Intelligence Vs. Religion?

[questfortruth]

There are very few highly intelligent people.
There are very few highly religious people.
Therefore, is expected, that Scientific Community consists almost entirely of atheists: the advance in intelligence reduces the advance in religion. The same reasoning says, that Scientific community is hostile place: the highly good people are very few.

The probability, that a human is saint is p=0.000001 or less. The probability, that a human is genius is P=0.000001 or less. Thus, the probability, that a human is both saint and genius is near zero:
p*P=0.000001*0.000001=0.000000000001. The University professors of Steven Hawking level are highly intelligent. Therefore, it is highly unlikely, that they are saints as well. Being not a saint means to be more or less evil.

"Austin Powers - Sharks with lasers"

It is not correlations I am talking about. I talk about concentrations: in Universities are more of atheism. Just recall the Darwinism in School.

 

[lukethethird]

...and rock n roll was a vicious game.

 

[Augustus]

the advance in intelligence reduces the advance in religion.

Yet in many parts of the developing world, increasing levels of education have coincided with increased religious conservatism for many people.

 

[Skwim]

There are very few highly intelligent people.
There are very few highly religious people.

I have a very good idea of what a highly intelligent person is but not what you have in mind when you say "highly religious."

Therefore, is expected, that Scientific Community consists almost entirely of atheists: the advance in intelligence reduces the advance in religion.

Guessing that by "scientific community" you mean scientists, the stats do point out a correlation between atheism and scientists, but it isn't close to "almost entirely of atheists".

The same reasoning says, that Scientific community is hostile place: the highly good people are very few.

Not sure how your reasoning goes, but why would this necessarily be the case?

.

 

[ChristineM]

I have a very good idea of what a highly intelligent person is but not what you have in mind when you say "highly religious."


Guessing that by "scientific community" you mean scientists, the stats do point out a correlation between atheism and scientists, but it isn't close to "almost entirely of atheists".

Not sure how your reasoning goes, but why would this necessarily be the case?

.

The chart seems bogus, do you have a source?

Maybe its only a sample of american opinion

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

I wouldn't say that there is any correlation between good people and religious belief or non belief. And certaily not one tha depends on intintelligence .
Good people are simply good people. Just as evil people come in all shades of belief and non belif.

 

[questfortruth]

Not sure how your reasoning goes, but why would this necessarily be the case?
.

The probability, that a human is saint is p=0.000001 or less. The probability, that a human is genius is P=0.000001 or less. Thus, the probability, that a human is both saint and genius is near zero:
p*P=0.000001*0.000001=0.000000000001. The University professors of Steven Hawking level are highly intelligent. Therefore, it is highly unlikely, that they are saints as well. Being not a saint means to be more or less evil.

 

[Shantanu]

There are very few highly intelligent people.
There are very few highly religious people.
Therefore, is expected, that Scientific Community consists almost entirely of atheists: the advance in intelligence reduces the advance in religion. The same reasoning says, that Scientific community is hostile place: the highly good people are very few.

One needs to be highly intelligent to know the truth that there is. Science broadens the base of knowledge upon which religion teaches the truth.

 

[Spirit of Light]

The probability, that a human is saint is p=0.000001 or less. The probability, that a human is genius is P=0.000001 or less. Thus, the probability, that a human is both saint and genius is near zero:
p*P=0.000001*0.000001=0.000000000001. The University professors of Steven Hawking level are highly intelligent. Therefore, it is highly unlikely, that they are saints as well. Being not a saint means to be more or less evil.

How did you calculate this?
was it intelligence or wisdom that made you conclude your theory?

 

[Jollybear]

There are very few highly intelligent people.
There are very few highly religious people.
Therefore, is expected, that Scientific Community consists almost entirely of atheists: the advance in intelligence reduces the advance in religion. The same reasoning says, that Scientific community is hostile place: the highly good people are very few.

I contest that highly intelligent people are atheist. Atheism is highly unintelligent in my view.

In fact, i think its down right intellectually bankrupt.

 

[Earthling]

I have a very good idea of what a highly intelligent person is but not what you have in mind when you say "highly religious."


Guessing that by "scientific community" you mean scientists, the stats do point out a correlation between atheism and scientists, but it isn't close to "almost entirely of atheists".

Not sure how your reasoning goes, but why would this necessarily be the case?

.

What do you do, just Google for charts that come to some kind of conclusion you are looking for?

 

[Spirit of Light]

One needs to be highly intelligent to know the truth that there is. Science broadens the base of knowledge upon which religion teaches the truth.

maybe i am wrong, but science have knowledge of what can be seen or messured while religion has wisdom about the unseen and spiritual world.

does it mean that one of them are wrong? or can both be right but on different level?

 

[Vinayaka]

This may be useful ... Religiosity and intelligence - Wikipedia

 

[questfortruth]

I contest that highly intelligent people are atheist. Atheism is highly unintelligent in my view.

In fact, i think its down right intellectually bankrupt.

It is not correlations I am talking about. I talk about concentrations: in Universities are more of atheism. Just recall the Darwinism in School.

 

[Shantanu]

maybe i am wrong, but science have knowledge of what can be seen or messured while religion has wisdom about the unseen and spiritual world.

does it mean that one of them are wrong? or can both be right but on different level?

Science is the human endeavour at determining the truth of the visible universe. Religion is the common person's commonsense of Reality.

 

[spirit_of_dawn]

There are very few highly intelligent people.
There are very few highly religious people.
Therefore, is expected, that Scientific Community consists almost entirely of atheists: the advance in intelligence reduces the advance in religion. The same reasoning says, that Scientific community is hostile place: the highly good people are very few.

Sorry Nope. I can't understand the logic here.

 

[Subduction Zone]

There are very few highly intelligent people.
There are very few highly religious people.
Therefore, is expected, that Scientific Community consists almost entirely of atheists: the advance in intelligence reduces the advance in religion. The same reasoning says, that Scientific community is hostile place: the highly good people are very few.

You seem to be mixing up ideas. It has been observed that in the sciences, a pursuit that tends to take a higher level of intelligence, that the acceptance of religious beliefs is much lower than in the general population. This implies that an increased intelligence correlates to a lower degree of religious belief. It does not mean that the scientific community is a hostile place or that there are few good people in it.

What led you to that conclusion?

 

[shunyadragon]

There are very few highly intelligent people.
There are very few highly religious people.
Therefore, is expected, that Scientific Community consists almost entirely of atheists: the advance in intelligence reduces the advance in religion. The same reasoning says, that Scientific community is hostile place: the highly good people are very few.

Over the top ridiculous opening to the thread,though there is a reason why science, not even counting atheists, is in many ways hostile to the ancient world views of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, and no relationship with the scriptures that reflect an ancient world tribalistic view. Judaism maintains a strong tribalistic world view, but leans to strong pragmatism to generally,but not totally accept science. Christianity became divided many times, and many over time attempted to compromise,and conditionally tried to accept science in varying degrees, but still conditionally Today from 40 to over 50 % Christians in America,and many world wide consider Science to by hostile to their religion and atheist clinging to an ancient world view.

The reality is science is not atheist, and it is simply science based on the objective verifiable evidence of our physical existence as it is, without consideration of metaphysical assumptions and beliefs. This was found threatening to those who clung to ancient worldviews. From the atheist and agnostic perspective science became a refuge for their Ontological Naturalism,and yes many scientists became atheists and agnostics like Einstein, and many other physicists and cosmologists, because their science had no place in the ancient worldviews and their scriptures.

 

[lukethethird]

Yet in many parts of the developing world, increasing levels of education have coincided with increased religious conservatism for many people.

No, just in the US.

 

[Jollybear]

It is not correlations I am talking about. I talk about concentrations: in Universities are more of atheism. Just recall the Darwinism in School.

Ok, so you mean "schooled" is intelligence?

Universities and schooling indoctrinate you. Thats not intelligence. Intelligence is using logic and critical thinking.