Most intelligent people are Atheist.

[IeraseU]

Scientists are not the most intelligent group of people historically, philosophers are. See the following:

"A normal intelligence quotient (IQ) ranges from 85 to 115 (According to the Stanford-Binet scale). Only approximately 1% of the people in the world have an IQ of 135 or over. In 1926, psychologist Dr. Catherine Morris Cox - who had been assisted by Dr. Lewis M. Terman, Dr. Florence L. Goodenaugh, and Dr. Kate Gordon - published a study "of the most eminent men and women" who had lived between 1450 and 1850 to estimate what their IQs might have been. The resultant IQs were based largely on the degree sof brightness and intelligence each subject showed before attaining the age of 17. Taken from a revised and completed version of this study, table II shows the projected IQs of some of the best scorers.

For comparison I have included table I which shows the IQs' relation to educational level.

Cox also found that different fields have quite widely varying average IQs for their acknowledged leading geniuses. Displayed below are there calculated Deviation IQs (the number in brackets is the number in the sample considered):

Philosophers (22) average IQ 160; Scientists (39) 159; Fiction writers (53) 152; Statesmen (43) 150; Musicians (11) 149; Artists (13) 153; Soldiers (27) 136.

As a curiosity it can be mentioned that the famous english philosopher and mathematician Bertrand Russell sometimes interpreted Nietzsche's overman as a person with an IQ of at least 180 (Actually Russell considered himself to have this IQ!). I read in some paper that Einstein , regarded as the prototype for a genius, may "only" have had just above 160 . "

Link

 

[VERTIGGO]

Originally posted by: Babbles

Originally posted by: VERTIGGO
Hey I just did a study, and I found out that 60% of PCs are powered by Intel, so obviously Intel users are more intelligent than AMD users.

You read that backwards. The 60% of people using Intel are dummies, and the remaining percentage that uses AMD are the intelligent ones!

Exactly. Just because 90% of scientists adhere to massively popular humanist theories has nothing to do with the legitimacy of an anti-God theory, in other words, the "intelligence" behind a theory of unintelligent design. "90%" of Germans in WWII adhered to Nazi philosophy, but I don't believe Naziism is intelligent because most Germans accepted it. (Germans are basically all scientists right?)

 

[Sunbird]

I am stupid and I am an Atheist!

So that means even stupid people can be Atheists, and it is more rewarding if you are lazy to boot, can sleep late on Sundays and such.

 

[tooltime]

i'm not sold on this

 

[lrad50]

I would think this to be pretty obvious, as scientists do usually see the Darwin Theory as logical compared to Gods and whatnot.

 

[IEC]

Originally posted by: HotChic
Excellent thoughtful response from BlueFlamme about the validity of the study. To that I would like to add that one of the very first things you learn in doing statistical analysis is that correlation does not equal causality.

For example, here are some other possible causal explanations (all of which could equally be in error to the OP's causal conclusion)
- Scientists tend to study problems longer before reaching a conclusion, thus many scientists do not profess belief in God until later in life
- Scientists fear confessing a belief in God because it could undermine public acceptance of their work
- People that are religious find members of (currently athiestic) scientific community to be more personally hostile to their beliefs than they are comfortable with, therefore they do not become scientists
- Scientists in the study country are more likely to be atheists but scientists in other countries are as likely or more likely to believe in God
- What if it were truly related to income? Lower income people are statistically more likely to be religious. People in higher income homes are less likely to be religious, and more likely to receive an education that would lead them to become a scientist.

I'm not claiming any of my explanations are the cause, just pointing out that the OP doesn't have a very good grasp on the basics of statistical analysis and his claims are, from a "scientific" viewpoint, very weak.

<--- Religious person who apparently is more scientific than the athiest OP

Good to see someone else on the forums has had Stats 101 and realizes correlation doesn't equal causation

 

[doanster]

To everyone here:
Read "Angels and Demons" by Dan Brown... does religion and science serve the same purpose?

 

[Albatross]

a statistic found that intelligent people are intelligent,can be found on bull$hit.org

 

[chambersc]

Originally posted by: doanster
To everyone here:
Read "Angels and Demons" by Dan Brown... does religion and science serve the same purpose?

i choose to never read anything by dan brown.

 

[Acanthus]

back on the topic at hand: Einstein, Hawking, Hemmingway, Poe, Stalin, Twain, Orwell, and Ben Franklin were all agnostic/atheist.

 

[Babbles]

Originally posted by: Acanthus
back on the topic at hand: Einstein, Hawking, Hemmingway, Poe, Stalin, Twain, Orwell, and Ben Franklin were all agnostic/atheist.

I fail to see how that is on-topic, and additionally it is sort of pointless. Furthermore agnostic and atheist is clearly different and as such is disingenuous of you to attempt to imply that they are identical.

 

[JDrake]

Originally posted by: Acanthus
back on the topic at hand: Einstein, Hawking, Hemmingway, Poe, Stalin, Twain, Orwell, and Ben Franklin were all agnostic/atheist.

LOL Ben Franklin :laugh:

 

[Acanthus]

Originally posted by: Babbles

Originally posted by: Acanthus
back on the topic at hand: Einstein, Hawking, Hemmingway, Poe, Stalin, Twain, Orwell, and Ben Franklin were all agnostic/atheist.

I fail to see how that is on-topic, and additionally it is sort of pointless. Furthermore agnostic and atheist is clearly different and as such is disingenuous of you to attempt to imply that they are identical.

They discard all current widespread religions as false, thats why i lumped them together.

 

[Acanthus]

Originally posted by: joedrake

Originally posted by: Acanthus
back on the topic at hand: Einstein, Hawking, Hemmingway, Poe, Stalin, Twain, Orwell, and Ben Franklin were all agnostic/atheist.

LOL Ben Franklin :laugh:

Benjamin Franklins Religious Beliefs

Religious beliefs
Franklin's parents had intended for him to have a career in the church. As a teenager, however, he became disillusioned with organized religion, after ". . . Some books against Deism fell into my hands. . . It happened that they wrought an effect on my quite contrary to what was intended by them; for the arguments of the Deists, which were quoted to be refuted, appeared to me much stronger than the refutations; in short, I soon became a through Deist."[14] He attacked Christian principles of free will and morality in a 1725 pamphlet, A Dissertation on Liberty and Necessity, Pleasure and Pain.

Later in life Franklin would become more accommodating of the utilitarian function of Christianity. He paid his annual subscription to Philadelphia's Presbytarian minister in recognition of the church's service to the community. In a letter to Thomas Paine, he wrote of his belief in the moral utility of faith: "If men are so wicked with religion, what would they be if without it."[15]

However, like most deists, Franklin did not believe in an interventionist God, thinking it "great vanity in me to suppose that the Supremely Perfect does in the least regard such an inconsiderable nothing as man".[16] He consistently attacked religious dogma and promoted tolerance, arguing that morality was dependant upon a person's actions rather than their religious beliefs: "I think opinions should be judged by their influences and effects; and if a man holds none that tend to make him less virtuous or more vicious, it may be concluded that he holds none that are dangerous, which I hope is the case with me."[17]

In contrast, it has been noted that Benjamin Franklin sometimes attended meetings with the Hellfire Club in England, which is widely believed to have been a Satanic group.

Franklin saw the catholic/christian religion as a means to an end, a way to control man in a way that would be beneficial to the human race as a whole. He himself strongly questioned the church and its teachings.

Franklin was agnostic.

Edit, bold tag misplaced - moved.

 

[JDrake]

Its just funny that you use Ben Franklin as an example.
He was a horrible person.

 

[Acanthus]

Originally posted by: joedrake
Its just funny that you use Ben Franklin as an example.
He was a horrible person.

That has no bearing on his intelligence.

Youd put franklin below Stalin? :Q

 

[Babbles]

Originally posted by: Acanthus

Originally posted by: Babbles

Originally posted by: Acanthus
back on the topic at hand: Einstein, Hawking, Hemmingway, Poe, Stalin, Twain, Orwell, and Ben Franklin were all agnostic/atheist.

I fail to see how that is on-topic, and additionally it is sort of pointless. Furthermore agnostic and atheist is clearly different and as such is disingenuous of you to attempt to imply that they are identical.

They discard all current widespread religions as false, thats why i lumped them together.

No, they all do/did not. Some, sure. Others, perhaps to a degree.

For one example, Einstein was apparently quite fond of Buddhism:

"Buddhism has the characteristics of what would be expected in a cosmic religion for the future: it transcends a personal God, avoids dogmas and theology; it covers both the natural & spiritual, and it is based on a religious sense aspiring from the experience of all things, natural and spiritual, as a meaningful unity" Albert Einstein

 

[Acanthus]

Originally posted by: Babbles

Originally posted by: Acanthus

Originally posted by: Babbles

Originally posted by: Acanthus
back on the topic at hand: Einstein, Hawking, Hemmingway, Poe, Stalin, Twain, Orwell, and Ben Franklin were all agnostic/atheist.

I fail to see how that is on-topic, and additionally it is sort of pointless. Furthermore agnostic and atheist is clearly different and as such is disingenuous of you to attempt to imply that they are identical.

They discard all current widespread religions as false, thats why i lumped them together.

No, they all do/did not. Some, sure. Others, perhaps to a degree.

For one example, Einstein was apparently quite fond of Buddhism:

"Buddhism has the characteristics of what would be expected in a cosmic religion for the future: it transcends a personal God, avoids dogmas and theology; it covers both the natural & spiritual, and it is based on a religious sense aspiring from the experience of all things, natural and spiritual, as a meaningful unity" Albert Einstein

While einstein did entertain the idea of buddhism, i dont think he was a buddhist.

Many of the people revered as the most intelligent people to walk this rock really did not follow any of the mainstream religions, is what i was trying to get at.

I do however disagree with the OPs link, just to make that clear.

 

[HardcoreRobot]

to believe in a creator is one thing, but to believe in one of man's fairy tale religions is ignorant

 

[sumyungai]

After reading this thread, I made a few observations:

Einstein is an extremely smart person. He is so smart that he worded his religious views so that nobody knows his religious stance and therefore, made no enemies. Genius!

Also, Anandtech is usually liberally biased from all the Bush bashing I see on here. Liberals by definition are open-minded, free-loving, and athiest because they believe in abortion. Ironically , MOST liberals and religious people tend to attack vehemently anyone who does not have the same views as they.

Now I'm a bit confused from all the people attacking the OP when I was expecting the majority of liberals of this forum to defend and support him.

 

[Babbles]

Originally posted by: Acanthus
While einstein did entertain the idea of buddhism, i dont think he was a buddhist.

He wasn't.

But. . .

Originally posted by: Acanthus
They discard all current widespread religions as false, thats why i lumped them together.

I'll just as well assume you made some mistake in attempting to create some sort of generalization that simply doesn't exist.

Many of the people revered as the most intelligent people to walk this rock really did not follow any of the mainstream religions, is what i was trying to get at.

Then just say what you meant to begin with instead of stating things that are incorrect. Simply because somebody may not be the most strict follow of religion does not imply that they do not hold some sort of religious belief, much less describe religions as false.

Originally posted by: HardcoreRobot
to believe in a creator is one thing, but to believe in one of man's fairy tale religions is ignorant

In life I have began to come to the opinion that when people start to judge others as ignorant, it is only because those that judge are first-hand experts in ignorance.

 

[Acanthus]

Originally posted by: Babbles

Originally posted by: Acanthus
While einstein did entertain the idea of buddhism, i dont think he was a buddhist.

He wasn't.

But. . .

Originally posted by: Acanthus
They discard all current widespread religions as false, thats why i lumped them together.

I'll just as well assume you made some mistake in attempting to create some sort of generalization that simply doesn't exist.

Many of the people revered as the most intelligent people to walk this rock really did not follow any of the mainstream religions, is what i was trying to get at.

Then just say what you meant to begin with instead of stating things that are incorrect. Simply because somebody may not be the most strict follow of religion does not imply that they do not hold some sort of religious belief, much less describe religions as false.

Originally posted by: HardcoreRobot
to believe in a creator is one thing, but to believe in one of man's fairy tale religions is ignorant

In life I have began to come to the opinion that when people start to judge others as ignorant, it is only because those that judge are first-hand experts in ignorance.

So if einstein entertained the idea of buddhism as being spiritually and rationally constructive, that means he thinks everyone should be buddhist? Even though he wasnt buddhist himself?

It sounds to me more like a situation of "Albert if you HAD TO pick a religion which one would you pick?" than "I like this ones ideas, this ones for me".

And furthermore, i would argue that many religions, including christianity can have constructive purposes. By no means does that make them correct or true.

 

[Yoshi911]

Originally posted by: stonecold3169
I'll agree with a previous poster here.

As a math/CS major, I can point out the main flaw of your arguement, and that is that you assumed the conclusion by incorrectly stating that intelligent people = scientists.

Memebers of the field of sciences are obviously going to inherently have some major issues with religion, especially taken literally, since modern scientific theory disproves much of the theory of christianity at least (I'm not educated enough to speak on other religions).

However, would you say for example that business men are not intelligent? It's in a different field but surely they are or at least can be. To limit your scope like this is to say that animals are vegitarians because 99% of rabbits are.

Really, how can you disprove that?? From what I've seen the OTHER belief (evolution) has been disproved on every account. And if you want to touch the issue of "FAITH, it's all on faith anyway. By faith aitheists believe their "no-God" just as much as "religious people" believe in God. I beg someone to argue this point.

 

[DaShen]

Originally posted by: Acanthus
back on the topic at hand: Einstein, Hawking, Hemmingway, Poe, Stalin, Twain, Orwell, and Ben Franklin were all agnostic/atheist.

Einstein was not an atheist. :roll: Get your facts straight.

Was Ben Franklin atheist / I thought he had a religious background? I thought the same with Orwell. Not sure though.

 

[DaShen]

Originally posted by: chambersc

Originally posted by: doanster
To everyone here:
Read "Angels and Demons" by Dan Brown... does religion and science serve the same purpose?

i choose to never read anything by dan brown.

Read "Da Vinci Code" and "Angels and Demons" both are fantasy with a little truth though which he makes out to be fact. The Da Vinvi Code was much more believable though.