SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
In 1990, about 8 percent of the US population had no religious preference but by 2010, this percentage had more than doubled to 18 percent. That's a difference of about 25 million people, all of whom have somehow lost their religion. Now MIT Technology Review reports that Allen Downey, a computer scientist at the Olin College of Engineering in Massachusetts, has analyzed the data in detail and says that the dramatic drop in religious affiliation is the result of several factors but about 25 percent of the drop is due to the rise of the Internet. Downey concludes that the increase in Internet use in the last two decades has caused a significant drop in religious affiliation: for moderate use (2 or more hours per week) the odds ratio is 0.82. For heavier use (7 or more hours per week) the odds ratio is 0.58.
What Downey has found is a correlation and any statistician will tell you that correlations do not imply causation. But that does not mean that it is impossible to draw conclusions from correlations, only that they must be properly guarded. "Correlation does provide evidence in favor of causation, especially when we can eliminate alternative explanations or have reason to believe that they are less likely," says Downey. It's straightforward to imagine how spending time on the Internet can lead to religious disaffiliation. "For people living in homogeneous communities, the Internet provides opportunities to find information about people of other religions (and none), and to interact with them personally," says Downey. "Conversely, it is harder (but not impossible) to imagine plausible reasons why disaffiliation might cause increased Internet use."
There is another possibility: that a third unidentified factor causes both increased Internet use and religious disaffiliation. But Downey discounts this possibility. "We have controlled for most of the obvious candidates, including income, education, socioeconomic status, and rural/urban environments. (PDF)" If this third factor exists, it must have specific characteristics. It would have to be something new that was increasing in prevalence during the 1990s and 2000s, just like the Internet. "It is hard to imagine what that factor might be."
(Score: 5, Interesting) by resignator on Thursday April 10 2014, @04:24PM
Being able to speak anonymously coupled with limitless data allows us all to explore new ideas we couldnt possibly achieve in a face to face conversation with average-joe-neighbor.
Before the internet most religious discussions were limited to, "Can God make a rock so heavy he cannot lift it?" where I lived. When asked questions like this the average person wouldnt even know what "begging the question" or "presupposition" meant unless they went out of their way to study philosophy or the scientific method. Now every forum or comment section is filled with people from every walk of life expressing new ideas that would take a lifetime of travel and interaction to accomplish. You are far more likely to be exposed to these concepts now. Is it really that surprising that people will consider new theories when they are broadcasted to them so frequently?
I am convinced that the internet age more to change the face of humanity than agriculture did.
(Score: 1) by resignator on Thursday April 10 2014, @04:26PM
Meant to say,"I am convinced that the internet age will do more to change the face of humanity than agriculture did." Sorry folks, still on my first cup of coffee :P
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 10 2014, @05:18PM
I'm not convinced. Here's a (not complete) list of things agriculture directly or indirectly caused:
* settledness (because your fields just don't wander around)
* property (because after you invested time and work into the land, there was a reasonable expectation that you also ought to get the benefits).
* states (enabled by the concept of property, as well as the need to collectively protect it).
* trade (basically a direct consequence of property, but also of settlement).
* mathematics (geometry was needed to determine whose property some land was, basic arithmetic was needed for trade).
* money (a consequence of trade).
* wide-distance communication (a result of settlement and trade).
* a street network (needed for trade and wide-distance communication).
* towns (which could only come into existence because of settledness, property and trade).
I'm sure the internet will have a large influence on our life. But I strongly doubt that it will be of the scale of agriculture. It probably will be of the scale of the Gutenberg press, though (which basically ended the middle ages).
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 11 2014, @02:21AM
wide-distance communication
Now, why did that make me think of the semaphore towers [wikimedia.org] in the Michael York version of The Three Musketeers? [wikipedia.org]
-- gewg_
(Score: 5, Informative) by MrGuy on Thursday April 10 2014, @04:41PM
I am convinced that the average person still does not know what "begging the question" means. And you certainly wouldn't learn what it means from reading most internet discussions including the phrase.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Begging_the_question [wikipedia.org]
(Score: 1) by urza9814 on Thursday April 10 2014, @05:22PM
So what you're saying is that we need more "grammar nazis"? ;)
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 10 2014, @05:42PM
No, the problem here is not the grammar, it is the semantics. So if anything, we need more semantics nazis.
(Score: 2) by bucc5062 on Thursday April 10 2014, @06:01PM
""Can God make a rock so heavy he cannot lift it?""
Let's ask him...
"Hey God, can you make a rock so heavy that even you can't lift it?
"Why should I?"
"Because you're God"
"Well then, I choose not too make one".
"Wait, okay, we're not asking you to do it, just can you do it?"
"Can you make a rock so heavy that you cannot lift it?"
"Of course not"
"Why not?"
"Because we're not God"
"So your only proof that one is God is whether they can make a rock so heavy it cannot be lifted?"
"No...Yes..we mean...oh hell"
"Now that is a different topic. Faith is not determined by testing God, it is determined by testing one's self in relationship to God. To quote a wise man, 'I find you lack of faith disturbing'.
Now, ask me another, this is fun. You guys are most entertaining".
The more things change, the more they look the same
(Score: 3, Insightful) by TK on Thursday April 10 2014, @06:13PM
I'd mod you funny if I hadn't posted already.
Sure I can, depending on your definition of "rock". I'll make a giant boulder out of clay that I am physically incapable of lifting. Then I'll build a machine that can lift rocks bigger than I can on my own, to be greater than god! /s Don't smite me.
The fleas have smaller fleas, upon their backs to bite them, and those fleas have lesser fleas, and so ad infinitum
(Score: 2) by Daniel Dvorkin on Thursday April 10 2014, @08:46PM
Unlike the straw-man characters in your little parable, anyone who understands anything about logic would see through the rhetorical trap in the third line quoted above.
Pipedot [pipedot.org]:Soylent [soylentnews.org]::BSD:Linux
(Score: 2) by bucc5062 on Thursday April 10 2014, @11:24PM
Okay, so enlighten me. What would God say. I was just putting out some humor, but am always up to learn. Besides, perhaps God had a sense of humor for bad logic.
The more things change, the more they look the same