• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Religious vs. Nonreligious - Who is More Trustworthy?

Who is more trustworthy?

  • Religious people are more trustworthy than nonreligious people

    Votes: 2 4.0%
  • Nonreligious people are more trustworthy than religious people

    Votes: 11 22.0%
  • Religious and nonreligious people are equally trustworthy

    Votes: 24 48.0%
  • No answer/refuse

    Votes: 13 26.0%

  • Total voters
    50

Quintessence

Consults with Trees
Staff member
Premium Member
When it comes to trustworthiness, who wins the prize? The religious? The nonreligious?

According to a recent survey done by the PEW Research group, roughly two-thirds of Americans would respond with: neither!


PF_11.15.19_trust.in_.religion-03-01.png

Source: Americans trust both religious, nonreligious people

This is great, considering how little the category of "religious" and "nonreligious" really means given the heterogeneity of both groups. Drilling down into the data, though, we see some expected in-group and out-group biases. What I find pretty funny about these biases is that given the heterogeneity of these groups, should I really take from this that Evangelicals would consider a Pagan like me more trustworthy simply for being religious? I doubt it. While surveys like these are interesting, they certainly have their limitations.

What do you think of these findings? What are your thoughts on the trustworthiness of "religious" and "nonreligious" people? What do those categories mean to you?
 

A Vestigial Mote

Well-Known Member
I voted "equally trustworthy" - because in the end it is probably a wash. There's a range of "trustworthiness" on both sides of the proposed "coin."

It's sort of hard to quantify anyway - because in different instances I would trust different people in different categories of knowledge or activity. For example, I would never, ever trust a theist to be telling "the truth" about aspects of the world they believe are tied to their religion. But this isn't because I don't think they are being sincere... they very well may be entirely sincere, and believe they are telling "the truth!" But due to the faith-based approach they take to that "truth," I can very safely assume they haven't done any actual study of empirical/investigate-able subjects to have come to their conclusion. I also wouldn't trust an atheist outright, with telling me facts about the details of a particular religion or religious belief, I would need to investigate for myself and corroborate their story in some fashion.
 
Last edited:

Sunstone

De Diablo Del Fora
Premium Member
It's funny to me that Evangelicals are more likely than other religious groups to consider religious people more trustworthy than non-religious people. That is something I would expect of Evangelicals -- I would expect them to think that -- but it is still funny because I know business people who will not do handshake deals with Evangelicals -- based on having gotten screwed by them once or twice too often.

I am talking about business people who ordinarily would not care one bit what religion you are -- money is money. But their actual experience has been that doing handshake deals with Evangelicals is unusually risky. If they are going to do business with an Evangelical, they want the deal in writing.
 

Vinayaka

devotee
Premium Member
You don't really know somebody until you REALLY know somebody. I've been surprised in both directions. My original take on some people has been that they're totally trustworthy, and then something comes up proving how wrong I was, and similarly, I can originally view someone as practically criminal only to find they have a heart of gold.

I think people can grossly overestimate their ability to judge people, and to use religious affiliation or non-affiliation as a basis for trustworthiness is just naivety, about as reliable as a person's height.
 

Sunstone

De Diablo Del Fora
Premium Member
As for me, I think it's a wash -- religious people and non-religious people are on average equally likely to be trustworthy/untrustworthy. Only exception I would make -- fundamentalists. Fundamentalists are people I just don't usually trust. I have never kept a record or careful account -- so I could be wrong -- but fundamentalists just give me the feeling they're shady.
 

lewisnotmiller

Grand Hat
Staff member
Premium Member
When it comes to trustworthiness, who wins the prize? The religious? The nonreligious?

According to a recent survey done by the PEW Research group, roughly two-thirds of Americans would respond with: neither!


This is great, considering how little the category of "religious" and "nonreligious" really means given the heterogeneity of both groups. Drilling down into the data, though, we see some expected in-group and out-group biases. What I find pretty funny about these biases is that given the heterogeneity of these groups, should I really take from this that Evangelicals would consider a Pagan like me more trustworthy simply for being religious? I doubt it. While surveys like these are interesting, they certainly have their limitations.

What do you think of these findings? What are your thoughts on the trustworthiness of "religious" and "nonreligious" people? What do those categories mean to you?

I said no answer. Overall, it comes down to the individual. But an individual's beliefs...both religious and non-religious...can impact on behaviour to some degree.

So the question doesn't quite make sense to me as stated (but is an interesting talking point).
 

lewisnotmiller

Grand Hat
Staff member
Premium Member
As for me, I think it's a wash -- religious people and non-religious people are on average equally likely to be trustworthy/untrustworthy. Only exception I would make -- fundamentalists. Fundamentalists are people I just don't usually trust. I have never kept a record or careful account -- so I could be wrong -- but fundamentalists just give me the feeling they're shady.

Yup. But in my mind you can have fundamentalists of non-religious flavours anyway.
(Eg. Political extremism)

Long story short, your basic premise holds even there, imho.
 

ChristineM

"Be strong", I whispered to my coffee.
Premium Member
I voted based on my experience.

But with the rider that there are trustworthy people and untrustworthy people on both sides of the divide .

In my life, on balance, i have come to consider nonreligious people more trustworthy, and thats how i voted.
 

Sunstone

De Diablo Del Fora
Premium Member
It is hugely difficult for me to believe that some fundamentalist who can lie through his or her teeth about evolution suddenly becomes just as honest as everyone else the moment they are no longer talking about evolution. Maybe. But I think it's reasonable to suspect that someone who can make up and/or believe a mountain of crap about one thing (e.g. evolution) is more likely than most folks to make up mountains of crap about other things, too.
 

PureX

Veteran Member
What do you think of these findings? What are your thoughts on the trustworthiness of "religious" and "nonreligious" people? What do those categories mean to you?
Interesting that the atheists show the strongest bias. Highlighting my contention that most atheists are really just anti-religion. So much so that real atheists have pretty much been driven right out from under the atheist label umbrella.
 

amorphous_constellation

Well-Known Member
What are your thoughts on the trustworthiness of "religious" and "nonreligious" people?

Well I think maybe two things working together can help me determine if someone is trustworthy if I merely had data on what they believe. And those would be their surety in their belief coupled with how they back it up with reasoned arguments. If they blindly believe something that they won't question, then they will not hesitate to believe they are correct in whatever way they are functioning on their side of a trust sensitive issue.
 

Sunstone

De Diablo Del Fora
Premium Member
Years and years ago, the Wall Street Journal published a story about business people in Hong Kong. Hong Kong is a city in which several religions meet, get along with each other. Muslim, Jew, Christian, Buddhist, Chinese folk religion -- you find them all in Hong Kong. The Journal sent a reporter to interview some of the leading business people in the city about which groups -- if any -- were the most honest to do business with.

It was by no means a scientific study. Just one reporter asking a fairly small number of prominent people which religious groups were the most trustworthy to do business with.

Buddhists. That's what the reporter said was the most common answer. Even people of other faiths were likely to agree Hong Kong's Buddhists were the folks you could most trust with your money.

Of course, this was years ago. My memory might have it all mixed up by now. But I'm pretty sure it was Buddhists.
 

ecco

Veteran Member
but it is still funny because I know business people who will not do handshake deals with Evangelicals -- based on having gotten screwed by them once or twice too often.
Yep. Screwed by the kind of evangelical (the owner) who had a sign in his wall:
God said it
I believe it
End of story

On the other hand, I did some work for Scientologists. I never had a problem getting paid.

Go figure.


ETA:
Catholics go to confession and the priest assigns 10 Hail Mary's and the culprit thinks all is well.
Fundamentalists pray to Jesus and know all is forgiven.
 
Last edited:

ecco

Veteran Member
Interesting that the atheists show the strongest bias. Highlighting my contention that most atheists are really just anti-religion. So much so that real atheists have pretty much been driven right out from under the atheist label umbrella.
????
 

Heyo

Veteran Member
I think that religious and non-religious people are most likely equally trustworthy and that it is more a personal thing than the membership in any religion. But my gut feeling is that the more religious a person is, the less trustworthy s/he is. That's based on personal experience. I know that that is just anecdotal evidence but feelings are based on experiences, not on objective evidence or logic.
 

crossfire

LHP Mercuræn Feminist Heretic ☿
Premium Member
Yup. But in my mind you can have fundamentalists of non-religious flavours anyway.
(Eg. Political extremism)

Long story short, your basic premise holds even there, imho.
There are also atheist fundamentalists who would make strategies to force churches to close down. Some of them would go on widespread rampages of vandalizing nativity scenes.
 

PureX

Veteran Member
I think one of the major problems with this question is that there are so many kinds of religiosity. And some of it is very loud and dishonest while some of it is nearly invisible to others, and yet very honest. Creating highly distorted perceptions of the relationship between religiosity and trustworthiness.
 

crossfire

LHP Mercuræn Feminist Heretic ☿
Premium Member
All in all, it comes down to the individual. Sure, some like-minded (honest or shady) individuals will gather together in religious, non-religious, or irreligious groups, but then the nature of each individual group must be considered. You can't just broad-brush religious/nonreligious in such a manner and expect to be accurate.
 

osgart

Nothing my eye, Something for sure
I don't judge trustworthiness along this basis of religious/nonreligious.

It's an individual matter.

I don't trust fundamentalists of any kind religious or nonreligious. Life is far too complex to trust such people. Fundies are closed off entirely in their worldview. Fundies are my way or the highway types. They are not people who use reason and justification, proof or evidence to support the greater good, nor with any consideration or care for those whom they differ or oppose.
 
Last edited:
Top