Religious people are less intelligent than atheists, according to analysis of scores of scientific studies stretching back over decades

[Lorizael]

There is no contradiction between being religious and scientific.

There doesn't have to be. It depends on how you frame your beliefs.

[MikeH]

That's as reaching a comment as Ben makes... or at least as much of a BAM .

Yes, exactly my point.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Yes, exactly my point.

Ah... my apologies... I missed the mocking-ness!

[DinoDoc]

Posted without comment.

Are atheists mentally ill?

Thanks to a couple of surveys, it’s being put about in certain circles that atheists have higher IQs than believers. That may or may not be the case, but one problem with this argument is that, if you accept "average group differences in IQ”, you get into all sorts of sinister debates which bien pensant atheist Lefties might find less to their liking.

So let’s not go down that unhappy road. Let’s dispense with the crude metric of IQ and look at the actual lives led by atheists, and believers, and see how they measure up. In other words: let’s see who is living more intelligently.

And guess what: it’s the believers. A vast body of research, amassed over recent decades, shows that religious belief is physically and psychologically beneficial – to a remarkable degree.

In 2004, scholars at UCLA revealed that college students involved in religious activities are likely to have better mental health. In 2006, population researchers at the University of Texas discovered that the more often you go to church, the longer you live. In the same year researchers at Duke University in America discovered that religious people have stronger immune systems than the irreligious. They also established that churchgoers have lower blood pressure.

Meanwhile in 2009 a team of Harvard psychologists discovered that believers who checked into hospital with broken hips reported less depression, had shorter hospital stays, and could hobble further when they left hospital – as compared to their similarly crippled but heathen fellow-sufferers.

The list goes on. In the last few years scientists have revealed that believers, compared to non-believers, have better outcomes from breast cancer, coronary disease, mental illness, Aids, and rheumatoid arthritis. Believers even get better results from IVF. Likewise, believers also report greater levels of happiness, are less likely to commit suicide, and cope with stressful events much better. Believers also have more kids.

What’s more, these benefits are visible even if you adjust for the fact that believers are less likely to smoke, drink or take drugs. And let’s not forget that religious people are nicer. They certainly give more money to charity than atheists, who are, according to the very latest survey, the meanest of all.

So which is the smart party, here? Is it the atheists, who live short, selfish, stunted little lives – often childless – before they approach hopeless death in despair, and their worthless corpses are chucked in a trench (or, if they are wrong, they go to Hell)? Or is it the believers, who live longer, happier, healthier, more generous lives, and who have more kids, and who go to their quietus with ritual dignity, expecting to be greeted by a smiling and benevolent God?

Obviously, it’s the believers who are smarter. Anyone who thinks otherwise is mentally ill.

And I mean that literally: the evidence today implies that atheism is a form of mental illness. And this is because science is showing that the human mind is hard-wired for faith: we have, as a species, evolved to believe, which is one crucial reason why believers are happier – religious people have all their faculties intact, they are fully functioning humans.

Therefore, being an atheist – lacking the vital faculty of faith – should be seen as an affliction, and a tragic deficiency: something akin to blindness. Which makes Richard Dawkins the intellectual equivalent of an amputee, furiously waving his stumps in the air, boasting that he has no hands.

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/seanthomas/100231060/are-atheists-mentally-ill/

[Hauldren Collider]

Good to know I'm mentally ill

[DinoDoc]

Good to know I'm mentally ill

* DinoDoc wonders what Kuci would say here

[Kuciwalker]

/me does not

[Dinner]

It's always entertaining to see Ben bring down the average.

And yes there probably was a lot of truth in Mike's comment. And that's probably still somewhat true today. I'm sure there were quite a few pedophiles that didn't truly believe in god. They just joined the priesthood for the opportunities.

That's actually well known and documented. Pedophiles go to great lengths to pick careers and even hobbies which will bring them into contact with children especially in a dominant position over children. So teachers, priests, people who run puppet shows, or kid's shows, etc... Teachers in public schools at least are watched like hawks but religious figures are often along in their church and so become ideal places for pedophiles to prey upon the unsuspecting especially since priests are supposed to be given obedience and respect.

[Kidlicious]

Good to know I'm mentally ill

You're also more physically sick.

[Kidlicious]

What you're referring to is called logic, reasoning, and problem solving and a predisposition to the scientific method.

It's no surprise people who become educated in such thinking tend to be less religious, as religion depends on you eschewing logic, reasoning, and a predisposition towards proven facts.

It's a shame that you haven't figured out how absurd life is yet.

[DaShi]

He's too busy being successful.

[Dr Strangelove]

The "scientific method" isn't really a thing you can credit to a single person so I don't see how your hypothetical about a Catholic priest coming up with it is relevant.

IIRC Muslims claim they invented it.

[Ben Kenobi]

The "scientific method" isn't really a thing you can credit to a single person so I don't see how your hypothetical about a Catholic priest coming up with it is relevant.

So pick one Catholic priest out of the following:

Aquinas, Scotus, Ockham, Roger Bacon, Albert Magnus, Grosseteste.

Most would credit the first modern formulation of empiricism to Bacon. Argue how you want about the backwardness of the Catholic church - this is hardly an exhaustive list.

[Dinner]

IIRC Muslims claim they invented it.

Wiki credits Parmenides a Greek who lived in 540 BCE so it seems to predate Islam by 1200 years.

[Kidlicious]

He's too busy being successful.

Just like Bush when he went to the grocery store. He didn't know how it worked.