Be nice to theists - they are victims of their genes

cofty

Identical twin studies show there is a strong inheritable component to religiosity.

Thomas Bouchard studied identical and fraternal twins raised apart and tested them on religious attitudes.

The correlation for the former turned out to be 62% compared to just 2% for the latter. His colleague. Kathryn Corson repeated the study with a different set of questions and got similar results - 69% for monozygotic twins raised apart and no correlation for dizygotic twins.

Similar huge differences were also found by large studies in Australia.

Which particular religion a person chooses is entirely environmental however.

McCourt, Bouchard, Lykken, Tellegen & Keyes 1999 cited in "Nature via Nurture" by Matt Ridley

nicolaou

Very interesting Cofty. How did the 'religiosity' manifest itself? How was it measured?

DJS

Cofty,

Not surprising. Humans evolved tendencies toward religiosity, encoding it into our gene code apparently. Considering how very difficult it was to be a human for 100,000 years or more, this makes perfect sense.

We can reverse this process by becoming a more rational, evidenced based species. It will take a few generations but I believe we can evolve religiosity out of our genes and evolve a more rational code into it.

Considering the data Coded Logic provided the other day re: atheists, their children, etc., we are on our way. Live long and prosper.

KateWild

Well I am not sure I actually believe this study. I was brought up by Jewish parents and went to a Jewish day school. My parents are agnostic and atheist. As a child I was very interested in God and religious education. My religious leaders and peers encouraged free thinking and exploring atheism during religious sessions.

My brother was not interested, but I was and have always had some type of faith although it has changed over the years.

To call people victims is derogatory cofty, and although I would not class myself as a theist, I am inclined to feel you are baiting some posters into a debate on a study that is not conclusive or recognised.

Some people are happy believing and are not harming anyone.

Kate xx

DJS

Kate,

As I see it, it is a predictable evolutionary paradigm. For hundreds of thousands of years, the superstitious, the fraidy-cats and those with irrational fears were probably more likely to survive the real threats, such as the sabre tooth tigers and the velociraptors that were trying to eat them (OK, OK, I know saber tooth tigers and velociraptors did not co-exist with humans - geesh. Give a guy a bit of hyperbole for dramatic effect occasionally). Not to mention the no-seeums that were also trying to eat them.

As a result, their DNA was likely passed along at a higher level, the same DNA which would have pre-disposed them to religion, than the DNA of the rational brave hearts. I don't see Cofty as being mean.

prologos

A related item in ScienceDaily: "How does the universe create reason, morality?" via complexity. the commentator includes religiosity in the inevitable outcome.

KateWild

Yeah DJS,

You're getting a bit extreme there to make your point. Sorry I don't buy into it totally, although it is possible that people are born with faith and keep it. But who really cares anyway.

I think that lurkers and newbies need to know that there are many healthy ways to go when you leave WT, and that believing in God is not necessarily a bad path.

Kate xx

DJS

Kate,

A bit extreme? I didn't invent this theory. Anyway, you are right; belief in god is not necessarily a bad path. Neither is belief in Santa, the Easter Bunny, Satan or the Tooth Fairy. Lots of things work.

However, my only objective for being here is to get people to think more rationally and objectively, requiring evidence before make a stand. Anyone doing so will almost certainly get farther away from theism and superstitions.

cofty

Kate - Our personal experiences and opinions are not valid data when held against scientific studies.

Here is a paper you will find interesting...

Genetic Influence on Social Attitudes: Another Challenge to Psychology From Behavior Genetics
Thomas J. Bouchard Jr., Nancy L. Segal, Auke Tellegen, Matt McGue, Margaret Keyes, and Robert Krueger

Conclusion
The findings reported in this chapter strongly support the conclusion that well developed and construct-valid measures of social attitudes are significantly and substantively influenced by genetic factors...

KateWild

Thanks for the link cofty, I probably would find it interesting if I could access the full paper. But I am not happy to register and sign up to site I know nothing about just to read the article.

I don't point blank disagree with the study. But you were a theist for a number of years and then changed. Was is genetic or environmental in your case?

My belief is there is some weight to the study, but people have the determination to change how they feel about religion, God and the bible so it can't be always the case it's genetic. I think I was born with some kind of gene that predisposes me to have faith in God, but who knows in ten years time I could change my mind.

As far as abiogenesis is concerned, at the moment there is room for God and enough evidence for me to have faith in a creator, but as science progresses that could definitely change for me. So am I genetically predisposed to have faith in God?

Kate xx

Be nice to theists - they are victims of their genes

Share this