The myth of the atheist elite:
Atheism and its correlation with Better education and intelligence
Are atheists smarter??
“Atheism almost always indicates healthy independence of the mind and indeed a healthy mind” is an example of many statements of this group repeated by Dawkins from early on in this book. All similar in structure and aiming simply to strengthen a certain argument that atheism is correlated with more education and intellectual abilities.
I am reminded by a nice term I found in while reading in Wikipedia once: Weasel words - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Avoid_weasel_words. I think this exactly what it is… except that instead of ‘some people’, ‘most people’, or ‘it is said’ he uses ‘almost always’, and almost surely as in ‘almost always indicates a healthy’, ‘almost sure there is no god’ …
For this discussion, I was tempted to ‘hit the net’ and look for ‘correlation of atheism and intelligence’.. I had read some references to study in the “God Delusion” but thought that the studies were actually too weak to show any significant correlation or meaning.. After the search, I saw a lot of what I expected… Atheists are indeed the louder group (many reasons here), and they are pretty absolutist as well I opened around 30 websites, and didn’t see a lot of evidence of high IQs and elitist education, which was pretty opposed to the statistics I read on those websites.. I researched deeper into what I read on those websites, all strongly promoting this correlation between atheism and intelligence, and had a 100% debunk rate!!!
The obvious reason for this claim is the ‘hijacking of pantheism’ (see below) by atheists. The manner in which a statistic is created will definitely make a huge difference about the answer. For the largest part of the educated intellectual elite, a literal belief in a personal god is something that is simply impossible, but it seems that to this exact group, atheism is exactly as refused. So many of these scientists (I couldn’t find any trustable statistics here) believe in a universal god, the moving intelligence, the pure energy, the spirit of the world…
Not just pantheism but also agnosticism (the belief that we don’t know, and can’t know if there truly is a god).
Some would argue that atheism in general expresses a lack of imagination and the ability to grasp concepts beyond the material, it also shows some form of intellectual-philosophical ‘poverty’ and that is evident in the nature of discussions that arise… of course they won’t have ‘real’ statistics exist for this, but then again.. Neither do the atheists.
Thinking about these issues only begins at a certain learning stage, which explains why a larger percentage of educated population (as opposed to the full population) [if it was] is atheist/agnostic, since theism is the default, so the largest percentage of uneducated people will be believers.
Let me elaborate a bit on statistics here… what questions are being asked to come up with these generalizations and to whom… Are all the factors considered? Social, Educational, Cultural, Personal? How ‘controlling’ is the control group?
In the “God Delusion”, and in one of the writer’s moments of glory he mentions the study below which asserts that out of this group of scientists only 7% believe in a personal god (too high a number for scientists anyway J ), and then he mentions that 90% of the American population believe in “some kind of supernatural being”….. The LIE .. the deliberate one I think, which tells a lot about motives and subjectivity lies in the different frames of reference…. Either check both for ‘personal gods’ (in which case I think that it will be 7% for scientists and around 20% for laymen) or check both for a ‘kind of supernatural being’ (in which case I’m sure that the percentage of believing scientists will grow to around 80%)…. Using the same frame of reference is something that any serious researcher should know about and use… the ridiculous thing is that we even need to mention this, but as I mentioned before, it’s NOT that simple. This is a sales man who will hide the truth, lie, and polish things so that he can sell you his goods…
- The effect of groups
- The prison numbers 0.2 % of the population of prisons are atheists
Anyway,
Examples :
Sweden:
I read on one of the website (of the very loud atheist minority) that Sweden is 80% atheist and that is one of the most advanced nations on earth. I was honestly surprised by this figure of ratio of atheism, but still with a bit more research I found that this figure is very debatable and not true. I read statistics that showed that more than 80% of the population in fact has a declared religion.
Bill Gates:
Is also mentioned many times as an atheist and I wanted to check if he truly is… then I found the below statement of his which answers this question ( he seemed to be agnostic+ )..
(November 1995 on PBS)
Here is how they make sure it comes out:
Again: if 7% of laymen believe in a ‘personal’ god, it would be too much if you ask me, let alone 7% of scientists !!
Marie Curie:
I read among the names of famous atheists her name and was tempted to read more. Well, turns out that she become an ‘anticlerical atheist’ after the death of her mother and sister. I mean, one can argue that such a deeply indulged scientist will have a rather weak opinion about religion, but to have such subjective reasons for this discovery really says a lot about the background and reasons.
Edison:
Edison is also mentioned as an atheist so many times, and I wanted to research further here, as it is rare that very educated gentlemen seem to be:
In an October 2, 1910 interview in the New York Times Magazine, Edison stated:
Nature is what we know. We do not know the gods of religions. And nature is not kind, or merciful, or loving. If God made me – the fabled God of the three qualities of which I spoke: mercy, kindness, love – He also made the fish I catch and eat. And where do His mercy, kindness, and love for that fish come in? No; nature made us – nature did it all – not the gods of the religions.[53]
Edison was called an atheist for those remarks, and although he did not allow himself to be drawn into the controversy publicly, he clarified himself in a private letter: "You have misunderstood the whole article, because you jumped to the conclusion that it denies the existence of God. There is no such denial, what you call God I call Nature, the Supreme intelligence that rules matter. All the article states is that it is doubtful in my opinion if our intelligence or soul or whatever one may call it lives hereafter as an entity or disperses back again from whence it came, scattered amongst the cells of which we are made."
Einstein:
Einstein is considered to be an atheist by Dawkins (and many other marketers of atheism) but one of the author’s arguments in proving Einstein’s atheism is that a "rabbi" called his sayings diametrically opposite to Judaism!!! WHAT ??? REALLY ? Is non-Judaism equal to atheism ?? Even if that Rabbi said that Einstein doesn’t believe in god, does it become true?
Anyway I read many of Einstein’s sayings, and he seemed to be a pantheist.. He said he believes in Spinoza’s god.
Hate and the Hate speech
An interesting - and somehow - correct point raised by the author is Hate and the Hate speech that is many times used by religious extremists. There is surely something linking a person's belief that he 'OWNS' the ultimate truth, and his attitude towards others. Hate speech is also linked to absolutism, and the belief in one's 'holier' status. This remains one important point that religions need to evolve from - all religions alike. Certain aggressiveness in pleading one's cause - when it comes to religion - needs to be understood within its historical/cultural circumstances, and the huge/savage/barbaric response with which these religions were originally faced... something that needs serious revisiting and indeed there is a really significant such movement among clerics of the different faiths (significant, but not necessarily enough).. Ridding religion of hate is very crucial for the evolution of religion, and can be easily done, since the essence of - most - religions is anti-hate!
A remarkable note here, though, is that the atheist leaders themselves seem to be copying the exact same faults of absolutism. Mr. Dawkins himself is like a religious leader of a new cult or religion, with similar characteristics... he does say I’m not absolutely sure, but in a manner which is extremely similar to saying "I am the ultimate truth, the holier truth"... He says in more than one occasion in his book that religion shouldn't necessarily be respected .... This 'disrespect' towards the other and his belief system is the hidden ingredient behind hate.... Atheist absolutism is simply the sad side of the joke!!!!
My point here .... Hate is due to human faulty psychological and cultural factors, not due to religion itself (I’m not talking about a specific religion here, but about the whole system)... Religion is innocent here Mr. Dawkins....
One can easily extend this argument to debunk the 'religion causes struggles' argument ... it’s not religion that causes the struggles... its people ... people and their greed, their love for power and tendency for corruption and their absolutism .... practically this is evident in the many struggles that were done against the religions themselves ... religion doesn’t necessarily cause struggle, rather tries to reduce them and reduce bloodshed and greed... the mix-up between religion and the un-religiousness of people is an important aspect of this argument as made by atheists ...
God : Complexity, Simplicity, and the human shackles of language
Is god complex or simple? What about the universe ?
Even discussing is an indicator of the weakness and inability of our language to discuss such things, which in itself leads – when mixed with other weak knowledge fields – accentuates our weakness.
Religion and Morals – not that it has an effect on proving god’s existence
One of the (very) funny instances in the ‘God Delusion’ when Dawkins actually argues that religion has a negative (or no) correlation with morals. He argues that the majority of people in prisons are believers while there are a few atheists (less than their population ratio). This is funny because prison population – even if it has an atheist/theist ratio higher than that of the society at large doesn’t include among its theist population ‘true theists’ – who believe in the religion and practice it… these people who commit crimes are ‘masked atheists’ because devout people will not commit these crimes as their fear (even if primitively) of god will usually prevent them. It is really ridiculous that we have to mention this in a serious discussion, which makes a man wonder if Dawkins when he mentioned these statistics has a real purpose he wants to prove, or is truly so ignorant of human nature, or deliberately wants to score verbal points…
Many of my wonderings – years ago – about the existence, nature of god, divinity and the supernatural contained a much more challenging and interesting context than the ‘God Delusion’.. It was a reading that informed on some topics, but somehow I was expecting more.. more knowledge, more philosophy, more science and more horizon. It is not a problem that Dawkins wrote in so huge a topic from such a small and limited perspective and knowledge frame, the problem is absolutism and certainty (even though he says he has none).. Left me with far more belief in god than when I started.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment