3 ms·

> One interesting question, which will only begin to be answered in the next several decades, is whether the rates of religious adherence within these European

> One interesting question, which will only begin to be answered in the next several decades, is whether the rates of religious adherence within these European countries correlate with anything. For instance, do countries with low religious adherence have any sort of markedly different character or outcomes than countries with high religious adherence? I'm not up on all the research that's been done, but we already have data on this. It's not hard to get - it's just comparing degrees of religious following with stats on things like crime, teen pregnancies etc. I remember hearing of a study (I think from pew) showing that, despite what is often claimed, the less religious countries had less crime. (I did a quick Google search but couldn't find a link) (And before anyone says correlation doesn't mean cause, I'm responding to a comment asking specifically about correlations) Here's something that came up http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-1101-zuckerman-violence-secularism-20151101-story.html http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-1101-zuckerman-vi...

maaark 9y ago
To quote Trent Reznor, "God is an excuse."
- cat199 9y ago
  to quote King David, "The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God." what's your point?
  - logfromblammo 9y ago
    ~King David didn't record Head Like a Hole. Your argument is invalid.~ Quotations are usually the result of either some serious distillation of individual philosophical thought beforehand, or selection pressure from those who propagate it afterward. The insertion of a quote into an argument isn't appealing to the authority of the author, but recognizing that they were the first to formulate it. It is suggesting that those currently in the discussion are reinventing the wheel. Other people have already considered the problem and published their findings in more succinct form. In this case, Reznor is apparently calling out the religious on justifying their antisocial or nonsensical behaviors with the ultimate appeal to authority: the fictional character that is better than everyone else by definition. As such, responding to one quote from a famous person with a quote from another famous person is only productive if the quote could otherwise stand alone without the attribution. To close the argument, I'll reference The Emperor's New Clothes, which is a parable that suggests children and fools are immune to the allure of sophisticated fictions. The fool wonders why he should believe in God, but he is foolish not for that doubt, but for failing to see the profit in playing along. The foolish parent tells their child that Santa Claus is not real, because they could otherwise have better-behaved children all December long. It is the same with God. What priest would admit to doubt when it is the tithes from believers that keep him warm, dry, and fed? For him, God is an excuse for freeloading upon the largesse of others. "God is dead, and no one cares; if there is a Hell, I'll see you there." --Nietzsche
soupflavor 9y ago
>> One interesting question, which will only begin to be answered in the next several decades, is whether the rates of religious adherence within these European countries correlate with anything. For instance, do countries with low religious adherence have any sort of markedly different character or outcomes than countries with high religious adherence? >I'm not up on all the research that's been done, but we already have data on this. It's not hard to get - it's just comparing degrees of religious following with stats on things like crime, teen pregnancies etc. I think the real interesting thing is the possibilities for looking at new metrics. Beyond the things you mentioned, perhaps we'll be able to see religious adherence correlated with social network; with types of media; with general demeanor; with professionalism or job success. Just to name a few. I only comment to point out that there may be many new correlations to be observed.

maaark 9y ago

To quote Trent Reznor, "God is an excuse."

cat199 9y ago
to quote King David, "The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God." what's your point?
- logfromblammo 9y ago
  ~King David didn't record Head Like a Hole. Your argument is invalid.~ Quotations are usually the result of either some serious distillation of individual philosophical thought beforehand, or selection pressure from those who propagate it afterward. The insertion of a quote into an argument isn't appealing to the authority of the author, but recognizing that they were the first to formulate it. It is suggesting that those currently in the discussion are reinventing the wheel. Other people have already considered the problem and published their findings in more succinct form. In this case, Reznor is apparently calling out the religious on justifying their antisocial or nonsensical behaviors with the ultimate appeal to authority: the fictional character that is better than everyone else by definition. As such, responding to one quote from a famous person with a quote from another famous person is only productive if the quote could otherwise stand alone without the attribution. To close the argument, I'll reference The Emperor's New Clothes, which is a parable that suggests children and fools are immune to the allure of sophisticated fictions. The fool wonders why he should believe in God, but he is foolish not for that doubt, but for failing to see the profit in playing along. The foolish parent tells their child that Santa Claus is not real, because they could otherwise have better-behaved children all December long. It is the same with God. What priest would admit to doubt when it is the tithes from believers that keep him warm, dry, and fed? For him, God is an excuse for freeloading upon the largesse of others. "God is dead, and no one cares; if there is a Hell, I'll see you there." --Nietzsche

soupflavor 9y ago

>> One interesting question, which will only begin to be answered in the next several decades, is whether the rates of religious adherence within these European countries correlate with anything. For instance, do countries with low religious adherence have any sort of markedly different character or outcomes than countries with high religious adherence? >I'm not up on all the research that's been done, but we already have data on this. It's not hard to get - it's just comparing degrees of religious following with stats on things like crime, teen pregnancies etc. I think the real interesting thing is the possibilities for looking at new metrics. Beyond the things you mentioned, perhaps we'll be able to see religious adherence correlated with social network; with types of media; with general demeanor; with professionalism or job success. Just to name a few. I only comment to point out that there may be many new correlations to be observed.