Why Are Religious People (Generally) Less Intelligent?

A piece in the Intellectualist looks at a topic that I have touched on previously over the years: the general negative correlation between intelligence and religiosity.  One prior post for instance looked at education levels of different denominations and showed highest education levels among Episcopalians and Evangelical Lutherans - the liberal denominations always attacked by fundamentalist Christofascists - and descending downward toward Pentecostals and other fundamentalist sects.  With the election of Donald Trump supposedly being a triumph for low education whites (at least according to the spin of some in the pundit class and Trump sycophants) and 81% of evangelical Christians having voted for Trump, it is worth considering whether what we just witnessed instead was a triumph of ignorance and the low IQ portion of society setting the nation on a course for disaster.  I don't deny that I hold religion in general in low regard because it opposes science, knowledge and logic and too often provides an excuse to avoid thinking and making one's own reason based decisions.  Given the negative correlation between intelligence and religiosity one has to ask why politicians give such deference to to the religious.  Are they merely playing to the least intelligent and most easily duped?  Here are article excerpts:

1) A meta-analysis of 63 studies showed a significant negative association between intelligence and religiosity.

2) The study indicates that it is uncommon to meet someone who is both highly intelligent and is also (sincerely) highly religious.

3) This study doesn’t mean that there are not some highly religious people among intelligent people (law of large numbers). This is a probabilistic model.

4) Yes, there are very famous scientists who were also devout Christians, however, if you notice, this combination tends to decrease when the time period shifts to the 19th century and becomes even less common in the 20th century. Atheism (or similar) was a serious crime against the State until fairly recently (It still is in many countries).  

5. Not being religious, doesn’t imply being an atheist.

Psychology Today:

The key question of the study is why are religious people generally less intelligent? And the authors of the study did not shy away from the answer, offering three compelling explanations:

(1) Intelligent people are generally more analytical and data-driven; formal religions are the antithesis: they are empirically fluffy and their claims are often in direct contradiction with scientific evidence, unless they are interpreted metaphorically – but maybe intelligent people are not that keen on metaphor. Another way of putting it is that people with a high IQ are more likely to have faith in science, which isn’t religion’s best friends (yes, yes, I do know about Einstein’s quotes).

(2) Intelligent people are less likely to conform, and, in most societies, religiosity is closer to the norm than atheism is. Although this interpretation is based on extrapolation, it still makes sense: first, smarter people tend to be less gullible; second, in most societies religious people outnumber atheists and agnostics – though global levels of religiosity have been declining, and there is substantial cultural variability in religiosity levels.

(3) Intelligence and religiosity are “functionally equivalent”, which means that they fulfill the same psychological role. Although this intriguing argument contradicts points 1 and 2, it deserves serious consideration. Humans will always crave meaning.

Religion – like science and logical reasoning – provides them with a comprehensive framework or system to make meaningful interpretations of the world.

At times, religion and science are in conflict; but they can also act in concert, complementing each other to answer non-falsifiable and falsifiable questions, respectively. The authors conclude that some people satisfy their desire to find meaning via religion, whereas others do so via logical, analytical, or scientific reasoning – and IQ predicts whether you are in the former or latter group.

It is noteworthy that these three explanations assume that IQ influences religiosity rather than vice-versa, which seems plausible: IQ levels remain very stable after childhood, whereas religiosity levels keep fluctuating – childhood IQ predicts adult IQ, but childhood religiosity is a very poor predictor of adult religiosity.

 I am sure some will find all of this insulting or "elitist," but the next time you are forced to someone expounding on their religiosity, know that you are likely listening to either a dullard or someone - i.e., a "scamvangelist" - preying on the less intelligent.  Either way, it is not a positive phenomenon. 

Religion’s Smart-People Problem

This blog has noted frequently that religion's best friend and most fertile ground is an ignorant, uneducated populous.  Hence why conservative Christianity's main growth area is the most backward regions of Africa.  The converse is that well-educated people are more likely to steer clear of religion all together.  A piece in Salon looks at religion's problem with smart people (or at least those not willing to use religion to enrich themselves financially or politically).  Here are excerpts:

Should you believe in a God? Not according to most academic philosophers. A comprehensive survey revealed that only about 14 percent of English speaking professional philosophers are theists.  As for what little religious belief remains among their colleagues, most professional philosophers regard it as a strange aberration among otherwise intelligent people. Among scientists the situation is much the same. Surveys of the members of the National Academy of Sciences, composed of the most prestigious scientists in the world, show that religious belief among them is practically nonexistent, about 7 percent.

Now nothing definitely follows about the truth of a belief from what the majority of philosophers or scientists think. But such facts might cause believers discomfort. There has been a dramatic change in the last few centuries in the proportion of believers among the highly educated in the Western world. In the European Middle Ages belief in a God was ubiquitous, while today it is rare among the intelligentsia. This change occurred primarily because of the rise of modern science and a consensus among philosophers that arguments for the existence of gods, souls, afterlife and the like were unconvincing. Still, despite the view of professional philosophers and world-class scientists, religious beliefs have a universal appeal. What explains this?

What mechanisms caused the mind to evolve toward religious beliefs and practices?

Today there are two basic explanations offered. One says that religion evolved by natural selection—religion is an adaptation that provides an evolutionary advantage. For example religion may have evolved to enhance social cohesion and cooperation—it may have helped groups survive. The other explanation claims that religious beliefs and practices arose as byproducts of other adaptive traits. For example, intelligence is an adaptation that aids survival. Yet it also forms causal narratives for natural occurrences and postulates the existence of other minds.

In addition to the biological basis for religious belief, there are environmental explanations. It is self-evident from the fact that religions are predominant in certain geographical areas but not others, that birthplace strongly influences religious belief. This suggests that people’s religious beliefs are, in large part, accidents of birth. Besides cultural influences there is the family; the best predictor of people’s religious beliefs in individuals is the religiosity of their parents. There are also social factors effecting religious belief. For example, a significant body of scientific evidence suggests that popular religion results from social dysfunction. Religion may be a coping mechanism for the stress caused by the lack of a good social safety net—hence the vast disparity between religious belief in Western Europe and the United States.

There is also a strong correlation between religious belief and various measures of social dysfunction including homicides, the proportion of people incarcerated, infant mortality, sexually transmitted diseases, teenage births, abortions, corruption, income inequality and more. While no causal relationship has been established, a United Nations list of the 20 best countries to live in shows the least religious nations generally at the top.

The simplest answer is that people believe what they want to, what they find comforting, not what the evidence supports: In general, people don’t want to know; they want to believe. This best summarizes why people tend to believe.

Why, then, do some highly educated people believe religious claims? First, smart persons are good at defending ideas that they originally believed for non-smart reasons. They want to believe something, say for emotional reasons, and they then become adept at defending those beliefs. No rational person would say there is more evidence for creation science than biological evolution, but the former satisfies some psychological need for many that the latter does not.  

Second, the proclamations of educated believers are not always to be taken at face value. Many don’t believe religious claims but think them useful. They fear that in their absence others will lose a basis for hope, morality or meaning.

Our sophisticated believers may be manipulating, using religion as a mechanism of social control, as Gibbon noted long ago: “The various modes of worship which prevailed in the Roman world were all considered by the people as equally true; by the philosophers as equally false; and by the magistrate as equally useful.” Consider the so-called religiosity of many contemporary politicians, whose actions belie the claim that they really believe the precepts of the religions to which they supposedly ascribe.

Although there are many educated religious believers, including some philosophers and scientists, religious belief declines with educational attainment, particularly with scientific education. Studies also show that religious belief declines among those with higher IQs. Hawking, Dennett and Dawkins are not outliers, and neither is Bill Gates or Warren Buffett.

If we combine reasonable explanations of the origin of religious beliefs and the small amount of belief among the intelligentsia with the problematic nature of beliefs in gods, souls, afterlives or supernatural phenomena generally, we can conclude that (supernatural) religious beliefs are probably false. And we should remember that the burden of proof is not on the disbeliever to demonstrate there are no gods, but on believers to demonstrate that there are.  . . . . If the believer can’t provide evidence for a god’s existence, then I have no reason to believe in gods.

Why is all this important? Because human beings need their childhood to end; they need to face life with all its bleakness and beauty, its lust and  its love, its war and its peace. They need to make the world better. No one else will.

New Study: Religious People Are Less Intelligent than Atheists

As the title to this post suggests, this topic was just too good to pass up and the referenced study confirms my own personal belief: fundamentalist Christians are less intelligent than both atheists and more intelligent individuals.  I would go further and posit that for the deeply religious who are more intelligent, they obviously have deed psychological issues that make them predisposed to cling to ignorance and closed mindedness (Ken Cuccinelli is a case in point as he battles his closeted self-loathing).  Here are highlights from Yahoo News: 

Religious people are less intelligent than non-believers, according to a new review of 63 scientific studies stretching back over decades.

A team led by Miron Zuckerman of the University of Rochester found “a reliable negative relation between intelligence and religiosity” in 53 out of 63 studies. Even in extreme old age, intelligent people are less likely to believe, the researchers found - and the reasons why people with high IQs shun religion may not be as simple as previously thought.

Previous studies have tended to assume that intelligent people simply “know better”, the researchers  write - but the reasons may be more complex.

For instance, intelligent people are more likely to be married, and more likely to be successful in life - and this may mean they “need” religion less.
The studies used in Zuckerman's paper included a life-long analysis of the beliefs of a group of 1,500 gifted children - those with IQs over 135 - in a study which began in 1921 and continues today.

Even at 75 to 91 years of age, the children from Lewis Terman’s study scored lower for religiosity than the general population - contrary to the widely held belief that people turn to God as they age. The researchers noted that data was lacking about religious attitudes in old age and say, “Additional research is needed to resolve this issue.”

As early as 1958, Michael Argyle concluded, “Although intelligent children grasp religious concepts earlier, they are also the first to doubt the truth of religion, and intelligent students are much less likely to accept orthodox beliefs, and rather less likely to have pro-religious attitudes.”

The paper, published in the academic journal Personality and Social Psychology Review, said “Most extant explanations (of a negative relation) share one central theme—the premise that religious beliefs are irrational, not anchored in science, not testable and, therefore, unappealing to intelligent people who “know better.”  

“People possessing the functions that religion provides are likely to adopt atheism, people lacking these very functions (e.g., the poor, the helpless) are likely to adopt theism,” the researchers wrote. 

I am not anti-religion per se, but I do believe that it is important to understand that for millennium, religion has been used as a means to control and exert power over the less intelligent.  Russia is a classic example.  For centuries the Russian Orthodox Church used religion and religious dogma that depicted the Tsar as second only to God as a means to keep the serfs and peasantry under control.  The high Church clergy and the aristocracy lived in luxury while the peasantry lived largely in abject poverty.  Now, under Putin, we see the Church once again being used to control the masses and focus attacks on those the leadership has deemed to be unworthy.  In the process, of course, the Church hierarchy will bolster its own power and wealth.   Christ and the Gospel message are (and will remain)  nowhere in the picture.