Smart Fundies- How is it Possible?

[punkiepie]

IMO, one of the main requirements, and/or necessary qualifications, for being a fundie is uneducated, simple-minded, and relatively to supremely unintelligent. I was lucky that my dad was a doctor and valued education because without that, growing up in my IFB church would have rendered me an idiot. Even with my education, all honors and AP classes, I can remember being in high school and having lengthy debates with my biology teacher about tbe stupidity of evolution, the missing "missing link" and the superiority of the Adam and Eve creation story. And the scary thing was I actually believed it! But just a few semesters at my heathen college, several science classes, a break from my IFB church, and it didn't take long before I was so embarrassed by former state of idiocy and denial of scientific truths. Even now when I think about it, the only thing that makes me feel better is that I was young and stupid and niave.

But what I don't understand are the smart educated fundies. There was a man at my old church who was one of the smartest people I've still ever met, has a Ph.D from a secular college in chemical engineering, and knows the answer to almost every question you could think to ask him- yet he's a KJV, 7-day creation, premillennial fundie. It maKes no sense to me. And Dougie- we can say a lot about his stupidity, but he's actually very smart. Beall too. They both went to and graduated from William&Mary and then from George Mason Law School. How can they be so "smart" but also so stupid? Why did they get to have an excellent education but their children get College Minus degrees, if anything?

It makes perfect sense that jimbob and Michelle are quivering fundies, as well as a whole buch of them, but I'm wondering how do we account for the actually intelligent fundies? Like Rhodes Scholar Stephen, California State University grad Scott Brown, Dinosaur Evolution Denying but Queensland Institue of Technology grad Ken Ham, Liberal Arts at Westminster- RC Sproul. Are there any good ones that I'm missing? And how is this possible, how does it happen?

[Anise]

I think it depends on how much stock people put into faith and religions and the kind of pressure they get from peer groups. My father took who knows how many different science classes before settling on a degree in physical sciences, and taught high school chemistry. Yet, to this day, he is an ardent creationist and often says that even in grade school evolution seemed like a fanciful myth to him. And then he complains that scientists keep changing the theory to fit new findings. So yeah, I don't think intelligence has much to do with it. Most people believe what they want to.

[lilwriter85]

I think Dougie is pretty intelligent compared to Bill Gothard. I have noticed that many of fundie lite types tend to be more educated the hardore fundies like the Duggars. Some fundie lites don't use College Minus crap.

[docmom]

Smart people can hold incredibly stupid opinions. Look at Peter Duesberg, a professor at Berkley and a member of the National Academy of Sciences, who believes and advocates for the belief that HIV does not cause AIDS. He even got a Nobel winner in Chemistry to sign on to his ideas. If you are willing to ignore or rationalize away a ton of evidence you can believe anything.

[Dev83]

I think one can be book smart but be lacking in logic, ciritical thinking and common sense. I think that is where you get the "smart" fundies. They can regurgitate books like no ones business, their writting skills are great, and they can be charismatic. However none of those things mean that a person is capable of true critical thinking, which IMO, is the true test of intelligence.

Edited for riffle.

[salsa]

That puzzles me, too.

I chalk it up to the fact that just because someone has the capacity for critical thinking doesn't mean they'll draw the same conclusion as I do. Obvioously, we come to our opinions and beliefs for a wide variety of reasons, based on our experience of life and how life makes sense to us.

There is an irony, however, in that fundies (especially smart ones) use critical thought to decide specifically NOT to use it (or at least to deny using it). Zsu is a prime example.

[maybeizfundie]

My incredibly smart and well-educated parents joined a cult. They didn't last long there :lol: but the fact remains that at least for a time, they were duped by a seriously toxic religious cult.

The group hooked them with things that weren't related to intellectualism. Relational and social things. It didn't claim to be a bastion of reason and education. It promised to fill the need they felt for close community (communal living), and intense, daily living out of Jesus' teachings.

Funnily enough, this group has duped many, many well-educated, very liberal people, through the social issues venue. Some joined. Many haven't joined due to the religious side of it, but remain friends and supporters because they connect on the social issues point and just can't see the toxicity because it is very well disguised.

[jaynie]

We're doing personality traits in one of my classes, so I'm inclined to interpret this in light of that. One personality trait that kind of sticks out to me wrt fundies is openness to experience (O). They don't have it (not, at least, the first gens, generally).

Now, people used to think that openness to experience was synonymous with intelligence because it tended to go along with being "cultured", having a lot of interest in the world, being a high achiever in fields like the arts and sciences, etc. But, although there is a little bit of a correlation, it's not 1:1; in other words, you can be very low on O and score highly on IQ/WAIS tests. People who are low on O tend to prefer familiar, traditional views, use faith as a coping mechanism, tend to be politically conservative, don't question their views as often, etc.

Another factor is (obviously) having an authoritarian personality (which correlates with low O). Such people favour submission and obedience, resist change, and a tendency towards preserving inequality. So someone low on O and high in authoritarianism is likely to accept what their "superiors" say (in this case, the superiors being church leaders, and possibly the bible itself). If they encounter troubling questions, they will dismiss them. In education, they tend to choose fields that are more conservative naturally (law school being a very good example; business is another), which means they are not put in a position where they would have to question in order to succeed. Their intelligence is directed at learning and using facts in a non-challenging way.

Now, where it gets interesting is in the children. O is fairly heritable, but also very much influenced by the child's environment, so you could conceivably have a 2nd generation fundie who is high O. This is also true of intelligence. So you could have a high O kid with a high IQ and parents with idiotic, rigid beliefs. The child, due to high O, is liable to direct their intelligence at creative, intellectual pursuits, or at questioning their parents beliefs and the authoritarianism that goes with it. That child, hopefully, grows up to be, say, Razing Ruth, or Libby Anne, or one of our many former IFB members here at FJ.

I have probably well oversimplified given I'm a) a bit hungover and b) focused on the very narrow interpretation of traits we need to learn for this class. Still, I hope that was in some way coherent and useful! :)

(There are other reasons smart people might be drawn to fundamentalism; particularly emotional vulnerability. This is just one facet, I think!)

[salex]

OK, my answer disappeared.

I'll try again.

The fundie leadership may or may not believe the stuff they say and teach the followers. But, it is critical for their continued power (in their church, area or politically) and possibly income to preach that gospel. Dougie's income would likely fall if he were to say "You know, there is no reason to think you can't believe in and follow God and still accept the facts of evolution." Not to mention, it is hard to preach the message that your followers are being persecuted for their stand on the truth if you accept mainstream ideas.

I view a lot of the leadership as being similar to other entertainment/celebrities. PeeWee Herman is typecast, and it took him a while, but he finally accepted it was his best bet at having a career. I figure for at least some of these "celebrity" fundies, that is where they are. How much of it they believe and how much of it they view as a way to keep the dollars and the power they have and want is anyone's guess.

[Moonbeam]

I think it's about suspension of disbelief and how far they are willing to take that disbelief. I'm a christian, although I refer to myself as a "small c" christian because I don't believe most of the dogma (like I don't really believe in salvation and totally don't believe in original sin). However, I realize that even to believe *some* of christianity I have to have suspended disbelief, and I'm willing to accept that. I just draw my line WAY earlier than big C christians and certainly earlier than fundies, and even fundie-lites.

[ceg045]

The short-ish answer...there are lots of different kinds of intelligence. Some people easily grasp academic concepts, can read a book and remember it forever, but can be woefully lacking in interpersonal intelligence, where they completely fail to see other points of view or accept the fact that other might see or deal with situations differently.

[punkiepie]

We're doing personality traits in one of my classes, so I'm inclined to interpret this in light of that. One personality trait that kind of sticks out to me wrt fundies is openness to experience (O). They don't have it (not, at least, the first gens, generally).

Now, people used to think that openness to experience was synonymous with intelligence because it tended to go along with being "cultured", having a lot of interest in the world, being a high achiever in fields like the arts and sciences, etc. But, although there is a little bit of a correlation, it's not 1:1; in other words, you can be very low on O and score highly on IQ/WAIS tests. People who are low on O tend to prefer familiar, traditional views, use faith as a coping mechanism, tend to be politically conservative, don't question their views as often, etc.

Another factor is (obviously) having an authoritarian personality (which correlates with low O). Such people favour submission and obedience, resist change, and a tendency towards preserving inequality. So someone low on O and high in authoritarianism is likely to accept what their "superiors" say (in this case, the superiors being church leaders, and possibly the bible itself). If they encounter troubling questions, they will dismiss them. In education, they tend to choose fields that are more conservative naturally (law school being a very good example; business is another), which means they are not put in a position where they would have to question in order to succeed. Their intelligence is directed at learning and using facts in a non-challenging way.

Now, where it gets interesting is in the children. O is fairly heritable, but also very much influenced by the child's environment, so you could conceivably have a 2nd generation fundie who is high O. This is also true of intelligence. So you could have a high O kid with a high IQ and parents with idiotic, rigid beliefs. The child, due to high O, is liable to direct their intelligence at creative, intellectual pursuits, or at questioning their parents beliefs and the authoritarianism that goes with it. That child, hopefully, grows up to be, say, Razing Ruth, or Libby Anne, or one of our many former IFB members here at FJ.

I have probably well oversimplified given I'm a) a bit hungover and b) focused on the very narrow interpretation of traits we need to learn for this class. Still, I hope that was in some way coherent and useful! :)

(There are other reasons smart people might be drawn to fundamentalism; particularly emotional vulnerability. This is just one facet, I think!)

That makes a lot sense actually. It kinda reminds me of when I studied the different types of cognitive biases. The ones that would fit here are Confirmation bias- where you tend to search for, or interpret, data that confirms your own beliefs. So if I believe that feminists are evil people who God hates, and feminists live in New York City, then my belief is confirmed as proof by 9/11 as evidence of God's wrath. Committment of escalation bias- the more invested in something you are, the more likely you are going to interpret information in a way that upholds those beliefs and discard information that goes against it. I buy a used car and spend $5000 fixing it up only to have it keep breaking down and needing to spend more money on it- the more I've invested, the more likely I will be to keep investing because I don't want to have lost all that money for nothing. If and Belief Bias- where you evaluate the logic of an argument or idea in light of a preformed belief about the conclusion's truth. So if I believe being gay is a choice but then someone tells me they have scientifically proven that it is a genetic manifestation, I have to conclude that what you are telling me is false.

When I first learned about all the different biases, and I realized my own biases, I was overwhelmed by my stupidity, haha!

[HereticHick]

Being a big fish in a small pond can be a huuuge attraction to some people. ATI and VF are frankly pretty small ponds, and the big players in both groups clearly get off on being "guest speakers" at churches and dinky little conferences. Having a giant passel of children makes you stand out from all the other fundy Christians-- its gets you all sorts of attention that the other run of the mill Southern fundies who have only produced 3-4 kids don't get.

If the Duggars weren't a clown car novelty act, who would invite them to speak or perform? Would Jim Bob have even gotten elected to the state legislature if he and Michelle hadn't already produced a truckload of kids?

[Wolfie]

The short-ish answer...there are lots of different kinds of intelligence. Some people easily grasp academic concepts, can read a book and remember it forever, but can be woefully lacking in interpersonal intelligence, where they completely fail to see other points of view or accept the fact that other might see or deal with situations differently.

Not only this, but many people will accept something if part of it sounds true, even if much of it makes no sense. Others, as some have said, just want to believe bad enough that they do. Even if a person can manage to get a good degree or more, it really only shows that they can memorize information.

I once saw a person with a biology degree from one of the University of California colleges fall so hard for the Weston A Price stuff that she told somebody that our bodies couldn't recognize the protein in milk if it was homogenized.

[Joan of Snarc]

I don't think all religious people are stupid, but I think pretty much all stupid people are religious (in the USA, anyway.)

:flags-waveusa: :flags-waveusa: :flags-waveusa:

[Wolfie]

I don't think all religious people are stupid, but I think pretty much all stupid people are religious (in the USA, anyway.)

:flags-waveusa: :flags-waveusa: :flags-waveusa:

Big generalization. The person I mentioned above is an atheist.

[YPestis]

The above mention of Peter Duesberg is a classic example of smart people who fall for stupid things. The guy won a Nobel prize in Chemistry yet he still denies HIV causes AIDS. One of my profs suggests he smoked too much weed in the 70's and it caught up with him LOL....who knows?

I can certainly believe that "smart" people can believe dumb things. It's usually not something in their fields though, so the examples mentioned are a bit rare. For example, there are people in my med school who don't believe in global warming because they don't realize that climatologists are all in agreement about it in the same way that biologists are in agreement about evolution. These are smart people and so if they were forced to read the data and converse with climatologists, many would realize otherwise. My husband is a physician who initially was skeptical about global warming. I pointed out to him the National Academy of Sciences agreed it was "real science", that the majority of scientists in that field had data to prove it, that he realized there was no scientific "controversy" about it.

The difference between that type of ignorance and the willful ignorance displayed by fundies is that fundies are set in certain beliefs and their brain will not entertain contradicting evidence for those set beliefs.

These fundies either had a religious experience and started blocking out anything that contradicts their beliefs, or they were always raised with those beliefs and they refuse to part with them. Smart people, if given enough brainwashing, can lose or never acquire a truly open mind. Critical thinking skills can be blocked off for certain concepts due to constant preaching. In other words, you talk about something like it's true enough times, people will start believing it in the face of overwhelming evidence. Furthermore, it may even become uncomfortable for fundies to be forced to face a different truth.

Fundies who are forced to study real paleontology or real geology or real biology may start feeling uncomfortable when confronted with a different truth daily. Some people's minds split into evolution at work, and creationism at home. I've heard of one surgeon who does just that. It's amazing what the tricks the human brain can do to itself in the face of contradicting and overwhelming evidence to the contrary.

[skeptifem]

You should google "the authoritarians". Its a free ebook by a psych researcher, it sheds light on exactly these sorts of questions.

It turns out that there is a sub category of fundamentalists who seem (to me) to be complete sociopaths and find their place in fundamentalism specifically to exploit the simpler people.

The book doesn't say that fundies are dumb, but it does point out how on average they score much more poorly on tests of logic and reason. They do have an amazing ability to compartmentalize, so they can be smart about one thing and just never cross reference it against the rest of what they know. Pretty crazy.

The whole book is worth reading, I can't do it justice in one post.

[miffy]

Mr Waller & Steve Maxwell are both former engineers. I don't doubt that they are intelligent people. Too bad they haven't allowed their children to get a degree & have a career.

Fundamentalism IS a cult & the most intelligent people can get caught up in one. My great uncle was in The Family (the Australian one, not the Charles Manson one) he is very smart & had a successful career before getting involved.

[Wolfie]

I am amused that I get a Liberty University ad on this page.

[Dandruff]

If you are willing to ignore or rationalize away a ton of evidence you can believe anything.

I've met a few smart, hard-core fundies and find them more toxic and annoying than the others. I think the zealotry is a personality trait, but they then use their intelligence to more actively bolster and spread the zealotry. There seems to be a large blind spot with regard to the potential validity of other people's points of view.

[darkplumaged]

You should google "the authoritarians". Its a free ebook by a psych researcher, it sheds light on exactly these sorts of questions.

It turns out that there is a sub category of fundamentalists who seem (to me) to be complete sociopaths and find their place in fundamentalism specifically to exploit the simpler people.

The book doesn't say that fundies are dumb, but it does point out how on average they score much more poorly on tests of logic and reason. They do have an amazing ability to compartmentalize, so they can be smart about one thing and just never cross reference it against the rest of what they know. Pretty crazy.

The whole book is worth reading, I can't do it justice in one post.

Re: the bolded--paging Doug Phillips (is a tool)...

(I really think Doug believes perhaps 50 percent of the stuff he says. He is a snake oil salesman to the core.)

The book sounds fascinating, skeptifem. Here's a link: http://members.shaw.ca/jeanaltemeyer/dr ... arians.pdf (not broken because I'm sure the author wouldn't mind us reading!

[GenerationCedarchip]

I've seen it up close. Even though I don't agree with all their beliefs, I have to admit that most of the fundies I know are actually pretty smart. I know fundies with degrees from top colleges (often more than one), but they still hold on to very fundamentalist religious beliefs. As others have mentioned, a lot of smart people can still buy into all kinds of ideas. In the case of the folks I know personally, I would say that many come from backgrounds that are at least fundie-lite and they all share a belief that there has to some purpose to the the world, some 1 right answer or philosophy. And if you read some of the better fundie authors, they actually do a good job of explaining their belief system and convincing at least some readers that it's the way to go. I've long thought that's why reformed fundie churches tend to draw so many doctors, engineers, lawyers and other deeply analytical people. And for what it's worth, the practice of discouraging college is still not all that common even in fundie-land. Parents tend to have very heavyhanded involvement in the college selection process, but it's still expected that most will get at least a BS/BA level degree - there is just a narrower universe of acceptable schools for the kids.

[Full enough quiver]

There's definitely a difference between book smart and real world smart. I think all the education in the world won't help you if you don't understand basic logic, or are so gullible that you fall for the likes of Gothard or Doug Phillips (is a tool) I think you have to have to have a certain gullibility to become a fundie in the first place. The second generation like the duggars may be handicapped by the sotdrt "education" but it doesn't mean they don't have inborn intelligence. Think Razing Ruth. Plenty of natural intelligence there. It's sad to see someone like that hampered by their upbringing.

[already hungover]

But what I don't understand are the smart educated fundies. There was a man at my old church who was one of the smartest people I've still ever met, has a Ph.D from a secular college in chemical engineering, and knows the answer to almost every question you could think to ask him- yet he's a KJV, 7-day creation, premillennial fundie. It maKes no sense to me. And Dougie- we can say a lot about his stupidity, but he's actually very smart. Beall too. They both went to and graduated from William&Mary and then from George Mason Law School. How can they be so "smart" but also so stupid? Why did they get to have an excellent education but their children get College Minus degrees, if anything?

Honestly, I think they have to try to believe what they do. I don't understand how one could go through a PhD. program in the hard sciences or engineering and not question the literal 7-day creation, premillenial stuff. Plus the types of people who are drawn to programs like that have to have at least some natural curiosity about the way the world works, right? It's baffling to me that they'd willfully bury their heads in the sand, but obviously some of them do.

I'm in academia, and at my last job I worked closely with a lot of engineers. Those of us on the theoretical side of the operation would often remark in amazement at how many of our colleagues were DEEPLY religious, 7-day creation types. Anecdata: one of the women in our office had a little cartoon of a Buddha hanging up on her door. One of the religious people asked her to take it down because it was "offensive" and "a graven image." It was so strange to work in an environment like that.