Satisfying LA Times Op-Ed Piece

The Dark Side of Faith (http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/opinion/la-oe-brooks1oct01,1,1240960.story?track=mostemailedlink ).

[JackWhite]

Obviously this is not going to be mentioned in an LA Times article, but there is another explaination why those Southern states have higher crimes rates than New England states. I won't mention it, but everyone knows what I mean, and it is not Bible reading.

[jason_t]

Thanks for the article.

On a different note would you mind explaining the reasons for your name choice? I'm writing a PhD in complex analysis so obviously I'm curious.

[daryn]

[ QUOTE ]
Obviously this is not going to be mentioned in an LA Times article, but there is another explaination why those Southern states have higher crimes rates than New England states. I won't mention it, but everyone knows what I mean, and it is not Bible reading.

[/ QUOTE ]

people are poorer

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Obviously this is not going to be mentioned in an LA Times article, but there is another explaination why those Southern states have higher crimes rates than New England states. I won't mention it, but everyone knows what I mean, and it is not Bible reading.

[/ QUOTE ]

people are blacker

[/ QUOTE ]
FYP.

(Note that I'm only guessing at OP's intent, not making a statement, however factually correct said statement may be)

[JackWhite]

[ QUOTE ]
people are poorer

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
people are blacker

[/ QUOTE ]

The history of poverty and lower quality of education are major factors in why the South has higher crime rates than New England. Does anybody here really believe the higher crime is caused by greater religious belief?

[ QUOTE ]
The history of poverty and lower quality of education are major factors in why the South has higher crime rates than New England. Does anybody here really believe the higher crime is caused by greater religious belief?

[/ QUOTE ]
Is it likely that lower quality of education and poverty results in more religious belief?
Perhaps they're the underlying causes of these results.

[RJT]

Can someone provide a link to the actual study? (I can’t even get into the LA link now, have to sign in - maybe I’ll do it later). From my experience, the media tends to portray studies like these in a way that makes good copy. As it stands now (with this news article) I would be quite embarrassed if I were a man of science with the newspaper’s use of the words “evolutionary scientist” (maybe it said evolutionary sociologist, can’t recall) linked to this fellow.

The study sounds like rubbish. It either is rubbish or a very incomplete portrayal of the man’s work. If the man’s work actually says anything, let’s take a look.

[ QUOTE ]
On a different note would you mind explaining the reasons for your name choice? I'm writing a PhD in complex analysis so obviously I'm curious.

[/ QUOTE ]

Your choice of:

a)"The shortest route between two truths in the real domain passes through the complex domain." - Hadamard, so often quoted before proving the prime number theorem.

b)It turns out that my only singularities are isolated poles.

c)It sounds cool.

[ QUOTE ]
Can someone provide a link to the actual study?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes (http://moses.creighton.edu/JRS/2005/2005-11.html).

[RJT]

Quote from the text of the study:

“This is not an attempt to present a definitive study that establishes cause versus effect between religiosity, secularism and societal health. It is hoped that these original correlations and results will spark future research and debate on the issue.”

I think I’ll wait for the sequel to come out.

All kidding aside, I haven’t read it all yet. Probably won’t have time until later. If I see anything of note, I’ll post. In the meantime, we’ll see what others think.

Thanks for the link, Morph.

RJT

[jason_t]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
On a different note would you mind explaining the reasons for your name choice? I'm writing a PhD in complex analysis so obviously I'm curious.

[/ QUOTE ]

Your choice of:

a)"The shortest route between two truths in the real domain passes through the complex domain." - Hadamard, so often quoted before proving the prime number theorem.

b)It turns out that my only singularities are isolated poles.

c)It sounds cool.

[/ QUOTE ]

Very nice.

The proof of the PNT and the topics surrounding that certain famous meromorphic function is what got me interested in complex analysis in the first place.

I'm sure you've heard the following joke.

Q: Why should a complex analyst's dog be named Cauchy?
A: Because he'll leave residues around poles.

[ QUOTE ]
I'm sure you've heard the following joke.

Q: Why should a complex analyst's dog be named Cauchy?
A: Because he'll leave residues around poles.

[/ QUOTE ]

Of course, as I'm sure you've heard:

Q: What's the contour integral around Western Europe?
A: Zero, because all the Poles are in Eastern Europe!

Ah, math humor. *grin*

Edit: Addendum:

For a little while as an undergraduate, my answering machine message was:

"The number you have dialed is imaginary. Please rotate your phone 90 degrees and try again."

Oy. /images/graemlins/tongue.gif

[Siegmund]

[ QUOTE ]

"The number you have dialed is imaginary. Please rotate your phone 90 degrees and try again."


[/ QUOTE ]

I love it. Wish I'd thought of it.

I am about to move to a new job the end of this month. That sounds like an ideal message to leave on my voice mail when I go.

(And yes, I took graduate courses in real and complex analysis, even though they weren't required for a statistics degree.)

[purnell]

All this thing does is provide evidence that assuming that if a society rejects religion, all hell beaks loose is wrong (as in incorrect).

[jason_t]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'm sure you've heard the following joke.

Q: Why should a complex analyst's dog be named Cauchy?
A: Because he'll leave residues around poles.

[/ QUOTE ]

Of course, as I'm sure you've heard:

Q: What's the contour integral around Western Europe?
A: Zero, because all the Poles are in Eastern Europe!

Ah, math humor. *grin*

Edit: Addendum:

For a little while as an undergraduate, my answering machine message was:

"The number you have dialed is imaginary. Please rotate your phone 90 degrees and try again."

Oy. /images/graemlins/tongue.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

The first I've heard and love, the second is new and I really love it.

[ QUOTE ]
Does anybody here really believe the higher crime is caused by greater religious belief?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes.

[NotReady]

I looked through the orginal article you linked in another post. I couldn't find any definition of religiosity. Untill he does that we aren't really talking about anything.

[purnell]

[ QUOTE ]
I looked through the orginal article you linked in another post. I couldn't find any definition of religiosity. Untill he does that we aren't really talking about anything.

[/ QUOTE ]

"In broad terms the hypothesis that popular religiosity is socially beneficial holds that high rates of belief in a creator, as well as worship, prayer and other aspects of religious practice, correlate with lowering rates of lethal violence, suicide, non-monogamous sexual activity, and abortion, as well as improved physical health. Such faith-based, virtuous “cultures of life” are supposedly attainable if people believe that God created them for a special purpose, and follow the strict moral dictates imposed by religion. At one end of the spectrum are those who consider creator belief helpful but not necessarily critical to individuals and societies. At the other end the most ardent advocates consider persons and people inherently unruly and ungovernable unless they are strictly obedient to the creator (as per Barna; Colson and Pearcey; Johnson; Pearcey; Schroeder)."

[imported_luckyme]

[ QUOTE ]

I looked through the orginal article you linked in another post. I couldn't find any definition of religiosity. Untill he does that we aren't really talking about anything.

[/ QUOTE ]

Unlike legal papers most definitions in other fields are contained in the context rather than a "is" = "what I want it to" format. This paper seems gorged with contextual definitions of religousity, too many for my liking. Here's one of many -

"The plots include Bible literalism and frequency of prayer and service attendance, as well as absolute belief in a creator, in order to examine religiosity in terms of ardency, conservatism, and activities."

hope that helps, luckyme

[NotReady]

[ QUOTE ]

religiosity is socially beneficial holds that high rates of belief in a creator, as well as worship, prayer and other aspects of religious practice


[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks, I missed that. Still, it's very general and would apply to a very high percentage of humanity throughout history. Does his study include Muslims? I'm not sure, but I think the crime rate, etc., is low in the Mideast, though I'm not sure how terrorism factors in. What about Hindu, Buddhist, Confucious? What about past history? What about genocidal atheists like Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot? I would include Hitler as well though it's unclear that he was technically an atheist. I think we can include Sadam in there as well. I also suspect their societies were relatively crime free, in you don't include the criminality of the state.

[NotReady]

[ QUOTE ]

hope that helps, luckyme


[/ QUOTE ]

Ok, I'm very unfamiliar with sociology. I think anyone has a very long row to hoe to prove that Bible study causes crime or that criminals are drawn to Bible study. Those are absurdities on their face and I doubt that contention will hold up.

[imported_luckyme]

[ QUOTE ]
I think anyone has a very long row to hoe to prove that Bible study causes crime or that criminals are drawn to Bible study. Those are absurdities on their face and I doubt that contention will hold up.

[/ QUOTE ]

I won't get into the strawman aspects of your statements but perhaps a comment on correlation and causation would be useful here. Sitting at a computer all day does not 'cause' obesity yet a comparison between mountain bikers and online poker players may find a correlation. Correlations can act as a wakeup call, alerting us to third,forth and fifth factors at work in a broader look at the area.
The general view that higher intelligence and better knowledge seems to correlate with lower religousity may be pointing to the same factors at work in this paper. Not claiming at this point that they are but it'd be interesting to know if, say, IQ ( or some measurable trait) and level of education is higher in the blue states vs the red states.

At this stage I'm just taking this paper as a good "hmmmm..." stimulator and I'd be interested in some well-thought out exploration of the reasons for the correlations if they stand up to scrutiny. ( correlations have reasons, that still doesn't make them causations, naturally).

You statements seems to miss the whole point of the paper and of correlation study in general, but since it's only a sentence or two I'm sure it doesn't necessarily express your thought on the issue.

luckyme

[NotReady]

[ QUOTE ]

You statements seems to miss the whole point of the paper


[/ QUOTE ]

I may well have missed the point of the paper and I may have inadvertently used a straw man argument. What concerned me was the LA Times story, which at least implies that Christians are more likely to be criminals and that therefore somehow Christianity should be avoided.

I don't doubt there is a correlation between superstition and IQ. It's when Christianity is equated with superstition that difficulties arise. And there are many other differences between the red and blue states besides "religiosity", such as economics and education.

But I'm not a sociologist so I probably shouldn't even be in this thread. I just want to deny ANY correlation between becoming a genuine Christian and becoming a criminal or becoming morally worse.

[purnell]

[ QUOTE ]
It's when Christianity is equated with superstition that difficulties arise.

[/ QUOTE ]

What difficulties, and for whom?

[NotReady]

[ QUOTE ]

What difficulties, and for whom?


[/ QUOTE ]

Christianity is not a superstition. Labelling it that way reduces it to the level of a witch doctor or an astrologer. For all Christians.

[RxForMoreCowbell]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

What difficulties, and for whom?


[/ QUOTE ]

Christianity is not a superstition. Labelling it that way reduces it to the level of a witch doctor or an astrologer. For all Christians.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why is it ok for you to insult those who believe in witch-doctors and astrologers?

[NotReady]

[ QUOTE ]

Why is it ok for you to insult those who believe in witch-doctors and astrologers?


[/ QUOTE ]

My apologies. If any wds or astrologers are reading this and would like to discuss your persuasion, please join this forum.

[imported_luckyme]

[ QUOTE ]
It's when Christianity is equated with superstition that difficulties arise.

[/ QUOTE ]

Shouldn't raise a difficulty since to non-belivers it's "An irrational belief ..." and they'd be committing a logical error not to refer to it as superstition. Subscribers to any superstition ( even poker players who won't change their shirts) believe there are logical reasons for their belief compared to the other guys silly superstition.


[ QUOTE ]
I just want to deny ANY correlation between becoming a genuine Christian and becoming a criminal or becoming morally worse.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ok, you're on record. Mind you, I don't see how denying a correlation somehow means it doesn't exist. Ahhhh... I see you've turned it into a causation again... sorry.

luckyme... if I thought I was wrong I'd change my mind

[RJT]

If anyone actually foresees this paper’s suggestion as ever being valid, then I think we have bigger problems than whether God exists or not or the validity (or non) of religions, that is: That anyone here actually thinks paper is going to stand up to logical scrutiny.