Azure Jane Lunatic (azurelunatic) wrote,
Azure Jane Lunatic
azurelunatic

"Monty" python; religion.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/04/20/e_snake/ -- surprise inclusion with television that was wasted on the recipients!
(Sources: http://news.scotsman.com/edinburgh.cfm?id=583922006, http://members.scotsman.com/clortho.cfm?going_to=http%3A//www.scotsman.com/%3Fid%3D582582006; bugmenot has valid logins.)

Scott Adams (dilbert_blog) asks about the reverse correlation between membership in religion and education. I have a few thoughts.

Religion is often used as a means of explaining the world around one as well as being an indicator of actual faith.

As the complexity of the other explanations (science) goes up, the intelligence needed to grasp the explanations goes up. If religion, not science, is what's taught from the cradle, and religion has the answers about how the universe was created and so forth, the default is always going to be religion. Religion is the Unified whatever Theory that's being taught to the masses at the moment. Why? G*d says so, that's why.

For someone with weak faith, the more one learns about science, the less credence one gives to religion. If you can see that natural and non-deity forces shape the universe, and your faith was weak to start with, what need is there to believe in a deity?

For someone with strong faith, learning science is more of a process of discovery of the physical rules by which G*d governs the universe. Each new scientific discovery is a thing of joy and insight into the mind of G*d. Either that, or it's a constant trial of faith, putting the facts as stated in [insert your favorite holy document here] into direct contention with the evidence of science and the senses. People for whom it's a trial of faith are likely to either drop the science or drop the faith, eventually.

Religious texts and suchlike are so bogged down with bad translation, obsolete politics, and the poor scientific understanding of past generations that eventually you're going to have to make a choice between the compatibilities of the literal text, your faith in the intangible experience of the Divine, and the physical universe in front of you.

People choosing the literal text and their faith tend to shun science. These people scare me.

People choosing the physical universe and the literal text make all sorts of contorted justifications for how the text does support scientific findings, or scientific findings support the text. These people also scare me.

I have faith, and I support science, at the price of not having a written text to hang my faith on. My religion of closest fit is Universalist/Pagan. I suspect I scare many people.

If it were possible to measure these three variables (strength of faith, IQ, and subscription to religion), I think one might see that the people of weak faith get sort of weeded out of the religion as the IQ goes up.

Hanging on IRC now, and have opted to use up the last of the chocolate milk in a very predictable fashion. It's early enough so I'll have time to sleep, and I'll be all rested up for work tomorrow after recovering today. Yay sleep. Yay Irish chocolate milk.
Subscribe
Comments for this post were disabled by the author