Bible was not written in English... Translation is a HUGE.  English is a really 'weird' language...


Some well-known historical astronomers/scientists were well-versed in the Bible and found insight by translating it.  (I would have to look into my notes to name a few...) My point is: if people learned the original language/s of their faith, I would be more open to the religion argument.  Right now is the word of the word of the word of someone else.  The 'telephone' game on crack...  Translation is key.

[Artois]

Yes, it was specifically fundamentalist ie. buying into the virgin birth, 6000 years of the world, etc... and believing these literally.

[acelink]

Yes, it was specifically fundamentalist ie. buying into the virgin birth, 6000 years of the world, etc... and believing these literally.

pretty sure all denominations of Christianity still believe in the virgin birth.

[Boingo]

His money was safe, because a mind capable of accepting illogical and unsubstantiated 'truths' would not be very successful in advanced mathematics.

This is ill-informed, mean-spirited and offensive.  I you were only trying for the latter 2.

For you reference, I've included a short list of some of the many religious people who happened to be "very successful in advanced mathematics," you may have heard of a few of them.  Some of them even invented new types of math:

Blaise Pascal (mathemetician, Catholic philosopher)
Rene Descartes (mathemetician, Roman Catholic)
Isaac Newton (mathemetician, physicist, theologian)
Nicolaus Copernicus (mathemetician, Catholic cleric)
Johannes Kepler (astonomer, mathemetician, used religious reasoning in his works)

[Artois]

His money was safe, because a mind capable of accepting illogical and unsubstantiated 'truths' would not be very successful in advanced mathematics.

This is ill-informed, mean-spirited and offensive.  I you were only trying for the latter 2.

For you reference, I've included a short list of some of the many religious people who happened to be "very successful in advanced mathematics," you may have heard of a few of them.  Some of them even invented new types of math:

Blaise Pascal (mathemetician, Catholic philosopher)
Rene Descartes (mathemetician, Roman Catholic)
Isaac Newton (mathemetician, physicist, theologian)
Nicolaus Copernicus (mathemetician, Catholic cleric)
Johannes Kepler (astonomer, mathemetician, used religious reasoning in his works)

Slow down Boingo, the bet required a fundementalist Christian, one who is capable of swallowing the ideas in the bible as literal ie. the earth is 6000 yrs old, Jesus was born of a virgin etc.  and passing a lie detector test.  Then sitting a test (SAT?) and beating Mr Sklansky (I found out more, but I'm still paraphasing).

I would like to question Newton, Pascal & Descartes, but it's quite impossible now... further I wonder if they would be open to the information that is currently available with regards to religion, and whether they would change their views?

[Boingo]

Slow down Boingo, the bet required a fundementalist Christian, one who is capable of swallowing the ideas in the bible as literal ie. the earth is 6000 yrs old, Jesus was born of a virgin etc.  and passing a lie detector test.  Then sitting a test (SAT?) and beating Mr Sklansky (I found out more, but I'm still paraphasing).

I would like to question Newton, Pascal & Descartes, but it's quite impossible now... further I wonder if they would be open to the information that is currently available with regards to religion, and whether they would change their views?

1. You're right about the fundamentalist Christian requirement for the bet.
2. It's a relatively safe bet since it's not that hard to ace the math section of the SAT and the bet stipulated you'd have to beat Mr. Slansky.  So if he aced it, you lose the bet no matter how well you do.
3. You're avoiding the crux of the complaint--those guys, like their contemporaries, believed a lot of things that'd seem crazy by today's standards and yet that didn't seem to limit their mathematical abilities.  Theism does not make someone less intelligent or less capable--that's just an atheist bias.