Why some are religious or not?

Vidqun

Time article: Several years before Pope Francis became pope of the Catholic Church in 2013, psychologists began to debunk the idea that being more educated meant a person was less likely to be religious. Instead, a new social psychology theory—one that had little to do with education level—arose. According to dual process theory, people are either deliberative or intuitive when they make decisions. People who are more deliberative tend to carefully think things through and find a rational reason for their choices, while people who are more intuitive do what appears to feel right.

I've always wondered about this. The above seems to make sense. Perhaps my intuitiveness talking? Any thoughts on the subject?

Phizzy

I don't think it is quite as simple as putting people in one box or the other, either intuitive or deliberative.

It seems to me that many people who have a deliberative approach to nearly everything in life, tend to choose the intuitive when it comes to what they perceive as "spiritual" or "religious" things.

Hence we come across some very well educated people, able to use Critical Thinking skills in their professional life, who are still believers in some very dodgy nonsense.

The difficulty is to get such people to apply the skills they have to their "beliefs".

The totally intuitive person, the " I cannot believe there is not a Supreme Being" or " something else..." or " more to the universe and life than we know" (this last is pretty accurate of course, but indicative of an attitude). is an even harder nut to crack, you have to get them to at least start using critical thinking skills in the first place.

Vidqun

Phizzy, interesting observation, I think you've got a point. The article says that education isn't the most important factor, rather the way we think - critical thinking skills. As the researcher said: "what type of critical thinking you're prone to do..." And you're right, it depends on the measure of intuitiveness and the measure of deliberativeness. All of us have both, but not in equal measure.

Ucantnome

Hence we come across some very well educated people, able to use Critical Thinking skills in their professional life, who are still believers in some very dodgy nonsense.
The difficulty is to get such people to apply the skills they have to their "beliefs".

Some people have university degrees in theology and apply the skills to their religious beliefs and still remain believers I would imagine that they have critical thinking skills and are intelligent people.

Disillusioned JW

Vidqun I think the point about deliberative versus intuitive is a very good point. I am very deliberative. But when I don't have relevant facts about a particular topic and can't find any, then I use an intuitive approach on the topic, or I stop thinking about the topic.

Vidqun

Bill Gates feature in a video to the CIA where he explained that a religious person or zealot thinks differently. This you can pick up from a brain scan. He insists that he and his organization can fix this by means of a targeted vaccine. That puts a different and quite ominous complexion on the matter. Must say, we are living in interesting times.

https://www.brighteon.com/c802dd9d-6670-4e12-9d92-7c35b27b7c01

Simon

The problem with any theory of why people are religious is it can't differentiate between the true-believers and those who see it as an opportunity for networking, selling and whatever.

The split between those groups may be down to education which could explain why there isn't a difference in religiousity (a word?) that can be seen - they are there for different reasons.

But the way obviously intelligent people and often sceptical people who question other things, can still be believers never ceases to astonish me.

Disillusioned JW

Regarding the video allegedly of Bill Gates giving a presentation to the CIA about a vaccine to remove a person's religious views, I ask those reading this post to use their critical thinking reasoning skills the following way.

Please ask yourselves the following.

1) Though the text overlay in the video says it is of Bill Gates giving a presentation to the CIA, could that text be intentionally false information? Could someone else be speaking instead of Bill Gates? Could even all of the people in the video be actors with the intent of creating a deception? Or, could the video be authentic, except for the text overlay which says it is of Bill Gates giving a presentation to the CIA? In other words, could the text overlay be a fraud?

2) Can you clearly see the face of the person giving the presentation, or is the image too grainy to do so? If you can see it well, does the face look the same as what you know Bill Gates' face looks like in audiovisuals of him which you know are authentic? If you don't remember for sure what his face looks like, why not watch an audiovisual of him which you know is authentic, so that you can make the correct conclusion?

3) Does the voice of the person giving the presentation sound the same as that which you know Bill Gates' voice sounds like in audiovisuals of him which you know are authentic? If you don't remember for sure how his voice sounds, why not listen to an audiovisual of him which you know is authentic, so that you can make the correct conclusion?

4) Do you think the CIA would allow anyone to bring audiovisual recording devices into a meeting in which the CIA would be considering a presentation promoting something which the general public would consider diabolic and which would outrage the general public if they learned of it? Even if the CIA didn't know such a proposal would be made, would they had seen to it that no unauthorized recordings of it were preserved; and would they had seen to it that no recordings of it were leaked out to the public?

5) Based upon what you know for certain about Bill Gates from sources which you consider impeccable, do you think Bill Gates is so evil a person as to make the proposal which is stated in the video? Or, is it more likely to you that some aspect of the video is a fraud instead?

I leave the decision making to you, instead of telling you in this post my conclusions regarding the video.

Simon

We know the public persona of Bill Gates has been carefully curated. Instead of the philanthropic geek it appears he's a womanizer. He also appears to be linked with Jeffry Epstein, and behaved strangely in one interview when questioned about it. So yeah, I don't believe what I see in the news and nothing is off limits when it comes to what the truth may be.

I also don't believe the FBI and CIA are as clever and careful as they are corrupt. Have they ever been involved subverting laws and justice? Yes, they have. So again, nothing is out of bounds of possibility.

Based on your "logic", any evidence of guilt presented would always act as evidence of innocence because "why would they be so dumb to be caught out", so let's not waste too much time on that theory.

Vidqun

In 2015 Bill Gates publically stated that the world's population needs to be reduced. In 2020 the same Bill Gates said that seven billion people should be vaccinated. Simple question: Would you take advice from such a man? Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation is one of the biggest contributors to WHO. Follow their agenda. Would you accept advice from the WHO?

Is it possible that the presentation to the CIA is the real thing? You're right. Judge for yourself.

Why some are religious or not?

Share this