| This thread has been locked, it will not receive new replies. |
|
Locked on 04/27/2012 5:23:31 AM PDT by Sidebar Moderator, reason:
dupe: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2876998/posts |
Posted on 04/26/2012 9:43:54 PM PDT by Steelfish
Thinking Can Undermine Religious Faith, Study Finds Those who think more analytically are less inclined to be religious believers than are those who tend to follow a gut instinct, researchers conclude.
Those who think more analytically are less inclined to be religious believers than are those who tend to follow a gut instinct, researchers conclude. By Amina Khan, Los Angeles Times April 26, 2012
Scientists have revealed one of the reasons why some folks are less religious than others: They think more analytically, rather than going with their gut. And thinking analytically can cause religious belief to wane — for skeptics and true believers alike.
The study, published in Friday's edition of the journal Science, indicates that belief may be a more malleable feature of the human psyche than those of strong faith may think.
The cognitive origins of belief — and disbelief — traditionally haven't been explored with academic rigor, said lead author Will Gervais, a social psychologist at the University of British Columbia in Vancouver, Canada.
"There's been a long-standing intellectual tradition of treating science as one thing and religion as separate, and never the twain shall meet," he said. But in recent years, he added, there has been a push "to understand religion and why our species has the capacity for religion."
According to one theory of human thinking, the brain processes information using two systems. The first relies on mental shortcuts by using intuitive responses — a gut instinct, if you will — to quickly arrive at a conclusion. The other employs deliberative analysis, which uses reason to arrive at a conclusion.
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
Pure propaganda. The greatest scientific minds have been among the most religious.
What exactly do they think theology is? A series of “gut feelings” that just happened to be codified and studied ad infinitum for the past several thousand years?
Only if you're muslim, mormon or a tree hugging liberal.
I am sure this “study” had an outcome before it had a methodology.
Thinking undermines Atheism.
More secularist twaddle.
Thinking can undermine faith if people forget that in His Own Word God tells us that now we see through a glass darkly. We aren’t meant to know the meaning of every mystery now, we’re told this. When people get hung up on thinking they have to “prove” their faith either to others or themselves, they are forgetting this important thing. It wouldn’t be called “faith” if it was supposed to be proveable on a scientific standard at all times. Though science is interestingly enough proving to uphold many events of the Bible.
Faith can’t be proven. Science is already leading us down many ethical conundrums through discoveries that have both positive and negative possibilities, morally speaking. (Though I really believe an earlier time of more common sense and less PC would have known better how to deal with these matters).
Such a crock... and very poorly written.
Thinking only increases my faith. The more one knows of true science, and the monumental struggle with microbes and their collective intelect, the more one realizes that biology, and existence is so much deeper than the self.
To God the Glory....
The authors need to ask Aquinas and Benedict XVI about serious thinking.
The devil will test your faith. It’s up to you in the end, though.
This lady apparently comes from a Muslim background. Thinking will clearly undermine the faith of a Muslim.
Anyone who has read Issac Newton, Tomas Aquinas, Augustine or John Calvin will have to admit that these guys were probably among the deepest thinkers in world history. Their faith was bolstered by thinking.
Christianity is a thinking man’s religion.
These guys, Lee Strobel and Josh McDowell, both go a long way toward that end. Sometime check out their works. I recommend The Case for a Creator and Evidence that Demands a Verdict.
Well...Duh!
In fact, my own analytical mind pulled my brain out my own "L.A." some time ago.
Back to re-reading the Good News. After that, some star gazing... and I don't mean Hollywood.
Because everyone knows that secular people are all so very clever. Isn’t that so, Mr Gore?
I don’t say Biblical events, principles, and prophecy (especially that which has already occurred, he) can’t be proved, only that faith can’t necessarily and needn’t be proven. It can’t be proven that faith in Jesus’ sacrifice to save us from sin is sufficient, but having first, faith that He is the Son of God, and second, faith that His Blood IS sufficient, I believe is sufficient to my salvation. The hows and wherefores and whys of that I see through a glass darkly, along with other mysteries such as the Second Coming and the Rapture, Hell, etc, but God says I’ll see later. That’s good enough for me.
I AM glad that science has been able to shore up many of the events and stories of Biblical history.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.