Thanks to the evangelical efforts of the New Atheism religion has gone totally out-of-style. All the cool kids know that faith is just the “opiate of the masses” and that theists are holding back progress.
But is it true? Are we theists just a bunch of dummies who need to get with the program?
Apparently, polls say that academics are more likely to be atheists and some assume this must be because higher IQ correlates with atheism.
Denyse O’Leary does an excellent job of debunking this assertion.
He analyzes the study that compares the average IQ of a nation with the number who claim to be atheists. There is significant differences among countries that have the same average IQ.
Here is the top 10 according to IQ. The number beside it is the percentage of the country claiming to be atheist.
- Singapore 108 13
- South Korea 106 30
- Japan 105 65
- Taiwan 105 24
- Italy 102 6
- Iceland 101 16
- Switzerland 101 17
- Austria 100 18
- Netherlands 100 42
- Norway 100 31
Italy is 6% atheist and the average IQ is 4 points higher than United States (98) while US has 10% Atheists. Going back to the original assertion That atheists are smarter and that is why they are more likely to be academics…I guess that might not be the reason.
I assert that the real reason is that Theists are just too cool for school.
Chels
July 26, 2011
How much of that population is agnostic though or goes to Church regularly? “Atheist” is a very ugly word, not one that many people want to be associated with.
The Deuce
July 26, 2011
Something else to keep in mind about those numbers: the top four countries are all East Asian. They may be technically atheist, but very few of those are atheist in the same sense that Western atheists are (meaning, they’re not materialists). Rather, they have religious backgrounds (eg. Buddhism) that aren’t theistic.
Alte
July 26, 2011
Interesting list.
I suspect that this is strongly trend-driven. In Italy you have the RCC’s heavy presence, which greatly influences academia there. Religion is very satisfying for the highly intelligent when it is theological and scholastic, less so when it’s more folksy in nature.
I was an atheist for a few years, but I found it a rather empty belief system. Natural Law is probably the religious teaching that I found most appealing, initially, and I suspect that the wisdom and utilitarian value of patriarchal religions is probably one of its main draws. Once you see how conclusive and sensible it is on the practical level, and you begin to delve more and more deeply into the specific teachings, the more the spiritual aspect also makes sense to you. Or, at least, that is my general impression and my own experience.
We should also remember that the highly intelligent tend to be drawn toward novelty, and therefore congregate wherever the intellectual thrust seems to be. For a while, that thrust was in atheism and liberalism, but that is waning and I see the trend moving to religion and traditionalism.
What I have also noticed is that the highly intelligent are less inclined to lukewarm faith, as they are extremely logic-driven and agnosticism is very unsatisfying for them. For myself, I decided that either there is a God and I should worship him, or there isn’t and then I should just do as I pleased. So there is a sharper orthodoxy/hedonism split.
Alte
July 26, 2011
Deuce,
I think Confucianism would be a better example.
Morticia
July 26, 2011
You guys might be interested in the ideological turing test over at Unequally Yoked. The voting is over the the results were interesting.
http://www.unequally-yoked.com/p/ideological-turing-test-contest.html
The Deuce
July 26, 2011
I think Confucianism would be a better example.
Yes, that too. And Shintoism (which contains lots of spirits, but not God), etc. The point is, most of those Asian “atheists” believe in a spiritual reality.
The Deuce
July 26, 2011
To give an example, large majorities of the Japanese population also, when polled, identify both as Shintoists *and* as Buddhists, despite being 65% “atheist” in this poll. So we’re clearly not talking about the same sort of atheism that comes to mind when we use that term here.
Alte
July 26, 2011
The book I read recently about scientists and religion suggested that about 20% of the self-proclaimed atheists in the scientific community where spiritual in the same manner. Some leaning more Buddhist, some more New Age, etc. Environmentalism can be quite pagan-y.
The Deuce
July 26, 2011
Yup, even one of the New Atheists (Sam Harris) is in that boat, actually, though the others don’t like to talk about it too much.
Stewart Griffin
July 26, 2011
Not in England (nor the rest of Europe from what I have seen). Christian is the dirty word here, unless you specify non-believing ‘cultural Christian’.
The image brought a comment by Pope Benedict XVI to mind:
Brendan
July 26, 2011
Yeah be very skeptical of the 65% Japan figure other than in a very technical “non-theistic” sense. The Shinto and Buddhist temples in Japan are generally seeing a steady stream of people lighting candles, tying prayer flags, chanting or saying prayers and so on. Not “theistic” prayers, mind you, but prayers to non-theistic things like bodhisattvas or ancestors non-theist animal spirits and so on. Yep, what a bunch of atheists.
Alte
July 26, 2011
My transition to Christianity was actually started by my ex (an ardent atheist). We got in a debate and he claimed that Christians were all idiots smoking the opium of the masses (yes, MOrticia, that was his favorite quote). I countered that I knew quite intelligent people who were religious and that Christianity doesn’t imply stupidity. He just laughed, and said, “You’ve probably never even read the Bible. What do you know about Christianity?” Then he actually walked to his bookcase, pulled out a Bible (yes, he owned one and had apparently read it before), and threw it at me. “There you go. The official Holy Book, for you to read.”
Then I surprised him by sitting down and reading it. And reading… and reading… and going back to church… and moving out… and dumping his sorry ass. LOL
My first impressions were:
“Wow the OT is totally kick-ass.”
“Wow the NT is totally profound.”
“Now everything finally makes sense. Damn, this is good. Can’t believe I’ve never read this book before.”
He admitted later that he knew very talented physicists who were very devout, but he always figured they were exceptions to the general rule. I even got him to the point where he was like, “I don’t mind your religion-stuff, really. I’ll drive you to church on Sunday, if you like. We could have a minister marry us.” Lzlzlzlzz
I found it all ironic that an atheist should lead me back to Christ.
terri
July 26, 2011
I have a woman on my blogroll (had the pleasure of hanging out with her once) whose husband is a rocket scientist and a minister. I thought that was pretty cool since we’re often told that science and religion are mutually exclusive.
This wasn’t always the case, but you’d never know it to listen to modern debates on the subject.
Aaron Traas
July 26, 2011
I’m sincerely convinced, many times over, that God has quite a sense of humor.
Alte
July 26, 2011
I know a very devout astrophysicist, and lots of engineers.
Morticia
July 26, 2011
I was in a relationship with a guy who was a hardened atheist while I was an agnostic. I wasn’t even pro-life but when he made the comment that he would never raise a kid he didn’t want (and would demand the woman get an abortion) I realized how soulless he was and was completely repulsed. My next boyfriend was a devout Catholic.
Sometimes it just takes being confronted with the extremes of your own opinions to realize they aren’t so great.
Alte
July 26, 2011
I had the exact same experience, Morticia. I informed him that my period was a few days late, and his charming comment was, “Well, if you’re pregnant, you don’t have to worry about it. I’ll pay for the abortion.” I nearly swallowed my tongue.
Luckily, I wasn’t pregnant, but I was certainly horrified.
Black_Rose
July 26, 2011
I am off the DL for a while. BTW, a few weeks ago this place is like Citizen’s Bank Park, and now it is like Dodger Stadium or Sun Life Stadium. What happened?
I feel like a fucking genius who shorted a stock at its peak since I bailed on this blog before Alte’s popularity instead of Homer Simpson telling Moe that he lost a costumer when he was selling the Flaming Moe (Flaming Homer),
Gee… it seems that people are insulted when people claim that their own group has lower mean intelligence. Alte, what did you find in the Bible that convinced you that the Judeo-Christian God exists and that he is worthy of worship?
Alte, BTW, give this to your son. He might enjoy it. http://chesstempo.com/chess-problems/65405 (pick the best move, which leads to the gain in the most material or mate. requires six moves. Got it correct in three minutes.)
Alte
July 26, 2011
Alte, what did you find in the Bible that convinced you that the Judeo-Christian God exists and that he is worthy of worship?
Justice and Natural Law were the two biggest intellectual draws, I think. Also, communitarianism.
Svar
July 26, 2011
“Gee… it seems that people are insulted when people claim that their own group has lower mean intelligence.”
Not insulted, just amused.
Alte
July 26, 2011
More bewildered. I wonder if it holds up equally for all age cohorts?
Svar
July 26, 2011
When it comes to Japan, believing that your Emperor is God and worshipping him is a religion. The Imperial Cult is a religion. They don’t do that anymore, however.
Svar
July 26, 2011
As for Confucianism: http://orientem.blogspot.com/
This Confucius quote: “”The superior man is catholic and no partizan. The mean man is a partizan and not catholic.”
(君子周而不比、小人比而不周。) ─ Confucius, The Analects, 2.XIV, translation by James Legge.”
Confucius really said that….. strange.
Alte
July 26, 2011
He means “catholic” (universal) and not “Catholic”.
Svar
July 26, 2011
That makes sense, I forgot catholic means universal and on top of that Confucius was long dead before Christ was even born.
Black_Rose
July 26, 2011
Confucianism is not a religion; it is more of a political philosophy whose primary purpose is to encourage attitudes from all social classes to maintain social order (which is presumably perceived as a local optimum for the welfare and stability of Chinese society), not a form a spirituality. For example, peasants are encouraged to be content with their lot in their life because acceptance of their fate is said to lead to a state of high civilization mutually beneficial to all; in contrast, Confucianism curbs the economic and political individualism of the high classes which is inherently threatening to a feudalistic social order.
“Natural law” and “justice”? You do have to remember that secular ethicists have competing theories that obviate the need to invoke a deity. BTW, elaborate more on soi-disant “Natural Law”
Black_Rose
July 26, 2011
“That makes sense, I forgot catholic means universal and on top of that Confucius was long dead before Christ was even born.”
Ha ha. Your blunder is epic! <img src="http://www.webstuffscan.com/wp-content/uploads/2006/12/chess-blunder-of-the-century.jpg" Black to move!
David Alexander
July 26, 2011
Italy is 6% atheist and the average IQ is 4 points higher than United States (98) while US has 10% Atheists.
Nearly 25% of the United States’ population is composed of groups with average low IQ.
What I have also noticed is that the highly intelligent are less inclined to lukewarm faith
I guess I’m not intelligent.
The Deuce
July 26, 2011
Svar;
When it comes to Japan, believing that your Emperor is God and worshipping him is a religion. The Imperial Cult is a religion. They don’t do that anymore, however.
That was actually a variant of Shintoism. As Japan imperialized and prepared to expand across Asia, the government came up with and aggressively pushed an official, organized, nationalistic version of Shintoism (which, previously, had been a loose and varying collection of beliefs) in which the emperor was divine.
terri
July 26, 2011
I guess I’m not intelligent.
I thought this had already been established, but thank you for confirming.
Just a joke, DA. Sort of,
.
The Deuce
July 26, 2011
Your blunder is epic!
…followed by an epic HTML fail. But yeah, you fooked up, Svar :-p
Alte
July 26, 2011
No, Natural Law is worthy of its own post. The secular ethics are less satisfactory as they preclude Final Judgment. Only religions provide a mechanism where justice is complete and nobody gets away with injustice forever.
The Deuce
July 26, 2011
I am off the DL for a while. BTW, a few weeks ago this place is like Citizen’s Bank Park, and now it is like Dodger Stadium or Sun Life Stadium. What happened?
I feel like a fucking genius who shorted a stock at its peak since I bailed on this blog before Alte’s popularity instead of Homer Simpson telling Moe that he lost a costumer when he was selling the Flaming Moe (Flaming Homer),
Show of hands. Who besides me missed BR’s particular brand of nonsense? Chels just isn’t the same.
Svar
July 26, 2011
“But yeah, you fooked up, Svar :-p”
Haha, yeah, I know. I realized that was a real screw up. Damn, I feel dumb.
Svar
July 26, 2011
“That was actually a variant of Shintoism. As Japan imperialized and prepared to expand across Asia, the government came up with and aggressively pushed an official, organized, nationalistic version of Shintoism (which, previously, had been a loose and varying collection of beliefs) in which the emperor was divine.”
Interesting. Japan created a new religion out of their tradition beliefs for political reasons. That’s kind of like German neo-paganism or esoteric nazism.
“Show of hands. Who besides me missed BR’s particular brand of nonsense? Chels just isn’t the same.”
BR is unique in her approach and has you wondering how someone who is so smart can be so stupid. With Chels, you’re just wondering how someone can be so stupid.
Stewart Griffin
July 26, 2011
Is the first of these small and the other’s big or something else?
Brendan
July 26, 2011
Is the first of these small and the other’s big or something else?
It’s the reverse, more or less.
Keoni Galt
July 26, 2011
Question Alte…when you say the communitarianism was one of the main draws for you, is that a RCC thing?
You’re not speaking of the political philosophy as promoted by Amitai Etzioni?
The Deuce
July 26, 2011
Interesting. Japan created a new religion out of their tradition beliefs for political reasons. That’s kind of like German neo-paganism or esoteric nazism.
It’s almost exactly like it. Germany and Japan were doing basically the same thing during that time (although Naziism didn’t have Hitler being literally divine).
Bike Bubba
July 26, 2011
Just for kicks, I did a scatter graph of % atheism vs. IQ, and the R^2 value (statistical correlation) is about .008 for the first ten nations. In other words, no statistical correlation whatsoever.
But what do I know? I’m just one of those theists, I guess. Regarding the article’s discussion that someone had gotten R^2 of .6 on this (60% correlation to the model), send me the data and we’ll take a look.
And then we can discuss the fact that “atheism” means entirely different things in different cultures.
Or, put differently, the slew of ad hominem attacks which masquerades as modern atheist argument ought to put to rest any ideas that atheists are, as a whole, smarter than the rest of us. Yes, I’m looking at you, Professor Dawkins. His book proves little besides the fact that atheists are sinners in need of a Savior like the rest of us.
Morticia
July 26, 2011
Only religions provide a mechanism where justice is complete and nobody gets away with injustice forever.
This is a big one for me, and why I find the idea of hell more comforting than scary. The idea of someone who rapes babies not paying for their crimes is too awful to contemplate.
People who are like “I don’t believe in hell that just so mean” confuse me. Like… the idea of sitting side-by-side with an unrepentant Hitler in the afterlife actually comforts you? WTH?
alcestiseshtemoa
July 26, 2011
Both Christians and atheists have the lowest rates of attendance for university in the UK -> http://voxday.blogspot.com/2011/07/those-well-educated-atheists.html
I understand why a proportion of Christians avoid it (bashing of Christianity, encouragement of heresies and non-orthodoxy, liberalism) but I have little idea why atheists do.
alcestiseshtemoa
July 26, 2011
Rather, they have religious backgrounds (eg. Buddhism) that aren’t theistic.
Agreed. East Asian religion is typically non-theistic and polytheistic. Of those East Asians that are part of a non-theistic religion then possibly the contradictory category of “religious atheist” will do to describe them well.
Svar
July 26, 2011
“People who are like “I don’t believe in hell that just so mean” confuse me. Like… the idea of sitting side-by-side with an unrepentant Hitler in the afterlife actually comforts you? WTH?”
They just don’t want to be punished for their sins. Besides, it doesn’t matter what you believe. Reality exists outside of you and your mind. Just because you don’t believe in Hell, doesn’t mean you’re free from the brimstone or hellfire. Or the hollenhunds. It’s like not believing in Death. Not believing in Death won’t make you immortal.
alcestiseshtemoa
July 26, 2011
Blogger Bruce Charlton from the UK once remarked how high IQ people due to being so intelligent delve a lot into the abstract and may lose sight of concrete reality and therefore become more susceptible to erroneous concepts (e.g. atheism). He also talked about “autistic atheism” (atheists whom can’t understand or comprehend religious theism and belief because there is a “barrier” erected for whatever reason).
Alte
July 26, 2011
Who besides me missed BR’s particular brand of nonsense?
Hand up.
Alte
July 26, 2011
Keoni,
I’m referring to the communitarian nature of the Early Church.
Bike Bubba
July 26, 2011
Speaking of atheism leading to great advances in faith, I’m told that Chinese Christianity’s explosion started with the Cultural Revolution. If I lead a millionth as many people to Christ as Mao Zedong inadvertently did, I’ll be doing OK.
And speaking of Mao, interesting that that atheist (like Nero as a pagan/autotheist, thinking he was god?) did not reckon on his actions leading to a great spiritual revival in his nation. Mebbe he wasn’t as smart as he reckoned, either?
alcestiseshtemoa
July 26, 2011
I’m told that Chinese Christianity’s explosion started with the Cultural Revolution.
Martyrdom and persecution (same as the early Church and the beginning stages of Christianity but the early Church also had the advantage of the decline and decadence of the Roman Empire).
Cane Caldo
July 26, 2011
And speaking of Mao, interesting that that atheist (like Nero as a pagan/autotheist, thinking he was god?) did not reckon on his actions leading to a great spiritual revival in his nation. Mebbe he wasn’t as smart as he reckoned, either?
I think it’s the contrast. We in Christendom are a lot like the Jews of Jesus’ day: we already think we’re doing it right. When you have a guy like Mao running the joint, and the poor local church finds rice for your family while you’re sent off to be re-educated…Christians really shine in hostile circumstances. Christianity: it’s what’s for dinner.
Black_Rose
July 26, 2011
“BR is unique in her approach and has you wondering how someone who is so smart can be so stupid. With Chels, you’re just wondering how someone can be so stupid.”
It was a failed reference to Vladimir Kramnik. I don’t think one can post images on blog comments.
http://www.webstuffscan.com/wp-content/uploads/2006/12/chess-blunder-of-the-century.jpg
Black to move.
1… Qe3?? You don’t need to be a genius to figure that out.
Black_Rose
July 26, 2011
“Speaking of atheism leading to great advances in faith, I’m told that Chinese Christianity’s explosion started with the Cultural Revolution. If I lead a millionth as many people to Christ as Mao Zedong inadvertently did, I’ll be doing OK.”
How did the Great Leader lead people to Christ?
Black_Rose
July 26, 2011
Citizen’s Bank Park, and now it is like Dodger Stadium or Sun Life Stadium
“Is the first of these small and the other’s big or something else?”
What do you mean by “small”? Are you referring to seating capacity or the dimensions of the field?
The Phillies have all of their home games sold out, and the fans boycott Dodgers games because of the McCourt divorce. Also, I remember reading on FanGraphs that the Marlins have the lowest home attendance.
A Simpsons analogy is that this blog is like Moe’s Tavern, a place were a few regulars drop by to wet their whistle, not Flaming Moe’s which was popular and filled when Moe was serving the Flaming Moe.
Cane Caldo
July 26, 2011
“How did the Great Leader lead people to Christ?”
By demonstrating the logical result of a Godless world.
Stewart Griffin
July 26, 2011
Figure what out? How are we supposed to know the blunder, which is one move on from the image, without already having knowledge of it? A disastrous move is not a Schelling point.
Which one gets the most people in it and is hence the ground of the ‘biggest’ team in terms of supporters.
I have heard of none of the five things named in that quote. I knew the ‘Dodgers’ were some kind of sports team and would have guessed the sport was baseball, but would not have been sure. Does this help demonstrate the level of ignorance from which my question was asked?
Are the number of hits on this site growing or shrinking? I have certainly seen a few new names at the new site (Mr Caldo, for example).
Black_Rose
July 26, 2011
“Just for kicks, I did a scatter graph of % atheism vs. IQ, and the R^2 value (statistical correlation) is about .008 for the first ten nations. In other words, no statistical correlation whatsoever.”
How about you use “irreligion” as the independent variable instead of “atheism”. BTW, Left-wing atheists do not find Richard Lynn (presumably the source of the IQ data) as a credible source.
“By demonstrating the logical result of a Godless world.”
So what is this logical result? Many of the deaths that are attributed to Mao should be blamed on natural disasters, policy blunders, and a hostile geopolitical environment had much to with it. By the way, the KMT were just as ruthless as the communists, and Mao knew that sentiments of kindness and tolerance towards his political adversaries. would not be reciprocated.
Black_Rose
July 26, 2011
Kramnik as black moved Qe3?? in that position against Deep Fritz on the 34th move. It doesn’t take a genius to figure out why that is blunder.
Stewart Griffin
July 26, 2011
Who was leading the government that made those policy blunders?
Agreed. However, your original reference came only with the image and the comment: “Black to move!”. Determining the blunder from that is a distinctly different challenge.
Svar
July 26, 2011
“Many of the deaths that are attributed to Mao should be blamed on natural disasters, policy blunders, and a hostile geopolitical environment had much to with it.”
Heh, that’s a laugh. It’s not the faulty nature of the ideology, it’s just everything else. It’s not like you’d expect to hear that from a communist. Other ruthless goverments like Imperial Japan and Nazi Germany worked out greatly before they were defeated. Even fascism provides a superior model than communism. Even fascism.
David Alexander
July 26, 2011
Other ruthless goverments like Imperial Japan and Nazi Germany worked out greatly before they were defeated.
Primarily because they rounded up their enemies, enslaved conquered people, and depleted the economic resources of the nations they invaded. Some economists have argued that once the Nazis would stop invading other lands, their system would implode as there was nothing else to plunder and redistribute.
David Collard
July 26, 2011
Denyse O’Leary is a woman, not a “he”.
I agree with Alte that smart people are early adopters of trends. When my mother converted to Catholicism, in the 1950s, the Catholic Church was going through a fashionable phase with intellectuals. It was the time of Evelyn Waugh, Graham Greene, Julien Green and other writers and thinkers who had converted to Catholicism.
But the Church lost a lot of the bien pensant people over Humanae Vitae.
I have always been very interested in science, but also in religion. And, moreover, been religious myself. In recent years, I have rediscovered tradition, and usually attend the Catholic Latin Mass, according to the 1962 missal of Blessed Pope John XXIII.
It has not been too hard keeping my faith through all of my training in science. However most science magazines are more-or-less edited by agnostics and atheists who think, probably correctly, that their readers will not be religious in the main. Most scientists are not as goddamned obnoxious as Richard Dawkins, but a substantial group dislike religion. Many scientists see science as a substitute for religion, intellectually and emotionality.
Svar
July 26, 2011
DA, my point wasn’t that those ideologies were great, just better that communism when it comes down to results. On top of that, the Soviets conquered other nations and rounded up their enemies as well.
“Nazis would stop invading other lands, their system would implode as there was nothing else to plunder and redistribute.”
Probably.
Svar
July 26, 2011
By results, I mean economically.
Svar
July 26, 2011
“Many scientists see science as a substitute for religion, intellectually and emotionality.”
Science is good at explaining the physical world, but it is foolish to think that it can explain the workings of the metaphysical world or prove the non-existence thereof.
David Collard
July 26, 2011
I was thinking this morning that science works because it harnesses the genius of the individual with the wisdom of the crowd, and thereby discovers more of the truth over time. Rather like the Catholc Church. There are many parallels. To some extent, they are alternate magisteria.
Svar
July 26, 2011
David, I have learned that Science has backed up Tradition and this has proven that Tradition isn’t an arbitary model, rather it is a time-tested model that has slowly developed over the centuries via the method of trial-and-error, similar to that of the Scientific Process.
Rusty Shackleford
July 27, 2011
Morticia – this is off topic so please feel free to delete it after you read it. (on my phone, not sure how to get something directly to you)
Regarding my case for “all cops are bad people, or are at least covering for bad people” sweeping generalizations:
http://fullertonstories.com/kelly-thomas-arrest-footage/
http://m.gawker.com/5825010/police-beat-gentle-homeless-mentally-ill-man-to-death
Be sure to take a look at the photos of the aftermath in regards to the man’s face. Cops are gangbanger scum, plain and simple.
Chris
July 27, 2011
I’m not sure who invented the term “High Church Atheist” but it is useful. The High Church of Atheism are a bunch of people who have converted in and thought through the consequences of what they beleive. They tend to be idiosyncratic on other issues as well. A.C Grayling is the high priest, Richard Dawkins the leader of his preaching dogs, and Hitchens a reluctant bedfellow.
These people are fun to debate with, because they take ideas seriously.
Low church athiests are post modern, identity politics, anti Christian because it is “oppressive” and do not want to be limited by the truth. Arguing with them is like arguing with rather stupid jelly. There is no joy in it.
The High Church group tend to be academically able, the Low church… vary, but tend to be sheeple.
Outside of the USA, in the commonwealth, taking Christianity seriously requires the same intellectual effort. You have to believe, and know why you believe. The default position is Low Church Atheism or liberal mush.
Since mushiness is profoundly unsatisfying to most scientists (which is a reason why most of them hate the soft sciences, and those in the soft sciences hate qualitative research), scientists tend to move either into serious faith or the High Church.
Now, the word of God is active, powerful, able to convict by itself . Hence Alte’s experience, which is not that unique.
David Collard
July 27, 2011
Chris, what do you mean by soft sciences and qualitative research?
Bike Bubba
July 27, 2011
“How about you use “irreligion” as the independent variable instead of “atheism”. BTW, Left-wing atheists do not find Richard Lynn (presumably the source of the IQ data) as a credible source. ”
Fair enough, Black Rose. Do you have a source for data, and an explanation for how the data were obtained?
That said, there is the question of whether “atheism” and “irreligion” in some circles is becoming a religion unto itself. There is also the reality, which I mentioned earlier, that the work of Christopher Hitchens and Richard Dawkins is so riddled with basic errors in logic that it does call into question the abilities of their followers to think. Not that there aren’t theistic abusers of Aristotle’s art, but if you’re going to argue that group A is so much smarter than group B, it sure helps if you can get through a paragraph of a famous Group A person without finding a dozen basic fallacies, don’t ya think?
The Deuce
July 27, 2011
Many of the deaths that are attributed to Mao should be blamed on natural disasters, policy blunders, and a hostile geopolitical environment had much to with it.
And Stalin too, right? Such bad luck these poor Marxist dictators have! Two epic famines with historically unprecedented death tolls in the tens of millions that were totally not their fault! I mean, what are the odds?! Really makes you feel bad for them!
The Deuce
July 27, 2011
How about you use “irreligion” as the independent variable instead of “atheism”.
Yes, let’s do that: http://www.voxday.net/mart/AgainstNewAtheism.ppt (page 6)
Alte
July 27, 2011
LOL
On that note, the economy is tanking because February was way too cold and July way too hot.
The Deuce
July 27, 2011
I’m not sure who invented the term “High Church Atheist” but it is useful. The High Church of Atheism are a bunch of people who have converted in and thought through the consequences of what they beleive.
That would be Vox Day, in “The Irrational Atheist” (available free here)
The Low Church Atheists, in his terminology, are simply those who lack any religious belief, even if they don’t self-identify as atheists, most likely because they simply don’t think much about that sort of thing at all, and aren’t self conscious about their lack of belief. They’re a much larger group than what he calls the High Church Atheists, and tend to have lower intelligence and higher criminality than the population at large.
Whether self-identified atheists count the Low Church atheists among their numbers depends on the situation. When the criminality or intelligence of the “no religion” crowd is pointed out, atheists will disavow any association with them. When self-identified atheists want to inflate their numbers in order to wallow in self-pity and complain about how victimized they are and how they should have more influence, they’ll count the great unwashed irreligious among them.
The Deuce
July 27, 2011
Or, put differently, the slew of ad hominem attacks which masquerades as modern atheist argument ought to put to rest any ideas that atheists are, as a whole, smarter than the rest of us. Yes, I’m looking at you, Professor Dawkins.
His “Ultimate 747″ argument is one of the most thoroughly broken arguments I’ve seen regarding anything. Were he not a (mediocre) scientist and atheist hero, and were he arguing for anything other than the nonexistence of God, he’d be instantly scorned to ribbons by anyone with two brain cells to rub together for an argument of similar quality.
The level of logical rigor that passes among the NAs goes way down when the speaker is a scientist or the topic is the falsehood of theism. The attitude seems to be “I just know that philosophy and theology are crap that any moron could do well, and that scientists are geniuses and science is the answer to everything, so scientists are automatically masters of philosophy and whatever a scientist says on the subject is automatically profound and superior to whatever fact-free nonsense those philosophers are prattling about.”
Black_Rose
July 27, 2011
“Who was leading the government that made those policy blunders?”
The policy blunders were often exaggerated. Indeed, the backyard furances didn’t work, but it was quietly abandoned when it was realized that only industrial furances could manufacture high-quality steel. Moreover, the Great Sparrow Campaign was implemented without any insight from rudimentary ecology (as the sparrows were predators of locusts).
Black_Rose
July 27, 2011
“Whether self-identified atheists count the Low Church atheists among their numbers depends on the situation. When the criminality or intelligence of the “no religion” crowd is pointed out, atheists will disavow any association with them. When self-identified atheists want to inflate their numbers in order to wallow in self-pity and complain about how victimized they are and how they should have more influence, they’ll count the great unwashed irreligious among them.”
My suggestion of counting the irreligious instead of explicit (strong) atheists is based on the assumption that the proportion of irreligious people would have a moderate correlation with national IQ instead of atheism rates. (BTW, some atheists, such as PZ Myers actually dismissed the study that suggested that national IQ is correlated with atheism rates because it used Richard Lynn’s data.)
Also, I did not invoke “irreligious” as a New Atheist agitprop to suggest that the irreligious were persectuted or needed more political representation.
“Italy is 6% atheist and the average IQ is 4 points higher than United States (98) while US has 10% Atheists. Going back to the original assertion That atheists are smarter and that is why they are more likely to be academics…I guess that might not be the reason.”
II didn’t notice this, but even if that is correct, it doesn’t refute the hypothesis that atheists tend to more intelligent than theists within a country. If that hypothesis is correct, then “atheists are smarter than theists.”
TH Scandinavian countries are highly secular and they certainly aren’t hellholes. It shows that religious is inversely correlated with a welfare state.
Problem of the day: http://chesstempo.com/chess-problems/44105
Black_Rose
July 27, 2011
“Such bad luck these poor Marxist dictators have! Two epic famines with historically unprecedented death tolls in the tens of millions that were totally not their fault! I mean, what are the odds?! Really makes you feel bad for them!”
I don’t know any Stalin apologists* out there, but it is clear to me that Mao isn’t a murderous ogre. China had a great famine in 1879, which was due to the El Nino Southern Oscillation, but no one blames that on the incompetence or malice of the Qing Dynasty. These famines were a once-in-a-generation event, and cannot be prevented in a pre-modern society. Also remember that after the Xinhai Revolution that overthrew the Qing monarchy, Yuan Shikai seized power for personal gain and wanted to become an autocratic monarch. After his death competing warlord factions fought for the control of China, but in 1928 the Warlord Era ended after Chiang Kai-Shek’s Northern Expedition. Then, China was embroiled in a civil war against the KMT and the PLA, and then the Japanese invaded. This succinct summary of Chinese history in the early half of the 20th Century should suggest that China did not have the opportunity to economically develop.
*Liu said he respected Stalin because unlike Trotsky, he realized that a revolution must be institutionalized and lead from the top-down. However, he also criticizes Stalin for persecuting and supressing elements of populist radicalism. Liu, if you did not realize, is a Maoist on the spectrum of Marxist revolution (with Trotsky and Stalin occupying the two extremes in this political philosophy) in which the revolution would be led by a Vanguard Party but would harness the enthusiasm and revolutionary fervor of the economically dispossessed masses.
Alte
July 27, 2011
Ah… this is what we miss when you’re not around, BR.
Black_Rose
July 27, 2011
Hey, did you give your son those two problems?
Alte
July 27, 2011
He doesn’t play chess yet. He’s not that smart.
Black_Rose
July 27, 2011
Karpov started at 4 and that criminal Jew and goddamn liar (according to Bobby Fischer) Garry
KasparovWeinstein started at 6.Black_Rose
July 27, 2011
BTW, does anyone consider me a member of the High or Low Church of Atheism?