Backroom Poll. The (major) Religious Affiliation in Backroom...

[Hax]

Buddhist (gosh).

Specifically, Tantrayana Esoteric Buddhism

Even more specifically, I'm following the teachings of Kobo Daishi, who founded Koyasan Shingon-shu.

[CountArach]

I find those statistics to be rather strange. Why use average IQ instead of percentage of college graduates (also note how some of the same results are coloured differently)? It also seems to believe that religiosity affects these other things whereas they are all in fact emblematic of bigger social problems.

[Hosakawa Tito]

Hmmm, Atheists bar graph color is pink. There's a lesson in there somewhere, but I can't put my finger on it...

[Tellos Athenaios]

The irony is that the “only true Christian (tm)” is only comfortable if rebuking other Christians for their heresy whilst defending his own reading of the Bible. This goes somewhat more for the “Protestant” kind of Christianity than Catholicism; but really that is what Christianity has been about since its inception.

Anyway, myself when it comes to religion I find it fascinating but maintain a “what the heck do I know anyway” idea. So the last option fits me perfectly.

[Fixiwee]

I find those statistics to be rather strange. Why use average IQ instead of percentage of college graduates (also note how some of the same results are coloured differently)? It also seems to believe that religiosity affects these other things whereas they are all in fact emblematic of bigger social problems.

Looking at statistics is interpreting them. This always means that two people looking at one statistic will have three opinions about it.

I do wonder about the conection of religion and IQ. There seems to be something to it. Looking at the scandinavian countries with the worlds best education system and IQ percentage and the high percentage of agnostics/atheist. (correct me if I'm wrong, but afaik only 40% of the population in scandinavia belongs to a registered church.)
Another example is the infamous fact that about 93% of the members in the National Academy of Sciences are agnostics/atheists as well.

I'm not saying that people whoe believe in god/s are idiots by any means and I very well respect religion as I posted before.

[CountArach]

I would say that is a result of higher education rather than higher IQ. The two go hand-in-hand generally but only an effective education system will bring out critical thinking skills, which may be lacking in some.

[The Wizard]

To return to the whole Catholic (*cough*dirty Papist scum*cough* ) thing, I admire Jesuits for their intelligence and learning while despising everything else in the Catholic church. Hey, I was raised by radical atheists coming from a hardcore Reformed region, bite me

EDIT: Fixiwee, AFAIK in Scandinavia the vast majority of citizens are registered members of the local Lutheran churches, because every Scandinavian country (this does not include Finland) has a state religion, and babies are immediately registered as church members upon birth (which would make me rage as a parent, as an aside). Chuch attendance is exceptionally low, however.

[Fixiwee]

I would say that is a result of higher education rather than higher IQ. The two go hand-in-hand generally but only an effective education system will bring out critical thinking skills, which may be lacking in some.

Yeah I agree. You can swap IQ in my post with education. I was never a big fan of the IQ index.

[Hax]

Hey, I was raised by radical atheists coming from a hardcore Reformed region, bite me

I would, but it goes against the theory of ahimsa.

[Cute Wolf]

I remember about Hooahguy...
So at least we can conclude that is no muslim here...

OOps... I just forgot LeftEyeNine

[Husar]

Why use average IQ instead of percentage of college graduates (also note how some of the same results are coloured differently)?

Because both don't say a whole lot?

[Strike For The South]

I thought this is interessting. Just to make it clear; this is only statistics:

Correlation /=/ cuasation.

[Sasaki Kojiro]

I would say that is a result of higher education rather than higher IQ. The two go hand-in-hand generally but only an effective education system will bring out critical thinking skills, which may be lacking in some.

I wouldn't even say critical thinking skills. It sounds more like culture. How else would you explain the wide discrepencies in atheism between western countries?

It doesn't matter how smart you are, you'll stick with religion if you were brought up that way and it works for you.

[Aemilius Paulus]

Correlation /=/ cuasation.

Ditch the cliché... You are not making an argument, but simply throwing words around. Or was the misspelling intentional, meaning you are trolling? Gah, one can never tell with you, Strike .

That many correlations are not a coincidence. Fixi was not explicitly naming any cause of the negative statistics, and even hinting towards something would not work with that poll as there are so many factors. I would assume poverty leads to low intelligence, crime, and religion - since it appeals to the simple-minded more than it does to an intellectual, and religion makes tough lives a whole lot more bearable. What is so wrong with what I just said, from a statistical and sociological point of view?

I find it strangely suspicious that there is such a large IQ difference, but then again, abstract reasoning, or what the today's tests are, is not a strength of rural and poverty-stricken folk... This is also why IQ scores are rising, a.k.a the Flynn Effect - because as the societies grow more sophisticated, especially in technological terms, abstract reasoning becomes more lucid.

[Strike For The South]

. I would assume poverty leads to low intelligence, crime, and religion -

Ding Ding Ding!!!!!

Couple that with the stronger church tradition in the south and you get those statistics. I would argue many people here just say they are christians simply because saying you're not one is considered something of a social fopah.

Being religous does not make you dumb fat, it's about the culture in which you are raised. The south has always looked to the church as the center of social, not just religous life. It is only natural for one to be a christian becuase so much of life is centered around it.

I can't spell and don't care to proofread

[Aemilius Paulus]

Ding Ding Ding!!!!!

Couple that with the stronger church tradition in the south and you get those statistics. I would argue many people here just say they are christians simply because saying you're not one is considered something of a social fopah.

Being religous does not make you dumb fat, it's about the culture in which you are raised. The south has always looked to the church as the center of social, not just religous life. It is only natural for one to be a christian becuase so much of life is centered around it.

Well yeah, that is what I always said... Poverty->low IQ->hardship+tradition->voilà, you are now religious.

The trouble is, once someone is religious they tend to become even more recalcitrant in their stand against science or reason (sorry, I am singling out mainly Southerners here, mainly Baptists ), and they pass on the religion, which coupled with poverty creates a vicious circle. Remove the religion, and the cycle is slightly easier to change, although not by much. But then the crime-rate can easily rise... Everything is a double-edged sword.

What is really disturbing though, are the religious folk who are not poor, but are ignorant as a result of their religion . That can be blamed on religion. At least the poor have a very good excuse - I do not expect someone living in such hardship in the Deep South to be a liberal, atheist intellectual. It is not their fault, and they are good people because of what they are, rather than what they are not.

I can't spell and don't care to proofread

Okay, I just remembered that often times when you jokingly bait people, you misspell things intentionally.

[Centurion1]

I would liem to argue that with you. poverty = poor education not low iq. There are chances someone who is poor (desperately poor) would be ill educated and not be able to read. and then they would be unable to complete an iq test. iq and conditional intelligence are two different things.

[Aemilius Paulus]

I would liem to argue that with you. poverty = poor education not low iq. There are chances someone who is poor (desperately poor) would be ill educated and not be able to read. and then they would be unable to complete an iq test. iq and conditional intelligence are two different things.

No, but they are too closely correlated. You need a special environment for IQ development. It is perfectly possible to be sharp and yet ignorant. Ignorance and stupidity are very different things. But poverty-stricken rural environments tend to produce inhospitable conditions for the development of the mind, and so you reap what you sow. People born into working-class families feature normal intelligence, but rural areas in poor regions tend to be sad exceptions. There is a line, below which high IQ tends to be more or less unattainable (very unlikely). This line is different, depending on each country and the culture of the family.

The really big kick in the teeth is that IQ tests, as I said before, are measures of abstract reasoning - which is the standard measure of intellect. This is severely hampered by the environment of poverty. But let us not jump on the bandwagon that IQ tests are horribly flawed and that they measure too little to be of use. IQ tests correlate very well with all sorts of other legitimate tests measuring cognitive performance.

[Centurion1]

You are still speaking of educational intelligence though.

Say there are twins born in rural west virginia. One grows up with her poor, alcoholic, parents. The other is adopted by a rich family in boston. Are they both going to be stupid because of where they are born. Or is the education going to make a difference (assuming the one twin gets a good education)

Iq tests are so subjective. I consistently get high scores on one test but on another my score drops ten points. (both legitimate tests). Ridiculous.

[Aemilius Paulus]

Y

Iq tests are so subjective. I consistently get high scores on one test but on another my score drops ten points. (both legitimate tests). Ridiculous.

Yeah, 'cause a teen like you and me definitely knows better than more than a century of scientific observation, experimentation, and gradual improvement ... Look, I make no secret that I dislike anti-intellectualism, whether intentional or semi-accidental. I am not saying that you are being anti-intellectualism here, but statistics show that IQ test correlate very well, and they are therefore still used. If I had a pence/penny (preferably a pence though - they are worth more ) for every anti-IQ test story...

[Beskar]

I like to inform you "IQ tests on the internet" are not legitimate.

A legitimate IQ test would involve being in an office with a psychologist for a couple-few hours to access your mentals in a long range of area, while they record your performance.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wechsle...lligence_Scale

[Centurion1]

I like to inform you "IQ tests on the internet" are not legitimate.

A legitimate IQ test would involve being in an office with a psychologist for a couple-few hours to access your mentals in a long range of area, while they record your performance.

Thank you beskar im not an idiot. I took one for my school and my parents had me given one when i was younger. I do not place any significance on online tests which question whether my intelligence is the same as Albert Einsteins.

I am not saying zero credence should be placed on IQ tests. My sentiments are not anti-intellectual. I think an IQ test is a helpful tool, however, it is NOT a fail-safe. You should not assume everything about a person because they do poorly on a Test.

To finalize, an IQ test is a helpful tool. It is not however the end all be all. As well there are many categories of a IQ test just like any other test. Failing one section of the test does not mean you are stupid by any means.

I want to point out that it is a commonly accepted fact that extreme conditions, biology, and nutritional factors all play a part in determining someones "intelligence". Are people poor because they are stupid? Perhaps but not necessarily. Are stupid because they are poor. Because of certain factors, yes.

[Beskar]

I want to point out that it is a commonly accepted fact that extreme conditions, biology, and nutritional factors all play a part in determining someones "intelligence". Are people poor because they are stupid? Perhaps but not necessarily. Are stupid because they are poor. Because of certain factors, yes.

Shush, that thinking leads to you to socialism.

[Centurion1]

Doesn't mean i have to try to fix it, only acknowledge it, duh

[Hax]

I think apathy is worse than ignorance

[Centurion1]

What about ignorance through apathy.

[Hax]

That would mean you don't know because you don't care?

Sounds a bit like the chicken-egg problem to me. However, willing apathy, knowing what is going on and yet not caring or not wanting to care is worse than not knowing because of a lack of information.

[drone]

I think apathy is worse than ignorance

Who cares?

[Centurion1]

That would mean you don't know because you don't care?

Sounds a bit like the chicken-egg problem to me. However, willing apathy, knowing what is going on and yet not caring or not wanting to care is worse than not knowing because of a lack of information.

?Who says i don't care. Just because my politics seek a different path to correcting the issue than Socialism or Communism does not mena i do not care. You don't have to believe in a workers paradise to care.

[Aemilius Paulus]

I am not saying zero credence should be placed on IQ tests. My sentiments are not anti-intellectual. I think an IQ test is a helpful tool, however, it is NOT a fail-safe. You should not assume everything about a person because they do poorly on a Test.

To finalize, an IQ test is a helpful tool. It is not however the end all be all. As well there are many categories of a IQ test just like any other test. Failing one section of the test does not mean you are stupid by any means.

How much actual data does your conclusion draw from? When I was saying the poor had lower-than-average IQ scores I was drawing on just about every sociology textbook. When you say you do not trust IQ tests, you state your personal opinion, which is, while supported by many upset moms, punctured egos, as well as some researchers, is contrary to the general scientific consensus.