Jump to content

Correlation Between Education / Intelligence And Religious Adherence?


Recommended Posts

Pretty self explanatory. I was reading something on societies where there's a discernible class divide between northern and southern territories, and in most cases where the levels of education were low (what people are quick to label as 'backwards') the religious fervour and adherence was at its peak, whereas in areas where there are greater numbers of educated professionals there is a noticeable relaxation in religious adherence.

Opinions on why that might be the case? Anyone else disturbed by the suggestion that religious adherence suggests a lack of intelligence (if measured by one's location, employment, environment, etc?) Why does a life lived religiously presuppose a distinct disadvantage in getting ahead in life (if "getting ahead" is measured by a high level of education, a professional job, and the resultant social and financial benefits). There are exceptions in many cases. This is just a broad, generalised look at issues.

All types of replies welcome; spiritual, empirical, whatever.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've read similar articles, there does seem to be a correlation between intelligence and religious belief

"A survey of Royal Society fellows found that only 3.3 per cent believed in God"

"A separate poll in the 90s found only 7 per cent of members of the American National Academy of Sciences believed in God"

Imo most people who believe in there own brand of religion dont actually belief in the tenets of there religion, in the 2011 census 59.3 down from 71.7% in 2001 identified them selves as christian.

From the 100% of only 32 per cent of the census “Christians” believe in the resurrection of Jesus. Only 35 per cent could pick out the correct answer to “What is the first book of the New Testament?” when given a 4-way choice of Matthew, Genesis, Acts, Psalms. When asked why they had ticked the Christian box, only 28 per cent of those who did so said it was because they believe the teachings of Christianity. The most popular answer to that question was, “I like to think of myself as a good person.” What? You ticked the Christian box because you like to think of yourself as a good person? Are you serious? Do you think atheists, Muslims, Jews, Hindus, Buddhists don’t think of themselves as good people?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A really interesting topic.

I'm going to furnish a response based on the example of the Bible. Say you've been raised in a fundamentalist Christian household: for as long as you can remember you have been told that the world is 6000 years old, that your world was created in six days and that the progenitors of mankind were Adam and a rib woman. Moreover, this book, one of the few pieces of literature which you possess, tells you again and again that reason and logic are things to be treated with suspicion and mistrust (most religions have this theme in common).

When you believe all ^that^, it's no surprise that you're impermeable to the wonders of science (the foundation stone of biology is evolution by natural selection), and critical thinking. As the degree of religiosity lessens, and warnings against thinking for yourself are taken less seriously, your critical faculties, which have to be strong in any intelligent person, begin to acquire a bit more room to breathe.

Sikhi is the only religion which deviates from this convention because it doesn't try to have a say in matters that should be purely scientific.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A really interesting topic.

I'm going to furnish a response based on the example of the Bible. Say you've been raised in a fundamentalist Christian household: for as long as you can remember you have been told that the world is 6000 years old, that your world was created in six days and that the progenitors of mankind were Adam and a rib woman. Moreover, this book, one of the few pieces of literature which you possess, tells you again and again that reason and logic are things to be treated with suspicion and mistrust (most religions have this theme in common).

When you believe all ^that^, it's no surprise that you're impermeable to the wonders of science (the foundation stone of biology is evolution by natural selection), and critical thinking. As the degree of religiosity lessens, and warnings against thinking for yourself are taken less seriously, your critical faculties, which have to be strong in any intelligent person, begin to acquire a bit more room to breathe.

Sikhi is the only religion which deviates from this convention because it doesn't try to have a say in matters that should be purely scientific.

Not entirely true. There are a couple of other Religions that don't meddle in science as much. To correct the bold I would say Sikhism doesn't discourage the study of the physical realm but has a strong foundation which Scientifically is compatible with the main basis of modern day science. In fact being active inside the sphere of Education and the world was something our Guru Sahib's definitely encouraged.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pretty self explanatory. I was reading something on societies where there's a discernible class divide between northern and southern territories, and in most cases where the levels of education were low (what people are quick to label as 'backwards') the religious fervour and adherence was at its peak, whereas in areas where there are greater numbers of educated professionals there is a noticeable relaxation in religious adherence.

Opinions on why that might be the case? Anyone else disturbed by the suggestion that religious adherence suggests a lack of intelligence (if measured by one's location, employment, environment, etc?) Why does a life lived religiously presuppose a distinct disadvantage in getting ahead in life (if "getting ahead" is measured by a high level of education, a professional job, and the resultant social and financial benefits). There are exceptions in many cases. This is just a broad, generalised look at issues.

All types of replies welcome; spiritual, empirical, whatever.

There reason why in poorer countries people are religious is that, people pray for good things, and that their suffering will be gone. In richer countries people tend to forget god, or are busy to pray to god. There are a bunch of European countries that are really religious. For education, people dismiss that Adam and Eve is fake, and the Earth is 6000 years old. Sikhism, doesn't believe in that and our religion has some really neat religious facts. In the future I feel that, religion will be the thing in the past, but I hope that the future generation will remember god.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_Europe there was a survey, and Europe is pretty religious.

There reason why in poorer countries people are religious is that, people pray for good things, and that their suffering will be gone. In richer countries people tend to forget god, or are busy to pray to god. There are a bunch of European countries that are really religious. For education, people dismiss that Adam and Eve is fake, and the Earth is 6000 years old. Sikhism, doesn't believe in that and our religion has some really neat religious facts. In the future I feel that, religion will be the thing in the past, but I hope that the future generation will remember god.

Well, the Bible talked about "Big Lizards", which are dinosaurs. So eh, it has some science.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can you corroborate that claim with evidence? I don't remember ever encountering 'big lizards' when I read the King James Bible.

Big Lizards lol, kinda reminds me of Raptor Jesus,

Personally if Sikhism was based on faith alone like all other religions i wouldnt follow it, but i would have to credit the teachings of the Guru Granth shiab jee to be the most secular text of any religious bodies, fair treatment of animals, women to have the same rights as men, or men to have the same rights as women, which ever way you want to look at it, a importance in solidarity with others, a constant nudge to move away from prideful thinking, the list really does go on.

But as its based on empirical evidence backed with testable concepts. Is why i 100% identify my self as a follower of Guru Granth Shaib Jee.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt


  • Topics

  • Posts

    • yeh it's true, we shouldn't be lazy and need to learn jhatka shikaar. It doesn't help some of grew up in surrounding areas like Slough and Southall where everyone thought it was super bad for amrit dharis to eat meat, and they were following Sant babas and jathas, and instead the Singhs should have been normalising jhatka just like the recent world war soldiers did. We are trying to rectifiy this and khalsa should learn jhatka.  But I am just writing about bhog for those that are still learning rehit. As I explained, there are all these negative influences in the panth that talk against rehit, but this shouldn't deter us from taking khanda pahul, no matter what level of rehit we are!
    • How is it going to help? The link is of a Sikh hunter. Fine, but what good does that do the lazy Sikh who ate khulla maas in a restaurant? By the way, for the OP, yes, it's against rehit to eat khulla maas.
    • Yeah, Sikhs should do bhog of food they eat. But the point of bhog is to only do bhog of food which is fit to be presented to Maharaj. It's not maryada to do bhog of khulla maas and pretend it's OK to eat. It's not. Come on, bro, you should know better than to bring this Sakhi into it. Is this Sikh in the restaurant accompanied by Guru Gobind Singh ji? Is he fighting a dharam yudh? Or is he merely filling his belly with the nearest restaurant?  Please don't make a mockery of our puratan Singhs' sacrifices by comparing them to lazy Sikhs who eat khulla maas.
    • Seriously?? The Dhadi is trying to be cute. For those who didn't get it, he said: "Some say Maharaj killed bakras (goats). Some say he cut the heads of the Panj Piyaras. The truth is that they weren't goats. It was she-goats (ਬਕਰੀਆਂ). He jhatka'd she-goats. Not he-goats." Wow. This is possibly the stupidest thing I've ever heard in relation to Sikhi.
    • Instead of a 9 inch or larger kirpan, take a smaller kirpan and put it (without gatra) inside your smaller turban and tie the turban tightly. This keeps a kirpan on your person without interfering with the massage or alarming the masseuse. I'm not talking about a trinket but rather an actual small kirpan that fits in a sheath (you'll have to search to find one). As for ahem, "problems", you could get a male masseuse. I don't know where you are, but in most places there are professional masseuses who actually know what they are doing and can really relieve your muscle pains.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use