Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I most certainly did read it. I'm wondering why the OP was against it...
Quote:
Originally Posted by kiggy
Please, I would be devastated if you remained mad at me!
I'm merely puzzled by the original poster --he dismisses the entire article as nonsense. I'm saying that unless the article completely agrees with what YOU (atheists) believe, then it's garbage. You can't substitute Christian for spiritual. It's intellectually dishonest and I stand by that statement.
Maybe the OP should explain why he dismisses the article.
because of this:
“It all falls down to what you consider to be religious,” said Schwadel, an assistant professor at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln. “If it’s simply attending religious services, then no. Highly educated people are not less religious; in fact, they’re more religious.”
I don't agree with the statement above.
Although i know very smart people who attend church, i don't believe for a second that with more education, comes a stronger belief in a deity.
because of this:
“It all falls down to what you consider to be religious,” said Schwadel, an assistant professor at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln. “If it’s simply attending religious services, then no. Highly educated people are not less religious; in fact, they’re more religious.”
I don't agree with the statement above.
Although i know very smart people who attend church, i don't believe for a second that with more education, comes a stronger belief in a deity.
Read the study itself... it is far easier to comprehend then the CNN article, which is a maze of words to most perusers. I believe that it found the more you attended religious services the more educated you were when it comes to secular schooling...nothing to do with atheists. Atheists that attend atheist meetings more often probably are more educated than the atheists who don't.
No because it is a pretty safe bet and nothing to do with Atheism. The Media is almost universally atrocious at reporting on Scientific Studies. The reason for this is that the Media quite happily breaks one of the main laws of Statistics and they do it because it gives them a good story that sells papers.
The law is "Correlation does not imply causation".
It is a very simple rule but it is inconvenient for the media to follow it so they ignore it.
I cannot rep you enough for your post, but especially for this ^^^ part of it. I do a lot of "translating" of the scientific jargon into plain English, and my professional reputation is built on understanding and revering that one law and not forgetting it in my writing. Now if CNN and the mass media could also grasp that one simple concept, their readers would have a much richer and deeper understanding of science.
As for this...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nozzferrahhtoo
I have read the study in question a number of times and I can tell you there is no link at all described or displayed in the study. Read it yourself and correct me if you believe I am wrong. What there in fact is however is a few vague correlations and unsurprising ones at that and there are many well known reasons why higher education correlates with things like Mass Attendance.
For example when the school parents wish to send their children to are run by... or the entrance acceptance is controlled by... someone of faith or someone involved in a church then people tend to start attending church in order to get in the "good books" of the controller and as we know in many countries the education system is still in the grip of the Churches. My own country of Ireland for example still has the majority of it's schools under Catholic Patronage.
And the speaker in the article linked above confirms this. He says it is dependent on what you consider "religious" and he adds “If it’s simply attending religious services, then no. Highly educated people are not less religious; in fact, they’re more religious. But if it’s saying the Bible is the literal word of God and saying that only one religion is the true religion, then they are less religious”
This fits exactly what I just said. I know what someone like you would LIKE this study to be "proving" but I can tell you it does not in any way show anything that the likes of you would like it to. In fact it appears the study is really saying that the more educated a person is the more they feel obliged to ACT like they are religious. That is both no surprise AND pretty typical of the type of dishonesty religion engenders in people.
As I said however, I am very open to being wrong on this so go read the actual study yourself as I have (it is available and as the article says it will be published in more places soon so will be even easier to obtain) and attempt to show anything I have said to be wrong instead of using your usual one liner ad hominem digs to cop out of actually engaging with the real issue and arguing an actual case of your own.
How DARE the likes of YOU call ME an atheist? It's not that I don't believe you, its that YOU don't believe me! I believe in God as the fountain and sustainor of ALL that is good, like science and agnosticism and schools and charity and friendliness and beauty, etc etc. for there would not be enough books in this world to fill with the glories of God.
How dare you misunderstand me? I wanted the writer of the article to change the words in his title from "Religious" to "spiritual" nothing to do with Christiantiy (end your delerium of persecution, no one cares about your biases).
The O.P. and others clearly explained that the title was misleading... and many questioned the study itself because it is Psychology, and you are always supposed to have a degree of doubt about their studies.
this was only ONE study, so it SHOULD be questioned. I am not an atheist, I merely pretend to represent them as I used to be one, just like I used to be a Christian, so I am very knowledgeable about Christian arguments as well.
Methinks that were it truth, it would be "luminous conjecture".
Methinks that were it truth, it would be "luminous conjecture".
Why even the title "Luminous" that would be a conjecture in itself. The point is that obviously it is my own thoughts, and you don't have to agree with me. The point of the name is to draw attention to the subject. It's supposed to be a radical name that is easy to remember.
But it's spot on target when you get media studies that say that the more educated are less relgious, right?
You would do well not to assume anything about me and/or my opinions. The answer is "no" to your question. If the media reports on a study that goes "my" way I will be JUST as critical of that study. So no, I do not have the bias you have just invented for me here.
In fact it is just plain good sense to be just as critical of the studies that support what I want too.... because the fact is that if I am not.... someone else will be and if I present a study that is essentially bunk then someone else will pull me up on it and hand my ass to me (as I just did).
My advice to you, and to everyone, is if you find a study that interests you while reading any news media... then go read the study yourself and see if it actually says what the media claims it says.... before you go citing it or using it for your own ends.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yzette
I cannot rep you enough for your post, but especially for this ^^^ part of it. I do a lot of "translating" of the scientific jargon into plain English, and my professional reputation is built on understanding and revering that one law and not forgetting it in my writing.
I can not over recommend "Bad Science" by Ben Goldacre if you have not yet purchased it. Its a must read for anyone working in science in the media and how the media very often (and very willfully too) mis-report science.
Thinking-man...I've read the article and been thinkingI think the title to the article is a very poor choice of words...very misleading...when basically what I get is that you can be just as intelligent if you believe as if you don't....personally my favorite quote( Disraeli,I think) is.."where education ends.religion begins".
Thinking-man...I've read the article and been thinkingI think the title to the article is a very poor choice of words...very misleading...when basically what I get is that you can be just as intelligent if you believe as if you don't....personally my favorite quote( Disraeli,I think) is.."where education ends.religion begins".
Thanks for the reply.
i agree with you....and yes, i like that quote too! :-)
i also find it amusing that 'someone' changed the name of my thread "i'm going to call B.S. on this 'study'......thoughts?" by taking out the "B.S."
i didn't know you can't even say BS here!
silly!
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I think the title to the article is a very poor choice of words...very misleading...when basically what I get is that you can be just as intelligent if you believe as if you don't....personally my favorite quote( Disraeli,I think) is.."where education ends.religion begins".
