Analytic Thinking Can Decrease Religious Belief

page: 2
15
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Apr, 27 2012 @ 10:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by rhinoceros
If anything, analytic thinking should increase "belief" in science, since that is the method how the information was obtained in the first place


I am sure you are a rational person. You had read and analysed the article. Yet, EVEN YOU, had to use the word 'Belief' for science.

If you are truly a man of perfect science, using the 'method', you would NOT need to have 'beliefs' in it. It is not semantics here, but 'theories' (crystal ball gazing) that are the 'beliefs' you subcribe to. Why thus the need for such 'leap of faith' in science if the 'method' can be use to decipher EVERY law of the Universe and answer to everything?

No..wait....our current science had not reach that level yet, so humans must take that 'leap of faith' in science like you?




posted on Apr, 27 2012 @ 10:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by SeekerofTruth101

Originally posted by rhinoceros
If anything, analytic thinking should increase "belief" in science, since that is the method how the information was obtained in the first place


I am sure you are a rational person. You had read and analysed the article. Yet, EVEN YOU, had to use the word 'Belief' for science.

If you are truly a man of perfect science, using the 'method', you would NOT need to have 'beliefs' in it. It is not semantics here, but 'theories' (crystal ball gazing) that are the 'beliefs' you subcribe to. Why thus the need for such 'leap of faith' in science if the 'method' can be use to decipher EVERY law of the Universe and answer to everything?

No..wait....our current science had not reach that level yet, so humans must take that 'leap of faith' in science like you?

Maybe this figure will clarify things for you.



posted on Apr, 27 2012 @ 10:26 AM
link   
Good post. Pretty much the story of my life. I was brought up Catholic, put in Catholic school, the works. When I was young I saw it as the only possibility, because I didn't see why so many people stake their lives on it if it was false. My parents, my friends and my teachers all said it was true, so it had to be. Jesus had to exist and have died for my sins. But when I turned 16, i began to drift away because the older I got, the more I would analyze things, and I began to understand the Christianity is just ONE WAY out of hundreds to live your life. I became really interested and began reading about other religions as well as the history of Christianity (which still makes my stomach turn to this day). Now I see how ridiculous it is, and I think all the hardcore religious schooling is the reason I came to realize it. I thank Catholic school for putting a sour taste in my mouth and getting me to realize the futility of religion.



posted on Apr, 27 2012 @ 10:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by Klassified

Originally posted by rhinoceros

Originally posted by Klassified
So is it any wonder that examining it critically dispels those irrational fears and beliefs, and sheds light in the dark corners of it.

I think the point of this research was that any analytic thinking (not necessarily related to religious beliefs) activated regions of the brains that then fought also "intuitive short-cuts related to religious beliefs" (I call this brainwashing damage)..


I did get that out of it as well. But it seems the effect would be neglible until a person actually began to pinpoint that analysis on their belief system.

I say this because I spent a good portion of my life as a christian. I have always been a very analytical person, but it wasn't until I focused that critical and analytical thought process on my belief system, and ask myself why I believed what I believed, that I began to see it for what it was.

Thanks for posting this. I find it interesting.


Part of it is that we're indoctrinated into our religions at very young ages. Most kids don't begin to develop even the most basic critical thinking skills until the teen years and it's a process that continues well into adulthood. By then some people are so into their faith that it scares them to question it.
edit on 4/27/2012 by HappyBunny because: Correct spelling



posted on Apr, 27 2012 @ 10:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by Barcs
Good post. Pretty much the story of my life. I was brought up Catholic, put in Catholic school, the works. When I was young I saw it as the only possibility, because I didn't see why so many people stake their lives on it if it was false. My parents, my friends and my teachers all said it was true, so it had to be. Jesus had to exist and have died for my sins. But when I turned 16, i began to drift away because the older I got, the more I would analyze things, and I began to understand the Christianity is just ONE WAY out of hundreds to live your life. I became really interested and began reading about other religions as well as the history of Christianity (which still makes my stomach turn to this day). Now I see how ridiculous it is, and I think all the hardcore religious schooling is the reason I came to realize it. I thank Catholic school for putting a sour taste in my mouth and getting me to realize the futility of religion.


For me, it was catechism class when the priest told a room full of 13 year olds that if a baby is born with a birth defect, it was because the parents sinned.



posted on Apr, 27 2012 @ 10:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by rhinoceros

A new University of British Columbia study finds that analytic thinking can decrease religious belief, even in devout believers.


100% true. This is exactly how I broke free from the cult.

Used to be the most DEVOTE Christian one can ever be...

...until I started THINKING for MYSELF.

Now I see it for what it is... fairy tales. And even harder to break the spell because these fairy tales consider anyone who breaks free from the delusion or tries to explain the truth to others is nothing but "satanic", "demonic", or of the "anti-Christ".

An extremely stubborn, superstitious, and delusional cult that is VERY DIFFICULT to break free from without TREMENDOUS thinking for oneself...
edit on 27-4-2012 by HangTheTraitors because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 27 2012 @ 10:34 AM
link   
reply to post by rhinoceros
 


I would plead that you do not give me a link to nonsense EVER AGAIN PLEASE!

Who wrote that chart? It is obvious he knows NOTHING about religion! And it would be a pain to discuss issues with individuals who know nothing about issue such as he who drew that chart.

Religion an 'idea'? I know not the words to express my contempt for such ignorances. The civilisation of our race, the sacrifices of blood, the monumental achievements to learn from mistakes in order to progress and evolve are mere 'ideas' of darwin's apes?

Sometimes, I wonder should I weep or laugh outright here at the insane ignorances of some.......



posted on Apr, 27 2012 @ 10:57 AM
link   
reply to post by SeekerofTruth101
 

Truth hurts? Prove that it's nonsense.



posted on Apr, 27 2012 @ 10:58 AM
link   
The irony is that "analytic" thinking in the form of the codified "scientific method" was specifically created to do just that - break down anything that allows one's consciousness to access realities and information beyond that which is accepted science.

Of course it does this, it was designed to do it, and this is not a good thing. That is not to say that wild, thoughtless devotion to religious absurdity is a better way to evolve, but the idea that the two are opposing forces is the real problem. This "study" will be used by the "god is an illusion that can't be proven so just shut up" people in an effort to further isolate them from anything other then what is present as the end all be all earth.



posted on Apr, 27 2012 @ 11:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by crankyoldman
break down anything that allows one's consciousness to access realities and information beyond that which is accepted science.

Well that's one way to say imaginary things. Although, if you read the abstract (first post bottom), you'll know that the article doesn't make any assumptions on the truth base of religious beliefs. I guess it's worth quoting again:



Although these findings do not speak directly to conversations about the inherent rationality, value, or truth of religious beliefs, they illuminate one cognitive factor that may influence such discussions.

edit on 27-4-2012 by rhinoceros because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 27 2012 @ 11:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by Atzil321
I am suprised they needed to conduct research to come to this conclusion, it seems self evident to me.


Yup. Right up there with that study that determined stupid people are too stupid to determine that they're stupid.

I think this apparent fact is what allows the banter on religion's behalf to continue on this site. We can't hold anything against someone who has a mild mental handicap. Essentially, they're pitied, not tolerated.



posted on Apr, 27 2012 @ 11:52 AM
link   
reply to post by chasingbrahman
 

It's not so self-evident to me at least that performing tasks that require analytical thinking also (at least temporarily) decrease your religious beliefs because some areas in your brains that promote reason are exited, but whatever..
edit on 27-4-2012 by rhinoceros because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 27 2012 @ 12:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by rhinoceros
Maybe this figure will clarify things for you.




The study and its experimental design is so bogus that Nature had to chime with an editorial to denounce it. It's full of assumptions and concepts that are taken as a given rather than critically analyzed.

That chart assumes the same flaw.



posted on Apr, 27 2012 @ 12:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by imherejusttoread
The study and its experimental design is so bogus that Nature had to chime with an editorial to denounce it.

Care to quote the paragraph in which this editorial denounces the paper? You won't because it doesn't. What's the point of lying?



posted on Apr, 27 2012 @ 12:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by rhinoceros
Care to quote the paragraph in which this editorial denounces the paper? You won't because it doesn't. What's the point of lying?


The entire article.

I would love to see a quote for where it doesn't.



posted on Apr, 27 2012 @ 12:29 PM
link   
reply to post by imherejusttoread
 

For example:



Their study, published in this week's issue of Science1, offers evidence that when people engage in analytical thinking, they are less likely to express strong religious beliefs. In other words, the more you’re inclined to think a problem through rather than to rely on gut instinct, the less likely you are to capitulate to belief in supernatural agencies.


your turn now
edit on 27-4-2012 by rhinoceros because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 27 2012 @ 12:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by rhinoceros
reply to post by imherejusttoread
 

For example:


That's a descriptive intro paragraph. The rest of the article is based on deconstructing the uncritically assumed concepts like religion or religiosity before concluding that the only thing the study says is to be more careful and critical with the words used while designing experiments:


What this valuable and stimulating study reveals, however, is the difficulty of subjecting religious belief to scientific scrutiny.


Because:


But what kind of religiosity? The authors state that they “focused primarily on belief in and commitment to religiously endorsed supernatural agents” — they examined beliefs in God, the devil and angels. That, of course, already assumes a Judaeo-Christian context, but there are plenty of devout believers who have no need of angels or the devil, and some who perhaps have no need of a belief in God in a traditional or Christian sense (Max Planck was one such example).



posted on Apr, 27 2012 @ 12:36 PM
link   
reply to post by imherejusttoread
 

Nowhere in your quotes is the study "denounced".



posted on Apr, 27 2012 @ 12:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by rhinoceros
Nowhere in your quotes is the study "denounced".


Is this better?


Originally posted by Nature Magazine
Okay, we denounce this study. We thought our article's premise was tautological, but apparently not.



posted on Apr, 27 2012 @ 12:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by rhinoceros
Truth hurts? Prove that it's nonsense.


Truth? What truth are you blabbering about? Your link? I assumed you are a rational man, but guess I was far too generous towards you,

Your link and the BC article is nothing more than a sleight of hand insidious play on the Creation vs Evolution theories. Man has to come from somewhere. Either you believe we are of intelligent design or came from darwin's apes.

Fortunately, billions around the world have more faith in our common Creator than there are those like you whom will call apes your ancestors and blindly believe scientific theories ( crystal ball gazing) as truths.

The debate will never end. It is pointless. Religion is a personal issue, between man and God, not some dogmatic utterances by fanciful hypocrite greedy clowns in suits with a fanciful temple institution telling his interpretated perspectives and demanding your obedience. Respect for community leaders are to be earned, not freely given. Some are deservedly respected, while many more do harm to civilisational guidelines than good, by wrong interpretations or hypocrisy. Blame flawed mortal men, not God for the mess we are in.

Sooner or later, you will find out the truth, on your own free will at your own time, not mine. To debate over this cunning con attempt BS article is only a waste of time. There are far more better and insightful ATS thread on topic that goes right back to the inception days of ATS than this if one wishes to comprehend both sides of the issue honestly and sincerly.





new topics

top topics



 
15
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join