The study of religiosity and intelligence explores the relationship between religiosity and issues related to intelligence and education (by country and individual level). Religiosity and intelligence are complex topics that cover a wide range of variables, and the interactions between variables are not always well understood. For example, intelligence is often defined differently by different researchers and also all grades of intelligence tests are only estimates of intelligence because concrete measurements, such as mass or distance, can not be achieved given the abstract nature of the concept of "intelligence". Religiosity is also complex because it involves a variety of interactions of religious beliefs, practices, behaviors, and affiliations in various cultures.
A meta-analysis finds a negative correlation between intelligence quotient (IQ) and religiosity for western society. This correlation is suggested to be the result of incompatibility, a more cognitive and less intuitive style of thinking among the less religious, and less of a need for religion as a coping mechanism. Some studies show a correlation between the national average IQ and the level of atheism in society, although others question whether the correlation is due to complex social, economic and historical factors that interact with religion and IQ in different ways. Others argue that any distinction in the national IQ and the rate of atheism is not always due to the degree of religiosity or nonreligiusity, but is correlated with economic, educational, environmental, and social factors. Less developed and poorer countries tend to be more religious, perhaps because religion plays a more active social, moral and cultural role in these countries.
One study shows that intuitive thinking may be one of the many sources that affect the degree of religiosity and analytical thinking that may be one of many sources affecting mistrust. However, others who have reviewed studies on analytic and non-kafir thinking suggest that analytical thinking does not mean a better reflection on religious matters or distrust.
A global study found that Jews, Christians, non-affiliated and Buddhists, on average, have higher levels of education than the global average. At the individual level, one study observed that educational levels were positively correlated with belief in gods in African countries, and negatively correlated in western countries.
Video Religiosity and intelligence
Definitions and issues
Intelligence
The definition of intelligence is still controversial because at least 70 definitions have been found among the various fields of research. Several groups of psychologists have suggested the following definition:
From "Mainstream Science on Intelligence" (1994), an open statement in the Wall Street Journal was signed by fifty-two researchers (out of a total of 131 invited to sign).
A very common mental ability that, among other things, involves the ability to think, plan, solve problems, think abstractly, understand complex ideas, learn quickly and learn from experience. It's not just learning books, narrow academic skills, or experimental intelligence. Instead, it reflects a broader and deeper ability to understand our environment - "catch," "understand" things, or "figure out" what to do.
From "Intelligence: Known and Unknown" (1995), a report published by the Council of Scientific Affairs of the American Psychological Association:
Individuals differ from each other in their ability to understand complex ideas, to adapt effectively to the environment, to learn from experience, to engage in various forms of reasoning, to overcome obstacles by taking thought. Although these individual differences can be great, they are never entirely consistent: the given intellectual performance of a given person will vary on different occasions, in different domains, as judged by different criteria. The concept of "intelligence" is an attempt to clarify and organize this complex collection of phenomena. Although considerable clarity has been achieved in several areas, there has been no such conceptualization that answers all the important questions, and none of them give the command to universal agreement. Indeed, when two dozen leading theorists were recently asked to define intelligence, they gave two dozen, somewhat different definitions.
Intelligence is a mind trait that includes many related abilities, such as the ability to think, plan, solve problems, think abstractly, understand ideas, use language, and learn. There are several ways to more specifically define intelligence. In some cases, intelligence may include traits such as creativity, personality, character, knowledge, or wisdom. However, some psychologists prefer not to include these traits in the definition of intelligence.
The index or classification of intelligence that is widely studied among scientists is the intelligence quotient (IQ). IQ is a summary index, calculated by testing the ability of individuals in various tasks and resulting in a combined score to represent the overall ability, for example, the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale. This is used to predict educational outcomes and other interesting variables.
Others have tried to measure intelligence indirectly by looking at individual or group educational attainment, although these risks are biased from other demographic factors, such as age, income, gender and cultural background, all of which can affect educational attainment.
Dissatisfaction with traditional IQ tests has led to the development of alternative theories. In 1983, Howard Gardner proposed a theory of multiple intelligences, which expanded the definition of conventional intelligence, to include logical, linguistic, spatial, musical, kinesthetic, naturalist, intrapersonal and interpersonal intelligence. He chose not to incorporate spiritual intelligence among his "intelligences" because of the challenging encoding of quantifiable scientific criteria, but suggested "existential intelligence" as workable.
Religiosity
The term religiosity refers to the degree of religious behavior, belief, or spirituality. The measurement of religiosity is hampered by the difficulties involved in defining what is meant by the term. Numerous studies have explored various components of religiosity, with most finding some differences between religious beliefs/doctrine, religious practice, and spirituality. Studies can measure religious practice by counting attendance at religious services, religious/doctrinal beliefs by raising some doctrinal questions, and spirituality by asking respondents about their sense of oneness with the divine or through detailed standard measurements. When religiosity is measured, it is important to determine which aspects of religiosity are referred.
According to Mark Chaves, decades of anthropological, sociological, and psychological research have established that "religious conformity" (the assumption that religious beliefs and values ​​are closely integrated in the minds of individuals or that religious practices and behaviors follow directly from religious beliefs or faith religions are chronologically linear and stable in various contexts) is rare. Human religious ideas are fragmented, loosely connected, and context-dependent, as in all other cultural and life domains. Confidence, affiliation, and individual behavior are complex activities that have many sources including culture. As an example of religious peculiarity he noted, "Devout Jews may not believe what they say in their Sabbath prayers, Christian ministers may not believe in God, and those who regularly dance for rain do not do it in the dry season."
Demographic studies often show the diversity of religious beliefs, possessions, and practices in religious and non-religious populations. For example, of Americans who are not religious and do not seek religion, 68% believe in God, 12% are atheists, and 17% are agnostics; As for the self-identification of religiosity, 18% consider themselves religious, 37% consider themselves spiritual but not religious, and 42% consider themselves unspiritual or religious, while 21% pray daily and 24% pray once a month. The global study of religion also shows diversity.
Religion and belief in gods are not always identical because nontheistic religions are included in traditions such as Hinduism and Christianity. According to anthropologist Jack David Eller, "atheism is a fairly common position, even in religion" and that "surprisingly, atheism is not an opponent or a deficiency, let alone an enemy, a religion, but the most common form of religion."
Maps Religiosity and intelligence
Study compares religious beliefs and IQ
In the 2013 meta-analysis of 63 studies, led by Professor Miron Zuckerman, the correlations between -20 to -25 between religiosity and IQ are very strong when assessing beliefs (which in their view reflect intrinsic religiosity) but the negative effect is less when comparing with behavior (like going to church). They note this limitation because seeing intrinsic religiosity as about religious beliefs representing American Protestantism over Judaism or Catholicism, both see behavior as important as religious beliefs. They also note that the available data do not allow adequate consideration of the role of religious and cultural types in assessing the relationship between religion and intelligence. Most of the studies reviewed are American and 87% of participants in the study came from the United States, Canada, and the United Kingdom. They noted, "Obviously, the current outcome is limited to Western societies." This meta-analysis discusses three possible explanations: First, intelligent people tend to be less self-adjusting and, thus, more likely to reject religious dogma, but this theory conflicts in most atheistic societies like Scandinavians, where religiosity-IQ relationships still exist. Second, intelligent people tend to adopt an analytic thinking style (contrary to intuitive), which has been shown to weaken religious beliefs. Thirdly, intelligent people may lack the need for religious beliefs and practices, because some functions of religiosity can be given by intelligence. Such functions include presenting the sense that the world is orderly and predictable, a sense of personal control and self-regulation and a sense of self-esteem and ownership.
Researchers Helmuth Nyborg and Richard Lynn, professor of psychology at the University of Ulster, compared belief in God and IQ. Using data from US research on 6,825 adolescents, the authors found that the average atheist IQ was 6 points higher than the average non-atheist IQ. The authors also investigated the relationship between faith in gods and the national average IQ in 137 countries. The authors reported a correlation of 0.60 between the rate of atheism and intelligence levels, which were determined to be "highly statistically significant". (It should be noted that 'belief in god' is not synonymous with 'religiosity.' Some countries have a high proportion of unbelievers in god, but who may be very religious, following non-theistic belief systems such as Buddhism or Taoism.)
The Lynn et al. The paper's findings are discussed by Professor Gordon Lynch, of London's Birkbeck College, who expressed concern that the study failed to take account of complex social, economic and historical factors, each of which has been shown to interact with religion and IQ in various ways. The Gallup survey, for example, has found that the poorest countries in the world are consistently the most religious, perhaps because religion plays a more functional role (helping people cope) in poor countries. Even on an individual scale, IQ may not directly lead to more distrust of the gods. Dr David Hardman from London Metropolitan University said: "It is very difficult to conduct a true experiment that will explain the causal relationship between IQ and religious beliefs." He added that other studies continue to correlate IQ with willing or able to question beliefs.
Another correlation between national IQ and other factors is available, Richard Lynn and Vanhanen claim that the national IQ correlates with per capita income on a correlation of 0.73. However, when the long GDP (1975 - 2003) was used, the correlation increased to 0.82 for 81 countries. Further studies confirmed results for 185 countries (r = 0.65) and for 152 countries (r = 0.76).
According to biopsychologist Nigel Barber, differences in national IQ are better explained by social, environmental, and wealth conditions than by the degree of religiosity. He admits that very clever people are religious and nonreligious. He noted that countries with more wealth and better resources tend to have higher non-theis levels and countries with less wealth and resources tend to have fewer non-theists. For example, countries with poverty, low urbanization, lower levels of education, less exposure to electronic media that increases intelligence, higher incidence of diseases that impair brain function, low birth weight, child malnutrition, and pollutant control as bad as lead has more factors that reduce brain development and IQ than richer or more developed countries.
Researcher Gregory S. Paul suggests that economic development has a closer relationship to religiosity. He argues that once every "nation's population becomes prosperous and secure, for example through economic security and universal health care, many residents lose interest in seeking the help and protection of supernatural entities." Other studies have shown that increased wealth correlates with decreasing religious beliefs. Indeed, the majority of nations who show a strong relationship between low religiosity and high IQ in 2008 studies are developed countries.
Studies that examine theistic and atheistic cognitive styles
The idea that analytical thinking makes people more likely to be religious is an idea supported by several studies on this issue, including reports from Harvard University. Harvard researchers found evidence that all religious beliefs became more confident as participants thought intuitively (atheists and theists became more convinced). Thus, reflective thinking generally tends to create a more qualified and questionable belief.
The study found that participants who tend to think more reflectively tend to be less trusting in gods. Reflective thinking is more correlated with greater belief changes since childhood: this change leads to atheism for the most reflective participants, and leads to greater belief in the gods for the most intuitive thinkers. This study is controlled for personality differences and cognitive abilities, pointing out that differences are due to thinking style - not just IQ or raw cognitive abilities. An experiment in this study found that participants moved toward greater faith in the gods after writing essays on how intuition produces correct answers or reflections produce the wrong answers (and vice versa, against atheism if thought to think about the failure of intuition or the success of reflection). The authors say it is all evidence that the relevant factor in religious beliefs is the style of thinking. The authors add that, even if intuitive thinking tends to increase belief in gods, "it does not mean that dependence on intuition is always irrational or unjust."
A study by Gervais and Norenzayan reached a similar conclusion that intuitive thinking tends to increase intrinsic religiosity, intuitive religious beliefs and beliefs in supernatural entities. They also added a causal element, finding that subtly triggering analytic thinking can increase religious distrust. They conclude that "Combined, this study shows that analytic processing is one factor (perhaps among some) that encourages religious distrust." While these studies link religious distrust with analytical rather than intuitive thinking, they insist on caution in the interpretation of these results, noting that they do not assess the relative merits of analytic and intuitive thought in promoting optimal decision making, or the merits or validity of religiosity. overall.
Reviewing psychological studies on atheists, Miguel Farias notes that the study concludes that analytical thinking leads to lower religious beliefs "does not imply that atheists are more conscious or reflective of their own beliefs, or that atheism is the result of conscious rejection than previously held religious beliefs" because they also have such diverse beliefs in conspiracy theories of the naturalistic variety. He noted that research on deconception indicates that a larger proportion of people who leave religion do so for motivational reasons and not rational reasons, and most deconceptions occur in adolescence and young adulthood when a person is emotionally volatile. Furthermore, he notes that atheists are indistinguishable from New Age or Gnostic people because there are similarities such as being individualistic, unconformist, liberal, and appreciating hedonism and sensation.
Regarding the study of cognitive science on atheists, Johnathan Lanman notes that there are various implicit and explicit beliefs that vary among individuals. Individual atheism and theism may be related to the number of "display credibility enhancements" (CRED) an experience in which people exposed to theistic CRED may be the theis and those less exposed to CRED theistis are likely to become atheists.
Neurological research on the mechanisms of belief and non-belief, using Christians and atheists as subjects, by Harris et al. has shown that the brain tissue involved in evaluating the truth of religious and non-religious statements is generally the same regardless of its religiosity. However, activity in these tissues differs across the religiosity of statements, with religious statements enabling the anterior and anterior cingulate cortex to a greater degree, and non-religious statements enable the hypocampus and superior frontal regions to a greater extent. The areas associated with religious statements are generally associated with prominent emotional processing, while the areas associated with non-religious statements are generally related to memory. The relationship between the network of significance and the religious claims is in line with Boyer's cognitive theory that the inability of religious propositions is balanced by their religious significance. The same neural networks are active both in Christian and atheist even when dealing with "blasphemous claims" to their respective worldviews. Furthermore, it supports the idea that "intuition" and "reason" are not two separate and separate but intertwined activities both among theists and atheists.
Study tests religiosity and emotional intelligence
A small study in 2004 by Ellen Paek examined the extent to which religiosity (in which only Christians were surveyed), operated as a religious orientation and religious behavior, related to the controversial idea of ​​emotional intelligence (EI). This study examines the extent to which religious orientations and behaviors are linked to self-reported EIs in 148 Christians attending church. (Non-religious individuals are not part of the research.) The study found that the self-reported individual self-orientation was positively correlated with them perceiving themselves to have a larger EI. While the number of denominational activities is positively related to EI perceptions, the number of years of church attendance is unrelated. Significant positive correlations were also found between religious commitment levels and EI perceptions. Thus, Christian volunteers are more likely to consider themselves emotionally intelligent if they spend more time in group activities and have more commitment to their beliefs.
Tischler, Biberman and McKeage warn that there is still ambiguity in the above concept. In their 2002 article, entitled "Connecting emotional intelligence, spirituality, and workplace performance: definitions, models, and ideas to research", they reviewed the literature on EI and various aspects of spirituality. They found that both IE and spirituality seem to lead to similar attitudes, behaviors, and skills, and there seems to be frequent confusion, intersection and linkage between the two constructs.
More recently, Owicki and Zajenkowski investigated the potential relationship between various aspects of religious belief and the abilities and nature of EI. In their first study, they found that EI's ability was positively correlated with a general level of belief in God or higher strength. The subsequent study, conducted among Polish Christians, mimics previous results and reveals that the nature and abilities of EI are negatively related to extrinsic religious orientation and negative religious prevention.
Study explores religiosity and educational attainment
The relationship between the level of religiosity and the level of one's education has become philosophical, as well as scientific and political concern since the second half of the 20th century.
The parameters in this field are slightly different from those proposed above: if "the level of religiosity" remains a difficult concept to be scientifically determined, on the contrary, this "level of education" is easily compiled, official data on this topic is publicly accessible to anyone in most countries.
Different studies available show a contrasting conclusion. Data analysis World Values ​​Surveys show that in most countries there is no significant relationship between education and religious presence, with some differences between the "Western" and earlier socialist countries, which the authors associate with historical, political and economic factors, not intelligence. Other studies have noted a positive relationship.
The global Pew Center 2016 study on religion and education worldwide places Jews as the most educated (13.4 years of schooling) followed by Christians (9.3 years of schooling). Unaffiliated religions - a category that includes atheists, agnostics and those who portray their religion as "nothing special" - the overall rank as the third most educated religious group (8.8 years of schooling) followed by Buddhists (7, 9 years of schooling), Muslims (5.6 years of schooling), and Hindu (5.6 years of schooling). At the youngest ages (25-34) the surveyed group, Jews averaged 13.8 years of schooling, unaffiliated groups averaging 10.3 years of schooling, average Christian 9.9 school years, average Buddhist 9.7 years of schooling, Hinduism averaging 7.1 years of schooling, and Muslims averaging 6.7 year-old school. 61% of Jews, 20% Christians, 16% of unaffiliated, 12% Buddhists, 10% of Hindus, and 8% Muslims have undergraduate and postgraduate degrees. The study observes that the possibility of having a US bachelor degree is higher for all surveyed religious minorities (perhaps in part because of selective immigration policies that support highly skilled applicants), including unaffiliated groups ranked fifth, to be higher than the national average 39%.
According to the Pew Center 2016 study, there is a correlation between education and income in the United States. About 77% of Hindus, 67% lower than the national average (depending on the size of the denominational group) of Christians, 59% of Jews, 47% of Buddhists, 43% Atheists, 42% Agnostics, 39% Muslim, and 24% of those who say their religion is "nothing special"; has a bachelor's and postgraduate degree.
Factors that affect IQ
Environmental and genetic factors play a role in determining IQ. Their relative importance has been the subject of much research and debate.
Micronutrients and vitamin deficiencies
Micronutrient deficiencies (eg in iodine and iron) affect the development of intelligence and remain a problem in developing countries. For example, iodine deficiency causes a decrease, on average, from 12 IQ points.
Heritability
Heritability is defined as the proportion of variance in genotype-induced traits in a population determined in a given environment. A number of points should be considered when interpreting heritability. The general rate for heritability IQ, according to the authoritative American Psychological Association report, is 0.45 for children, and rises to about 0.75 for late adolescents and adults. It seems reasonable to expect genetic influences on traits such as IQ to be less important when one experiences experience with age. However, the opposite happened. The size of heritability in infancy is as low as 0.2, about 0.4 in middle-age children, and as high as 0.8 in adulthood. One explanation put forward is that people with different genes tend to amplify the effects of the gene, for example by looking for different environments.
Family members have the same environmental aspects (eg, house characteristics). This shared family environment contributed 0.25-0.35 variations of IQ in childhood. In late adolescence, it is quite low (zero in some studies). The effect for some other psychological properties is similar. These studies have not seen the effects of extreme environments, such as in rough families.
Gene-environment interactions
David Rowe reports the interaction of genetic effects with socioeconomic status, resulting in high heritability in high SES families, but much lower in low SES families. In the US, it has been replicated in infants, children, adolescents, and adults. Outside the US, the study did not show a link between heritability and SES. Some effects can even reverse sign outside the US.
Dickens and Flynn (2001) argue that genes for high IQ initiate a feedback cycle that shapes the environment, with a genetic effect that causes intelligent children to seek a more stimulating environment that then increases their IQ. In the Dickens model, environmental effects are modeled as rotting over time. In this model, the Flynn effect can be explained by an increase in environmental stimulation independent of the one being sought by the individual. The authors suggest that programs aimed at improving IQ will most likely generate long-term IQ profits if they are constantly increasing the urge of children to seek a demanding cognitive experience.
See also
- An outline of human intelligence
- Religious psychology
- The relationship between religion and science
References
Further reading
- Shermer, M. (2000). How we believe . New York, NY: W.H. Freeman. ISBNÃ, 0-8050-7479-1.
Source of the article : Wikipedia
0 Comments