Atheists know more about religion than religious adherents do

Jason

A Pew survey released yesterday shows that atheists could answer more questions correctly about religion that the people who ascribe to a faith.

The results seem to indicate that the more you know about religion, the less likely you are to be a believer. Thoughts?

George Patches

The results seem to indicate that the more you know about religion, the less likely you are to be a believer. Thoughts?

Given how close Jews and Mormons are to atheists, I don't think that's a logical conclusion. Also, Evangelical Protestants scored second highest on knowledge of Christianity, just behind Mormons.

Lyddi

I saw that the other day and thought it was quite interesting.

The test had questions pertaining to more than one religion, so I can see that super-believers might do more badly because they only believe in their faith, and they tend to not try to understand/study the other ones. Which is the same reason most christians don't know what evolution actually is. (Interestingly, my mom is a super christian, yet she loves to study other religions. I remember her reading the Quran once, and I was like O_o?)

Anyway, I can also see how people that know more about many religions realize that in the end they are all the same and it is pointless to choose one.

Or maybe Atheists are indeed smarter. :P

Sail

I saw this headline the other day and thought it was satire. Haha.

Apreche

The study shows that people who self-define as atheist know more about religions, as a whole.

I think the thing is we don't know the causality. Is it that non-believers research religion more? Is it that they are smarter, so they just know more in general? Is it that they used to be religious, but because they actually learned too much they realized it was stupid and became atheist?

zehaeva

I heard this on Bill Maher his morning, I listen to the podcast of his HBO show, and I have to say I'm not surprised.

If you were to explain catholic dogma to someone who did not grow up with it, but instead grew up with logic and solid reasoning, you would find mid sentence that the person you're explaining this to would start to think you're insane.

Those who say that a strict interpretation of the bible is the way to go really haven't read the bible closely. If they did they'd either find that the bible is a horrid violent and bigoted book, or that it was right up their ally and why is it that we don't have slaves today and stone people to death?

I mean it's in the bible right? Then it can't be bad at all!

Most of the exposure that people get to the bible is selected excerpts that are read to them by a priest/pastor/reverend and never go into it any further.

Even Sunday school where you're supposed to learn the bible, by and large, all you get is a watered down version that glosses over large amounts of the bigotry and ignorance and violence that actually is in the bible.

This is the way it has been for the past several thousand years so why should it be any different now?

Education is the great slayer of religion. If we didn't muck it up so badly here in the states we might find that we would have an easier time with things like the climate and evolution and medical research and manned spaceflight and the deficit (what other hot button issues can I stab in the face here?)

Victor Frost

I think the thing is we don't know the causality. Is it that non-believers research religion more? Is it that they are smarter, so they just know more in general? Is it that they used to be religious, but because they actually learned too much they realized it was stupid and became atheist?

This was very much the case with me and many people I know who self define as atheists.

Jason

A similar story last week got the newsroom here talking about religion (dangerous). My editor belongs to one of those wishy-washy middle-of-the-road social churches, and she admitted she had never read the source material. When I started telling her what the bible actually says and advocates, she refused to believe it. I showed her. She said outright she doesn't believe in anything the bible has to say, so I asked why she bothers with Christianity at all. Her response: Her family always went to church. She never questioned it.

Wyatt

I think a lot of people who consider themselves to be catholic have only learn through repetition without seeking exterior sources. Maybe they read the bible, but that's about it. I'm know a lot of people (catholics) mumble through the prayers, responses, and songs without even knowing the words. Mormons take a more proactive approach to their faith. They do a lot of bible study groups, but only the bible, in preparation for 'doing that year of trying to recruit more people into being Mormon... where they go door to door and stand on the street'. I forget what it's called.

As for the Jews, they all are living in NYC or LA. They're bound to learn something. Also, they need to learn something about other religions in order to know who is oppressing them.

Lets take this back topic back 100 years. I wonder how much the average person knew about religion when catholic mass was still read in Latin. My guess: even less they they do now.

chaosof99

Not surprising me at all. I still believe the fastest way to becoming an atheist is actually reading and critically and sceptically analyzing what is in them. Additionally, the major reason why most people are religious isn't because they chose it based on evidence or understanding of the religion they subscribe to, but because they were indoctrinated into the faith as children by their parents or caretakers.

I honestly do not believe that one can be knowledgeable about any one religion and be a follower of it at the same time. That is unless there are some screws loose as well.

balderdash

The data seem at first to fit the just-so story a lot of us like to tell ourselves about the association between religion and ignorance, but I don't think that holds up. The much stronger correlation that jumps out at me under closer examination is the one between correct answers and average socioeconomic status. I'd be prepared to wager that the real driver here is level of and indeed access to education, with perhaps a secondary influence based on the level of consciousness and deliberation that come from being a minority to explain why WASPS scored lower than atheists, Jews, and Mormons. All you really need to see the real driver, though, is to look at how much lower the typically poorer groups with less access to education scored. I'm not convinced this is primarily a religious issue. I'd bet that the scores would be similar if the questions had been about civics or science.

Lyddi

I honestly do not believe that one can be knowledgeable about any one religion and be a follower of it at the same time. That is unless there are some screws loose as well.

I dunno... I find many DO really know their religion, yet believe the magical-ness of it anyway. Many can just recite tons and tons of verses and examples and stuff (probably due to years of training beaten into their heads as kids). Like you said, there may be a bunch of people with loose screws, or maybe they all just lack rational thought because they were never taught how to use it. My boss is one of those super christian crazy people, and he is always reading his bible and doing mission trips and stuff. Even when we are really busy and he is complaining about how much work he has, he is constantly reading his bible. He seems like a normal smart-ish person on the outside, but I always have to wonder...

Wyatt

they were indoctrinated into the faith as children by their parents or caretakers.

Some people reach a point where religion becomes more of a passive hobby then an active belief in a higher power. We Atheists need to work on the indoctrination part. It's hard to indoctrinate someone into not believing something without first having to explain what said something is.

People have other reason for following religions other then spirituality. Church groups do provide a sense of community and can give people a sense of purpose. That's all well and good, and some people need those intangible goals get away from other bad habits. That means heaven was the first unlockable achievement. Think about it.

Apreche

I dunno... I find many DO really know their religion, yet believe the magical-ness of it anyway. Many can just recite tons and tons of verses and examples and stuff (probably due to years of training beaten into their heads as kids). Like you said, there may be a bunch of people with loose screws, or maybe they all just lack rational thought because they were never taught how to use it. My boss is one of those super christian crazy people, and he is always reading his bible and doing mission trips and stuff. Even when we are really busy and he is complaining about how much work he has, he is constantly reading his bible. He seems like a normal smart-ish person on the outside, but I always have to wonder...

I think a lot of these people memorize, but don't comprehend or really think about what it is that they have memorized. Also, what version of which bible they are reading matters a lot. The bibles that most people read are new testament only, and a so heavily edited to not be as crazy. Jews, who read the old testament, read it in Hebrew, so they have no fucking clue. They know how to read hebrew letters, as in translate the written language into spoken words, but do not know the meaning at all.

Ask most non-ultra-religious jews to recite the prayers for bread or wine, and they can do it in hebrew from memory. Ask them what it means in English, they have no clue.

balderdash

I find many DO really know their religion, yet believe the magical-ness of it anyway. Many can just recite tons and tons of verses and examples and stuff (probably due to years of training beaten into their heads as kids). Like you said, there may be a bunch of people with loose screws, or maybe they all just lack rational thought because they were never taught how to use it.

False dichotomy. Human beings are, neurologically, unavoidably, exceptionally good at compartmentalization and self-deception. Reasoning can help people overcome nonsensical beliefs, but only if they actually have the presence of mind and the desire to apply it, and those are factors that are going to depend at least as much, if not far more, on circumstance as on any internal constitution. Even people who are informed and rational in most of their lives can believe nonsense. We're just not perfect thinking machines. We're fallible, emotional, and highly prone to rationalization and mental blind spots, and perversely, being more intelligent only makes you better at rationalizing what you've already decided. Being consciously rational can help, but that alone can never erase or completely overcome our intrinsic irrationality.

Not making excuses. Just sayin' how it is. Everybody's irrational about something.

Jason

I'd be prepared to wager that the real driver here is level of and indeed access to education,

The survey data was adjusted to accommodate different levels of education. It says that in the two-paragraph introduction.

Lyddi

Yeah, I guess its hard for me to understand the mind of the hard core believers.
When I was a kid, Jesus was like Santa Claus. The adults told me he was real, and I believed. But then I grew up. Its like these other people never grew up, and I just don't understand how they can read these fairy tales and still believe it. Oh well.

George Patches

We need to learn to act like Vulcans more. We're not thinking creatures with emotions, we're emotional creatures that just happen to be capable of thinking.

balderdash

The survey data was adjusted to accommodate different levels of education. It says that in the two-paragraph introduction.

Whoops. Welp, I'm just gonna go soak my head.

I'm curious how that adjustment was made. Quality of education influences modes of thought as much as it does simple factual knowledge. That doesn't excuse my reading comprehension fail, though.

TheWhaleShark

we're emotional creatures that just happen to be capable of rational thought

I agree with this, for the most part. The problem with this, though, is that you're saying that emotions are also irrational. This is not necessarily true. Some emotions are perfectly rational. The problem occurs when people refuse to consider their emotions rationally at all, and never figure out why they might feel a particular way in a certain circumstance.

In fact, once you start analyzing emotions, many of them become frighteningly rational.

balderdash

Ah-ha. From the article, now that I am actually bothering to shut my trap and read it: "Data from the survey indicate that educational attainment – how much schooling an individual has completed – is the single best predictor of religious knowledge."

balderdash

The problem with this, though, is that you're saying that emotions are also irrational. [...] In fact, once you start analyzing emotions, many of them become frighteningly rational.

Been reading some Jonah Lehrer?

George Patches

I agree with this, for the most part. The problem with this, though, is that you're saying that emotions are also irrational. This is not necessarily true. Some emotions are perfectly rational. The problem occurs when people refuse to consider their emotions rationally at all, and never figure outwhythey might feel a particular way in a certain circumstance.

In fact, once you start analyzing emotions, many of them becomefrighteninglyrational.

Fixed because of Pete finding meaning where I intended none.

WindUpBird

That means heaven was the first unlockable achievement. Think about it.

Plenary indulgences are MLG. Pope Innocent III? Just a powergamer who realized that crusades and heretic burnings were OP.

Apreche

I'm curious how that adjustment was made.

A statistical adjustment.

Let's say I test 5 old men, 5 young men, 5 old women, and 5 young women. Well, with two factors, how can I get any real meaning out of the results? If I compare the old to the young, I have to adjust for gender. If I compare gender, I have to adjust for age. How you do this is very simple.

First you compare just the old men to the old women. Then you compare only the young men to only the young women. Those two separate comparisons only involve gender differences and not age differences. If you want to see the age difference, without gender messing it up, just compare only the young men to the old men and the young women with the old women.

Andrew

In fact, once you start analyzing emotions, many of them becomefrighteninglyrational.

This isn't surprising. It would make sense that many behaviours and emotions provide an evolutionary benefit, however that doesn't mean they are beneficial in a rational society. Dealing and living with these core emotions in a rational society is what defines the human condition.

Rym

From the article, now that I am actually bothering to shut my trap and read it: "Data from the survey indicate that educational attainment – how much schooling an individual has completed – is the single best predictor of religious knowledge."

And interestingly, educational attainment is also directly correlated to atheism rates.

Walker

When I was a kid, Jesus was like Santa Claus. The adults told me he was real, and I believed. But then I grew up. Its like these other people never grew up, and I just don't understand how they can read these fairy tales and still believe it. Oh well.

It's a matter of cognitive dissonance, I think. They associate a lot of positive feelings with religion. The sense of community, safety, tradition, and spiritual fulfillment that people find in religion can make it one of the most positive forces in their life. When confronted with evidence against their faith it's too ingrained to go away without a fight, so they hold the two beliefs in their head for a time. Eventually the brain does whatever it can to resolve the dissonance, which has manifested as everything from scary fundamentalists who abandon all reason to wishy-washy Unitarians and born-again Buddhists who compartmentalize the emotional and rational parts of their philosophy.

I'm probably oversimplifying, but that's the general impression that I get. I've met a lot of smart, respectable people with puzzlingly genuine faith in the supernatural.

WindUpBird

I'm probably oversimplifying, but that's the general impression that I get.

Cognitive dissonance probably is a big part of it for a lot of people. I mean, I probably wouldn't even identify as religious if it wasn't for certain members of my family, who would likely talk about me with phrases such as "An MD/PhD in Molecular Bio with a BA in Linguistics is a marvelous achievement, and he's done terrific things for people with his work, but it's a shame he's an atheist."

balderdash

A statistical adjustment.

I understand the principle but I appreciate the explanation since I am made of fail so far in this thread. My old stats professor would be sad.

What I really meant to ask, though, was whether an adjustment for level of education alone would be sufficient to account for the effects of general level of education on the cultural milieu, which, yes and no, it both does and does not, but it does sufficiently for this purpose, and I should have just thought about it some more before I started pontificating.

TheWhaleShark

I'm probably oversimplifying, but that's the general impression that I get. I've met a lot of smart, respectable people with puzzlingly genuine faith in the supernatural.

I've observed this in the sciences, often in older folks. I'm convinced that it has to do with the "fuck it" mentality; when you've spent the last 45 years exercising your brain on levels that few humans ever have, you get tired. When you get tired, you say "fuck it" and go with the easy path.

Religion is nothing if not expedient. Quick, go-to answers for life's dilemmas, involving a minimum of thought.