New Research Says That Analytic Thinking Decreases Religious Beliefe

[Noivad]

This for fun.

Is there a god?

A large scientific organization in America (where else) decided to pose the question to it's Hitech computer. "Is there a GOD". After feeding in all relevant information available they typed it in and waited. After a lot of hard disk searching and the checking of all drives the computer went into an eerie silence for a few hours and then started typing.

Its answer was "Insufficient data".

Not to be outdone the scientists in their infinite wisdom started gathering information on God from the Worlds libraries, archives, and archaelogy institutions. So much information was assembled that it was decided that one computer could not handle it all so all large computers in the States were linked together for the operation. Again the question was posed and all the computers went into action. After three days the answer was forthcomming.

"Not enough resources to compute answer".

This time they were going to get an answer to an age old problem and nothing would stop them. After months of negotiations with governments around the world they were able to link all the computers in the world together to produce the ultimate computer. Nothing would stop them now. Just to make sure they fed in all information even remotely connected to God.

The information entered and all computers linked a scientist typed in the question "Is there a God?". The computer whirred into action checking all it's drives and then linking with all the other computers. After months of activity going from one computer to another the computer started typing the answer and everybody waited eagerly as it typed to the screen.

"There is now".

[Baneblade]

Skynet!

[Malorn]

Meh.

[p0intman]

Originally Posted by Malorn

Your logic is flawed. There are more than two explanations.

The article also has a bit of a misleading title leading people to come to the wrong conclusion about what they actually discovered.

What they did was create tasks that required analytical thinking to solve, and then immediately afterwards measured a baseline of "belief" (which was most likely a self-report questionnaire). They compared the results to individuals who did not perform analytical thinking tasks.



What they measured was immediate, not long-term, and as he says here it's a temporary condition. It's also one that may have little to do with religious belief - accessing that part of the brain could makes one question all manner of information. Or what they observed may have been specific to Western culture. It may have been related to the manner in which we are educated. It could be that the way we are taught to analytically solve problems is by questioning, so when we are in that 'mode' we question everything, but it may be different for someone of a different culture.

There are many explanations, and the coverage of the article has an inflammatory title that many athiests are clearly using as a weapon against those of faith. They are looking at the research and making the causation/correlation fallacy and twisting the findings of the research for their own purposes.

I'm still not sure if your arguments in favor of a god are a troll, or you really are that daft. I like to think you're smarter than that...

[Figment]

First off, has the research itself and its method been verified yet? Otherwise, it's not 'fact' just yet. And indeed, Malorn can and should ask the questions he is asking to come to such verification. How was it performed, what was tested, was it an appropriate test? Was the test setup to come to these conclusions?

And yes, these questions should be asked, because otherwise it's just like random "research" from biblical universities that misinterpret data, use bad logic and pre-conceived answers.

Note that Malorn is not argueing in favour of, nor against a god, but for verification of and ability to analyse the research before accepting it and twisting its meaning, as indeed is tempting to do.


Analytical skills however should IMO be able to influence the degree of being open to religious views as you should be more likely to pinpoint inconsistencies and problems. The question is whether it actually does, or that there are other inhibitors or katalysts that overcome the reasoning ability. For instance, there's the trait of trust. What do you trust and what do you not trust? As this is stated as a 'research' source, there are indeed people who would immediately trust it. Another trait might be interest: do you take the time to analyse it? Another trait might be indoctrination: are you open to analyse it or is it such an inherent part of your frame of reference that you cannot analyse it objectively anymore?

The word research does not always imply or mean proper, unambiguous, scientific research and like a few others noted, there's a lot of ambiguity here.

[ItsTheSheppy]

Originally Posted by Noivad

Analytical Analysis is only correct if all the data analized is correct. A lot of times it is not making the Analytical answer wrong.

Analytical skill is the ability to visualize, articulate, and solve both complex and uncomplicated problems and concepts and make decisions that are sensical based on available information. Such skills include demonstration of the ability to apply logical thinking to gathering and analyzing information, designing and testing solutions to problems, and formulating plans.

NOTE: Available Information

Boolean Algebra is the mamthematics of pure logic. the subject of study is either logical or not. There either is a God or there is Not. True or False.

Boolean algebra (or Boolean logic) is a logical calculus of truth values, developed by George Boole in the 1840s. It resembles the algebra of real numbers, but with the numeric operations of multiplication xy, addition x + y, and negation −x replaced by the respective logical operations of conjunction x∧y, disjunction x∨y, and negation ¬x.

This is the logic of computers, they use states of on or off - yes or no, there is or there is not. Boolean Algebra is the algebra of two values.

The problem with Boolean Algebra, and analytical thinking are that they rely heavily in absolutes. One way or the other. A very digital way of looking at things. In reality, we also know that between the absolute yes or no is the maybe. There is a state we call analog. There is an infinite amount of maybes between yes and no. True or false, up or down, there is a god, there is not a god.

For anyone to play god, and say that there is no god, or to say that there is a god, without considering all of the maybe in between, is not being truely analytical.

Science historically has been wrong about many things, because Science is a product of man himself. And man himself is the most un logical, least analytical creature known to itself.

So in the final analysis, maybe there is a God, and maybe there is not. But I'd rather err with the Analog, because sometimes Logic and Science just don't work.

Saying that it is a binary question (either there is a god, or there is not) does not actually paint a complete picture. My favorite comparison is the binary question of what I will be having for dinner tonight. I will either have steak, or I will have 'not steak'. It's binary!

Except it isn't. We all know steak isn't the only option (though I wouldn't mind if it was!). I could have eggs, or spaghetti, or soup, or noodles, etc. Or I could skip dinner.

In much the same way there could be a god, or there could be super intelligent space aliens, or our universe may be a computer program, or we could all be a dog's dream, etc. But absolutely none of it holds any weight until there is evidence to support it. Until there is solid evidence, all we're doing is spinning wheels and playing Make Believe.

I, and analytic thinkers like me, tend to focus on what we do know. We focus on what the evidence suggests is true. And there is nothing to suggest that supernatural elements are at play.

[Baneblade]

God is relative.

[Malorn]

Meh.

[BuzzCutPsycho]

Lots of edgy people in this thread.

[Zulthus]

^ Yeah. I keep asking it but never get an answer. Why do you people seriously care about what other people believe so much? Damn.

[Vash02]

Originally Posted by Zulthus

^ Yeah. I keep asking it but never get an answer. Why do you people seriously care about what other people believe so much? Damn.

Because what people believe influences their actions.

[Figment]

Originally Posted by Vash02

Because what people believe influences their actions.

That and they tend to try to influence other people to "save us from ourselves through ignorance".

[Zulthus]

Originally Posted by Vash02

Because what people believe influences their actions.

And? That can be said about anything, not just religion. So, why does religion matter? You'll never change anyone's beliefs, so just give up. This is pointless bickering... I don't even see why I read these threads. There are much more important things to be discussing, such as drunk drivers. They're much more annoying and important an issue than this.

[CutterJohn]

Originally Posted by Zulthus

And? That can be said about anything, not just religion. So, why does religion matter? You'll never change anyone's beliefs, so just give up. This is pointless bickering... I don't even see why I read these threads. There are much more important things to be discussing, such as drunk drivers. They're much more annoying and important an issue than this.

Like how many more rights against unreasonable searches we can violate in the name of public safety? How MADD has gotten so insane at lobbying you can get a DUI for sleeping it off in your car with the keys in your pocket in many places? Yay! Checkpoints in America! Step into the line citizen, so we can inspect you for contraband. Don't question, its for your own good.

[Vash02]

Originally Posted by Zulthus

And? That can be said about anything, not just religion. So, why does religion matter? You'll never change anyone's beliefs, so just give up. This is pointless bickering... I don't even see why I read these threads. There are much more important things to be discussing, such as drunk drivers. They're much more annoying and important an issue than this.

Religion matters when people try to stuff it down other peoples throats without permission. It matters when they take taxpayer money to promote their religion to the exclusion of everyone else. It matters when they use it to cover up or excuse vile crimes.

Of course it bloody matters.