SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the "number-of-the-beast"-is-natural,-whole,-rational,-real,-AND-imaginary dept.
Religious beliefs are not linked to intuition or rational thinking, according to new research by the universities of Coventry and Oxford. Previous studies have suggested people who hold strong religious beliefs are more intuitive and less analytical, and when they think more analytically their religious beliefs decrease.
But new research, by academics from Coventry University's Centre for Advances in Behavioural Science and neuroscientists and philosophers at Oxford University, suggests that is not the case, and that people are not 'born believers'. The study -- which included tests on pilgrims taking part in the famous Camino de Santiago and a brain stimulation experiment -- found no link between intuitive/analytical thinking, or cognitive inhibition (an ability to suppress unwanted thoughts and actions), and supernatural beliefs.
Instead, the academics conclude that other factors, such as upbringing and socio-cultural processes, are more likely to play a greater role in religious beliefs.
[Abstract]: Supernatural Belief Is Not Modulated by Intuitive Thinking Style or Cognitive Inhibition
Would you agree with this conclusion or do you believe that there is something else that influences people's religious beliefs ?
(Score: 4, Interesting) by NewNic on Thursday November 09 2017, @07:20PM (16 children)
I believe that the reason religious people fight wars or blow themselves up is that they believe in an afterlife. If dying is not the end, then why fear death?
That is, IMHO, the most dangerous aspect of most religions.
lib·er·tar·i·an·ism ˌlibərˈterēənizəm/ noun: Magical thinking that useful idiots mistake for serious political theory
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 09 2017, @07:27PM (15 children)
"What is life after death? The same as life before birth. Nothing." —Atheists.
If anything, only the religious fear death; they fear hell. Buddhists fear having to live again, don't they? Nirvana is the escape of the virtually endless cycle of reincarnation, especially reincarnation as a lower form of life.
If the religious are motivated by the "afterlife", then it's probably out of fear of what is to come, not longing. Indeed, that's why it's so important to cut up the sexual organs of completely healthy boys and girls; you have to signal your virtue and conviction to the creator of the entire universe, amirite?
(Score: 5, Interesting) by NewNic on Thursday November 09 2017, @07:43PM (9 children)
You ignore that most people have genetic programming to avoid death (there are some people who are without fear).
Religion weakens this programming.
Almost everyone believes they personally are righteous, and religion teaches that the righteous have nothing to fear from death. It's the other people who are going to hell, not them.
You ignore the "72 virgins" concept that is used to motivate suicide bombers and others.
No, religion makes it easier for people to risk their lives, not harder. Religion allows and motivates people to risk their lives in far off places where there is no other reason to fight there. For example: the Crusades.
lib·er·tar·i·an·ism ˌlibərˈterēənizəm/ noun: Magical thinking that useful idiots mistake for serious political theory
(Score: 4, Insightful) by c0lo on Thursday November 09 2017, @08:36PM
Can't stop to note that all your examples are drawn from Abrahamic religions.
It may or may not be the same for all religions.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 5, Insightful) by ilsa on Thursday November 09 2017, @10:58PM (1 child)
Correction. Most people believe in some kind of *spirituality*. In other words, they feel a sense of connection with the environment around them, people, the universe, what have you.
IMO Religion is a method of brainwashing people into doing whatever the controllers of that particular religion want. Sometimes religion abuses that sense of spirituality to give itself additional legitimacy, but not necessarily.
(Score: 1) by pdfernhout on Friday November 10 2017, @03:13AM
For a more nuanced view of cost/benefit: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolutionary_origin_of_religions [wikipedia.org]
The biggest challenge of the 21st century: the irony of technologies of abundance used by scarcity-minded people.
(Score: 2) by AnonTechie on Friday November 10 2017, @09:50AM (5 children)
Why Call Him God?
Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?
- Epicurus
Albert Einstein - "Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former."
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday November 10 2017, @10:09AM (4 children)
> Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent.
this is when an average intellect guy should have put Epicurus in chains
"it is right, epi, there is no way you can commit crimes if the chain prevents you to move, freedom is not important compared to fighting evil, you implied it, remember?"
but of course let's not ruin non sequiturs on simple stuff like the existence of god.
(Score: 2) by Wootery on Friday November 10 2017, @11:47AM (3 children)
Except that god is generally held to be the creator of good and evil, happiness and suffering. If god is indeed all-powerful and all-good, why did god create suffering?
(Score: 1) by MindEscapes on Friday November 10 2017, @03:57PM (2 children)
Would you know good was good without suffering to compare it to? It would just be what is and no longer good.
Need a break? mindescapes.net may be for you!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday November 10 2017, @04:34PM
Sure, you can have gradations of goodness without having evil to compare it against. For example, allowing people to starve is evil, not sharing when they would otherwise be fine is neutral, sharing delicious food is good. You can know that sharing is better when compared against not sharing, you don't need to have the people starving to death to know that.
(Score: 2) by Wootery on Friday November 10 2017, @05:05PM
The proposed god is all powerful. That has to include the ability to create a universe in which pleasure can exist without pain.
Whether us humans can know pleasure without pain, is hardly the point. The whole system can be blamed on god.
(Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Thursday November 09 2017, @07:43PM (4 children)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pascal%27s_Wager [wikipedia.org]
--
From what I remember of the article on female genital mutilation, it's more of a cultural thing than religious (the creepiest part is that it's actually the *women* who are doing it to their daughters). Presumably you're also referring to circumcision.
"Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
(Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Thursday November 09 2017, @08:00PM
the creepiest part is that it's actually the *women* who are doing it to their daughters
That just reinforces my personal theory that "every group of people is its own worst enemy".
(Score: 3, Informative) by mrpg on Thursday November 09 2017, @09:53PM (2 children)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Female_genital_mutilation [wikipedia.org]
The practice is rooted in gender inequality, attempts to control women's sexuality, and ideas about purity, modesty and beauty. It is usually initiated and carried out by women, who see it as a source of honour, and who fear that failing to have their daughters and granddaughters cut will expose the girls to social exclusion.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday November 10 2017, @06:11AM
If gender inequality is the source of this, why is it that these cultures also mutilate males? If anything, I have to say there is MORE equality when both are getting mutilated. I think you're just seeing a random accidental correlation that isn't meaningful, but that happens to suit your anti-traditional agenda.
The idea of control is a bit better, fitting nicely with the fact that women mutilate women and men mutilate men. The younger people of the same sex are a threat to the grey and shriveled old people. This method is horrible, but control isn't bad: spreading STDs and fracturing families is harmful to the continuation of society.
(Score: 2) by Wootery on Friday November 10 2017, @11:50AM
Ok, but these are orthogonal to tangomargarine's point. Some people wrongly think FGM is particular to Islam. In fact it's particular to Africa (in both non-Islamic regions, and Islamic regions like Egypt).