|
the more religious you are, the less intelligent you are. (pg. 3)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| occrider |
| quote: | Originally posted by ::TranceVanDyk::
ive read explicitly, and several times that the common belief here in this forum, among the participants is one of not doubt over a god, but the total denial of any god.
|
Actually, I would say that there are more theists here than atheists. You know there is more to theism than the Christian God ...
| quote: |
well, we've gotten into arguements before, ive put out evidence from science itself, of which, im guessing because of the pressuppositions most already have in their minds, they have made up their minds, their not going to hear anything, my evidence is totally looked over.
|
Huh? What? What arguments did you raise that were totally ignored. To the best of my knowledge MisterOpus and several others made it a point to rebut every single one of your arguments ... and I believe they're still waiting for a few responses on your part. I can drag up old threads and source them specifically if you would like. So by all means, where do you want to continue with this?
| quote: |
this isnt a battle between science and creationism. its a battle between evolutionary interpretation and theistic interpretation. we all have the same evidence, but we both have a different preconcieved notion of how we are going to examine the evidence. science is nuetral. |
But it is a debate between science and creationism. You don't criticize scientific arguments of evolution in favor of scientific alternatives. Instead it's a grand dismissal of science and the exploitation of "plausible" doubt as a means to "prove" creationism ... when in fact it doesn't prove anything close to that at all. |
|
|
| Goashem |
| you guys wanna tell me you never met a smart person who believe in god? or a complete moron who didnt ??? you should get out more. just because someone has faith in the afterlife doesnt mean hes stupid. grow up. |
|
|
| pkcRAISTLIN |
| quote: | Originally posted by Aquarian
Knowledge has absolutely nothing to do with intelligence. Intelligence is your ability to reason, not to hold information. |
id agree with that.
| quote: | Originally posted by Aquarian
Oh and by the way, the I.Q. system is a joke. The only thing it can do is give you extremely vague estimates...In any case, the only true indication of intelligence is opinions, and no such testing system could be implemented because of political correctness (or simply because everyone is brought up to think 'all opinions are equal'). A credible \"I.Q.\" test would have questions like: \"Are you religious? ()yes ()no\", or \"What is your stance on this political situation?\". |
yes, IQ tests arent a reliable means, though they are the closest we have. but your examples of what would be a credible IQ test are quite laughable to be honest.
real IQ tests are those that can be solved without needing prior information or specialist knowledge. most of the tests ive done relate to patterns. any test that requires you to have a good understanding of, say, maths or language isnt a proper test imo.
back on topic, i still dont see how you can equate faith with stupidity. |
|
|
| garlick |
| quote: | Originally posted by St_Andrew
We both have the same evidence, but we interpret it differently?! You mean, you dont accept all evidence as evidence?
For example the order of things in the creation accout totally contradicts with proven science, how could you interpret that differently?! :conf: |
I assume that both you and Trance Van Dyk are talking about creation as it's stated in the bible.
If this is true, and that is an assumption, then the best statement I've heard in years is by an historian who was studying Sodom and Gaamora, that all things in the bible, while they may be based on some part of history, are also written in parables, or in a manner that they are meant to be taken not as historical fact but as a matter of a story based in truth. So while the account of the creation may have been stated that the world was created in 7 days and that man was created by god and that Adam was the first man, this is meant as a story that teaches us something about our nature and the ability of man to choose from right and wrong and the ability of an almighty being to create a world such as ours.
Now while there are many people who state that if you believe in Science you therefor can not believe in God, there are many who believe in science that do believe that God exsist. These people are not dumb or unintelligent, they just have Faith. Faith is not something that can be measured, and it doesn't make any one person less inteligent than the other.
In fact if you take faith and apply it to other parts of our life you will see that we all have some amount of faith, including many scientists. We have faith that Gravity exsists, and while we can not define gravity, and we can't see gravity, we can feel it, but is it really there?
Also the universe, you have faith that the pictures that are taken from our telescopes are real and that people aren't making them up, or that our sun isn't distorting the images.
Also many inteligent people who don't believe in god, believe in Aliens, we have faith they exsist even though we can't prove it beyond a resonable doubt.
So no, the more religious you are has nothing to do with your inteligence.
My $.02
Brian G. |
|
|
| pkcRAISTLIN |
| quote: | Originally posted by garlick
We have faith that Gravity exsists, and while we can not define gravity, and we can't see gravity, we can feel it, but is it really there? |
agreed with everything apart from this. we can measure gravity ;) |
|
|
| Aquarian |
| quote: | Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
yes, IQ tests arent a reliable means, though they are the closest we have. but your examples of what would be a credible IQ test are quite laughable to be honest. |
How so? They are the only accurate measure of intelligence. Or is it simply because you disagree with them?
| quote: |
real IQ tests are those that can be solved without needing prior information or specialist knowledge. most of the tests ive done relate to patterns. any test that requires you to have a good understanding of, say, maths or language isnt a proper test imo. |
Pattern interpretation is very vague and too dependant on situation. Your ability to reconize patterns is very dependant on your current state of mind, and a vast multitude of outside factors ranging from your social life to what you ate for breakfast. IQ can only be calculated as a range, and even then, the amplitude of the "spikes" would still vary from person to person, mainly based on their social situation and/or health. I know people who have taken IQ tests (relatively good ones) and have had similar scores every time. I, on the other hand, have taken those same tests and have had scores ranging up to 30 points apart.
| quote: |
back on topic, i still dont see how you can equate faith with stupidity. |
Faith (at least in the context of religion), is completely illogical. Regardless of wether it's right or wrong, it cannot be an intelligent belief. |
|
|
| Lepanto |
| Why is faith illogical? Believing in something higher than yourself and than the "physical reality" around you is illogical? You know, all wacko scientists' collegues thought they were illogical but yet they are reknowned because they believed in themselves and had faith in something that couldn't be explained...yet. |
|
|
| Aquarian |
| quote: | Originally posted by Lepanto
Why is faith illogical? Believing in something higher than yourself and than the "physical reality" around you is illogical? You know, all wacko scientists' collegues thought they were illogical but yet they are reknowned because they believed in themselves and had faith in something that couldn't be explained...yet. |
It's illogical because there is no reasonable evidence to support it. The arguments behind it are purely emotive. As for science, the arguments behind it are purely rational. |
|
|
| Lepanto |
| quote: | Originally posted by Aquarian
It's illogical because there is no reasonable evidence to support it. The arguments behind it are purely emotive. As for science, the arguments behind it are purely rational. |
you don't know too much about science do you? you think that we know alot? LMAO. a hundred years ago people claimed the same thing and look how different we look at health and science and evolution now? Science isn't more concrete than the "Let there be light" |
|
|
| Renegade |
One of my most intelligent friends is also a fundamentalist Christian, so I don't think that innate intelligence is any guarantee that you won't go down that path. It's pretty easy to believe in anything you want so long as you have the ability to compartmentalise what you know and stubbornly refuse to waiver in your belief.
Naturally I think that religious fundamentalism of any kind is "dumb", but, that said, you don't have to be "dumb" to believe in it.
| quote: | Originally posted by garlick
In fact if you take faith and apply it to other parts of our life you will see that we all have some amount of faith, including many scientists. We have faith that Gravity exsists, and while we can not define gravity, and we can't see gravity, we can feel it, but is it really there? |
There's a difference between real, testable and verifiable faith and completely blind faith. Everytime I've thrown a ball up in the air it's fallen to the ground, so my "faith" that it will fall the next time as well is grounded in demonstrable experience. The faith people have that God exists and created the world in seven days is not grounded in any sort of verifiable, objective reality at all and so cannot be compared to the sort of "faith" we have in the empirically verified tennets of gravity.
| quote: | Originally posted by Aquarian
As for science, the arguments behind it are purely rational. |
Purely empirical actually. ;)
Empiricism and rationalism, in philosophical language at least, are the exact opposite of each other. |
|
|
| Aquarian |
| New research and new discoveries have ruled out old theories and made place to new ones. You can look back at the science of 100 years ago and laugh at it precisely because it's advancements have been due to rational thinking and not emotive thinking. You just confirmed my point. |
|
|
| pkcRAISTLIN |
| quote: | Originally posted by Aquarian
How so? They are the only accurate measure of intelligence. Or is it simply because you disagree with them? |
no, becoz asking someone to provide an opinion on a political situation would almost always require some form of previous knowledge to make an adequate assertion. grabbing someone from the middle of the jungle and they are unable to tell you the best course for the US in iraq doesnt prove they are less capable than someone who studied political theory at university. you said as much yourself.
| quote: | Originally posted by Aquarian
Pattern interpretation is very vague and too dependant on situation. |
any IQ test is subject to that.
| quote: | Originally posted by Aquarian
Faith (at least in the context of religion), is completely illogical. |
i totally agree. but being illogical doesnt equate with a lack of intelligence imo. there is more to the make-up of the human condition than just a certain level of intelligence. i have thoughts/feelings all the time that are thoroughly illogical. doesnt mean im stupid. emotion is just as important in our decision making and life choices as our intelligence is. |
|
|
|
|
