Can evidence be interpreted multiple ways? Can evidence be completely conclusive?

Question

In my last question I got some interesting answers, and led me to another thought. One person provided proof that atheists were actually more intelligent than the national average. Seems open and shut, no? Time to burn my Bible and distance myself from the imbeciles!

There's a few ways to interpret those findings, though.

It may be that:

a) Atheists are just smarter and the rest of us should sit back in awe.

b) People who are more intelligent may develop better coping strategies and be more self sufficient than people who have less resources to rely on, thus less intelligent people might feel that they need God more.

c) More intelligent people more frequently end up continuing on to post secondary institutions that are usually very anti-Christian, pro-naturalism.

d) Something else...

The findings in the studies are correlations, they only show that A increases as B increases, NOT that A increases BECAUSE B increases. It might be that stupidity causes religion, or that religion causes stupidity or may be neither, but either way a correlation can't prove it.

Previous question: http://ca.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20081105001750AAjrY3i&r=w

Answer 1

The problem with these "studies" that "prove" a negative correlation between intelligence and religiosity is that they're not actually comprehensive enough to prove anything. It's propaganda. Some atheists are stupid, some are smart; some theists are stupid, some are smart.



Intelligence is hereditary. Religion is not.

Answer 2

The first rule which is taught when one is ‘educated’ in this is that commonality does not prove causality. Coefficients are more useful in that regard.



There are other factors which the studies do not take into account and that is the means in which intelligence is measured. I average a 167 on the IQ tests I have taken, but this is not a measure o my intelligence by only my ability to take tests (to pull out the correct answer out of my brain.) While this is helpful in an academic sense (coupled with my obsession with always learning), I learned it is rather useless without the ability to apply knowledge to real life, that is wisdom, which we have not tests for.



The second problem is that they are nonselective. That is they are simply statistical data which is trying to be used to make a point, instead of being a real study using a correct method. That is, if one wishes to seek to learn a correlation between religion and intelligence, then comparing religion against religion or nonreligon is not the proper means. That is, a more proper study would start with intelligence first rather then religion first. That is, if one is trying to determine if higher intelligence means less religious, then the average person has little value in such a study.



There is much more to it then that, but basically I am agreeing with you. The more complex the issue the less likely the facts themselves are going to be proof for a conclusion.

Answer 3

When a person who is used to reviewing all the facts is confronted with a person who goes on faith...they tend to think you are stupid, because you haven't paid attention to the facts that are there. They forget that you think in a totally different way - They don't believe in God, because there is no evidence. You believe God exists DESPITE lack of evidence. (by evidence I mean empirical data) Those are two totally different thought processes.



Can evidence be interpreted multiple ways? Do you believe the Bible is evidence for your religion? So do all the other denominations of Christianity. They just interpreted it different ways.



Can evidence be completely conclusive? Absolutely not. The only way it could be conclusive is based solely on the knowledge that is presently at hand. You learn something new, something that overturns your 'conclusive evidence'.



As to Atheists being more intelligent....don't listen to those kinds of things. They might be, yes. However a number of things could of happened....more Atheists than Christians took the test, for example. I don't trust statistics like that.

Answer 4

Many of the questions you have are answered in a Book written by Lewis Sperry Chafer. It is called Major Bible Themes and No the Holy Bible is the Best source on interpretation of its self.



Often the Bible will have related passages written in the center of a page or at the end to make it easy to look at similar verses related to the same subject. Read the Whole section where the verse is found verse to get at the meaning of that scripture. Taken out of Context it can be twisted but in context you will find that the Scriptures have amazing continuity .

Answer 5

Environmental factors often determine educational success. A person in a small, poor village in India may have a high IQ, but with his resources, he is likely to become little more than the rest of his family (probably a farmer). A person with an average IQ in America that goes to college has a greater chance of gaining enough knowledge to become something more (maybe a scientist). The person in India may be have a higher IQ, but the one in America was the one with a higher education.Religion (in this hypothetical case at least) is not even a factor, so I would call the argument moot.

Answer 6

Yes it can be interpreted in many ways. I'm agnostic and good at what ever I try. Intelligence is just a meter that we use to measure things. A Peruvian indian would not last long in the big city, just as most would not last long in their jungle. Who than is the smartest. All depends on what the playing field is.

Answer 7

Anything that causes C. is evil in origin, and B. is talking yourself out of it, and A. is a farce once you have read the articles of Atheism. Atheism has yet to address eternal versus temporal, their Big Bang is temporal, as is the state of our universe, as addressed in that log you are about to toss on the fire, our Universe is promised to be ReCreated in an eternal form with our transfiguration, which explains our lost and dying universe, and how The Author of your yule log is going to fix what science can not and never will. The Big Bang has preexisting matter, which cries for an Eternal Creator, since theories have yet to address the "Creation" of matter from nothing at all. It's natural to burn that which is no longer a part of your life, I burned every issue of Playboy back to 1970, just weeks before my Baptism 3 years ago, to not allow another to sin on my behalf, in my little barbecue, I guess Satan is still a little upset about that, and wants to return the favor through you, so have a good "Bonfire of the Vanities" and seal your fate, I did mine.

Answer 8

"One person provided proof that atheists were actually more intelligent than the national average"



I am an atheist and I would question this "proof". There is a positive correlation between atheism and education - which is not the same as intelligence.

Answer 9

Yes, to varying degrees everyone interprets data according to their core beliefs.



You do have some really interesting points about

'intelligence'. Jesus praised God stating that God hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes



http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=49&chapter=10&verse=21&version=9&context=verse



Of course, one needs to compare scripture with scripture and read the context. But it is, nevertheless a truth. There is something within the heart of God that delights to choose the despised and rejected of this world and then turn them into something great for His kingdom.



A short story:



In a West Country village there was a man called the ‘Village Fool’ . He ws called a fool because whenever the locals mockingly offered him a choice between a £20 or a £1, the fool would hastily grab the £1. .So they laughed, mocked and called him a Fool.



As this man fame spread, many people came to visit the village just to try it and see for themselves, the fool who refused £20.. And on and on it went.



Now...

Who was the Fool?



This question was a burning subject of debate in Ancient Greece.

“Who were the fools and who were the wise”.

One group called the Epicureans believed it was wise to fulfil ever pleasure, passion and appetite that ‘grab them’. They lived their life’s to do whatever their heart felt good to do.

‘Eat, drink for tomorrow we die.’

The Stoics on the other hand said



“The Epicureans were Fools, if a man lives that way, instead of being free as they suppose, they will actually become trapped, enslaved and eventually ruled by these very same lascivious practices that they suppose will free them”.

A stoic taught that passions and appetite should be rigidly subdued. To be indifferent to pleasure or sorrow.

To go to the height of a mountain top and maintain that stoical attitude and to be unmoved and impassionate by the love of a women.

So they would argue, who was wise and who was foolish, and their favourite place of debate was ‘Mars hill’ in Athens.

One day while these great intellectuals and Scholars were debating and listening to one another’s ideas, a short, bald and probably bandy legged Jew (not much too look at) told them the truth about God.

The majority on hearing just began to laugh and ridicule.

The apostle Pauls next port of call from Athens was Corinth, where later He wrote to Corinthians saying-



http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Corinthians%201:%2017-31%20;&version=50;



God requires faith and a humble heart not just knowledge.



Why?



If you could reach God by purely intellectual means, only the cleaver people would find God and then they would rather likely have an monopoly of power on all other ‘lesser’ mortals..Isn’t our Father wise, even a child can believe. How wise is our Father.

How could sin be dealt with, without repentance and a humble knowing that we have done nothing to deserve this free gift of Grace? In fact, to find God purely on an intellectual basis would certainly increase the pride of the individual who found Him.

The bible says that ‘God resists the proud but gives grace to the Humble’

I know who I believe and I know through experience, He is Faithful.

I don’t blindly believe in a distant God. God has proved himself again and again.

In Hebrews 11 &12

In these chapters we have the testimony of Gods faithfulness in the lives of men and woman who have trusted Him.We have an even greater cloud of witnesses than we find in these scriptures, because we have another 2000 years worth of testimonies to Gods faithfulness.

I’ve people all around me who can bare testimony to the faithfulness of God. God is Faithful, He is faithful and true.

In fact, He is The Truth.

Answer 10

One ought to undergo in techniques that that's no longer Zealotry, this could nicely be a scam, a thank you to make money, era. the key's money, look at who's asserting this, how are they paid, via donations, government help, no kidding? How greater advantageous to make sure you gets a commission than to make the subject you're being paid to come to a decision, gets larger, badder, and greater elusive. with the aid of fact the subject is going away, determine you're making greater noise approximately how undesirable that's, no person will care a pair of little distortion, mendacity, aggravated B.S., considering that's a worth reason in spite of each thing. look on the companies being rewarding in this, what's going to happen to GM whilst they are able to no longer replace all of those ozone depleting freon fridges and air conditioners with new fashions making use of "ozone friendly" R-134a , which via the way, is made via Dupont chemical. What with reference to the persons like ALGORESKI who're getting paid great dollar for their B.S., and that's now all going away, undesirable al goreski, he has no reason, and NO earnings!!

Answer 11

The answer to both questions is yes. It depends on the question asked, the evidence provided, the source of the evidence, and the experience of the one providing the evidence.

Answer 12

Un-education is fertile ground for Religion.



Education is a Weed Whacker.



Higher intelligence usually means better education and thus a better Weed Whacker.

Answer 13

stupidity causes religion, religion causes stupidity or may be neither, but either way a correlation can't prove it.

You have answered your own question....(?!?)

Answer 14

yes, correlation does not mean causation. but it does lead to further inquiry.

Answer 15

atheists are mostly intelligent, you never know when they take U turn