Skip to main content

View Diary: Media Assuming Mormon Claims as Part of Christianity (189 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  That's not the point. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Stein, ravagerofworlds2

    As I said above, I'm opposed to Romney because he is a Republican, not because he is a Mormon, and I would not refuse to vote for somebody because of being Mormon.  Some of the best lawyers in my professional association are Mormons and I have great admiration for them.

    Nevertheless, we're supposed to be a reality-based community here, and it's reasonable for somebody like the diarist to point out that many Christians have good reason to regard the Mormons as heretics and not genuine Christians.

    It's really silly for non-Christians who know nothing of these matters to contradict the diarist.

    Suppose some group claimed that Muslims are actually Jews because they both follow the Abrahamic faith.  Would you not agree that Jews would have a right to refute that?

    The diarist's main point is the blankness of the media on this topic. He has a point.

    It is a calling...to do things about injustice.... It helps to have a goal. I've always tried to have one.--Ted Kennedy, True Compass

    by Timaeus on Tue Oct 11, 2011 at 02:29:47 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  non-Christians know more (0+ / 0-)

      than you give them credit for. Most Atheists in the USA are former Christians who left because they learned more than the average believer. Saying our voice is irrelevant is a great way to ignore the opinions of a large group that is more educated than average.

      •  learned more about what? (0+ / 0-)

        I'm a social scientist, my wife is an aquatic biologist. Both of us are believers, despite coming from different socio-economic and denominational backgrounds. Both of us have Masters and are in the final stages of our PhDs. So what are you claiming exactly? After all, 81% of American University Professors consider themselves spiritual people (ie, not atheists).

        Above Grecian mantles were chiseled these words... Know Thyself... Nothing in Excess... the pop philosophy of its day.

        by ravagerofworlds2 on Tue Oct 11, 2011 at 08:39:39 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  about Christianity (0+ / 0-)

          That is the subject of the diary.
          Spiritual does not equal Christian, just ask Einstein.
          The higher you go on the respected scientist lists the smaller that percentage of Christian is.

          •  Ha ha ha ha ha. What an ignorant (0+ / 0-)

            and bigoted comment! It's just not true.

            It is a calling...to do things about injustice.... It helps to have a goal. I've always tried to have one.--Ted Kennedy, True Compass

            by Timaeus on Tue Oct 11, 2011 at 09:29:13 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  ? (0+ / 0-)

              What part of this is bigoted? It's a simple statement about the percentage of religious belief among scientists. For respected think NAS & AAAS members or similar organizations. See my response to ravagerofworlds2 for a link.

          •  please provide a link (0+ / 0-)

            when making claims as general as "The higher you go on a respected scientist lists the smaller that percentage of Christian is."

            Otherwise- it is just a claim sans evidence and warrant.

            Above Grecian mantles were chiseled these words... Know Thyself... Nothing in Excess... the pop philosophy of its day.

            by ravagerofworlds2 on Tue Oct 11, 2011 at 10:21:39 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  here is a link (0+ / 0-)

              http://www.stephenjaygould.org/...
              I was unaware saying religious belief drops off as you go up the chain in scientific organizations was controversial. I've seen that correlation acknowledged from both sides of the religious divide.

              •  an intersting link (0+ / 0-)

                An interesting link

                It was difficult to find the original instance of the article in Nature due to problems in the link's citation. To further compound things, when I did find the actual printing of the Nature article- it was in the "commentary section." I was unable to determine whether the commentary section was peer reviewed or not. Even when all this is said and done…. The evidence you are arguing- the correlation of “greater scientists” and disbelief, is not actually argued in the published Commentary.

                Here is what Larson/Witham says in the published version of Nature-

                “Due to the dramatic expansion in the US scientific community since 1916, our survey polled only about 3 per cent of the biological and physical scientists and mathematicians listed in the 1995 American Men and Women of Science. From his listing, Leuba reached more than 20 per cent of these groups. In Leuba’s day, the editors of the reference book went through the painstaking process of deciding who were “great scientists” compared to ordinary, and an asterisk was put by those names. Thus, Leuba could analse belief among the great compared to “ordinary.” He found a higher amount of disbelief among great scientists, but this was a category we could not test- the asterisks do not appear in modern editions.”

                So… are you arguing for data that is from 1916 about the current scientific community? Or that I should trust that correspondence to a fan site for Gould is actually from Larson/Witham? I am a healthy skeptic- you should appreciate that.

                Even so- let’s compare the results from the 1916 and 1996 surveys from the 1000 person random sample.

                Belief in personal God (1916 is 41.8 and in 1996 is 39.3)
                Disbelief in personal God (1916 is 41.5 and in 1996 is 45.3)
                Doubt or agnosticism (1916 is 16.7 and in 1996 is 14.5)

                There is no margin of error reported- but even with a 5% standard, there would be no significant deviation, even by just eyeballing these basic figures. The original Nature article is exactly that- no change, hence, it’s real title “Scientists are still keeping the faith”

                As a social scientists at a research 1 university, I am well acquainted with how to judge academic papers in my field (and measuring belief in a co-culture is definitely in my ballpark)- so I give you citations from peer reviewed sources on this very subject.

                Religious Beliefs: Their dynamics in two groups of life scientists.Full Text Available By: Falcao, Eliane Brigida Morais. International Journal of Science Education, Jul2008, Vol. 30 Issue 9, p1249-1264

                Probing scientists' beliefs: how open-minded are modern scientists? By: Coll, Richard K.; Taylor, Neil. International Journal of Science Education, 5/14/2004, Vol. 26 Issue 6, p757-778

                The Conflict Between Religion and Science in Light of the Patterns of Religious Belief Among Scientists. By: Brown, C. Mackenzie. Zygon: Journal of Religion & Science, Sep2003, Vol. 38 Issue 3, p603

                If you have access to a research library then you should be able to find any of these articles. If not, I cannot lawfully provide them to you here. If you send me a message and provide an email address, I’ll see whether I can email you a copy of the pdfs- some are immune to attachments. : /

                At any rate, I would point out that science and religion have gone hand in hand since the first Museum was created by Aristotle (they worshipped Philosophy), since Ibn al-Haytham in the 10th century used repetition and experimental research to test his theories, and since Francis Collins, the research leader of the Human Genome project, wrote The Language of God (an argument for science, for god and how he converted from atheism to Christianity based on his ground breaking research).

                As someone at a Research 1 university, I meet a lot of atheists and agnostics, but I meet a lot more believers- in Christianity, in Islam, in etc. We have graduate students and faculty from all over the world. And you know what I have found? The only people evangelizing their beliefs are the militantly atheist. It’s like some kind of zealoutry for them- they see a believer, it’s time for a throwdown. And what do I encounter from them? People who are ignorant of the belief systems that they target for ridicule and derision.

                Socrates said: “A fool knows everything, a wise man knows nothing.”

                Words to live by in my opinion.

                Above Grecian mantles were chiseled these words... Know Thyself... Nothing in Excess... the pop philosophy of its day.

                by ravagerofworlds2 on Thu Oct 13, 2011 at 08:01:45 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site