Religion Breeds Irrationality

[volgadon]

http://www.seti.org/page.aspx?pid=1593 A scientist who considered a religious text a deep influence on his carreer.

[USU78]

I thought Talmud study was only for Ultraorthodox babymurderers living in the West Bank settlements.

Why would a perfectly good scientist waste his time with such nonsense?

[ERayR]

http://www.seti.org/page.aspx?pid=1593 A scientist who considered a religious text a deep influence on his carreer.

Foxtrot reads by the light of his own perceived brilliance.

[kolipoki09]

Foxtrot reads by the light of his own perceived brilliance.

Or perhaps, worships at the shrine of his own ignorance (of Mormonism and science that is).

[Rivers]

I thought Talmud study was only for Ultraorthodox babymurderers living in the West Bank settlements.

Why would a perfectly good scientist waste his time with such nonsense?

Why did all the general authorities of the church, who are mostly very intelligent and successful men, decide to devote their lives to a religion?

[Bill Hamblin]

Why did all the general authorities of the church, who are mostly very intelligent and successful men, decide to devote their lives to a religion?

Alas, they had not met Foxtrot. If they had, they could have devoted their lives to staring into the cosmic void and ridiculing those with whom they disagree. Not that's a life worth living!

[44Foxtrot]

<br><a href="http://www.seti.org/page.aspx?pid=1593" class="bbc_url" title="External link" rel="nofollow external">http://www.seti.org/page.aspx?pid=1593</a> A scientist who considered a religious text a deep influence on his carreer.<br>

So just to make sure we all understand, I brought up the fact that 93% of the members of the National Academy of Sciences do not believe in God. Based on this and a number of similar surveys, I pointed out that among the top scientists in the US, the vast majority are do not burden themselves by slavish adherence to unfounded belief.

In an ingenious counterargument you point to one individual, who at best is among of the 7% of the top scientists in the country who do believe in God, as evidence that I must have been wrong in my assertions.

Brilliant - and sadly typical.

[volgadon]

So just to make sure we all understand, I brought up the fact that 93% of the members of the National Academy of Sciences do not believe in God. Based on this and a number of similar surveys, I pointed out that among the top scientists in the US, the vast majority are do not burden themselves by slavish adherence to unfounded belief.

In an ingenious counterargument you point to one individual, who at best is among of the 7% of the top scientists in the country who do believe in God, as evidence that I must have been wrong in my assertions.

Brilliant - and sadly typical.

Actually, I was challenging your notion that religion shackles reason and intellect. I provided a specific, contrary example. Religion can shackle the mind, true, but there is nothing inherent about it.

[Daniel Peterson]

http://www.seti.org/page.aspx?pid=1593 A scientist who considered a religious text a deep influence on his carreer.

Ugh. Apparently a theist. Not the kind of "scientist" that 44F would hire at his firm.

[TAO]

Foxtrot, there was a study back a while ago that showed that the most educated Mormons are the religious ones. So I think your previous study doesn't really apply to the LDS church. After all, there are a good amount of scientists from it, no?

[Walden]

http://www.seti.org/page.aspx?pid=1593 A scientist who considered a religious text a deep influence on his carreer.

There are exceptions to every rule

[44Foxtrot]

Ugh. Apparently a theist. Not the kind of "scientist" that 44F would hire at his firm.

Hello Dr. Peterson,

Last time you responded to something I wrote, you informed me that you had me on "ignore". You then made the assertion that my statements related to Church history were dubious and failed to respond when I pointed out that each one could be confirmed by Church scripture and/or approved Church records and publications.

Am I to understand that you only place me on "ignore" when you do not wish to respond to my direct questions to you?

[44Foxtrot]

Actually, I was challenging your notion that religion shackles reason and intellect. I provided a specific, contrary example. Religion can shackle the mind, true, but there is nothing inherent about it.

I agree to some extent. It depends on the religion and how it is practiced.

Jews, for example, are represented in the ranks of Nobel Prize winners in far greater numbers than one would expect based on the Jewish population in the world. To my knowledge, however, none of these Nobel Prize winners are (or were) Orthodox Jews. Mormons claim as many adherents in the world as do the Jews, yet among the Mormons there are no Nobel Prize winners.

As I said, the effect of religion on the scientist depends on the religion and how it is practiced.

[44Foxtrot]

Foxtrot, there was a study back a while ago that showed that the most educated Mormons are the religious ones. So I think your previous study doesn't really apply to the LDS church. After all, there are a good amount of scientists from it, no?

There may be a lot of American Mormons who work in the sciences. (In my experience, this is certainly not the case outside the US.) And the Church does encourage education among its members (or at least it used to when I was in school).

However, in recent years the Church has seen fit to align itself more closely with the anti-science conservative factions in this country. Most of the Mormon scientists I know personally, including a number of very good ones, among them my present business partner, my former boss at a national laboratory, have left the Church, some with no small degree of acrimony.

The only Mormon scientists I still know personally who remain in the Church are my two sons and a former Stake President.

[kolipoki09]

There may be a lot of American Mormons who work in the sciences. (In my experience, this is certainly not the case outside the US.) And the Church does encourage education among its members (or at least it used to when I was in school).

However, in recent years the Church has seen fit to align itself more closely with the anti-science conservative factions in this country. Most of the Mormon scientists I know personally, including a number of very good ones, among them my present business partner, my former boss at a national laboratory, have left the Church, some with no small degree of acrimony.

The only Mormon scientists I still know personally who remain in the Church are my two sons and a former Stake President.

Incidentally, I am aware of several LDS researchers at a local national laboratory, and several other faithful Latter-day Saints who have remained in the Church with no small degree of amicability. The Church still encourages its members to receive higher education, and requires all graduates of Church-owned universities to take courses on the scientific method, Big Bang Theory, Atomic Theory, Geology, and Evolution. Students must then specify which of those areas to study further as part of their foundational (GE) courses. At BYU-Idaho, those receiving their Bachelor's degrees typically leave having the same amount of science credits as they have religion credits, regardless of their majors.

You noted:

However, in recent years the Church has seen fit to align itself more closely with the anti-science conservative factions in this country.

! Would you care to name any of these anti-science factions, with which the Church has allegedly aligned itself?

[WalkerW]

! Would you care to name any of these anti-science factions, with which the Church has allegedly aligned itself?

I love Tyson!

My in-laws recently let me take Origins: Fourteen Billion Years of Cosmic Evolution home, but I haven't really been able to give it much attention due to school and other reading material. I plan to this summer.

[WalkerW]

For a more recent example of "conservatives" or "Tea Partiers" being labeled anti-science, see Alex B. Berezow, "Tea Party is Unfairly Labeled 'Anti-Science'," Real Clear Science (Oct. 20, 2010).

[kolipoki09]

I really am curious about the Church's alleged affiliations with these anti-science groups. I wonder of 44Foxtrot has ever had the chance to review BYU's Evolution Packet that was approved by the First Presidency, members of the Relief Society General Presidency, members of the Quorum of the Twelve, and other General Authorities.

I wonder why the academic community would even bother to take people like John Butler, Don L. Lind, Dula Parkinson, and Ron Hellings seriously. If in fact the Church was actively participating in said groups, wouldn't sites like MST warrant disciplinary action?

Of course, DCP was released as a Bishop recently, which can only be explained by his involvement in pro-science, Internet Mormon activities.

[volgadon]

There are exceptions to every rule

That raised a chuckle. Touche.

[mfbukowski]

The entire question of a conflict between religion and science misses the point entirely.

Science only regards as "real" those things of which replicable observations may be made.

On this logic, things which have not yet been observed, like for example, undiscovered stars, planets, species etc. are not "real".

How reasonable is that?

Faith is the "evidence of things not seen".

To me, the only reasonable position is calling "real" things we can see, as well as some we have not seen yet, but felt in our hearts.

Every scientist who tries to discover something new is acting on faith.

[LeSellers]

in recent years the Church has seen fit to align itself more closely with the anti-science conservative factions in this country.

CFR.

Lehi

[Tarski]

Why would a perfectly good scientist waste his time with such nonsense?

Emotional intelligence? Too much exposure to superstition while a child? Who knows?

Maybe he can't grow up and come to terms with mortality or the "horror" of authentic action and responsibility undirected by a supernatural supervisor.

Intelligence or training in science doesn't fix everything and sometimes doesn't even manage to give the kind of perspective that we expect. Far from it.

There are apparently scientists that find they need to believe in Scientology or Hinduism or in the extraterrestrial origin of crop circles (or in Mormonism).

But, so much the worse for that scientist (or, better, so much the worse for that human being).

[44Foxtrot]

Why did all the general authorities of the church, who are mostly very intelligent and successful men, decide to devote their lives to a religion?

I ask myself the same question. There are different kinds of intelligence. There are different kinds of success. Whatever good qualities they may exhibit, these individuals clearly lack curiosity, critical thinking skills, courage or integrity.

[44Foxtrot]

in recent years the Church has seen fit to align itself more closely with the anti-science conservative factions in this country.

CFR.

You must be kidding.

Prop8, Tea Party, Glen Beck.

RIng a bell?

[volgadon]

I ask myself the same question. There are different kinds of intelligence. There are different kinds of success. Whatever good qualities they may exhibit, these individuals clearly lack curiosity, critical thinking skills, courage or integrity.

CLEARLY?