Let's Start This All Over... - Page 1

Here's something fresh to chew on! A contemporary, worldwide survey! Just what Noitsyou wanted...

 

First worldwide survey of religion and science: No, not all scientists are atheists

December 3, 2015

http://phys.org/news/2015-12-worldwide-survey-religion-science-scientists.html

Are all scientists atheists? Do they believe religion and science can co-exist? These questions and others were addressed in the first worldwide survey of how scientists view religion, released today by researchers at Rice University. "

No one today can deny that there is a popular 'warfare' framing between science and religion," said the study's principal investigator, Elaine Howard Ecklund, founding director of Rice University's Religion and Public Life Program and the Herbert S. Autrey Chair in Social Sciences.

"This is a war of words fueled by scientists, religious people and those in between." The study's results challenge longstanding assumptions about the science-faith interface. While it is commonly assumed that most scientists are atheists, the global perspective resulting from the study shows that this is simply not the case. "

More than half of scientists in India, Italy, Taiwan and Turkey self-identify as religious," Ecklund said. "And it's striking that approximately twice as many 'convinced atheists' exist in the general population of Hong Kong, for example, (55 percent) compared with the scientific community in this region (26 percent)."

The researchers did find that scientists are generally less religious than a given general population. However, there were exceptions to this: 39 percent of scientists in Hong Kong identify as religious compared with 20 percent of the general population of Hong Kong, and 54 percent of scientists in Taiwan identify as religious compared with 44 percent of the general population of Taiwan. Ecklund noted that such patterns challenge longstanding assumptions about the irreligious character of scientists around the world.

When asked about terms of conflict between religion and science, Ecklund noted that only a minority of scientists in each regional context believe that science and religion are in conflict. In the U.K. - one of the most secular countries studied - only 32 percent of scientists characterized the science-faith interface as one of conflict. In the U.S., this number was only 29 percent. And 25 percent of Hong Kong scientists, 27 percent of Indian scientists and 23 percent of Taiwanese scientists believed science and religion can coexist and be used to help each other.

In addition to the survey's quantitative findings, the researchers found nuanced views in scientists' responses during interviews. For example, numerous scientists expressed how religion can provide a "check" in ethically gray areas. "

(Religion provides a) check on those occasions where you might be tempted to shortcut because you want to get something published and you think, 'Oh, that experiment wasn't really good enough, but if I portray it in this way, that will do,'" said a biology professor from the U.K.

Another scientist said that there are "multiple atheisms," some of which include religious traditions.

"I have no problem going to church services because quite often, again that's a cultural thing," said a physics reader in the U.K. who said he sometimes attended services because his daughter sang in the church choir. "It's like looking at another part of your culture, but I have no faith religiously. It doesn't worry me that religion is still out there."

Finally, many scientists mentioned ways that they would accommodate the religious views or practices of the public, whether those of students or colleagues.

"Religious issues (are) quite common here because everyone talks about which temple they go to, which church they go to. So it's not really an issue we hide; we just talk about it. Because, in Taiwan, we have people [of] different religions," said a Taiwanese professor of biology.

Ecklund and fellow Rice researchers Kirstin Matthews and Steven Lewis collected information from 9,422 respondents in eight regions around the world: France, Hong Kong, India, Italy, Taiwan, Turkey, the U.K. and the U.S. They also traveled to these regions to conduct in-depth interviews with 609 scientists, the largest worldwide survey and interview study ever conducted of the intersection between faith and science.

By surveying and interviewing scientists at various career stages, in elite and nonelite institutions and in biology and physics, the researchers hoped to gain a representative look at scientists' views on religion, ethics and how both intersect with their scientific work.

Ecklund said that the study has many important implications that can be applied to university hiring processes, how classrooms and labs are structured and general public policy.

"Science is a global endeavor," Ecklund said. "And as long as science is global, then we need to recognize that the borders between science and religion are more permeable than most people think."

Enjoy! 

@Beetree

 

Do atheists have beliefs like been discussed many times in this forums? Of course they do! Atheists believe that matter arose by natural processes. Can they prove this? Not at all! Atheists believe the universe, all life, the laws of nature, and laws of logic arose by natural processes. Can they prove this? Of course not, but they believe it to be so. Atheists believe they cease to exist after they die. Can they prove this? No, but they believe this is what happens. Atheists believe no God exists. Can they prove this? Not at all—it’s their belief.

 

Merriam-Webster dictionary defines the word religion this way:

1. a : the state of a religious <a nun in her 20th year of religion> b (1) : the service and worship of God or the supernatural (2) : commitment or devotion to religious faith or observance

2: a personal set or institutionalized system of religious attitudes, beliefs, and practices

3: archaic : scrupulous conformity : conscientiousness

4: a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith

 

Athiests admit to believing life arose by natural processes—he has a belief, a religion. Atheists have a “system of belief held to with ardor and faith.” Atheists are very religious people.

Atheists have conducted a propaganda campaign to try to brainwash the public into believing that people who believe in God are religious, but those who don’t believe in God are not religious. Because of this atheist propaganda, many have been indoctrinated to believe that when secularists get the Bible out of public schools, or crosses and nativity scenes out of public places, they removed religion so the situation could be neutral. However, the reality is that these secularists have imposed their atheistic religion on the schools and culture in general. As Jesus taught: "He who is not with Me is against Me, and he who does not gather with Me scatters. Luke 11:23 There is no neutral position. No person has no religion—everyone has a religion, and ultimately it comes down to those who are for the true God and those who are not.

Shtal,

I don't think you read the article. It is about whether quantifying scientists of the world with respect to their views of any spiritual nature or not— if there is a correlation, and if any such views will interfere with their intellectual reasoning.

I am not an atheist but I don't believe in God does that make me a heathen? Shtal, atheist don't believe matter made life. What did make life was microbes (organisms) that mutated and evolved over billions of years, that is why dinosaurs lived before humans and we evolved from other species. I have never heard an atheist claim we evolved from rocks like you have said 10s of times on this forum. BTW, I see you aren't a man of your word, sad.

@Beetree

 

Ooops I didn't read

 

 

@GSDADMIN

 

You don't believe in God of the Bible do you? Do you believe life came from natural process? So you got that belief? So you don't start with evidence but instead you start with a belief?

 

You claim the universe started with a God 6000 years ago but you ignore the fact that the universe is billions of years old and dinosaurs lived before humans. Plus, it has been proven by DNA that the first people came out of Africa and not the middle east. So, your religion also started with belief, right, a fairy tale, right?

There are religions that predate Christianity that tell a similar but different story. Some with strange virgin births. Weird how Christianity copied those previous religions but claims to be the first religion because God created it all 6000 years ago.

What is your evidence because you can't claim I started with a belief and show no evidence beyond a man written bible that has been changed so many times over the centuries that no one is sure what is right and what is wrong. Where is your hard evidence since you want me to show evidence of exactly how we came to be. You have no proof except stories fairy tales.

 

Listen, I don't care what you believe - but you and your buddy came here and told us we are going to hell if we don't get saved. Well I don't want to be saved but I will be damned if I will live in hell. So, go to hell with your hell. I will live my life as I see fit and I will be morally and spiritually just fine. Maybe those who follow so blindly in your occult are actually the ones going to hell. But we don't know that as all you have are stories. Ever played the game in school were a story is started and as it goes around the classroom it gets changed. Well imagine how a story over centuries or millennia gets changed and that is your fairy tale Shtal, that is all you got.

BTW, I edited my post as I was at work and didn't proof read what I wrote and once I did - wow so I edited to clear up my mumbo jumbo and add more thoughts.

LOL@"mumbo jumbo". I wondered about that!

---

This next article is VERY fascinating and also, very contemporaneous!

http://blog.case.edu/think/2016/03/23/the_conflict_between_science_and_religion_lies_in_our_brains

 

The conflict between science and religion lies in our brains

News Release: March 23, 2016

CLEVELAND—The conflict between science and religion may have its origins in the structure of our brains, researchers at Case Western Reserve University and Babson College have found.

Clashes between the use of faith vs. scientific evidence to explain the world around us dates back centuries and is perhaps most visible today in the arguments between evolution and creationism.

To believe in a supernatural god or universal spirit, people appear to suppress the brain network used for analytical thinking and engage the empathetic network, the scientists say. When thinking analytically about the physical world, people appear to do the opposite.

“When there’s a question of faith, from the analytic point of view, it may seem absurd,” said Tony Jack, who led the research. “But, from what we understand about the brain, the leap of faith to belief in the supernatural amounts to pushing aside the critical/analytical way of thinking to help us achieve greater social and emotional insight.”

Jack is an associate professor of philosophy at Case Western Reserve and research director of the university’s Inamori International Center of Ethics and Excellence, which helped sponsor the research. 


"A stream of research in cognitive psychology has shown and claims that people who have faith (i.e., are religious or spiritual) are not as smart as others. They actually might claim they are less intelligent.,” said Richard Boyatzis, distinguished university professor and professor of organizational behavior at Case Western Reserve, and a member of Jack’s team.

“Our studies confirmed that statistical relationship, but at the same time showed that people with faith are more prosocial and empathic,” he said.

In a series of eight experiments, the researchers found the more empathetic the person, the more likely he or she is religious.

That finding offers a new explanation for past research showing women tend to hold more religious or spiritual worldviews than men. The gap may be because women have a stronger tendency toward empathetic concern than men.

Atheists, the researchers found, are most closely aligned with psychopaths—not killers, but the vast majority of psychopaths classified as such due to their lack of empathy for others.

The new study is published in the online journal PLOS ONE. The other authors are Jared Friedman, a research assistant and recent graduate in Philosophy and Cognitive Science who will begin his PhD in organizational behavior at Case Western Reserve in the fall, and Scott Taylor, assistant professor of organizational behavior at Babson College.

 

Brain structure

The research is based on the hypothesis that the human brain has two opposing domains in constant tension. In earlier research, Jack ‘s Brain, Mind & Consciousness lab used functional magnetic resonance imaging to show the brain has an analytical network of neurons that enables us to think critically and a social network that enables us to empathize. When presented with a physics problem or ethical dilemma, a healthy brain fires up the appropriate network while suppressing the other.

“Because of the tension between networks, pushing aside a naturalistic world view enables you to delve deeper into the social/emotional side,” Jack explained. “And that may be the key to why beliefs in the supernatural exist throughout the history of cultures. It appeals to an essentially nonmaterial way of understanding the world and our place in it.”

Friedman said, “Having empathy doesn’t mean you necessarily have anti-scientific beliefs. Instead, our results suggest that if we only emphasize analytic reasoning and scientific beliefs, as the New Atheist movement suggests, then we are compromising our ability to cultivate a different type of thinking, namely social/moral insight.”

“These findings,” Friedman continued, “are consistent with the philosophical view, espoused by (Immanuel) Kant, according to which there are two distinct types of truth: empirical and moral.”

 

Experiments and results

The researchers examined the relationship between belief in God or a universal spirit with measures of analytic thinking and moral concern in eight different experiments, each involving 159 to 527 adults. Consistently through all eight, the more religious the person, the more moral concern they showed. But no cause and effect was established.

They found that both spiritual belief and empathic concern were positively associated with frequency of prayer, meditations and other spiritual or religious practices, but neither were predicted by church dinners or other social contact associated with religious affiliation.

While others theorize that mentalizing—interpreting human behavior in terms of intentional mental states such as needs, desires or purposes—has a positive association with belief, the researchers found none.

Like other studies, these experiments showed that analytic thinking discourages acceptance of spiritual or religious beliefs. But the statistical analysis of data pooled from all eight experiments indicates empathy is more important to religious belief than analytic thinking is for disbelief.
 So why can the conflict between science and religion become so strong?

“Because the networks suppress each other, they may create two extremes,” Boyatzis said. “Recognizing that this is how the brain operates, maybe we can create more reason and balance in the national conversations involving science and religion.”

 

Using both networks

The researchers say humans are built to engage and explore using both networks. “Far from always conflicting with science, under the right circumstances religious belief may positively promote scientific creativity and insight,” Jack said. “Many of history's most famous scientists were spiritual or religious. Those noted individuals were intellectually sophisticated enough to see that there is no need for religion and science to come into conflict."

They refer to Baruch Aba Shalev’s book 100 years of Nobel Prizes, which found that, from 1901 to 2000, 654 Nobel laureates, or nearly 90 percent, belonged to one of 28 religions. The remaining 10.5 percent were atheists, agnostics or freethinkers.

“You can be religious and be a very good scientist,” Jack said.

The researchers agree with the New Atheists that suspension of analytical thinking—at the wrong time—can be dangerous, and point to the historical use of religious differences to persecute or fight wars.

“Although it is simply a distortion of history to pin all conflict on religion,” Jack said. “Non-religious political movements, such as fascism and communism, and quasi-scientific movements, such as eugenics, have also done great harm.”

The researchers suggest, however, that taking a carefully considered leap of religious faith appears be an effective route to promoting emotional insight. Theirs and other studies find that, overall, religious belief is associated with greater compassion, greater social inclusiveness and greater motivation to engage in pro-social actions.

Jack said the conflict can be avoided by remembering simple rules: “Religion has no place telling us about the physical structure of the world; that’s the business of science. Science should inform our ethical reasoning, but it cannot determine what is ethical or tell us how we should construct meaning and purpose in our lives."

To dig deeper into belief, the researchers are planning studies to learn if individuals who increase their empathy then increase their religious or spiritual belief, or vice versa.

Enjoy! 

Yeah, I was on break and had to get back to work so didn't really read what I wrote. When I read it at home I SMH because that was not what I remembered writing. I know people who say they are real religious who aren't emphatic towards others. Trump is a prime example of a lack of empathy. But they are right on the fact he isn't very bright. lol. Oh wait that's right he isn't all that religious to begin with, just a faker but some will eat it up and forget he isn't all that empathetic, he is just pathetic.

Trump worships power and strength more than anything, and he does so in a way that bears no resemblance to Peale but is totally consonant with Nietzsche's vision. While Nietzsche would find Trump terribly tacky (although the middle-class pastor's son was never as aristocratic as he thought of himself), Trump certainly has an aesthetic that Nietzsche commends to the Übermensch, a concern foreign to Yankee liberal protestant preachers. The Übermensch will make his life into a work of art, a self-creation, Nietzsche writes, a motto that Trump took to heart, he the empty core surrounded by a façade

http://theweek.com/articles/634443/what-donald-trumps-religion

Atheists, the researchers found, are most closely aligned with psychopaths—not killers, but the vast majority of psychopaths classified as such due to their lack of empathy for others.

This revelation starts me with the giggles... Every time I read it! 

Hehehe.....