FOLLOW BOREME
TAGS
<< Back to listing
How come some people are very smart but also extremely religious?

How come some people are very smart but also extremely religious?

A great question for an equally baffled Richard Dawkins. An intelligent reply if not conclusive.

Share this post

You can comment as a guest, but registering gives you added benefits

Add your comment
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Realist (2453 days ago)
Faith is the acceptance of ignorance. We can override our own instincts, habits and even conscious motives to do things that would completely baffle rational thinking.
ReplyVote up (101)down (95)
Original comment
Faith is the acceptance of ignorance. We can override our own instincts, habits and even conscious motives to do things that would completely baffle rational thinking.
Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: loki (2453 days ago)
yep psychology. organised attachment styles are denial, anger, bargaining as brain floor plans. so what do you expect? and whats belief if not pretending and conveniently forgetting you're pretending?
ReplyVote up (102)down (99)
Original comment
yep psychology. organised attachment styles are denial, anger, bargaining as brain floor plans. so what do you expect? and whats belief if not pretending and conveniently forgetting you're pretending?
Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
glortman glortman (2452 days ago)
Sadly, Dawkins focuses on the extremist, and not the general case. Many very intelligent people (who may include scientists) also have faith. They do not necessarily believe the earth is 6,000 years old, but they do believe in a deity, the existence of whom can neither be proven nor disproven by science. Science is NOT the measure of all things, nor should it be, and "proof" of things only gets you so far.
ReplyVote up (101)down (100)
Original comment
Sadly, Dawkins focuses on the extremist, and not the general case. Many very intelligent people (who may include scientists) also have faith. They do not necessarily believe the earth is 6,000 years old, but they do believe in a deity, the existence of whom can neither be proven nor disproven by science. Science is NOT the measure of all things, nor should it be, and "proof" of things only gets you so far.
Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: (2452 days ago)
"Proof" and evidence gets you closer to truth and isn't that what we should all be striving for? Those "general case[s]" who say they believe in God and yet say they don't believe the world is only 6,000 years old are merely picking the bits of their own instruction manual that they like and ignoring the bits that make them uncomfortable....surely that's a cop out? That same book apparently gives them all the other rules they live by and preach that others should follow, so why ignore entire sections of this manual? This is precisely Dawkins' point. In any other situation, you'd have gone back to the drawing board until you came up with an answer where everything fits. Why should religion be any different?
ReplyVote up (109)down (121)
Original comment
"Proof" and evidence gets you closer to truth and isn't that what we should all be striving for? Those "general case[s]" who say they believe in God and yet say they don't believe the world is only 6,000 years old are merely picking the bits of their own instruction manual that they like and ignoring the bits that make them uncomfortable....surely that's a cop out? That same book apparently gives them all the other rules they live by and preach that others should follow, so why ignore entire sections of this manual? This is precisely Dawkins' point. In any other situation, you'd have gone back to the drawing board until you came up with an answer where everything fits. Why should religion be any different?
Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
glortman glortman (2452 days ago)
'Proof' does not make a sunset beautiful, and not all 'truth' is subject to the laws of scientific exploration. If you insist on making the bible into a science textbook, you do violence both to science and the bible, and are no better than the fundamentalists who do the same thing.
ReplyVote up (106)down (103)
Original comment
'Proof' does not make a sunset beautiful, and not all 'truth' is subject to the laws of scientific exploration. If you insist on making the bible into a science textbook, you do violence both to science and the bible, and are no better than the fundamentalists who do the same thing.
Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Antisamit (2451 days ago)
The fact that the sun ist 150 millions of kilometers away and yet so incredibly hot that you can feel the heat on your cheek makes a sunset even more beautiful . . . to me.
ReplyVote up (101)down (91)
Original comment
The fact that the sun ist 150 millions of kilometers away and yet so incredibly hot that you can feel the heat on your cheek makes a sunset even more beautiful . . . to me.
Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: (2451 days ago)
BRAVO Antisamit!!!! @glortman....You're right, proof doesn't make a sunset beautiful but SCIENCE DID! It's the scientific and physical properties of light bending through a colloid that made it happen, thereby creating that beauty. Everything on this planet and the universe beyond relates to science, whether you like it or not. But to me and Antisamit that makes it more beautiful, not less. And the fact that I can scientifically prove and understand why it all happens also makes it all the more wonderous. Why do people insist on thinking that science denies beauty! It just isn't true! The bible isn't a textbook. But if it wants to keep telling people how to live their lives then surely it ought to be true!
ReplyVote up (97)down (110)
Original comment
BRAVO Antisamit!!!! @glortman....You're right, proof doesn't make a sunset beautiful but SCIENCE DID! It's the scientific and physical properties of light bending through a colloid that made it happen, thereby creating that beauty. Everything on this planet and the universe beyond relates to science, whether you like it or not. But to me and Antisamit that makes it more beautiful, not less. And the fact that I can scientifically prove and understand why it all happens also makes it all the more wonderous. Why do people insist on thinking that science denies beauty! It just isn't true! The bible isn't a textbook. But if it wants to keep telling people how to live their lives then surely it ought to be true!
Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
glortman glortman (2451 days ago)
Guest and Antisamit, I will agree that my understanding of science adds to my sense of wonder and awe of the physical world. Yes, scientific principles are responsible for the interaction of that world with my senses, and ultimately my brain. Science did NOT make the sunset beautiful. Nor did physical laws. No, friends, in the words of Plato beauty is beheld with the eye of the mind.
ReplyVote up (115)down (61)
Original comment
Guest and Antisamit, I will agree that my understanding of science adds to my sense of wonder and awe of the physical world. Yes, scientific principles are responsible for the interaction of that world with my senses, and ultimately my brain. Science did NOT make the sunset beautiful. Nor did physical laws. No, friends, in the words of Plato beauty is beheld with the eye of the mind.
Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: (2451 days ago)
and both your eye and your mind and every reaction each has, can be stunningly quantified and explained by beautiful chemical reactions and equations, without which you would have no receptors to appreciate that beauty, which incidentally was all created by a wonderful and complex mix of scientific reactions and equations. It's still all about science any way you look at it ultimately.
ReplyVote up (65)down (101)
Original comment
and both your eye and your mind and every reaction each has, can be stunningly quantified and explained by beautiful chemical reactions and equations, without which you would have no receptors to appreciate that beauty, which incidentally was all created by a wonderful and complex mix of scientific reactions and equations. It's still all about science any way you look at it ultimately.
Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
glortman glortman (2451 days ago)
Guest, the beautiful chemical reactions and neural processes explain HOW the brain can perceive beauty (although our understanding of the neural basis of mind is still very rudimentary), but I would argue that WHY we find a thing beautiful is not explicable by science. Philosophy comes closer.
ReplyVote up (108)down (130)
Original comment
Guest, the beautiful chemical reactions and neural processes explain HOW the brain can perceive beauty (although our understanding of the neural basis of mind is still very rudimentary), but I would argue that WHY we find a thing beautiful is not explicable by science. Philosophy comes closer.
Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
glortman glortman (2451 days ago)
Guest, I would also point out that a moral text does not need to be scientifically accurate to be true. Stories and fables contain great truth, although some are devoid of factual accuracy. Only a very dense person would reject Aesop's story of the Mouse and the Lion simply because mice don't actually talk.
ReplyVote up (75)down (116)
Original comment
Guest, I would also point out that a moral text does not need to be scientifically accurate to be true. Stories and fables contain great truth, although some are devoid of factual accuracy. Only a very dense person would reject Aesop's story of the Mouse and the Lion simply because mice don't actually talk.
Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Antisamit (2451 days ago)
I am a neurobiologist. We work freaking hard every day (also on weekends) to find out more about the (mous)brain. Experiments are fine tuend, repeated over and over again. The data ist then peer-reviewed for publication (this is a pain in the ass). But thats how scientists (and I include everyone how works with the laws of scientific inquiry) find out whats "true". Saying "God did it" is NOT an ecually valid point. You must be kidding me.
ReplyVote up (106)down (103)
Original comment
I am a neurobiologist. We work freaking hard every day (also on weekends) to find out more about the (mous)brain. Experiments are fine tuend, repeated over and over again. The data ist then peer-reviewed for publication (this is a pain in the ass). But thats how scientists (and I include everyone how works with the laws of scientific inquiry) find out whats "true". Saying "God did it" is NOT an ecually valid point. You must be kidding me.
Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
glortman glortman (2447 days ago)
Latest comment: I too am a neuroscientist. I am well acquainted with the scientific method and peer review process. Nevertheless, I firmly believe that metaphor, mythos, abstraction and narrative teach profound truths about life, love, the human condition and the nature of the world. This is not a contradiction or folly, but in my view, a more complex understanding of a complex world. In the words of Hamlet, "There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy."
ReplyVote up (125)down (113)
Original comment
Latest comment: I too am a neuroscientist. I am well acquainted with the scientific method and peer review process. Nevertheless, I firmly believe that metaphor, mythos, abstraction and narrative teach profound truths about life, love, the human condition and the nature of the world. This is not a contradiction or folly, but in my view, a more complex understanding of a complex world. In the words of Hamlet, "There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy."
Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: (2451 days ago)
@ Antisamit. Maybe when in school getting your great education you should have paid more attention and you might now actually be able to spell. Or were you drunk when writing?
ReplyVote up (109)down (103)
Original comment
@ Antisamit. Maybe when in school getting your great education you should have paid more attention and you might now actually be able to spell. Or were you drunk when writing?
Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Antisamit (2450 days ago)
I'm from germany. Sorry if my english isn't perfect. Can you contribute something to the discussion or are you just a troll?
ReplyVote up (108)down (121)
Original comment
I'm from germany. Sorry if my english isn't perfect. Can you contribute something to the discussion or are you just a troll?
Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Antisamit (2452 days ago)
"not all 'truth' is subject to the laws of scientific exploration" name one . . .
ReplyVote up (100)down (103)
Original comment
"not all 'truth' is subject to the laws of scientific exploration" name one . . .
Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
glortman glortman (2452 days ago)
Antisamit, for beginners, I would direct you to the study of philosophy, where the idea of truth has its genesis. Start with Socrates and Plato, add some Hegel, Vico and Habermas, and round it out with Dewey and James. Truth? Yes. Science? No. If you still need ideas I can help you out.
ReplyVote up (104)down (97)
Original comment
Antisamit, for beginners, I would direct you to the study of philosophy, where the idea of truth has its genesis. Start with Socrates and Plato, add some Hegel, Vico and Habermas, and round it out with Dewey and James. Truth? Yes. Science? No. If you still need ideas I can help you out.
Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Antisamit (2452 days ago)
You know what the LAWS of scientific exploration are? Logic, falsifiability, reproducibility, etc. Your philosophers use those. Since you got this wrong i will give you another try.
ReplyVote up (88)down (104)
Original comment
You know what the LAWS of scientific exploration are? Logic, falsifiability, reproducibility, etc. Your philosophers use those. Since you got this wrong i will give you another try.
Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
glortman glortman (2451 days ago)
Antisamit, fair enough... you have me on a syntactical foul. Yes, the LAWS of scientific inquiry are also used by philosophers, artists, students of aesthetics, among others. Perhaps I would have been better to say that 'not all truth is subject to scientific exploration'.
ReplyVote up (112)down (98)
Original comment
Antisamit, fair enough... you have me on a syntactical foul. Yes, the LAWS of scientific inquiry are also used by philosophers, artists, students of aesthetics, among others. Perhaps I would have been better to say that 'not all truth is subject to scientific exploration'.
Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Antisamit (2451 days ago)
Wow. A resonable person on the internetz. I am baffled! :) Discussion goes on some posts below . . .
ReplyVote up (96)down (102)
Original comment
Wow. A resonable person on the internetz. I am baffled! :) Discussion goes on some posts below . . .
Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: (2451 days ago)
unfortunately he skipped the most interesting part of the question and jumped onto those believing in the bible literally right away.
ReplyVote up (101)down (117)
Original comment
unfortunately he skipped the most interesting part of the question and jumped onto those believing in the bible literally right away.
Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: a christian (2452 days ago)
what an ignorant man he is
ReplyVote up (83)down (108)
Original comment
what an ignorant man he is
Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: (2451 days ago)
ignorant of what exactly? Because surely you wouldn't be IGNORANT enough to call a man who is an Oxford University graduate, with Bachelors', Masters, and Doctorate degrees lacking in knowledge? Just because you don't agree, it doesn't make him ignorant.
ReplyVote up (101)down (98)
Original comment
ignorant of what exactly? Because surely you wouldn't be IGNORANT enough to call a man who is an Oxford University graduate, with Bachelors', Masters, and Doctorate degrees lacking in knowledge? Just because you don't agree, it doesn't make him ignorant.
Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: a christian (2451 days ago)
just because he is knowledgeable does not mean that he is not ignorant. he appears to be ignorant of the fact that not all Christians are creationists and then goes on to say that if you are religious you must be a lunatic.
ReplyVote up (116)down (108)
Original comment
just because he is knowledgeable does not mean that he is not ignorant. he appears to be ignorant of the fact that not all Christians are creationists and then goes on to say that if you are religious you must be a lunatic.
Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: smart american (2453 days ago)
Re this subject, it really hurts to see it. Meeting an intelligent and articulate person who confesses their faith almost is as painful as seeing a really nice cute girl dating an asshole. There isn't much you can do in either situation except hope that they use birth control efficiently.
ReplyVote up (87)down (110)
Original comment
Re this subject, it really hurts to see it. Meeting an intelligent and articulate person who confesses their faith almost is as painful as seeing a really nice cute girl dating an asshole. There isn't much you can do in either situation except hope that they use birth control efficiently.
Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: hitchins (2451 days ago)
"smart america" your name is a misnomer and your comment is neither smart or wittty. You are well suited to being a follower of dawkins
ReplyVote up (113)down (106)
Original comment
"smart america" your name is a misnomer and your comment is neither smart or wittty. You are well suited to being a follower of dawkins
Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: (2451 days ago)
I thought it was both smart and witty. Even if you don't agree with the comment it was quite good. The retort however lacked both intelligence and wit, and was more like the "ner ner ner ner ner" playground response of a 12 year old who knows he's been beaten
ReplyVote up (106)down (103)
Original comment
I thought it was both smart and witty. Even if you don't agree with the comment it was quite good. The retort however lacked both intelligence and wit, and was more like the "ner ner ner ner ner" playground response of a 12 year old who knows he's been beaten
Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: a christian (2451 days ago)
you probably are the poster "smart" american and are so dumb you think we wont cop on to it if you leave your name out.
ReplyVote up (114)down (106)
Original comment
you probably are the poster "smart" american and are so dumb you think we wont cop on to it if you leave your name out.
Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: this is SPARTA (2452 days ago)
I have never seen the statement in the bible that the earth is only 6000 years old. Does anyone know where it is? Likewise, the trinity dogma is not in the bible. It was not written as a scientific text book, that was not it's purpose. Ridicule is a powerful tool that gets people on side for fear of looking foolish. The Dawkins camp is as much of a religion as the theists, insisting that they and only they are the possessors of truth.
ReplyVote up (109)down (142)
Original comment
I have never seen the statement in the bible that the earth is only 6000 years old. Does anyone know where it is? Likewise, the trinity dogma is not in the bible. It was not written as a scientific text book, that was not it's purpose. Ridicule is a powerful tool that gets people on side for fear of looking foolish. The Dawkins camp is as much of a religion as the theists, insisting that they and only they are the possessors of truth.
Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
glortman glortman (2452 days ago)
@SPARTA the people who take the bible as being literally true, with no possibility of metaphor, count the generations of people from the creation until the present day. Considering the various ages of famous biblical figures, they calculate the moment of creation, assuming that man was created on the sixth day, and that the Hebrew word 'yom' is to be construed as a 24 hour event.
ReplyVote up (107)down (91)
Original comment
@SPARTA the people who take the bible as being literally true, with no possibility of metaphor, count the generations of people from the creation until the present day. Considering the various ages of famous biblical figures, they calculate the moment of creation, assuming that man was created on the sixth day, and that the Hebrew word 'yom' is to be construed as a 24 hour event.
Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: (2451 days ago)
Dawkins has NEVER said that he is the possessor of any ultimate truth, only that through science he and his fellows wish to aim to come closer to that universal truth. All he has said is that the Bible is NOT truth. The "purpose" of the bible was to control the masses in a time of chaos and lack of understanding about the world around us. It paved the way for legal systems and helped instill morals, granted, but surely since we have law and knowledge now we have no need for fairytales to instruct people how to live their lives? The bible is nothing more than a set of stories, not unlike Aesops fables, but somewhere along the line people started believing it to be the gospel truth (excuse the pun). It's time for the human race to grow up a bit and stop clinging to the fairytales of youth just because it makes you feel all warm and fuzzy inside
ReplyVote up (92)down (106)
Original comment
Dawkins has NEVER said that he is the possessor of any ultimate truth, only that through science he and his fellows wish to aim to come closer to that universal truth. All he has said is that the Bible is NOT truth. The "purpose" of the bible was to control the masses in a time of chaos and lack of understanding about the world around us. It paved the way for legal systems and helped instill morals, granted, but surely since we have law and knowledge now we have no need for fairytales to instruct people how to live their lives? The bible is nothing more than a set of stories, not unlike Aesops fables, but somewhere along the line people started believing it to be the gospel truth (excuse the pun). It's time for the human race to grow up a bit and stop clinging to the fairytales of youth just because it makes you feel all warm and fuzzy inside
Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
RELATED POSTS
Can you get smarter?
Can you get smarter?
Surveillance Nation
Surveillance Nation
TYT - Smart Trump will get intelligence only when he needs it
TYT - Smart Trump will get intelligence only when he needs it
How intelligent are humans?
How intelligent are humans?
Are crows really smarter than young children?
Are crows really smarter than young children?