Cognitive Style and Acceptance of Evolution

[Bradly Capel]

Not better educated. A high school drop out who learns to serve the Lord and goes to Heaven had a better education than a professor with 5 degrees who teaches that the Bible is a book of myths and subsequently goes to Hell. He learned the things which matter.

Just how would anyone know who got to heaven and who hasn't? do you claim to know or are you just guessing?
are you saying that education is detrimental to getting into heaven? can only thick people get into heaven? or are you saying that it's easier to get into heaven if you are not very bright?

 

[Bradly Capel]

We know the one of whom you speak. We call him Con-sol.

From what I have read about Consol he/she was never religious, or does he/she do as a lot of people do here, simply tell lies.

If you are a creationist living in a creationist family how many of your family actually believe the stories in Genesis are true?
they might say they do but how would you know that they really did believe? if you didn't believe would you keep quiet about it in case you upset your family? could they be doing the same?

 

[Loudmouth]

It was a lie, of course. That same poster makes that same claim repeatedly under different account names. We know him as Consol, but he's used dozens of names. It's always the same lie; "I was a Christian and a creationist but when I saw none of it made sense I became an atheist."

If you missed the thread, he's about due to repeat it again under a new account.

Libby Anne isn't making it up. She was homeschooled, and that included creationism. When she went to college and came face to face with the facts, she became an atheist.

http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/2012/04/29/why-i-am-an-atheist-libby-anne/

 

[crjmurray]

From what I have read about Consol he/she was never religious, or does he/she do as a lot of people do here, simply tell lies.

I wouldn't put it past consol to pretend to be a former creationist.

 

[AV1611VET]

Hence why, as a christian, I view creationism as a threat to the faith.

Jesus didn't.

Mark 10:6 But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female.

 

[HitchSlap]

Jesus didn't.

Mark 10:6 But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female.

Hearsay, your honor.

 

[bhsmte]

Hearsay, your honor.

Sustained.

 

[ecco]

There IS a correlation between the number of times a person is exposed to something and their acceptance of what is being taught. Since evolution is being crammed down our throats in academia on a daily basis, the longer one remains is school the more likely they are to agree with what is being taught; especially if they don't have a strong spiritual background.

There IS a correlation between the number of times a person is exposed to something and their acceptance of what is being taught. When Religion has been crammed down the throats of children on a daily basis from before they even learned to speak, the longer they remain in that environment the more likely they are to agree with what is being taught.

 

[juvenissun]

"Despite overwhelming scientific consensus, popular opinions regarding evolution are starkly divided. In the USA, for example, nearly one in three adults espouse a literal and recent divine creation account of human origins. Plausibly, resistance to scientific conclusions regarding the origins of species—like much resistance to other scientific conclusions (Bloom & Weisberg, 2007)—gains support from reliably developing intuitions. Intuitions about essentialism, teleology, agency, and order may combine to make creationism potentially more cognitively attractive than evolutionary concepts. However, dual process approaches to cognition recognize that people can often analytically override their intuitions. Two large studies (total N = 1324) found consistent evidence that a tendency to engage analytic thinking predicted endorsement of evolution, even controlling for relevant demographic, attitudinal, and religious variables. Meanwhile, exposure to religion predicted reduced endorsement of evolution. Cognitive style is one factor among many affecting opinions on the origin of species."

If an ape stood side by side with a human, very few will admit that human evolved from ape.
if an ape skeleton is laid side by side with a human skeleton, most observers will agree that human could be evolved from ape.
The former does not need a study.
The later need a study to display.

This explains everything about your statistics.

But, it is hard to say which one is right.
If one thinks one step further than the morphology, more people would doubt the evolution model. That is why a significant proportion of highly educated people agree with creation. Even it is a smaller population in the statistics, it demands a serious explanation. Otherwise, your model would be rendered into a meaningless one.

 

[juvenissun]

Yes, better educated.

No, that's obviously absurd. Education is not measured by one's disposition in the afterlife. Education is measured by... one's education.

No no no.
Education NEEDS to be built on a right foundation.
The Bible has a very good analogy: a mansion built on sand.
A very intelligent person well educated by Communism is no good at all.
If the afterlife is true, then the world education would come the second. The first would be the education about the afterlife.

 

[ecco]

That is why a significant proportion of highly educated people agree with creation.

That depends on your definition of "significant proportion". Perhaps you could show something that supports your assertion.

Even it is a smaller population in the statistics, it demands a serious explanation.

Now it sounds like you are hedging your bets somewhat.


In any event, IMO, the biggest factor in accepting creationism is childhood indoctrination into all things religious. The second biggest factor is the extent to which this indoctrination has resulted in a continued belief that all parts of the bible are literal rather than literary. There are many Christians who believe in evolution (see biologos).

 

[Zosimus]

While you were all arguing, I contacted the author and got the full study.

 

[ecco]

While you were all arguing, I contacted the author and got the full study.

Thanks for the link. I read through it and especially the abstract and coda. I don't think the study significantly disagrees with my earlier statement:

...the biggest factor in accepting creationism is childhood indoctrination into all things religious. The second biggest factor is the extent to which this indoctrination has resulted in a continued belief that all parts of the bible are literal rather than literary.​

 

[Cimorene]

This is all so weird to me still.

 

[PsychoSarah]

If an ape stood side by side with a human, very few will admit that human evolved from ape.
if an ape skeleton is laid side by side with a human skeleton, most observers will agree that human could be evolved from ape.
The former does not need a study.
The later need a study to display.

This explains everything about your statistics.

But, it is hard to say which one is right.
If one thinks one step further than the morphology, more people would doubt the evolution model. That is why a significant proportion of highly educated people agree with creation. Even it is a smaller population in the statistics, it demands a serious explanation. Otherwise, your model would be rendered into a meaningless one.

Actually, going beyond morphology into, say, genetics, provides the strongest support for evolution. That is, stronger than the fossil record and homologous traits combined.