Can this 3-Question Quiz Predict Whether You Believe in God?

[Eudaimonist]

This 3-Question Quiz Predicts Whether You Believe in God | Big Think | Praxis

Before you put your martyrdom tunic on, it isn't the point of the quiz that IQ determines religious belief. The explanation for the reasoning behind the quiz is at the end of the article.

So, do the creators of the quiz have a point here?


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[YESLORDIWILL]

 

[Eudaimonist]

Those questions took less than 10 seconds each to answer, I'm pretty sure believers aren't complete idiots.

That's not the point of the test. It isn't to measure IQ.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[YESLORDIWILL]

 

[Eudaimonist]

The article say:

If, however, your answers were what the authors label “analytical” (also known as “correct&#8221, you are probably in the quarter of Americans who do not profess religious belief.

So is that to say, if you got these "incredibly easy" questions right, you are probably not a believer, or am I misreading?

Those questions are not "incredibly easy". Many people get tripped up by them. Perhaps you are analytical enough not to be fooled, and congratulations for that!

The questions invite a quick intuitive response. Even skilled question-takers can be fooled and leap for the intuitive answer to the question. This is really a test of intuitiveness as opposed to analytical thought.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[Colter]

Its an interesting set of questions, I rushed through them without much analytical thought and got 1,3 wrong. I'm notoriously mentally lazy when "some assembly is required." I rush through the process without reading the instructions at times. But when I am interested in something I put deep thought into it. I'm typical ADHD.

I wondered if the questions were deliberately trick questions to achieve the desired result?

Either way I agree with the conclusion, an analytical approach to spirituality or faith is using an apple when you need a wrench.

From the vantage point of wisdom, I often wonder why analytical minds aren't more self critical of their own working hypothesis. They seem to miss the forest while looking at the trees under a scanning electron microscope.

 

[Sonfest Rocker]

This 3-Question Quiz Predicts Whether You Believe in God | Big Think | Praxis Before you put your martyrdom tunic on, it isn't the point of the quiz that IQ determines religious belief. The explanation for the reasoning behind the quiz is at the end of the article. So, do the creators of the quiz have a point here? eudaimonia, Mark

I got 2 out of 3 correct and I'm not a believer

 

[YESLORDIWILL]

 

[DogmaHunter]

The underlying idea here is that theists tend to act / decide more on intuition rather then based on a conclusion following a skeptical and analytical inquiry.

This has been confirmed already in several other tests and experiments.

I remember this one experiment (sorry, forgot to much about it to provide a link) where the subjects were presented a series of relatively simple questions of which they needed to try to answer as much as they could in a limited time frame.

On average, theists scored better on that test then atheists.
The reason was psychological: theists tend to ride on intuition, while atheists are more analytical and (as a result / side effect) more concerned to give a wrong answer to a question. This made them spend more time per question, lowering their overall score.

So it's not that one was smarter then the other. It's rather that atheists cared more about providing correct answers then theists.

I think the same concept is reflected in the test of the OP.
A theist is more easily pleased with a certain answer, where the atheist will re-read the question for extra clarity, double-check the answer, consider alternatives etc.

 

[dms1972]

People should use intuition when required and critical analysis when required.

I wonder how Leibnitz and Pascal would have scored.

 

[essentialsaltes]

I still have a memory seared in my brain of question #1 showing up in my 5th grade class as an extra credit question on a math test. My teacher even went so far as to announce that only one person got it 'wrong'.
I was so furious and indignant, I eventually got out of my chair and went to the blackboard and started to explain. It was about when a few other students started to say, "I think he has a point" that the teacher shut me down with threats of detention.

And that's why I have a Question Authority - Think for Yourself button.

"I wondered if the questions were deliberately trick questions to achieve the desired result? "

I'm not sure 'trick' is the right word, but yes they are deliberately designed to have an obvious(?) intuitive answer.

 

[dms1972]

I got the first one wrong - went for the obvious 10 cents - the second I skipped as it looked difficult and came back to it. The third I got right.

What if the ball was free but there was a 10 cents service charge?

 

[abysmul]

I got them right. Now what?

 

[YESLORDIWILL]

 

[com7fy8]

Being able to analyze does not teach us how to love.

 

[Eudaimonist]

Being able to analyze does not teach us how to love.

No one said that it did.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[abysmul]

and you probably do not profess religious belief.

http://www.oocities.org/heartland/plains/4484/lpgrid.gif

Oh my! Maybe I should renounce my faith! No! Wait, I'll retake the 3 question quiz and get them all wrong! Right!?

 

[Resha Caner]

So, do the creators of the quiz have a point here?

No. I got all 3 questions correct, but the article poisons the well, so to speak. I always approach such questionnaires with a suspicion that they are trick questions, so I slow down and take the time to be sure I've got it right.

I'm a very analytical person, and also a believer. In this forum I've found many unbelievers who jump to conclusions about me that are not true, so I think unbelievers are just as likely to reach for the intuitive answer as anyone else.

But there is also a time and place for intuition - when stopping to analyze can be fatal. As an engineer I've had jobs both in research and in production. In research one has time to stop and think. In production one is often pressed to make quick, intuitive decisions. I did better at the former rather than the latter.

To be honest, the impression I usually get is that all of these social experiments are very poorly designed. It's a topic one of my engineering colleagues brought up recently because her mother has a rare disease and the doctors want her to volunteer to be part of a medical study. My colleague looked at the study, and thought it so poorly designed, she brought it into work to get our opinions. As part of my training, I was required to take classes on the design of experiments. Do all the sciences require that?

 

[JohnLocke]

Without access to the survey data I cannot judge their conclusions (representativeness of the sample, sample size etc. etc.)

What I can say is that I solved the questions correctly using what they call an analytical approach and I believe in God.

I will state that I do not believe that facility with mathematics causes believe in God.

 

[keith99]

I think they are incredibly easy, but tricksey to use a favorite word of Gollum.

Put them here, alone with no time pressure and most will get them right. Well at least those who are not too casual about it.

Bury them in 10 questions the rest of which are not tricksey and get ready for people to miss them.

I also wonder if perhaps there is a correlation with specific education. I'm positive I saw 2 out of 3 of these questions before most of the posters here were born. Absolutely positive of the bat and ball one being EXACTLY that one. The Algae growth may be a different number of days. Probably saw the middle one decades ago also, just not sure.

Those questions are not "incredibly easy". Many people get tripped up by them. Perhaps you are analytical enough not to be fooled, and congratulations for that!

The questions invite a quick intuitive response. Even skilled question-takers can be fooled and leap for the intuitive answer to the question. This is really a test of intuitiveness as opposed to analytical thought.


eudaimonia,

Mark