Pharyngula::Sinners in the hands of an angry phantasm

Pharyngula has moved to http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/

Tuesday, September 27, 2005

Sinners in the hands of an angry phantasm

PZ Myers • 121 Comments (last page)

Many liberal Christians and believers of other faiths hold that religious belief is socially beneficial, believing that it helps to lower rates of violent crime, murder, suicide, sexual promiscuity and abortion. The benefits of religious belief to a society have been described as its “spiritual capital”. But the study claims that the devotion of many in the US may actually contribute to its ills.

The paper, published in the Journal of Religion and Society, a US academic journal, reports: “Many Americans agree that their churchgoing nation is an exceptional, God-blessed, shining city on the hill that stands as an impressive example for an increasingly sceptical world.

“In general, higher rates of belief in and worship of a creator correlate with higher rates of homicide, juvenile and early adult mortality, STD infection rates, teen pregnancy and abortion in the prosperous democracies.

“The United States is almost always the most dysfunctional of the developing democracies, sometimes spectacularly so.”

Now, to be fair, I don't think this necessarily says that being religious is bad for the individual; it's just not good for a culture. I also think it's a bit sweeping in associating these ills with religious belief in general, because the US is afflicted with particularly malignant forms of religion (and at the root, the problem may not be religion itself, but irrationality and anti-intellectualism and ignorance, something our country has in volume). On the other hand, countries with more traditional religions also seem to have some serious problems (who knew Portugal was such a mess?).

But heck yeah, it seems obvious to me that if you base national policy on pious ignorance and the low-rent tribal power fantasies of a bronze-age gang of thugs, you're not going to cope well with the real issues of a modern pluralist society.

Here's some of the data, correlating god-belief with homicide rates and mean life expectancy. That little "U" that's typically floating off by itself as an outlier (and not on the good side) is us.

A = Australia
C = Canada
D = Denmark
E = Great Britain
F = France
G = Germany
H = Holland
I = Ireland
J = Japan
L = Switzerland
N = Norway
P = Portugal
R = Austria
S = Spain
T = Italy
U = United States
W = Sweden
Z = New Zealand

(via Omniorthogonal)

I've noticed that a few people are freaking out over this study, and are in denial. Mostly it is because they are misinterpreting it; it does not say that if you believe in God, you will get an abortion and start murdering strangers. It says that prevalent god-belief in a culture does not discourage that sort of behavior, and that more secular societies are clearly not hotbeds of sin and corruption.

If the data showed that the U.S. enjoyed higher rates of societal health than the more secular, pro-evolution democracies, then the opinion that popular belief in a creator is strongly beneficial to national cultures would be supported. Although they are by no means utopias, the populations of secular democracies are clearly able to govern themselves and maintain societal cohesion. Indeed, the data examined in this study demonstrates that only the more secular, pro-evolution democracies have, for the first time in history, come closest to achieving practical “cultures of life” that feature low rates of lethal crime, juvenile-adult mortality, sex related dysfunction, and even abortion. The least theistic secular developing democracies such as Japan, France, and Scandinavia have been most successful in these regards. The non-religious, pro-evolution democracies contradict the dictum that a society cannot enjoy good conditions unless most citizens ardently believe in a moral creator. The widely held fear that a Godless citizenry must experience societal disaster is therefore refuted. Contradicting these conclusions requires demonstrating a positive link between theism and societal conditions in the first world with a similarly large body of data - a doubtful possibility in view of the observable trends.

Why this should be triggering such knee-jerk antipathy is a mystery to me; is denying the efficacy of religion and the perfection of American society, and providing evidence for same, such a horrifying idea to people? Apparently, it is.

Trackback url: http://pharyngula.org/index/trackback/3007/rhfNK6uz/

Comments:

#41790: rew — 09/27 at 07:19 AM
You might like this article:

http://www.cwfa.org/articles/9033/BLI/dotcommentary/index.htm

My favortie part:

"1 Corinthians 2:12-15 warns that those of the Spirit will always be misjudged and misunderstood because the things that we hold as TRUTH are foolishness to the world."

I love a mindset where the more wrong you are proves the more sound you are to God. How can you argue with that?

#41791: — 09/27 at 07:23 AM
I'm no Bible thumper, but I have to point out that:

a) 18 data points is not much upon which to make a correlation. There are only two countries in the Western hemisphere represented here. What's up with that?

b) I don't see much of a correlation here anyway. To be sure, you've got two significant outliers, the U.S. and Portugal, on both charts. But the cluster to the left on the homicide chart, well, how do you draw a line through that? Answer: you don't.

I have no doubt that the American brand of conservative Christianity does a lot of bad things for our country, but this just strikes me as the kind of sloppy partisanship that gives ammunition to those defending such thinking.

#41792: — 09/27 at 07:37 AM

I also think it's a bit sweeping in associating these ills with religious belief in general, because the US is afflicted with particularly malignant forms of religion (and at the root, the problem may not be religion itself, but irrationality and anti-intellectualism and ignorance, something our country has in volume)

What a sweeping bit o' ignorance, I would say. In the list of countries where is communist China, U.S.S.R, Cuba, or Khmer Rouge? They were/are god-less communists and should have been paradise for you.

#41793: — 09/27 at 07:39 AM
A couple of things on that chart look wrong to me.

1. What's with Portugal? It seems to be exactly the opposite of its culturally similar next door neighbor. I don't remember it seeming like a violent place, and the life expectancy looks awfully low for an EU country. I don't remember any polluted wastelands like the old Soviet Union or our own "cancer alley" in Louisiana.

2. What's with Denmark? It too has a life expectancy more in line with the Soviet Union, even though it is, like Sweden and Norway, one of the most progressive countries in Europe.

Could this be a typo on the chart? I don't know that PZ would have an answer at his fingertips, but maybe this blogg has some European readers that could clear this up.

#41794: The Commissar — 09/27 at 07:40 AM
PZ,

Really disappointing. The US is far larger, and far more diverse than those countries.

Try looking at black vs. white homicide rates in the US.

http://www.benbest.com/lifeext/murder.html

"In 2002 blacks were 7 times more likely to commit homicide and 6 times more likely to be victims of homicide than whites. The rate of homicide victimization for 2002 can be summarized by race & gender."

I know you will all freak out and call me a racist for daring to post such data. But those are the facts. The CAUSES for differential rates are complex and tied up with poverty, education, etc. NOT inherent racial differences.

The claim that religious belief is responsible for a high homicide rate is about as absurd as claiming that it's due to race.

#41795: — 09/27 at 07:45 AM
No islamic countries on that list either, how can one draw any inferences from this?

#41796: Orac — 09/27 at 07:48 AM
Geez, the correlation in the graphs look really weak. Ditto most of the other figures. They all look like what I'd call a star chart. And look at this comment from the article:

Regression analyses were not executed because of the high variability of degree of correlation, because potential causal factors for rates of societal function are complex, and because it is not the purpose of this initial study to definitively demonstrate a causal link between religion and social conditions. Nor were multivariate analyses used because they risk manipulating the data to produce errant or desired results,<5> and because the fairly consistent characteristics of the sample automatically minimizes the need to correct for external multiple factors (see further discussion below). Therefore correlations of raw data are used for this initial examination.

Given the star charts they published, no wonder the authors didn't even attempt any sort of statistical correlations. Even as a preliminary study, this looks like pretty thin gruel to me.

--
Orac “A statement of fact cannot be insolent.”
http://oracknows.blogspot.com

#41797: The Commissar — 09/27 at 07:50 AM
LJ,

There are plenty of countries that are "off the charts." Colombia and South Africa. Not included. Only "good" countries. You know "civilized."

They also left off Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, and Russia, which happen to be "good" European countries, but ... oops .. with murder rates double the US.

Cant have them in there, messing up the data.

#41798: — 09/27 at 07:53 AM
"In the list of countries where is communist China, U.S.S.R, Cuba, or Khmer Rouge?"

For those who are too lazy to read the linked paper above, the title of the paper is "Cross-National Correlations of Quantifiable Societal Health with Popular Religiosity and Secularism in the Prosperous Democracies" (emphasis added). That tends to explain why certain countries are missing.

#41799: Orac — 09/27 at 07:56 AM
Even so, it's a pretty weak paper.

--
Orac “A statement of fact cannot be insolent.”
http://oracknows.blogspot.com

#41800: mark — 09/27 at 08:02 AM
One explanation is that there are a lot of (unpolled) Japanese visitors to the US who satisfy their blood lust away from home. Or maybe it's the number of research papers on evolution published each year in the US.

#41801: — 09/27 at 08:03 AM

For those who are too lazy to read the linked paper above, the title of the paper is "Cross-National Correlations of Quantifiable Societal Health with Popular Religiosity and Secularism in the Prosperous Democracies" (emphasis added). That tends to explain why certain countries are missing.

Touché. The main point I was making was against a study that left out god-less countries and made the implication that religious belief caused this evil. They left something out. I mean you can't make a comparison if you don't have two things to compare.

#41803: PZ Myers — 09/27 at 08:11 AM
No one is claiming that the sole cause of societal dysfunction is religion. The paper limited the analysis to a subset of countries to minimize the number of variables, which is a perfectly reasonable, even necessary, thing to do.

The bottom line is that the US is far from being a great moral or even material exemplar--on average, it's a crappy place to live. Even I don't believe that religion is entirely causal, however, but is a symptom: countries that neglect their people, fail to support education for everyone, encourage greater and greater economic disparities, and retreat from high standards of civilized social behavior, like the US, will see more strife, more misery, and more religion in their populations.

And the important message here is that the high level of dumb piety in our country hasn't done diddly-squat to correct our problems, despite the promises of the high priests of religion. The claims of the moral peons of the religious right are empty air, just like the claims of the Maharishi, and ought to be regarded the same way: as dangerous lies.

PZ Myers
Division of Science and Math
University of Minnesota, Morris

#41804: — 09/27 at 08:11 AM
The paper only had church going and evolution on the graphs, were is the info on homicides and STD's?

#41805: — 09/27 at 08:14 AM
LJ:
Name just one prosperous Islamic democracy. Yep. That's why they didn't include any.

#41806: Arun — 09/27 at 08:16 AM
Among prosperous democracies, it would appear atheism is a good thing. But actually, cause and effect are not clear. Do Americans turn to religion in the face of persistent social ills such as relatively high rates of homicide, sexually transmitted diseases etc., that seem intractable? Or does the religious nature of the society place obstacles to solving these problems?

#41807: Nullifidian — 09/27 at 08:23 AM
"Sinners in the hands of an angry phantasm"

This is the best post title ever. I laughed until I choked on my morning coffee.

"We are obliged, therefore, to spread the news, painful and bitter though it may be for some to hear, that all living things on earth are kindred.” Edward Abbey, Desert Solitaire

#41808: Joseph ODonnell — 09/27 at 08:24 AM
This study hasn't said or shown anything really. Their data is just a bunch of random figures out in the middle of nowhere. Honestly, sometimes this just proves the point that just because it is published it doesn't mean it can't be complete rubbish.

For example, note Spain which is a heavily Catholic country and compare it against New Zealand. They are more religious than we are (not that the authors bothered to quantify what degree of religiousity was significantly different) and have far less murders and higher life expectancy. Same thing with Italy and several other countries.

You don't need to include 'godless' regimes like the old USSR or anything to see their data is worthless.

#41809: — 09/27 at 08:25 AM
Looks like the best interpretation of this data is that there's no correlation between these factors and that religion appears neutral with regards to life expectancy and homicides.

But still, that is *not* what the fundies want to hear. They want to hear that the most righteous wins.

#41811: Joseph ODonnell — 09/27 at 08:32 AM

Or does the religious nature of the society place obstacles to solving these problems?

Looking over their data, I would say no for several reasons. The first is that the US is an outlier and is clearly an exception, yet many of the other religious countries on their charts don't seem to be disentegrating. Their data is absolutely inconsistent with a 'religion is societies' evil hypothesis and simply points to something being REALLY stuffed with the US.

It does however prove that just because a country is religious it doesn't mean that it won't be utterly stuffed up. It just shows that there is something seriously wrong with American culture somewhere, but I don't think religion is it. I think it's more to do with an anti-intellectual, anti-science and generally poor public attitude to social issues that many Americans have. Even though America is one of the most powerful countries in the world, vast inequalities exist in it between those who are rich and those who are worse off, such as blacks and other minorities. As has been mentioned earlier, these minorities have murder/crime rates that are through the roof.

#41812: coturnix — 09/27 at 08:34 AM
The murder rates shot up sharply after the defeat of communism in Eastern Europe, mainly due to the fast economic stratification of society. In Yugoslavia, murder rate was 1 per million people per year before the fall of communism, and five wars and millions dead after the fall of communism.

The paper is pretty weak. Still, it is interesting. I would prefer to see a both a study within the USA on a microlevel (not the crude Red state - Blue state crap division), and a study that includes less 'prosperous' countries. The kind/type of religious belief needs to be accounted for, too, as the fear of a wrathful, vengeful God is going to elicit different set of social behaviors than belief in the God of Grace (or Buddhism for that matter).

I have argued several times before that religion is not the cause but a symptom. To be religious or not, and if so, which denomination to join, depends on many factors, most important being the religious belief of parents, childrearing philosophy of parents (Dobson or Spock), size of community one grows up in (City or Country) with correlated differences in social norms, taboos and behaviors, etc.

#41813: — 09/27 at 08:38 AM
I don't think the data on overall life expectancy and homicide rates are very strong, although one can see a mild correlation. However, if you read the paper, you'll see that there are strong correlations between religious beliefs and under 5 mortality, STD infection, and teenage abortion rates. That suggests that there is a definite correlation between religion and social pathology in the countries studied. However, correlation is not causation. Might there be stronger religious beliefs in the countries with high under 5 mortality, etc because the countries have major problems and people seek the opiate of religion to relieve their suffering?

#41814: Adam Ierymenko — 09/27 at 08:40 AM
While I am semi-skeptical of this paper, I do think that religion's supposed social benefits are vastly overstated.

My personal strong suspicion is that how people raise their children (especially in infancy and early childhood) is *the* strongest determinant of moral behavior, period. This is partly anecdotal and partly evidence-based.

If two Satanist parents cared well for their child, responded to them when they cried as infants, did not spoil them as toddlers, gave them structure and consistency and a rational upbringing, I would expect their children to be more moral and compassionate than the children of a Christian family that gave their children a neglectful, abusive, or *inconsistent* upbringing. I would also expect this to apply in reverse as well. I think that psychology has as much or more of an effect on morality than ideological techings. A great part of personal moral behavior is the capacity to feel *empathy*, which is a capacity related to one's early childhood imprints.

Note that I'm not saying that ideology is completely irrelevant either.

Another point I'd like to make in relation to this article is a possible explanation for why in some cases religious belief actually leads to increased crime, violence, etc.

The reason is, I suspect, that fanatical religious belief is a form of hedonism. I would call it intellectual hedonism; "I believe it because I feel it and it makes me feel good."

Someone who is willing to believe something just because it feels good to them regardless of the evidence for or against it's truth might be more likely to do things just because they feel good regardless of any evidence of their harmfulness.

Religion is anti-reason emotionalism glossed over by sophisticated pseudo-rational apologetics.

#41815: coturnix — 09/27 at 08:42 AM
I like this sentence, Adam:
"Religion is anti-reason emotionalism glossed over by sophisticated pseudo-rational apologetics."
...and I agree with you.

#41817: PZ Myers — 09/27 at 08:48 AM

It does however prove that just because a country is religious it doesn't mean that it won't be utterly stuffed up. It just shows that there is something seriously wrong with American culture somewhere, but I don't think religion is it. I think it's more to do with an anti-intellectual, anti-science and generally poor public attitude to social issues that many Americans have.

Isn't that what I just said?

PZ Myers
Division of Science and Math
University of Minnesota, Morris

Page 1 of 6 pages 1 2 3 > Last »

Next entry: Edward Daley

Previous entry: Great pelagic orgies!

<< Back to main

Pharyngula has moved to http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/

Tuesday, September 27, 2005

Sinners in the hands of an angry phantasm

Info