The Link Between IQ, Religiosity and Academic Subjects

[Notedstrangeperson]

Unfortunately unless we find another source I can't actually read the study because it's hidden behind a paywall.

I've located one of these so-called "studies."

It's based on the idea that there is such a thing as "national IQ," and that people from "stupid countries" (i.e. Africans) are more likely to believe in God than people from "smart countries" (i.e. Europeans).

I'm astonished that such racist garbage gets published. I'm even more astonished that people take it seriously.

Studies which correlate IQ with any kind of group (religious, national, racial, gender etc.) are always controversial. The issue however is not to dismiss the results just because they're controversial, but to find out why some groups may have lower IQ scores than others, and what to do about it.

There may be perfectly legitimate reasons why national IQ scores from African countries are lower than European ones. For one, many African nations are much poorer than European ones - perhaps many of them can't afford to go to school, or don't even have a lot schools for them to go to. Africa is also home to many diseases and parasites which are known to negatively affect intelligence, especially in children. The effects can sometimes be permanent.

There are probably huge variations within these regions as well - the national IQ in Romania may not be as high as in Norway. Similarly the national IQ in Botswana may not be as low as in the Congo.

(BTW Radagast, I'm also pretty sure Subduction Zone was just having a joke. )

 

[Radagast]

I can't even find it in this site that measures Impact Factor:

Impact Factor List | 2012 Journal Impact Factor

Possibly because it's a psychology journal? Wikipedia has an article on it, FWIW.

 

[Notedstrangeperson]

I was hoping for links to the actual studies. The one I found (see earlier post) was such garbage that I'm really not motivated to chase up any more.

I posted lists from the two links in my OP mostly to save time and space. If there are as many as 63 studies, it would take a long time to actually find them, post them and read through them all.

The link to religjournal.com did have a list of names and years the studies were conducted, so they should be easier to look up.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Don't forget about the effects of nutrition on children when it comes to poor nations doing worse on IQ tests.

If you half starve your population as their brains are developing would it be any wonder if they grew up with brains that were not fully developed?

Though it is hard to measure the effects of nutrition on intelligence look at the effects of nutrition on height. Both Japan and South Korea used to be thought of countries of short people. But since WWII the average height of Japanese has shot up by several inches and that applies to South Koreans after the Korean war.

It is not racist to point out that a country has a population whose intelligence has suffered a negative impact from its environment. If you claimed that the people were inherently less intelligent that may be a racist statement.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Possibly because it's a psychology journal? Wikipedia has an article on it, FWIW.

Perhaps I was wrong. According to the Wiki article it is 12th out of 120 journals in the field. Not stunning but a possibly worthy source.

 

[Radagast]

Studies which correlate IQ with any kind of group (religious, national, racial, gender etc.) are always controversial. The issue however is not to dismiss the results just because they're controversial, but to find out why some groups may have lower IQ scores than others, and what to do about it.

IQ scores are basically a way of expressing intelligence in percentile terms (and hence can be helpful in comparing children to their peers). However, "intelligence tests" have a substantial cultural bias (compare this test and this one).

Consequently, calibrating raw test scores from nation A to the mean and standard deviation of nation B is in my view a totally invalid way of using an "intelligence test."

I must say, I'm finding this overt support for racism rather disturbing, and I think it's time to say adios.

 

[Subduction Zone]

IQ scores are basically a way of expressing intelligence in percentile terms (and hence can be helpful in comparing children to their peers). However, "intelligence tests" have a substantial cultural bias (compare this test and this one).

Consequently, calibrating raw test scores from nation A to the mean and standard deviation of nation B is in my view a totally invalid way of using an "intelligence test."

I must say, I'm finding this overt support for racism rather disturbing, and I think it's time to say adios.

What racism? Recognizing that certain factors can affect intelligence is not racism especially if that factor, famine for example, is not related to race.

If a country of white people went through a period of sever starvation as a generation was growing up I would not be surprised if they would be negatively affected intellectually too.


Hmm, interesting question. Are there any studies on the effect of diet of a country and intelligence?

 

[lesliedellow]

Knowing that Einstein was an agnostic at the worst is supported by quotes that are not taken out of context. Yes, you can misquote him and make it look like he believed in some sort of god. You would be hard pressed to give that god any significant power at all.

Did I say anything about Einstein? Nope, I don't believe I did.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Did I say anything about Einstein? Nope, I don't believe I did.

Fine, you didn't say Einstein. But as my link showed physicist were in a virtual tie with biologists in their degree of atheism. At the highest of all scientists. That would still be the opposite of what you claimed.

 

[Notedstrangeperson]

Just to keep on topic - the subject is about religiosity and intelligence, not race or nationality.

 

[bhsmte]

From the research that I have read, there is little question the higher the IQ, the lower chance of one being religious and that has been established.

With that said, I believe this is a complex psychological issue that is specific to each person and goes beyond IQ alone. Analytical thinkers tend to be less religious as well, separate from pure IQ. Granted there are very intelligent people who are religious, so there must be another factor that drives someone to be a believer and I believe it is the personal psychology of that person that creates a need to have the comfort that comes along with having a God in the picture. I am not saying this need is unhealthy, just that it isn't as prevalent in all people.

 

[lesliedellow]

there must be another factor that drives someone to be a believer and I believe it is the personal psychology of that person that creates a need to have the comfort that comes along with having a God in the picture. I am not saying this need is unhealthy, just that it isn't as prevalent in all people.

Francis Collins began his journey towards faith when he sat at the bedside of a patient who had only hours or days to live. She was telling him about her faith, and he was indulgently listening, even though he thought it was nonsense. After she had come to the end of her story, she said, "Tell me doctor, I have told you about my faith, but what do you believe?"

As he puts it, he felt the ice breaking under him, and he made a quick and embarrassed exit. Afterwards he wondered what it was about that simple question which had discomfited so much, and he realised that it was because he was a scientist. Scientists are supposed to be persuaded by the evidence, and he had never really investigated religion, beyond dismissing it as so much nonsense.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Francis Collins began his journey towards faith when he sat at the bedside of a patient who had only hours or days to live. She was telling him about her faith, and he was indulgently listening, even though he thought it was nonsense. After she had come to the end of her story, she said, "Tell me doctor, I have told you about my faith, but what do you believe?"

As he puts it, he felt the ice breaking under him, and he made a quick and embarrassed exit. Afterwards he wondered what it was about that simple question which had discomfited so much, and he realised that it was because he was a scientist. Scientists are supposed to be persuaded by the evidence, and he had never really investigated religion, beyond dismissing it as so much nonsense.

Our mortality makes us nervous. So what? Was there some point in this story?

 

[lesliedellow]

Our mortality makes us nervous. So what? Was there some point in this story?

By the sound of it, religion makes you as embarrassed as it once did Francis Collins.

 

[PsychoSarah]

By the sound of it, religion makes you as embarrassed as much as it once did Francis Collins.

I don't know why religion would make someone embarrassed. If it is your religion, then it makes no sense for it to embarrass you because whatever reservations you have about it aren't enough to prevent you from believing. If it isn't your religion, it makes even less sense to be embarrassed, because you aren't a part of the thing that would be potentially embarrassing to begin with.

 

[lesliedellow]

I don't know why religion would make someone embarrassed. If it is your religion, then it makes no sense for it to embarrass you because whatever reservations you have about it aren't enough to prevent you from believing. If it isn't your religion, it makes even less sense to be embarrassed, because you aren't a part of the thing that would be potentially embarrassing to begin with.

It might not embarrass you, but I know that it embarrasses some people, because it once embarrassed me.

 

[PsychoSarah]

It might not embarrass you, but I know that it embarrasses some people, because it once embarrassed me.

Ok... Don't really get that. I don't really get embarrassed easily anyways,I guess it is one of the backhanded perks of my social disorder.

 

[Notedstrangeperson]

Our mortality makes us nervous. So what? Was there some point in this story?

I seems more like he was embarrassed by the fact he had never bothered to investigate religion from an objective point of view, as a scientist would with any other subject. If he was once a doctor it seems unlikely that talking to a dying patient would have affected him that much.

I believe it is the personal psychology of that person that creates a need to have the comfort that comes along with having a God in the picture.

That's the same conclusion mentioned in arstechnica.com - having higher intelligence proves people with a sense of comfort that others find in religion.

I think there is far more to it than that: it seems that most non-religious people seem to think people believe in God primarily for emotional reasons. While that is probably true, it often ignores the idea that people's religious beliefs might actually stem from a great deal of self-reflection and thought.

Additionally, people who have high intelligence are also known for being more prone to depression, alcoholism and drug addiction. Having a higher-than-average IQ doesn't seem to provide a lot of emotional stability.

 

[PsychoSarah]

Having to face reality isn't going to make one optimistic.

 

[Notedstrangeperson]

Having to face reality isn't going to make one optimistic.

Cynicisms has never helped anyone.