Richard Dawkins Atheism Scale==I'm a Plus One

God, the FSM, and everything else.
bobbo_the_Pragmatist
True Skeptic
Posts: 10180
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: Richard Dawkins Atheism Scale==I'm a Plus One

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Tue Jan 17, 2017 10:15 pm

Lance Kennedy wrote:Bobbo

That was not simply my opinion. A detailed survey of Canadian Mensa Club members showed no fewer than 40% had some weird belief.

Lance: yeah: "some weird beliefs" compared to: nothing but and too stupid to know it. Take ME for instance...I know which of my ideas are a bit whacked.....it was how I grew up. BUT, I can reflect upon it. My dumb cluck sister.... doesn't have a clue on just about any subject I can think of.... including home economics on which she taught in schools for 30 years. She can teach the syllabus....but cannot connect any of the buttons.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
Has More Than 9K Posts
Posts: 9869
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Richard Dawkins Atheism Scale==I'm a Plus One

Postby Lance Kennedy » Tue Jan 17, 2017 10:42 pm

The most common of 'some weird belief' was astrology.
High IQ clearly does not protect against believing crap.

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26356
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: Richard Dawkins Atheism Scale==I'm a Plus One

Postby Matthew Ellard » Tue Jan 17, 2017 11:16 pm

Lance Kennedy wrote:Matthew I hate to disillusion you, but IQ is not an appropriate test. Members of the Mensa Club worldwide have been widely reported to support weird beliefs, including astrology, Little Grey Men from outer space, assorted mythical monsters, and other superstitions.


Fair enough. I totally agree with the comment that highly intelligent people are just as likely to have a "woo" belief as a person with a low IQ.

However, I would still argue that a person with a higher IQ has better application use of all critical thinking skills as a whole, across the board. That is a slightly different position.
:D

User avatar
Cadmusteeth
Regular Poster
Posts: 927
Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2014 7:43 pm
Location: Colorado Springs, CO

Re: Richard Dawkins Atheism Scale==I'm a Plus One

Postby Cadmusteeth » Tue Jan 17, 2017 11:50 pm

Now they just need to put it into practice. And be aware of how to properly do it.

User avatar
Abdul Alhazred
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2667
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 9:08 pm
Custom Title: Yes that one.
Location: Chicago

Re: Richard Dawkins Atheism Scale==I'm a Plus One

Postby Abdul Alhazred » Wed Jan 18, 2017 3:48 am

Lance Kennedy wrote:Bobbo

That was not simply my opinion. A detailed survey of Canadian Mensa Club members showed no fewer than 40% had some weird belief.


Such as the weird belief that having a high IQ is a substitute for acting like a human? ;)
Scientists don't know everything, therefore my favorite flavor of stoopidz is true.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
True Skeptic
Posts: 10180
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: Richard Dawkins Atheism Scale==I'm a Plus One

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Wed Jan 18, 2017 3:10 pm

I spent only 10 minutes on google. The "study" is not available. Just oral histories with many saying the study was very small and very flawed. What to think? That without the study available to critique.... its simply FUD.

but.... right or wrong.... we can play a game: what if it was right?/or wrong???? What would "that" mean???

But I'll skip that for what I first thought to myself: assuming its true just as anyone might wish, what does it say about "moi"? If stupid people and smart people both hold unreasonable positions..... what does it say about me? And I have to conclude: odds are I've got some unsupportable positions too? ((I actually already said express that!)) So egotistical we hoomans. We go around thinking "Humans are xyz" but all too often we exclude ourselves from our own thoughts, ................ because thats what humans do. "Egotistical." Fun to think through that. What weird ideas do I actually hold? ON TOPIC: try it yourself. THEN....I wonder who of the two groups is better at thinking through such issues. The Mensa's or the Morons???????

Its NOT ENOUGH identify some kind of ill defined commonality. Its NEVER the whole story....really.... not even a part of the whole story because it stands alone. Probably as FUD. Things that grab hold in a culture, the truth and falsity of which isn't even the point.

Is thinking, and the ability to think, a process or an end point?
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
Has More Than 9K Posts
Posts: 9869
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Richard Dawkins Atheism Scale==I'm a Plus One

Postby Lance Kennedy » Wed Jan 18, 2017 6:32 pm

About high IQ people.

I think of general intelligence (measured by IQ) as being the ability to manipulate data in the head. The problem is that the question still remains "what data?"

Archbishop Ussher was undoubtedly a very intelligent man. He chose to use the writings in the bible to deduce the age of the Earth (6,000 years). While I have not ever studied his method (spare me, please!), I do not doubt that it was done thoroughly, cleverly, and with high intelligence. But the data he began with was flawed.

The same applies to modern day high IQ people. They have a wonderful ability to manipulate data, but if they choose the wrong data, they will still draw wrong conclusions. It takes a good skeptic, who can think critically and rationally, to take a long and critical look at the strength of the data BEFORE beginning the process of manipulating it to draw conclusions. Bad data makes bad conclusions, regardless of how smart a person might be.

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26356
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: Richard Dawkins Atheism Scale==I'm a Plus One

Postby Matthew Ellard » Thu Jan 19, 2017 12:59 am

Lance Kennedy wrote:About high IQ people. I think of general intelligence (measured by IQ) as being the ability to manipulate data in the head. The problem is that the question still remains "what data?"


In Star Trek :The Wrath of Khan, the crew of the Enterprise have to battle Khan in a stolen spaceship, who has a higher IQ than anyone else. Spock points out that Khan has no training and no experience and thus Khan's high IQ does not matter. Spock then uses his experience playing 3D chess to outmaneuver Khan, who keeps thinking in a 2 dimensional battlefield, because that's all Khan knows about.

It's sort of the same point.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
True Skeptic
Posts: 10180
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: Richard Dawkins Atheism Scale==I'm a Plus One

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Thu Jan 19, 2017 1:08 am

Without a SCIENTIFICALLY VALID SURVEY: no one knows.

One of the data sets people can think about: the universe around us and what is reasonable.

Data sets. Amusing. What is YOUR data set? A single sentence in a blog?
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Gord
Real Skeptic
Posts: 29090
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:44 am
Custom Title: Silent Ork
Location: Transcona

Re: Richard Dawkins Atheism Scale==I'm a Plus One

Postby Gord » Fri Jan 20, 2017 8:02 am

digress wrote:atheism now has a richard dawkins scale. how richard dawkins are u

Didn't you used to use capital letters? :befuddled:
"Knowledge grows through infinite timelessness" -- the random fictional Deepak Chopra quote site
"You are also taking my words out of context." -- Justin
"Nullius in verba" -- The Royal Society ["take nobody's word for it"]
#ANDAMOVIE

User avatar
Gord
Real Skeptic
Posts: 29090
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:44 am
Custom Title: Silent Ork
Location: Transcona

Re: Richard Dawkins Atheism Scale==I'm a Plus One

Postby Gord » Fri Jan 20, 2017 8:30 am

"Knowledge grows through infinite timelessness" -- the random fictional Deepak Chopra quote site
"You are also taking my words out of context." -- Justin
"Nullius in verba" -- The Royal Society ["take nobody's word for it"]
#ANDAMOVIE

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
Has More Than 9K Posts
Posts: 9869
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Richard Dawkins Atheism Scale==I'm a Plus One

Postby Lance Kennedy » Fri Jan 20, 2017 6:47 pm

Gord

I have never appreciated people doing what you just did - posting references with no word of explanation. I think you owe it to your potential readers to at least add a few words in summary, to show what the reference is about, to enable people to decide if to read it or not.

In this case, I read it anyway.
The first reference is an old article by Michael Shermer in which he says that smart people believe weird things for non smart reasons, and use their intelligence to defend their irrational beliefs. This is partly true, since they do not necessarily use their smarts at all in such cases.

The second reference is a list of ultra smart people who have irrational ideas. This backs up what I said quite well, but is a bit flawed itself, in that some of the beliefs are not yet demonstrated to be irrational. For example, Elon Musk is listed for his idea that artificial intelligence might prove to be an existential threat. He might be right or wrong, since that possible threat is still well in the future.

User avatar
Gord
Real Skeptic
Posts: 29090
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:44 am
Custom Title: Silent Ork
Location: Transcona

Re: Richard Dawkins Atheism Scale==I'm a Plus One

Postby Gord » Fri Jan 20, 2017 11:09 pm

Lance Kennedy wrote:Gord

I have never appreciated people doing what you just did - posting references with no word of explanation.

I was busy.

I think you owe it to your potential readers to at least add a few words in summary, to show what the reference is about, to enable people to decide if to read it or not.

Nah. If people only read stuff because they think the writer owes them something, then t' hell with 'em. :P
"Knowledge grows through infinite timelessness" -- the random fictional Deepak Chopra quote site
"You are also taking my words out of context." -- Justin
"Nullius in verba" -- The Royal Society ["take nobody's word for it"]
#ANDAMOVIE

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
Has More Than 9K Posts
Posts: 9869
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Richard Dawkins Atheism Scale==I'm a Plus One

Postby Lance Kennedy » Fri Jan 20, 2017 11:13 pm

Gord wrote:Nah. If people only read stuff because they think the writer owes them something, then t' hell with 'em. :P


I understand. But it might be better to think of it like an advertisement. You are encouraging others to do what you thought worthwhile.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
True Skeptic
Posts: 10180
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: Richard Dawkins Atheism Scale==I'm a Plus One

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Sat Jan 21, 2017 1:04 am

I second Lance on the appropriateness of an intro. Its plain lazy not to, or in Gord's case, if too busy to provide even one sentence, then you are too busy to post at all. EXCEPT: in my own mind, Gord has enough history and credibility for "me" to assume its a link to "something" related. But if I don't know the person, or haven't followed the thread closely enough...I skip non-intro'd links....too likely off topic/Rick Rolled.

Lance: isn't it howling in your ears yet that your "evidence" is anecdotal? As you note, the ideas attributed to Felon Musk are not irrational at all. What if most of the High IQ people that make up the Irrational Elite are likewise in error?

You don't know: UNTIL A VALID SURVEY IS PERFORMED. Until then: you are just repeating urban myths. memes.
Last edited by bobbo_the_Pragmatist on Sat Jan 21, 2017 1:49 am, edited 1 time in total.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Gord
Real Skeptic
Posts: 29090
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:44 am
Custom Title: Silent Ork
Location: Transcona

Re: Richard Dawkins Atheism Scale==I'm a Plus One

Postby Gord » Sat Jan 21, 2017 1:38 am

Lance Kennedy wrote:
Gord wrote:Nah. If people only read stuff because they think the writer owes them something, then t' hell with 'em. :P

I understand. But it might be better to think of it like an advertisement. You are encouraging others to do what you thought worthwhile.

:nownow: You're assuming I thought it was worthwhile. I posted what I had ready when I was interrupted because that's what I had collected so far, not because I was finished making the post. What I found worthwhile was to simply post the minimal information I had already prepared rather than abandoning it. The choice was to click a single "Submit" button, or to not click it and lose the two links (since I doubted I would go looking for them again). I chose the former because it retained the information with virtually no expenditure of effort on my part.

When I came back to the forums half an hour later, I did not bother to return to my post because I had lost interest in it. That's how worthwhile I found it: It wasn't worth finishing, or even remembering to think about finishing it.
"Knowledge grows through infinite timelessness" -- the random fictional Deepak Chopra quote site
"You are also taking my words out of context." -- Justin
"Nullius in verba" -- The Royal Society ["take nobody's word for it"]
#ANDAMOVIE

User avatar
digress
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1692
Joined: Thu May 22, 2014 2:11 am
Custom Title: doomer
Contact:

Re: Richard Dawkins Atheism Scale==I'm a Plus One

Postby digress » Sat Jan 21, 2017 3:57 am

Gord wrote:Nah. If people only read stuff because they think the writer owes them something, then t' hell with 'em. :P


to hell with them
  God is an idea.  

"For now, I am going to err on the side of freedom of speech..." -Pyrrho
"Every instance that has always existed is a piece of evidence that God is not needed." -yrreg
"I am not a concept..." -Confidencia

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
Has More Than 9K Posts
Posts: 9869
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Richard Dawkins Atheism Scale==I'm a Plus One

Postby Lance Kennedy » Sat Jan 21, 2017 4:43 am

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:
Lance: isn't it howling in your ears yet that your "evidence" is anecdotal? As you note, the ideas attributed to Felon Musk are not irrational at all. What if most of the High IQ people that make up the Irrational Elite are likewise in error?



The survey I quoted was in New Scientist a few years back. I am going by memory, but I know the irrational ideas the Canadian Mensa Club people had were not like Elon Musk's. They were astrology, ESP and the like. But there have already been enough posts backing up my claim that high IQ does not stop people having weird beliefs. Not something you should deny.

High IQ is a very useful thing to have, but unless it is coupled with high rationality, that use is not as good as it might be. Fortunately, scientists and engineers tend to have both high IQ and high rationality, and they contribute massively to human society.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
True Skeptic
Posts: 10180
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: Richard Dawkins Atheism Scale==I'm a Plus One

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Sat Jan 21, 2017 8:31 am

"Fortunately, scientists and engineers tend to have both high IQ and high rationality,.." //// There ya go..... but we know this.... how?
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
ElectricMonk
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3067
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2015 6:21 pm
Custom Title: His Beatitude

Re: Richard Dawkins Atheism Scale==I'm a Plus One

Postby ElectricMonk » Sat Jan 21, 2017 8:36 am

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:"Fortunately, scientists and engineers tend to have both high IQ and high rationality,.." //// There ya go..... but we know this.... how?


From the fellow scientists I personally know, they are very good at compartmentalizing between their sphere of expertise and topics they have only popular knowledge of.
They might have outrages opinions at times, but they are aware that they can't substantiate them.
I've come up with a set of rules that describe our reactions to technologies:
Spoiler:
1. Anything that is in the world when you’re born is normal and ordinary and is just a natural part of the way the world works.
2. Anything that's invented between when you’re fifteen and thirty-five is new and exciting and revolutionary and you can probably get a career in it.
3. Anything invented after you're thirty-five is against the natural order of things.
- Douglas Adams

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
True Skeptic
Posts: 10180
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: Richard Dawkins Atheism Scale==I'm a Plus One

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Sat Jan 21, 2017 12:59 pm

EM--well, that sounds just like how I described myself.

BUT THIS IS ALL ANECDOTAL.

Shows the power of egotistical outlooks. In my gut, I still think its true, .. .... but analytically, I know there isn't even an attempt to be objective on the subject. How hard should i work to undermine "myself?"
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?


Return to “Belief, Nonbelief, and Philosophy”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest