Atheists More Intelligent?

[Chicken bones]

I had to post it... apparently religious folk are less intelligent than atheists.

http://news.yahoo.com/religious-people- ... ml#upCr476

(Not that I am saying they are, of course)

[Conuly]

Well, I won't argue too strenuously about that! LOL! But it certainly isn't an article I'd share in mixed company.

[Chicken bones]

Exactly! There are certainly many religious folks on FJ that disprove this article! I just found the theory about self-regulation very interesting. I grew up very non-religious, with a heavy emphasis on education and logic and it certainly bumps up against my Bible Belt location.

Then again, just saw an article somewhere yesterday about a possible link between over education and mental illness! You can't win.

[duplessis3]

I am sure that in Albania the intelligence is pretty well distributed among atheists.

[miffy]

I think there are a lot of other factors involved in this. Such as SODRT, differences between religions ie. a Quaker or Buddhist is going to have a very different take on religion than one of 'our' fundies.

I find it hard to get annoyed about this because although I am an Anglican, i'm also eligible for MENSA membership. Although i'm mainly Anglican because I like the theatrics of a Cathedral or High Church mass, going to church isn't an integral part of faith for me.

[crazyforkate]

My dad, who is an archbishop, and his merry band of clergy pals are among the smartest people I've ever known. There are some religious groups which may tend to attract dumbasses - but that is hardly the same thing as atheists being smarter. We all know a knee-jerk idiot atheist (whether online or in real life), too, so there's that.

[Rachel333]

Dumb atheists and smart religious people (both of whom absolutely exist!) don't disprove this at all.

The articles discusses different reasons why this might be the case:

The answer may, however, be more complex. Intelligent people may simply be able to provide themselves with the psychological benefits offered by religion - such as “self-regulation and self-enhancement,†because they are more likely to be successful, and have stable lives.

...

“People possessing the functions that religion provides are likely to adopt atheism, people lacking these very functions (e.g., the poor, the helpless) are likely to adopt theism,†the researchers wrote.

[RosyDaisy]

I think this is only true if you allow your faith to dictate every aspect of your life and interfere with learning and gaining knowledge.

[2xx1xy1JD]

Not a particularly helpful study.

Is there any standard definition or measure of religiosity used? On FJ, we often can't agree on the definition of "fundie". How do you characterize cultural religious identification? Is there any difference between faiths? Is there any distinction between fundamentalist types of beliefs vs. more abstract or more liberal types? Is there any distinction between attitude toward intellect and education in various religions? [Full disclosure: I come from a religious background with a hyper-focus on intellectualism and education.]

How is intelligence measured, esp. in the older studies? Is there any awareness of cultural or class bias? I won't give much credence to a 1916 study on scientists. In 1916, how diverse was the field? Two groups that are often more religious than the American average - African Americans and Hispanics - are also likely to be victims of bias. In some cases, what this study might really be measuring is who is privileged. It is true that churches in some communities play a big role in social support. They may also be picking up on some urban v. rural issues. Some groups are more mobile and cosmopolitan, and tend to be located in urban centers. There is far more exposure to diverse ideas and educational opportunities. Other groups are more rural, less mobile, and part of that may mean that local communal structures like churches are stronger.

[Curious]

I once read an article that said Republicans tend to be less intelligent (or maybe it was more easily led? it's been a while) than Democrats. I thought it was funny at the time, but didn't really think it probably held much water. They did go into the reasoning on why, which I've forgotten now and it did kind of make sense.

Now that we have the teabaggers and the party of NO, etc. I wish I could find that article again (I read it in a print magazine).

I know some wicked smart republicans/christians and some dumb as rocks democrats/atheists, but I think that studies like this probably are on to something, even though it's a small sample of people and there are a lot of different factors involved.

Some people just have better skills in certain areas (reasoning, logic, critical thinking, many others) and I suspect those types of people are more drawn to being democrats/atheists. I think that there are people like someone above pointed out that are able to moderate themselves so they don't go over the edge when they go the other way into republican/christianity.

If you think about most of the people we talk about here, the thing they seem to worry about the most if self-control. Men have absolutely no self-control, it's all up to the women to make sure they stay on the straight and narrow. Women would be out of control if it wasn't for them being submissive to their manly men husbands. They have to live by rules written during the bronze age, which make zero sense in modern times. Everything is about rules and following them strictly. It's very much about control. Control of themselves and control of others.

edit to add: the more I think about the article, I think it was about republicans being resistant to facts than about intelligence. I'm going to see if I can google up the article.