26 Mar 12
Originally posted by sonhouseNo, I was wondering why all of those he picked were bias.
So any truth in the data is disregarded if you think the researcher is biased?
I have seen complaints here more than a few times that links given to prove
a point were by theist and they were blasted for the bias. So when he started
talking about data I thought he was going to bring in some data that proved
his point that were so bias. So when he brought in links by those that push
that agenda I was a little surprised.
I'll still go through the links starting with the one he rec.
Kelly
Originally posted by KellyJayHere is a link to a UNODC report of global homicide rates by country. There's the report itself plus a link to a spreadsheet with the raw numbers.
No, I was wondering why all of those he picked were bias.
I have seen complaints here more than a few times that links given to prove
a point were by theist and they were blasted for the bias. So when he started
talking about data I thought he was going to bring in some data that proved
his point that were so bias. So when he brought in links by those t ...[text shortened]... was a little surprised.
I'll still go through the links starting with the one he rec.
Kelly
http://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/statistics/crime/global-study-on-homicide-2011.html
It talks about correlations with economic and other data but the raw data could be tied to other data sets giving religiosity. For example, this one:
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/rel_rel-religion-religions
gives the religious breakdown of each countries populace so maybe something could be done with that. It may be that those studies your are looking through have simply taken this source data and found those correlations. Have a look at the reliability of the source data and look at the methods used rather than purely on the motives of the researchers.
The trouble is, those who do take that data and do the research with it are likely to have a specific question they want to answer and the choice of question may well be driven by their biases. Likewise, the likelihood that such research will be published will be affected by whether it agrees with their expectations. This is a known issue (called publication bias) that people like Ben Goldacre are trying to fix, particularly in the medical arena, by getting research properly registered before it is started.
So the fact that this research only ever has atheist authors could be down to a number of reasons, including
1. Maybe religious researchers are not doing the research because they are afraid the results will show religion in a bad light. Or maybe they are doing the research but the results always go against their agenda so they neglect to publish it.
2. Maybe only atheists are doing the research because they want to demonstrate a correlation. Maybe they are getting both positive and negative results but are only ever publishing the studies that agree with their agenda's.
If there really was no link at all, then I think you would get both religious and non-religious researchers publishing but you would find a bias in the results published based on the agendas of the publishers.
Of course there is also the difficulty of getting reliable, accurate data on religious belief, as highlighted by the recent research commissioned by the Richard Dawkins crowd.
Then you have the issue of whether any apparent correlation is actually a causation.
--- Penguin.
- Joined
- 31 May 06
- Moves
- 1795
26 Mar 12
Originally posted by PenguinThis is indeed true, and I would like to make clear at this point that the fact that the
Then you have the issue of whether any apparent correlation is actually a causation.
--- Penguin.
correlation between the level of religiosity of a place and various social indicators does
not necessitate a causal link between religious belief and crime (or any other factors)
but does disprove the many claims that societies becoming more secular necessarily leads
to increased crime (or other social ills).
This point is made clear by the author I cited.
An example of correlation without causation would be over representation of African Americans
in the prison system.
If you didn't understand statistics or scientific methods you could look at the statistics on prison
populations and conclude that because there are proportionally more African Americans in prison
than there are African Americans in the general population that African Americans are naturally more
inclined to commit crime.
Or in other words there is a causal link and they commit crimes because they are African Americans.
This is not true however.
The majority of criminals (of any origin) come from poor and deprived backgrounds.
African Americans (as a product of some of the more shameful parts of Americas history) are
disproportionately poor and impoverished.
This leads to there being a higher proportion of African Americans in the prison system than in the
general population without there being any causal link between being an African American and committing
crime.
And importantly it means that measures designed to reduce crime need to be targeted at poverty and
not at racial minorities.
In the case of these studies there is no known causal link between committing crime and religious belief.
There may or may not be one.
But what the research does demonstrate is that IF there is a causal link between atheism and crime then
it is a negative one (ie crime goes down with increasing atheism).
Which was my point in refuting Kelly's assertions that if religion was eradicated/diminished crime and societal
welfare would get worse.
I cited that particular author because he addresses that very issue specifically.
And he does cite all the studies from which he got his data and made his methods open and transparent so if you
were so minded you can go check the raw data yourself.
26 Mar 12
Originally posted by KellyJaySo you know anyone that has ever made such a claim? Or are you 'not getting' some imaginary person you made up as a strawman?
I do not get those that think if they can do away with religion that people will
not be doing evil things.
... I also imagine things would be much worse too since restraints would be greatly deminished upon mankinds lusts.
Theists often imagine that, but the facts simply do not support such a stance. Others have pointed you to statistic that show otherwise. What is your personal experience? How many atheists do you know and how would you describe their behavior morally as compared to the various theists you know? Worse or better on average?
- Joined
- 16 Jan 07
- Moves
- 95105
26 Mar 12
the words good and evil get thrown around on this forum like they are clean and simple decisions people make. this person is evil, this person is good. is evil quantifiable or is it subjective?, is anybody really evil? isnt evil really just a word to used in childrens books to simplify a character to help children understand morals. if you take child A and bring them up in a horrible environment and they grow up to commit a horrible crime, are they now evil? were they evil when they were born, or at what point do they become 'evil'. it is a terrible word and doesn't do justice to the complexities of the human brain and its strength and its frailties. it seems to me that it is easier for the world to call people good or evil then they can praise them or lock the up without having to really deal with societies issues.
26 Mar 12
1 edit
Originally posted by PenguinI agree setting up the study could bias it too, data doesn't lie, but cherry
Here is a link to a UNODC report of global homicide rates by country. There's the report itself plus a link to a spreadsheet with the raw numbers.
http://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/statistics/crime/global-study-on-homicide-2011.html
It talks about correlations with economic and other data but the raw data could be tied to other data sets ou have the issue of whether any apparent correlation is actually a causation.
--- Penguin.
picking data points could mislead. 🙂
Kelly
26 Mar 12
Originally posted by googlefudgeThe trouble I see is going to be how you gather your data, for example we
This is indeed true, and I would like to make clear at this point that the fact that the
correlation between the level of religiosity of a place and various social indicators does
not necessitate a causal link between religious belief and crime (or any other factors)
but does disprove the many claims that societies becoming more secular necessarily ...[text shortened]... ethods open and transparent so if you
were so minded you can go check the raw data yourself.
could call America very religious country, but that does not at all mean that
the religious in that country are the ones carrying out all the crime. So if we
paint American as a religious country and say that it is crime ridden and fail
to take into account that those slipping away from religion are causing the
crimes than your study would be flawed wouldn't you think?
Kelly
26 Mar 12
2 edits
Originally posted by KellyJayI don't think that is what is being suggested by the research. It's just saying that crime overall is higher when the religious polulation of a country is higher, not who the criminals are. It could indeed be that the criminals are all non-religous. That would be easy to check though. There are probably studies of the religious beliefs of the prison population...
The trouble I see is going to be how you gather your data, for example we
could call America very religious country, but that does not at all mean that
the religious in that country are the ones carrying out all the crime. So if we
paint American as a religious country and say that it is crime ridden and fail
to take into account that those slipping awa ...[text shortened]... rom religion are causing the
crimes than your study would be flawed wouldn't you think?
Kelly
Here is a report on the UK prison population:
http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CCkQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.parliament.uk%2Fbriefing-papers%2FSN04334.pdf&ei=mtFwT9etIcTU8gPO8-y-DQ&usg=AFQjCNHbGgTGb1ZxvE3w_nYWbjNzHQ74qQ
It says that 49.9% are Christian and less than 32.5% are atheist.
This site covers the American situation:
http://www.adherents.com/misc/adh_prison.html
and gives the non-religious population as just under 20%.
So my quick browse of the internet suggests that the prison population is mainly religious.
Of course, as I previously mentioned, the Dawkins foundation survey does imply that many of those may say they are religious but don't actually follow their churches teachings. You might want to make something of that next.
--- Pengun.
26 Mar 12
Originally posted by jaywillA) I cannot remember a news report about a non religious person doing a good deed either but I am sure they do them all the time.
No one has said anything about the perception left upon the public about "religious people" by pop media.
There may be 100 wonderful deeds in a week done towards others by people of faith. Nothing outside of the circles of faith reports on them. But if [b] one "clergyman" or one "priest" has a scandel it is promptly sensationalized around the world. ...[text shortened]... hing" or that only an endless procession of evil acts are produced by people of faith.[/b]
B) Not sure it is possible to sensationalize sexual and physical abuse, if that is the scandal your referring to; and the reason it is perhaps more shock worthy is because the 'clergymen' and 'priests' still occupy a position of trust in even the most secular societies, it is the abuse of that trust that may add to the scandal.
Oh yeah and the apparent cover up by the church hierarchy's/Whores of Babylon.
26 Mar 12
Originally posted by KellyJayThe only way to do away with religion, or what it stands for, is to cut out the heart that you refer to.
I do not get those that think if they can do away with religion that people will
not be doing evil things. We due to our hearts act out in certain ways due to
our nature, the 'reasons' or 'causes' for us to act that is driven mainly due to
our hearts and what is in them. If we could do away with religion, and I do not
believe it is possible, nothing wou ...[text shortened]... be much
worse too since restraints would be greatly deminished upon mankinds lusts.
Kelly
27 Mar 12
1 edit
Originally posted by KellyJayHi Kelly,
No, I was wondering why all of those he picked were bias.
I have seen complaints here more than a few times that links given to prove
a point were by theist and they were blasted for the bias. So when he started
talking about data I thought he was going to bring in some data that proved
his point that were so bias. So when he brought in links by those t ...[text shortened]... was a little surprised.
I'll still go through the links starting with the one he rec.
Kelly
Have you had a chance to look through any of Googlefudge's links? If so what are your thoughts on the data (was it well sourced and free from bias?) and their interpretation (was it justified?).
--- Penguin.
27 Mar 12
Originally posted by KellyJayDo you not believe it is possible for all people to do away with religion, or do you believe that any single society with no religion would be unable to function? Are you saying that a community of atheists would self destruct, or are you just saying there will always be some religious people?
If we could do away with religion, and I do not believe it is possible,...
- Joined
- 31 May 06
- Moves
- 1795
Originally posted by KellyJayYou evidently didn't read the links I posted.
The trouble I see is going to be how you gather your data, for example we
could call America very religious country, but that does not at all mean that
the religious in that country are the ones carrying out all the crime. So if we
paint American as a religious country and say that it is crime ridden and fail
to take into account that those slipping awa ...[text shortened]... rom religion are causing the
crimes than your study would be flawed wouldn't you think?
Kelly
They include the information that despite America being conservatively 16% atheist.
atheists make up less than 1% of your prison population.
EDIT: http://www.pitzer.edu/academics/faculty/zuckerman/Zuckerman_on_Atheism.pdf
P7
"But when it comes to more serious
or violent crimes, such as murder, there is simply no evidence suggesting that
atheist and secular people are more likely to commit such crimes than religious people.
After all, America’s bulging prisons are not full of atheists; according to Golumbaski
(1997), only 0.2 percent of prisoners in the USA are atheists – a major underrepresentation[sic]."
Also crime and other factors was broken down by state and the more religious the
state was the higher the crime rate.
Also it was broken down by city and similar results were found.
And if it were true that the less religious people got the more they committed crime then
there would HAVE to be a positive correlation between a country getting more secular and
crime rates and the reverse of that is true.
You would know this if you had actually read the links I gave you because this obvious and basic
issues was of course dealt with because the people doing these studies are not thick.
- Joined
- 31 May 06
- Moves
- 1795
27 Mar 12
Originally posted by PenguinThe stat from the study you cite looks like this...
This site covers the American situation:
http://www.adherents.com/misc/adh_prison.html
and gives the non-religious population as just under 20%.
[heavily Snipped]
--- Pengun.
None/Atheist/Unknown 18,537 19.908%
Which means they are including all those who didn't want to answer the question in the
same group as atheists which means that there is no way of knowing (from these numbers)
how many of those are actually atheists.