(January 18, 2020 at 7:55 pm)Daniel Wilson Wrote: Daniel Wilson
(January 18, 2020 at 7:52 pm)Mr Greene Wrote: What do you think they mean by 'very strong evidence'?
Just read the article and see for yourself.
Thank you. The full study seems to be available here, if we're talking about the same one.
https://emilkirkegaard.dk/en/wp-content/...ations.pdf
I haven't read the whole thing yet. I did look at the methods they used to define who is intelligent.
This is always a tricky thing, I think. IQ measures certain kinds of things, which may or may not correlate to intelligence in the real world. Recently Nassim Nicholas Taleb, the Black Swan guy, has been on something of a tear against IQ tests, claiming that they don't hold up statistically. I don't know enough about statistics to say if he's right or not, but it's enough to show that intelligent people disagree on the subject.
A popular-style summary of the study on PsyPost had this paragraph:
Quote:The researchers also found evidence that cognitive styles explained some of the relationship between religiosity and intelligence. In particular, an analytic (as opposed to intuitive) thinking style was related to both increased intelligence and reduced religiosity.
This may be a bit like begging the question. Do we assume that "analytic thinking style" is more intelligent than intuitive thinking style? I'm not sure.
The danger is just that we define intelligence in such a way that it favors a particular outcome. I mean, if a guy with a 150 IQ and five failed marriages is automatically deemed more intelligent than a secure happy guy with a 100 IQ, then I'm skeptical. Ted Kaczynski would score high in this study's method.
Overall, though, I suspect that by most academic/scientific definitions, the study is accurate. But this doesn't necessarily tell us anything about God or religion. In fact I think that Christians have done a terrible job in presenting their religion, especially in America, and people who are smart but not particularly interested in researching Christian thought are likely to turn away young. This would be a result contingent on societal factors and popularity.
