americanatheists

A faith-based prison is pushed - (November 7, 2009) - WAKITA €” This tiny town near the Oklahoma-Kansas state line ... http://ow.ly/160bVJ - more
The Helen Mitzman Challenge DOUBLES your tax-deductible Donation! -- NEWS: Membership dues reduced to just $20! Join Now! You can also donate your car or boat to American Atheists!

Why yes, we are smarter

OK So this is elitist at best, but here’s the rub. Religion is a stupid thing. It doesn’t take brains to believe in stupid things. It DOES take brains to QUESTION stupid things, and then to identify them as stupid.

A study published in the journal “Intelligence” shows the smarter a person is, the less likely they are to believe in God.Ulster University Psychology Professor Richard Lynn found a large percentage of people with a high IQ considered themselves to be atheists.His survey of the Royal Society found that just over three percent believed in God. That compares to nearly 69 percent of Britain’s general population who are believers.During the 20th century, as intelligence levels rose, religious belief in 137 developed nations declined. Critics dismiss Lynn’s research as too simplistic.

116 Responses to “Why yes, we are smarter”

  1.  reluctantatheist says:

    ‘Evidence’:

    No we don’t, “Walking willingly into the buzzsaw” is obviously suicidal.
    It’s clear that you’ll say stupid things to try to prove a point. Here’s what a martyr is to clarify your misunderstanding:

    Well, I made the analogy that suicide was the equivalent of walking into a buzzsaw, you agreed. I?d thought the transitive value was there. Sorry.
    Let?s further examine the concept:

    From the Greek word meaning ?witness?, the term was originally used within Christianity for the Apostles ? that is, those who had witnessed Christ’s life and resurrection. As Christians came to be persecuted in the pre-Constantinian period, it was used first for those who underwent hardship for the faith, and then only for those who died for the faith.

    Since there?s an extreme likelihood that there?s NO GOD, it qualifies as suicide, then.

    I never stated he was an atheist. And I never stated that you blamed CW, WWI, etc. on religion. I was simply saying there are plenty of terrible things that happen outside of religious causes.

    And I quote:
    ?So Lenin, Stalin and Hitler were promoting their religion. And the Civil War, WWI & WWII, and Vietnam were a “holy jihad”. There are plenty of things that make this world ugly…including atheistic influences.?
    So lessee, you INFER these fucktards were atheists (Stalin & Lenin were), it?s pretty clear you were playing the ?guilt by association? card. Or so it seemed.
    Your conflation of Nazi eugenics w/evolutionary theory was?well, to use your own words, ?you’ll say stupid things to try to prove a point?.
    In fact, anti-Semitism is a Christian legacy. Along w/the concept of the ?holy race?, bloodlines, & pile of other crap.

    Oh, and bravo on the list of organizations atheists have supported, though I’m not sure how many were atheist founded and run. Some of the mentioned groups are supported by the religious community as well. But you are all too willing to scorn anything religious entities do that are genuinely good.

    & here I thought we?d agreed that it was the people, not the ideology.
    Way to move the goalposts.
    No, I don?t scorn the entities that do genuine good. I scorn their epistemology. Superstition? Why does anyone need superstition to contribute to the betterment of his or her species? The fact that someone needs an external source to motivate them to do good deeds is quite suspicious, in my book.
    Skeptics have & will continue to contribute to humanity. The reasons you?re unaware of this is multiple:
    A. You don?t make the effort to investigate this possibility,
    B. Atheists have been HUGELY outnumbered throughout history, &
    C. A great many folks throughout history were major league skeptics. Since being godless has always been anathema, for the most part they kept it under their hats.

    …and a world full of skeptics would be just as “cheap and dangerous”. Atheistic individuals are not without human error, abuse and cruelty.

    Would it now? History has shown us time & again that while human nature is fraught w/xenophobia (that?s how we evolved, it?s a defense mechanism), as a rule religion has usually proven to be the gasoline thrown on the forest fire.
    In fact, the belief in an afterlife, a free pass to heaven, & a get-out-of-jail-free card (in the next world) has really caused far too much grief in the real world.
    Really, an argument from fallibility is just a cheap rhetorical device, not even worthy of analysis.

  2.  reluctantatheist says:

    Oh, here’s more on the eugenics controversy in pre-WWII Germany:
    http://tinyurl.com/63pfwb
    It appears that the Church (or ANY church) wasn’t quite as squeaky clean as the believers have been led to ‘believe’.

  3.  Evidence says:

    What,

    and accurate. So what is your point?

    Churches take in huge sums of cash, dole out a bit, and pocket the rest.

    No, you’re not accurate. It’s obvious that you are speaking out of an irrational and emotional opinion.

    You dolts spend countless dollars on supporting your religion and you have nothing to show for it – same (or higher) rates of crime, drug abuse, child abuse etc than in nonreligious groups. And you wonder why I call you a dumbass.

    Do have the specifics for this statement?

    KA,

    Since there?s an extreme likelihood that there?s NO GOD, it qualifies as suicide, then.

    This deductive reasoning is absurd.

    So lessee, you INFER these fucktards were atheists (Stalin & Lenin were), it?s pretty clear you were playing the ?guilt by association? card. Or so it seemed.

    That statement was an attempt at sarcasm that you missed. Voice inflection profits nothing on a blog.

    History has shown us time & again that while human nature is fraught w/xenophobia (that?s how we evolved, it?s a defense mechanism), as a rule religion has usually proven to be the gasoline thrown on the forest fire.
    In fact, the belief in an afterlife, a free pass to heaven, & a get-out-of-jail-free card (in the next world) has really caused far too much grief in the real world.
    Really, an argument from fallibility is just a cheap rhetorical device, not even worthy of analysis.

    It’s naive to think human nature would not find different “gasoline [to throw] on the forest fire”. Greed, hatred, insensitivity and the like would surley find it’s place. By the looks of it, suicide would become a major factor in an atheist majority world. I wouldn’t make any favorable predictions if I were you.

  4.  reluctantatheist says:

    ‘Evidence’:

    This deductive reasoning is absurd.

    So bring some ?evidence?. Haven?t seen any yet.

    That statement was an attempt at sarcasm that you missed. Voice inflection profits nothing on a blog.

    Vanity of vanities, sayeth the preach. Of what profit?
    Oh, oops. That?s right. I can talk your patois, you can?t speak mine.

    It’s naive to think human nature would not find different “gasoline [to throw] on the forest fire”. Greed, hatred, insensitivity and the like would surley find it’s place.

    Oh, ye of little faith?
    Oops again. (snigger). Maybe back then. But you see, if you?re an atheist, you value this life a lot more. Less likely to take the life of another.

    By the looks of it, suicide would become a major factor in an atheist majority world. I wouldn’t make any favorable predictions if I were you.

    Oh, posh. Codswallop. You find some survey on the web that suits your fancy, dress it up & take it dancing. The people factored into that survey (regardless of its integrity) were a small control group that were targeted because they were suicidal. You show me the suicide rates of religious vs. secular countries, and THEN I?ll take your ?atheism leads to suicide!? balderdash a little more seriously.
    You realize that there are secular countries that have religious people residing in them, correct?
    I thought we had this conversation about making broad sweeping generalizations? Guess the lesson didn?t take.
    ?Believing in an invisible sky daddy will keep people from killing themselves!?
    Does that sound as stupid to you as it does to me?
    Keep squirming ? this is fun.

  5.  what says:

    Everdense’s response to all arguments and facts is fundamentally this: “Nuh Uh”.

  6.  reluctantatheist says:

    What:

    Everdense’s response to all arguments and facts is fundamentally this: “Nuh Uh”.

    Guess that’s what happens when someone’s primary source is Conservapedia.

  7.  reluctantatheist says:

    Evidence:

    Uh, did you miss this part as shown above…

    No, I didn’t. I asked for hard numbers, not a naked assertion.
    How many? What are the numbers? Did they all leave suicide notes? What did the notes say? Did all these guys live in 3rd world countries? Were they all atheists? I’d like a full breakdown, please.
    Also, what is meant by ‘high levels of atheism?’ Was every suicide an atheist?
    The other problem w/this, is that it’s from one year only. Gimmee a 10 year spread – hell, I’ll be gracious & ask for 5, howzat?
    Another problem is nailing down the censuses in these countries – how do we know the numbers are anywhere near accurate? Bureaucracy’s are notorious for getting things wrong.
    The Sri Lanka thing screws the pooch – SL is VERY religious, yet that country rates among the top ten, which could be indicative of the lower living standards there.

    Actually, it does! It’s called accoutablility. Why is it so difficult for you to grasp that someone who believes death brings silence wouldn’t object to indulging?

    It’s not difficult @ all. Especially in 3rd world countries, where living is hard, & life is cheap. REGARDLESS OF RELIGIOUS AFFILIATION.
    We have India, as an example. India rates upwards as being an extremely religious country. Yet suicide seems to be growing, as evinced here:
    http://tinyurl.com/3q2dzu
    Highest suicide rate? Lithuania (2005). 79% of them are Roman Catholic.
    2nd up is Belarus, which is historically has been Russian Orthodox. Freedom to worship is granted by their constitution.
    3rd up is Russia – hey, completely atheistic, right?
    Wrong.
    “Christianity, Islam, Buddhism, and Judaism are Russia?s traditional religions, deemed part of Russia’s “historical heritage” in a law passed in 1997. Estimates of believers widely fluctuate among sources, and some reports put the number of non-believers in Russia as high as 16?48% of the population. Russian Orthodoxy is the dominant religion in Russia. 95% of the registered Orthodox parishes belong to the Russian Orthodox Church while there are a number of smaller Orthodox Churches. However, the vast majority of Orthodox believers do not attend church on a regular basis. Nonetheless, the church is widely respected by both believers and nonbelievers, who see it as a symbol of Russian heritage and culture. Smaller Christian denominations such as Roman Catholics, Armenian Gregorian and various Protestants exist.”
    So, in a nutshell:
    Male suicides seem to be higher in ‘atheistic’ countries, but thus far, naked assertion is yet another sad rhetorical device that comes apart under scrutiny.
    Do stop being so casuistic next time, please.
    I’ve posted on this elsewhere:
    http://tinyurl.com/5gdcht
    PS – I deep-sixed the double post thing for ya.

  8.  Evidence says:

    KA,

    You show me the suicide rates of religious vs. secular countries, and THEN I?ll take your ?atheism leads to suicide!?

    Uh, did you miss this part as shown above…

    According to the 2003 World Health Organization’s report on international male suicides rates (which compared 100 countries), of the top ten nations with the highest male suicide rates, all but one (Sri Lanka) are strongly irreligious nations with high levels of atheism. It is interesting to note, however, that of the top remaining nine nations leading the world in male suicide rates, all are former Soviet/Communist nations, such as Belarus, Ukraine, and Latvia. Of the bottom ten nations with the lowest male suicide rates, all are highly religious nations with statistically insignificant levels of organic atheism.
    http://www.adherents.com/misc/religion_suicide.html

    ?Believing in an invisible sky daddy will keep people from killing themselves!?

    Actually, it does! It’s called accoutablility. Why is it so difficult for you to grasp that someone who believes death brings silence wouldn’t object to indulging?

  9.  Evidence says:

    Sorry, the repeat was not intentional. Browser moved slow.

  10.  Evidence says:

    KA,

    Male suicides seem to be higher in ‘atheistic’ countries, but thus far, naked assertion is yet another sad rhetorical device that comes apart under scrutiny.

    I think more “scrutiny” can border on denial. I’m not so sure more “numbers” would satify. But more accuracy is always better.

  11.  Ralph Reese says:

    I agree that it is difficult sometimes to live without belief or certainty, but that does not make me want to delude myself with some sort of comforting hogwash. It may be that the true nature of the universe, time, space and matter etc. are beyond our current ability to fully comprehend. Perhaps in another million years or so we will have evolved to a higher level. Personally I still have trouble getting the idea of quantum physics. As for the premise of the study, all I can say is… DUHH

  12.  reluctantatheist says:

    I think more “scrutiny” can border on denial. I’m not so sure more “numbers” would satify. But more accuracy is always better.

    Weak showing.
    What did I say earlier in this thread? 1st law of statistics: correlation doesn?t prove causation.
    Points we agree on:
    A. Contributions made regardless of ideology.
    B. Broad sweeping generalizations are a bad thing.
    Turned around & changed your mind to suit your needs?
    Texas sharpshooter fallacy.
    Do better homework next time.

  13.  ping says:

    I used to be an atheist for a short time when I was 18 and knew everything. Since then I have pondered everything any human could ever ponder regarding creation.
    All my studies and meditation led me through agnosticism to a faith in GOD!
    I do not believe Atheists are smarter than people of faith. But I do believe they are just as smart.
    You see you are also people of faith.
    Your faith lies in the natural miracle of the singularity.
    You would have to deny your own existance if you actually believe that at some point before the big bang there was an absolute zero value.
    All the energy that transformed into our known physical universe had to come from somewhere! M theory does not address the issue of creation,
    it just conveniently tip toes around the one hurdle our limited minds cannot handle.
    So in the end my freinds you have to ask yourself the most important question you have ever asked yourself.
    As intelectual people what do you feel more comfortable with?
    That existence created intelligence?or that inteligence created exsistence?
    I stress the word feel because as intelectuals we know there is an element of the human heart that directs our intelect. Like it or not we have emotions and senses, and there is a way in which our creator speaks to us.
    One last thing do not let the failures of man kind attenuate your willingness to study the word of God.
    Religion has failed missurably over the centuries in setting an example of Godly living. That was what kept me away.
    Jesus comanded us to love everyone
    and spread the word so here I am.
    Let’s talk over our differences and
    have some fun doing it!
    ping

  14.  Obeah says:

    ping,
    Before you engage a group of atheists in a debate, I think you should know that some of us (in spite of the admonitions not to) are prone to mocking theists if their arguments are of the same old tired stripes which are used to prove the existence of a Christian god. Be prepared.

    You stated that you have pondered everything ponderable. This is a difficult assertion to accept.
    Through your studies and meditation you have arrived at a conclusion. This suggests that you have the proof we all need in order to accept one of the thousands of gods available. Please, do tell.

    Please explain what you are trying to say when referencing “the singularity”. I gather it’s something to do with black holes, which I fail to see how the existence of a god would be involved.

    “One last thing do not let the failures of man kind attenuate your willingness to study the word of God.”

    You will have to translate this for me.

    I speak for some atheists when I say that we are comfortable with not knowing everything. We use the best evidence available to believe. There is no need for faith. Faith and belief are not synonymous. Faith is the belief in something for which there is no evidence.

  15.  reluctantatheist says:

    ping:

    I stress the word feel because as intelectuals we know there is an element of the human heart that directs our intelect.

    I speak for myself, when I say – it’s silly to have an ‘intelectual’ conversation w/someone who can’t even spell the word.

    Since then I have pondered everything any human could ever ponder regarding creation.

    Good – then you can fill in the gaps towards the ‘theory of everything’. Is string theory worth anything? 10 or 11 dimensions?

  16.  karen says:

    ping

    Your faith lies in the natural miracle of the singularity.
    You would have to deny your own existance if you actually believe that at some point before the big bang there was an absolute zero value.

    Since then I have pondered everything any human could ever ponder regarding creation.

    The first quote contradicts the second quote. Quite obviously, you have not pondered everything or you would not assign us thought such as those in the first quote. Plus, you would have to know all the thoughts of all the people of all time-past present and future- to know that you have pondered whatever they might come up with. How is that possible?

    You may no longer be 18, but you still think you know everything, apparently. Guess what?