A new study at the University of British Columbia shows that analytic thinking can decrease religious belief. No great surprise as a general observation, some might be thinking, but it's interesting that getting people perform analytic tasks seems to actually produce an (at least temporary) reduction in religiosity.
I think that in the future, the cognitive sciences may take over from traditional areas like evolution as the main battleground between science and religion. That's for various reasons, but important amongst them is that scientists are studying religiosity and religious beliefs themselves.
'Can' is a Weasel Word like maybe or perhaps, and doesn't really show anything. The computer in front of you 'can' blow up or someone drive a car through your living room, yet neither statement really indicates probability. It's all circumstantial and depends to what extent one's religious belief or faith was founded on conviction from honest examination of the evidence as opposed to brainwashed ignorance. Religion like political beliefs or any kind of major worldview is too often the result of second-hand information where people simply rely on someone else to do their thinking rather than considering the evidence for themselves and reaching their own conclusions.
'Can' is a Weasel Word like maybe or perhaps, and doesn't really show anything. The computer in front of you 'can' blow up or someone drive a car through your living room, yet neither statement really indicates probability.
Wrong. It says that the probability is greater than zero. (I note your own use of the weasel word 'really'.) We would need to read the paper to know what the actual value is. But your implied suggestion that [paraphrasing] "since the headline uses the word 'can' therefore the odds are near zero" is baseless.
Jzyehoshua writes:
It's all circumstantial and depends to what extent one's religious belief or faith was founded on conviction from honest examination of the evidence as opposed to brainwashed ignorance.
...and also how much analytical thinking they are encouraged to do.
Jzyehoshua writes:
Religion like political beliefs or any kind of major worldview is too often the result of second-hand information where people simply rely on someone else to do their thinking rather than considering the evidence for themselves and reaching their own conclusions.
Analytic thinking would help them overcome this, yes? Because there is a paper being published in Science regarding how analytical thinking causes a decrease in religious belief. I think it agrees with your opinion that religious views are too often the result of inaccurate thinking.
'Can' is a Weasel Word like maybe or perhaps, and doesn't really show anything. The computer in front of you 'can' blow up or someone drive a car through your living room, yet neither statement really indicates probability.
But my dear chap, it is you who is weaseling the word. They have shown that in their experiments at least, analytic thought doesdecrease religiosity. You can see perfectly well that those are in fact the results they've got. And then you weasel the word "can" by suggesting that when they say "can" they might be talking about some bare and remote future possibility, rather than something that they've watched happening. If there's a mustelid round here, it's you.
It's all circumstantial and depends to what extent one's religious belief or faith was founded on conviction from honest examination of the evidence as opposed to brainwashed ignorance.
But not, perhaps, in the way that you suppose. For example, no amount of analytical thinking alone will change your asinine opinions about hominid fossils as recently expressed in the age correlations thread --- precisely because they were formed, not on the basis of lazy thinking about the facts, but on the basis of complete ignorance of the facts. Analytic thought needs some material to work with. It is precisely "brainwashed ignorance" which will successfully defeat analytic thought.
It will, therefore, be just those religious people who have made some effort at honesty who will be made less religious by thinking more.
Religion like political beliefs or any kind of major worldview is too often the result of second-hand information where people simply rely on someone else to do their thinking rather than considering the evidence for themselves and reaching their own conclusions.
Exactly. That's why aberrations like creationism exist. Bad thinking makes for bad theology.
On the bright side, the experiment suggests that maybe bad thinking "can" be cured.
But my dear chap, it is you who is weaseling the word. They have shown that in their experiments at least, analytic thought doesdecrease religiosity. You can see perfectly well that those are in fact the results they've got. And then you weasel the word "can" by suggesting that when they say "can" they might be talking about some bare and remote future possibility, rather than something that they've watched happening. If there's a mustelid round here, it's you.
That analytic thought does decrease religiosity is very different from can decrease religiosity. I see the latter shown from the findings, not the former, and again, to me it logically appears dependent upon the type of religiosity being discussed. I did look at the articles but the first gives no definite values while the second can't be accessed.
That analytic thought does decrease religiosity is very different from can decrease religiosity. I see the latter shown from the findings, not the former.
But what they showed is that it did decrease religiosity.
™ Version 4.0 Beta
