Atheism Intelligence Correlations - The Strongest Argument for Atheism

[ZeeJustin]

[ QUOTE ]
1) Excluding scientific knowledge, are the "geniuses" of today posess any greater reasoning capacity than the "geniuses" of prior eras.

[/ QUOTE ]

Does evidence that the exodus never happened count as non scientific knowledge? Do statistics of how many religions there are (which is PROOF that the vast majority of people are wrong) count as non scientific knowledge? Etc.

[ QUOTE ]
2) To what extent have advancements in science provided any conclusive evidence for or against a divine being responsible for creation-- assuming that is a minimal definition of "God" shared by the predominate religions of our time.

[/ QUOTE ]

God(s) was often invented just to explain the unexplainable. Science shows we can explain almost everything.

Science has effectively refuted basically every major religion, whether it be through carbon dating, evolution, or even finding grammatical errors in the Qur'an.

So I would say yes, science has shed A LOT on the matter at hand, and there is more reason now than there ever has been before to not believe in god. Even most theists will admit that is true, especially those that disagree with evolution, and think evolution is not compatible with Christianity.

[ QUOTE ]
I would assume that the greater one's capacity to comprehend and explain the world in empirical terms, the LESS accepting they are of the propositions that some things defy comprehension or explanation in empirical terms.

[/ QUOTE ]

I find it baffling that you use this as reason to believe that there probably is a God.

[madnak]

[ QUOTE ]
As to the second point, I questioned the breadth of the data. His saying (falaciously) that 99.9% of the general population is nominally religeous

[/ QUOTE ]

In Europe in 1600. When the penalty for heresy is death, people tend to say they're religious. I don't think there exist any actual statistical data so 99.99% is obviously speculative (as is 1%). The goal was to have something appropriate for the era and with the same ratio as today.

[ QUOTE ]
is NOT a refutation, it is just a false statement. And making up data that "very smart people" are 100 times more likely to be atheists isn't either-- though if it were true it would have a lot more persuasive value and I would agree.

[/ QUOTE ]

Dude, less than .5% of the general population in the US are atheists. But almost 50% of the scientists (considerably more of the top scientists) are. This is based on adherents.org and the Larson/Witham study discussed in this thread.

[ QUOTE ]
1) Excluding scientific knowledge, are the "geniuses" of today posess any greater reasoning capacity than the "geniuses" of prior eras. (I would say negligbly if any).

[/ QUOTE ]

I think people are much, much smarter today than they have ever been in the past.

As for the rest, I don't much care.

[InTheDark]

[ QUOTE ]
I think the strongest single argument for atheism (yes I know the burden of proof is on the theists, that's not relevant) is the fact that there is a high correlation between atheism and intelligence.


[/ QUOTE ]

This is essentially a selfish position. You likely seek validation for personal reasons.

I see the strongest arguments for and against atheism as those that bear on the future success of the species and its overall happiness along the way. I await the historical record of the stunningly successful atheist society, something on a par with that of western Christianity. None exists unless you engage in academic gyrations of gymnastic proportion (and this board has many such athletes). In situations where religion is supressed, overall societal happiness falls like a rock.

So if you wish to prove the value of atheism for society, meer theory regarding the future won't get it done. Study history like it matters and you may come to realize that humanity fares best with religion in general and has done very well indeed under Christianity. Sadly, none of this is any longer common wisdom.

[Alex-db]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think the strongest single argument for atheism (yes I know the burden of proof is on the theists, that's not relevant) is the fact that there is a high correlation between atheism and intelligence.


[/ QUOTE ]

This is essentially a selfish position. You likely seek validation for personal reasons.

I see the strongest arguments for and against atheism as those that bear on the future success of the species and its overall happiness along the way. I await the historical record of the stunningly successful atheist society, something on a par with that of western Christianity. None exists unless you engage in academic gyrations of gymnastic proportion (and this board has many such athletes). In situations where religion is supressed, overall societal happiness falls like a rock.

So if you wish to prove the value of atheism for society, meer theory regarding the future won't get it done. Study history like it matters and you may come to realize that humanity fares best with religion in general and has done very well indeed under Christianity. Sadly, none of this is any longer common wisdom.

[/ QUOTE ]

If I understand correctly you are being very pragmatic; considering truth to be irrelevant in deciding whether atheism is 'correct'.

I have never heard of a hypothesis accepted or rejected based on how well we expect to like its effects.

[InTheDark]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think the strongest single argument for atheism (yes I know the burden of proof is on the theists, that's not relevant) is the fact that there is a high correlation between atheism and intelligence.


[/ QUOTE ]

This is essentially a selfish position. You likely seek validation for personal reasons.

I see the strongest arguments for and against atheism as those that bear on the future success of the species and its overall happiness along the way. I await the historical record of the stunningly successful atheist society, something on a par with that of western Christianity. None exists unless you engage in academic gyrations of gymnastic proportion (and this board has many such athletes). In situations where religion is supressed, overall societal happiness falls like a rock.

So if you wish to prove the value of atheism for society, meer theory regarding the future won't get it done. Study history like it matters and you may come to realize that humanity fares best with religion in general and has done very well indeed under Christianity. Sadly, none of this is any longer common wisdom.

[/ QUOTE ]

If I understand correctly you are being very pragmatic; considering truth to be irrelevant in deciding whether atheism is 'correct'.

I have never heard of a hypothesis accepted or rejected based on how well we expect to like its effects.

[/ QUOTE ]

What end is served by proving atheism 'correct'? Leave aside the fact the proof will not come. What do we, society, gain?

[vhawk01]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think the strongest single argument for atheism (yes I know the burden of proof is on the theists, that's not relevant) is the fact that there is a high correlation between atheism and intelligence.


[/ QUOTE ]

This is essentially a selfish position. You likely seek validation for personal reasons.

I see the strongest arguments for and against atheism as those that bear on the future success of the species and its overall happiness along the way. I await the historical record of the stunningly successful atheist society, something on a par with that of western Christianity. None exists unless you engage in academic gyrations of gymnastic proportion (and this board has many such athletes). In situations where religion is supressed, overall societal happiness falls like a rock.

So if you wish to prove the value of atheism for society, meer theory regarding the future won't get it done. Study history like it matters and you may come to realize that humanity fares best with religion in general and has done very well indeed under Christianity. Sadly, none of this is any longer common wisdom.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yawn, we've done this over and over, if Stalinist Russia counts as an atheistic society (your position) then so does the US, and the US is the greatest nation to have ever existed. Stop with this old saw any time.

[tame_deuces]

While I don't dispute with the survey that finds correlation between atheism and intelligence, I disagree with the statement that intelligence leads to correctness.

Usually you have hindsight when judging who was the most intelligent of two parties, and we often incorrectly attribute the 'right' ones with greater intelligence.

[Piers]

[ QUOTE ]
I think the strongest single argument for atheism (yes I know the burden of proof is on the theists, that's not relevant) is the fact that there is a high correlation between atheism and intelligence.


[/ QUOTE ]

This is only true for someone who does not have confidence in their own judgement, typically due to understanding of the impact of thier lack of intelligence. Personally I am arrogant enough to ignore other’s opinion in this matter, however intelligent they are.

[Splendour]

[ QUOTE ]
The Claim:


I think the strongest single argument for atheism (yes I know the burden of proof is on the theists, that's not relevant) is the fact that there is a high correlation between atheism and intelligence.

Can anyone give a single example of a case in the course of all of human history where there was a high correlation between intelligence and a belief when the belief was wrong? Specifically, I mean a belief not held by everyone where there were 2 or more possible sets of belief, where the correct one was held by a group of lesser average intelligence.

If there is such a case, I think it is likely a fluke where the lesser intelligent people believed the right thing for the wrong reason.


The Evidence:


Wiki entry on Religiosity and Intelligence :

[ QUOTE ]
The study concludes that, of the most intelligent respondents, a disproportionately high percentage did not believe in God or did not believe that it was possible to know whether or not God existed. Similarly, a disproportionately high percentage of the most intelligent surveyed considered that the bible was not the “inspired word of God.”

[/ QUOTE ]

I also recall a study where 20% of community college professors (obviously above avg intelligence and above average %) were atheist, while 40% of Ivy League professors were atheist.

A quick Google search led me to An article that drew a similar data set containing this paragraph:

[ QUOTE ]
The study found that 23.4 percent of college and university professors describe themselves as either atheists or agnostics, with the remainder reporting some level of belief in God or another higher power. The authors also made a distinction between the general professoriate and those professors who teach at elite doctoral institutions, as defined by the US News and World Report's list of the 50 best doctoral-awarding universities. In the latter category, 36.6 percent of respondents described themselves as atheists or agnostics.

[/ QUOTE ]

The Poll:

[/ QUOTE ]

How do we know that atheists are smarter? Maybe the less intelligent atheists are not making any arguments so they are never in the limelight for us to assess their intelligence? How do we know that some less intelligent atheists aren't hanging out in churches pretending to be theists because of social/family/career pressures they perceive as dictating they do that?

The Jesuits are a religious group and history consistently tells us that they were an exceptionally brilliant class of theists.

Today's culture may be subverting people into no faith or weaker manifestations of faith. Peer pressure has a lot of influence on shaping people. A perfect example of this is the the military which is famous for using peer pressure to break people down so they can rebuild them in the military mode. How do they break people? They apply peer pressure.
They say do this right or the whole group will pay. If the individual fails to do something right the whole group pays then the group applies its social condemnation of the individual putting further pressure on that individual to conform.

Today it looks like the pendulum has swung in the opposite direction. For a couple of thousand years people have been striving to do right using what they perceive as God's boundaries from their religions, but along comes atheism saying "Hey, exalt yourself! Follow your urges. Nevermind your heart your intellect is enough". Now we have a society that is negatively reinforcing some of the worst urges.

Peer pressure can be used for both evil and good purposes. Evil peer pressure: see Hitler. Good peer pressure: see the Amish on the slaughter of their children.
Someone throwing off evil peer pressure: see that 5th guy in the recent rape article someone posted in a thread showing the craziness of some Pennsylvania judge's ruling. He could have followed the crowd instead he chose to get that woman out of a bad situation.

Here's an interesting slant on intelligence, belief and performance:
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releas...-swb013107.php

Do non-theists focus on random chaos while theists focus on order? Is the whole world a balance between the 2?

[madnak]

[ QUOTE ]
How do we know that atheists are smarter?

[/ QUOTE ]

The claim being made is that smart people are atheists, not that atheists are smart people. These are two very different claims.