It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
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
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?
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.
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.
Originally posted by rhinoceros
A new University of British Columbia study finds that analytic thinking can decrease religious belief, even in devout believers.
Originally posted by crankyoldman
break down anything that allows one's consciousness to access realities and information beyond that which is accepted science.
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.
Originally posted by Atzil321
I am suprised they needed to conduct research to come to this conclusion, it seems self evident to me.
Originally posted by rhinoceros
Maybe this figure will clarify things for you.
Originally posted by imherejusttoread
The study and its experimental design is so bogus that Nature had to chime with an editorial to denounce it.
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?
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.
Originally posted by rhinoceros
reply to post by imherejusttoread
For example:
What this valuable and stimulating study reveals, however, is the difficulty of subjecting religious belief to scientific scrutiny.
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).
Originally posted by rhinoceros
Nowhere in your quotes is the study "denounced".
Originally posted by Nature Magazine
Okay, we denounce this study. We thought our article's premise was tautological, but apparently not.
Originally posted by rhinoceros
Truth hurts? Prove that it's nonsense.