Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by n1 on Thursday April 10 2014, @03:42PM   Printer-friendly
from the internet-is-the-devil dept.

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."

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by bucc5062 on Thursday April 10 2014, @06:01PM

    by bucc5062 (699) on Thursday April 10 2014, @06:01PM (#29611)

    ""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
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 3, Insightful) by TK on Thursday April 10 2014, @06:13PM

    by TK (2760) on Thursday April 10 2014, @06:13PM (#29614)

    I'd mod you funny if I hadn't posted already.

    "Can you make a rock so heavy that you cannot lift it?"

    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

    by Daniel Dvorkin (1099) on Thursday April 10 2014, @08:46PM (#29703) Journal

    "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"

    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

      by bucc5062 (699) on Thursday April 10 2014, @11:24PM (#29766)

      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