Here I’d like to talk about two articles that I consider
particularly interesting because they contradict what I consider to be a general opinion at least in some media and in academia.
First, I’d like to look at this study that focuses on a study by Schwadel that claims
that unlike popular belief, increased education actually increases a belief in
a higher power. This does not mean that the more education that a person has, the higher chance they are to be Christian or Muslim, or any other religion, but rather to have general belief. In fact, the study said that the more educated someone is, the less likely
they are to claim that their religion is the only way, but the more likely
they are to believe in an afterlife. The article puts several more of these interesting findings very well in a series of bullet points which I will quote here:
“-Education
had a strong and positive effect on religious participation. With each
additional year of education, the odds of attending religious services
increased 15 percent.
-Increases
in education were associated with reading the Bible. With each additional year
of education, the odds of reading the Bible at least occasionally increased by
9 percent.
-Education
was related to respondents' switching of religious affiliations. The odds of
switching to a mainline Protestant denomination increased by 13 percent for
each year of education.
The more
educated respondents were, the more likely they were to question the role of
religion in secular society. Yet, they were against curbing the voices of
religious leaders on societal issues and supported those leaders' rights to
influence people's votes. “
It seems that becoming more religious as you become more educated also influences your ideas of religion and politics. Fortunately, more education still opposes outright interference of religion with politics although suggestion is supported.
Another interesting article was focused on the reasons why
people accept or don’t accept evolution.
Commonly, it is thought that all a person needs to do is look at the
facts logically to accept evolution, and if that person does not accept
evolution, he or she is being irrational.
This study introduces a new idea.
Ha, Haury, and Nehm conducted a study after finding that the research on
religion affecting acceptance of evolution was contradictory. In some studies religion interfered with acceptance of evolution, but sometimes it actually did not. In a quest to discover a consistent reason, they explored emotional responses to evolution. Their study suggests that
the “gut feeling” that we experience is actually very important to if
someone will accept evolution. If a person "just feels like" evolution is wrong, they may completely refute evolution even in light of the most air-tight evidence.
They
propose presenting students with data and also presenting information about
“gut feelings” and how we process information so that students can make a
better, informed decision. Personally, this sounds like a much more appealing way of convincing students of evolution. Some religious groups are famous for trying to rhetorically beat acceptance into people, and that is usually to no avail. The same might be said of evolution: if you just tell someone that they must accept evolution, there may not be acceptance. Appealing to the emotions at the root of the denial of evolution might be more effective at convincing people of the facts. I'm in favor of the widespread acceptance of evolution, and this might be the start of something truly revolutionary in the classroom.
Food for thought.
"Increases in education were associated with reading the Bible" Have they statistic the attitude of these people that how many of them become christian and how many of them are still atheists? I am always wondering that if people are apt to accept to religion when they find that the more they don't know after higher education. --Yang Zhang
ReplyDeleteInteresting about most religions not opposing the ideas of evolution in theory. I'm going to be cynical and say that it's a purposeful misconception. Those in power saw evolution as a threat to the stability of their religion and their power (mainly the Roman Catholic Church), so denounced it to keep the unwavering support of their subjects. Churches/established religions have done this quite often, though, condemning potentially threatening ideals, even if these other ideals are not in direct opposition to the original religions. Back in the medieval/renaissance/pre-modern times, this was called heresy and the Catholic Church did its best to squash it. Thus, I believe that religion and evolution can coexist and potentially overlap if human egos don't get in the way.
ReplyDelete