Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

analytic thinking promotes religious disbelief

12 views
Skip to first unread message

wiki trix

unread,
Apr 26, 2012, 3:20:54 PM4/26/12
to
Study suggests that analytic thinking promotes religious disbelief.

Duh.

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/health/2012/04/26/logic-linked-to-religious-disbelief-study-implies/

wiki trix

unread,
Apr 26, 2012, 3:29:06 PM4/26/12
to
On Apr 26, 3:20 pm, wiki trix <wikit...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Study suggests that analytic thinking promotes religious disbelief.
>
> Duh.
>
> http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/health/2012/04/26/logic-linked-to-religio...

The main point above is obvious, but the following is actually the
more interesting conclusion in the above link:

"But devout believers may be shocked to hear their faith can wax and
wane with tricky tests."

Friar Broccoli

unread,
Apr 26, 2012, 3:35:11 PM4/26/12
to
On Thu, 26 Apr 2012 12:20:54 -0700 (PDT), wiki trix <wiki...@gmail.com>
wrote:

>Study suggests that analytic thinking promotes religious disbelief.
>
>Duh.

Not "Duh" for me.
Did you read the final paragraph(?):

“I suppose some people might find it surprising,” Gervais said, “that
really subtle experimental manipulations might be able to temporarily
alter religious beliefs.”



>
>http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/health/2012/04/26/logic-linked-to-religious-disbelief-study-implies/

--
Friar Broccoli (Robert Keith Elias), Quebec Canada
I consider ALL arguments in support of my views

Mitchell Coffey

unread,
Apr 26, 2012, 3:45:53 PM4/26/12
to
On Apr 26, 3:35 pm, Friar Broccoli <elia...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 26 Apr 2012 12:20:54 -0700 (PDT), wiki trix <wikit...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> >Study suggests that analytic thinking promotes religious disbelief.
>
> >Duh.
>
> Not "Duh" for me.
> Did you read the final paragraph(?):
>
> “I suppose some people might find it surprising,” Gervais said, “that
> really subtle experimental manipulations might be able to temporarily
> alter religious beliefs.”
>
>
>
> >http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/health/2012/04/26/logic-linked-to-religio...

Actually, the findings are pretty interesting.

Mitchell Coffey

wiki trix

unread,
Apr 26, 2012, 3:50:37 PM4/26/12
to
On Apr 26, 3:35 pm, Friar Broccoli <elia...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 26 Apr 2012 12:20:54 -0700 (PDT), wiki trix <wikit...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> >Study suggests that analytic thinking promotes religious disbelief.
>
> >Duh.
>
> Not "Duh" for me.
> Did you read the final paragraph(?):
>
> “I suppose some people might find it surprising,” Gervais said, “that
> really subtle experimental manipulations might be able to temporarily
> alter religious beliefs.”
>
>
>
> >http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/health/2012/04/26/logic-linked-to-religio...
>
> --
>   Friar Broccoli (Robert Keith Elias), Quebec Canada
>    I consider ALL arguments in support of my views

Yes my good friar. I read the whole thing. I said "duh" to the obvious
point that the study suggests that analytic thinking promotes
religious disbelief. In a followup post I pointed out (6 minutes
before your post), the following

<self-quote>
The main point above is obvious, but the following is actually the
more interesting conclusion in the above link:
"But devout believers may be shocked to hear their faith can wax and
wane with tricky tests."
</self-quote>

I stand by my original duh.



wiki trix

unread,
Apr 26, 2012, 3:51:20 PM4/26/12
to
I agree

Mitchell Coffey

unread,
Apr 26, 2012, 4:13:19 PM4/26/12
to
> I agree.

It suggests if you're subjected even briefly to tasks involving
rational methods or standards, you might at least briefly impose upon
yourself rational methods and standards for unrelated tasks or
beliefs. I find this ever so cheering.

Mitchell

Robert Carnegie: Fnord: cc talk-origins@moderators.isc.org

unread,
Apr 26, 2012, 3:56:40 PM4/26/12
to
I suppose it'll reaffirm the convictions of some
that thinking is Satanic.

wiki trix

unread,
Apr 26, 2012, 4:27:04 PM4/26/12
to
Yes. I think that it is very true. People are not as resolute as they
think they are. People are affected by advertizing more than they
realize. People are not aware of how inconsistent they really are.
Just like they over-estimate their own intelligence, memory, and
fairness, etc. Biblical literalists are not really very literal.
Governments manipulate us more than we know. etc. It is a long list of
perceptual problems. Scary. Not so cheering perhaps, but interesting.



wiki trix

unread,
Apr 26, 2012, 4:29:03 PM4/26/12
to
On Apr 26, 3:56 pm, "Robert Carnegie: Fnord: cc talk-
Hey, you want a bite of this fruit from the tree of knowledge?

0 new messages