HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: mam@jcnpc.cmhnet.org (Mike A. McAngus)
Subject: Re: Truth
Organization: Homebrew Virtual Reality Labs
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 11:16:59 GMT

Robert Huss (rhuss+@EDRC.CMU.EDU) wrote:
: 
:    This concept of Truth has been brought up in another discussion, and I thin
 it might be interesting enough to get it's own subject line.  The possibilitie
s are:
: 
: 1. There is only one Truth.  One way the universe was created, one
: correct way to believe, one way to be Right.  
: 
: 2. There is one Big Truth, which allows for some divergence at lower levels,
: so there could be more than one way to believe and still be right.  There is
still only one way the universe was created, but multiple ways to believe,
: and multiple ways to be right.
:
: 3. There is no such thing as One Truth.  Each person's truth is unique.
: There are multiple ways for the universe to have been created, multiple ways
to
: believe, and multiple ways to be right.
:
:
:    Agreement on the subject of Truth doesn't mean we have to agree on
: what the truth is.  Can anyone provide other possibilities for the existance
: of Truth?

4.  There is no such thing as One Truth (the Buzzards Big-T truth).  There are
lots of little truths, most of which are contextual.  There is only one way
that the unverse was created.
-- 
Mike McAngus (mam@jcnpc.cmhnet.org)| Let the raucous sleigh bells ringle   | Tom
The Truth is still the Truth	   | Hail our dear old fried Chris Kringle |Lehrer
Even if you choose to ignore it.   | Driving his reindeer across the sky
I wasn't sure if anyone would join | Don't stand underneath when they fly by. 
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
From: sdoe@nmsu.edu (Stephen Doe)
Subject: Re: iq<->religion: connection?
Organization: New Mexico State University
Distribution: world,public
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1992 20:12:06 GMT

In article <1992Dec30.125552.1056@prime.mdata.fi> iikkap@mits.mdata.fi (Iikka Paavolainen) writes:
>In article <1992Dec30.063253.3689@nmsu.edu> sdoe@nmsu.edu (Stephen Doe) writes:
>>
>>There's no moderator in a.a.  He's just setting his newsreader to
>>automatically skip articles on this topic, so he doesn't need to read
>>our bickering.  
>
>Hey, what if I do that too? 8)

That's fine.  I'm beginning to suspect we've been "talking past" each
other anyway.  Maybe it was a bit unreasonable of me to expect a
rigorous proof of your correlation, since you indicated later on that
it was just a tentative observation, and you were looking for
something more to back it up.  From my perspective you weren't very
clear in saying this though, and did drag in stuff about "emotional
attachment" and so on, which I found objectionable.  Probably the best
thing to do is to let this thread die, an action I'm sure most of the
others reading this particular thread would appreciate.

SD
 
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
From: sdoe@nmsu.edu (Stephen Doe)
Subject: Re: iq<->religion: connection?
Organization: New Mexico State University
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1992 07:12:10 GMT

In article <1992Dec19.224717.1993@prime.mdata.fi> iikkap@mits.mdata.fi (Iikka Paavolainen) writes:
>Am I seeing wrongly, or is there a connection between one's IQ and one's
>religiousness? Of all people I know, I know only about 8 exceptionally smart
>people (IQ>125), and all of them happen to be atheists. On the contrary, the 
>dumbest people I've seen (eg. unable to use a remote control) are the most
>religious. Observing other atheists that I don't know (from this group for
>example) leads me to make a conclusion that on the average, atheists have a
>much better sense of logic (and thus usually have a higher IQ) and think much
>more clearly than religious people. From my own experiences, I can say that
>freeing oneself from the grasp of religion requires a certain level of logical
>thinking. Coincidentally, all these 8 people are mathematically gifted.
>When I speak of atheism here, I mean it to be a lack of belief in any god or
>superstition.
>Opinions?
>
>BTW, if this offended you, go to a church instead of coming to alt.atheism.
>--
> __/|_  ,  ,--------------------------------------------------------------,
>/o    \/:--| Iikka Paavolainen / iikkap@mits.mdata.fi, in Espoo, Finland  |
>\__~__/\:--| "I won't have a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent."    |
>   `    `  `--------------------------------------------------------------'
 
Ah, here's the first post in the series.  Well, old bean, in this
first post you didn't:

tell us the size of your sample (later you say it's 1000)

tell us how you prevented any bias from creeping into your
observations (oh, that's right, you're not biased at all.  Yeah,
right, give me a break)

tell us how the sample was selected

tell us how you determined degree of religiousness, and IQ, for the
1000 person sample you later refer to 

etc.

Do you see what I am getting at now?

At most, tentative observations like this should prompt us to see if
such a correlation exists.  In and of itself, this just doesn't cut it
as a "proof" of your correlation, not without a lot more to back it
up.  This isn't a bedtime story, you can't just make sweeping
generalizations on the basis of such flimsy evidence.  Ah, but I
forget, my emotional commitment to decent intellectual standards and
fairness have blinded me to the Gospel as propounded by Iikka
Paavolainen.  

It still seems to me that this correlation is just being used as a
convenient device to dismiss theists with the wave of a hand.  Ad
hominem all the way.

SD


Newsgroups: alt.atheism
From: sdoe@nmsu.edu (Stephen Doe)
Subject: Re: iq<->religion: connection?
Organization: New Mexico State University
Distribution: world,public
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1992 02:05:56 GMT

In article <1992Dec28.010237.15761@prime.mdata.fi> iikkap@mits.mdata.fi (Iikka Paavolainen) writes:
>I didn't want to include any quotes, because your statements had degenerated
>into pointless babblings. Insulting is an easy way to show weakness, and you
>showed it well.

If you are talking to me, then I will say once again that you're just
engaging in more ad hominem.  I hope you're not so unpleasant to all
who happen to disagree with you, especially when your own methodology
is so sloppy.

I'm so sorry, I didn't know we weren't allowed to question how you
reach your conclusions.  How unforgivably gauche of me.  What a cad I
must be.  

SD
From: iikkap@mits.mdata.fi (Iikka Paavolainen)
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
Subject: Re: iq<->religion: connection?
Date: 25 Dec 92 16:23:55 GMT
Organization: Microdata Oy, Helsinki, Finland

In article <Stafford-221292170738@stafford.winona.msus.edu> Stafford@Vax2.Winona.MSUS.EDU (John Stafford) writes:
>Consistent in my experience, too.  However, I do find among some of the
>brightest (and intellectually brave) a compelling interest in
>transcendental consciousness or the idea of a greater 'mind' but not
>the conventional notion of a god.

Environment, personality and idealistics are also important factors, 
but not as important is logical intelligence. You can also find atheists
among the dumbest people.

--
 __/|_  ,  ,--------------------------------------------------------------,
/o    \/:--| Iikka Paavolainen / iikkap@mits.mdata.fi, in Espoo, Finland  |
\__~__/\:--| "I won't have a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent."    |
   `    `  `--------------------------------------------------------------'
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
From: iikkap@mits.mdata.fi (Iikka Paavolainen)
Subject: Re: iq<->religion: connection?
Organization: Microdata Oy, Helsinki, Finland
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1992 22:45:44 GMT

In article <2934646808.0.p00168@psilink.com> p00168@psilink.com (James F. Tims) writes:
>Here is a brief summary of some studies, which I am sure will interest
>no one on this thread.  For every study there is the counterargument
>that it proves nothing. 

[studies deleted]

Thank you *very* much, the posting was very resourceful.
Nice to see people who bother to post info they have.

--
 __/|_  ,  ,--------------------------------------------------------------,
/o    \/:--| Iikka Paavolainen / iikkap@mits.mdata.fi, in Espoo, Finland  |
\__~__/\:--| "I won't have a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent."    |
   `    `  `--------------------------------------------------------------'
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
From: sdoe@nmsu.edu (Stephen Doe)
Subject: Re: iq<->religion: connection?
Organization: New Mexico State University
Distribution: world,public
Date: Sat, 26 Dec 1992 23:03:21 GMT

In article <1992Dec26.220732.28497@prime.mdata.fi> iikkap@mits.mdata.fi (Iikka Paavolainen) writes:
>In article <1992Dec26.152251.12274@jcnpc.cmhnet.org> mam@jcnpc.cmhnet.org (Mike A. McAngus) writes:
>>Iikka Paavolainen (iikkap@mits.mdata.fi) wrote:

>>: >I have yet to see a satisfactory definition of intelligence, one that
>>: >doesn't boil down to how well one does on some arbitrary intelligence
>>: >test.
>>:
>>: Nobody was talking about the whole definition of intelligence, just the
>>: logical and abstract thinking part, which is easy to measure.
>>
>>Where is your statistical study of this area of intelligence?
>
>On my desk.

Then by all means, tell us more about this study.  If you're correct,
it's just the sort of substantiation that OUGHT to have been provided
by this thread in the first place.

SD
Newsgroups: alt.atheism,talk.religion.misc,alt.pagan
From: jginther@epas.utoronto.ca (James Ginther)
Subject: Re: did I like miss your point?
Organization: University of Toronto - EPAS
Date: Sat, 2 Jan 1993 04:59:17 GMT

In article <C073MM.IA8@news.cso.uiuc.edu> ba@mrcnext.cso.uiuc.edu
(B.A. Davis-Howe) writes: (some deleted)
>
>  As for the use of
>Latin, it was used by scholars as the universal language, however, it was 
>against Canon Law in the Roman Church for anyone who was not a priest to
>interpret the scriptures, and it was forbidden to translate it into any
>laguage of the people.  The official position was that people, if they read
>the scriptures directly, would misinterpret them and disagree with the Roman
>Church.

Fascinating.  I am quite curious, though, as to exactly where in Canon
Law this may be found.  Is it found in Gratian's Decretum or does it
appear even earlier than that? And if so, in what major collection? I
don't remember seeing this, but I would be happy to be instructed if I
have missed it. 



J.R. Ginther
Centre for Medieval Studies

________________________________________
If I had any opinions that counted, they
would be my own.
________________________________________
From: iikkap@mits.mdata.fi (Iikka Paavolainen)
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
Subject: Re: iq<->religion: connection?
Date: 27 Dec 92 13:50:19 GMT
Distribution: world,public
Organization: Microdata Oy, Helsinki, Finland

In article <1992Dec27.120409.1687@nmsu.edu> sdoe@nmsu.edu (Stephen Doe) writes:
>In article <1992Dec27.105721.6061@prime.mdata.fi> iikkap@mits.mdata.fi (Iikka Paavolainen) writes:
>>First tell me what is unclear.
>>I suppose you have your own sources, too?
>
>Look, all I want is for someone, on EITHER side of the issue, to cite
>some support more substantial than the "me and my friends" argument.
>That's all I ask.  Refer me to a paper published in some reputable
>journal, and I'll be happy.  Give us some relevant numbers from that
>study on your desk, tell us how it was carried out!  That is something
>no one participating in this discussion has done yet.  

Tell me, how many people do you know? 300? 400? 500? Are those insignificant
values?

8 people out of 1000 means that the sample was 1000. How come you find it so
hard to understand anything? Must everything be served to you on a dish?

You want a journal to refer to? How about Synapsia, Volume 3 Number 1, for
example?

>
>SD


--
 __/|_  ,  ,--------------------------------------------------------------,
/o    \/:--| Iikka Paavolainen / iikkap@mits.mdata.fi, in Espoo, Finland  |
\__~__/\:--| "I won't have a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent."    |
   `    `  `--------------------------------------------------------------'
From: cj@eno.esd.sgi.com.esd.sgi.com (C.J. Silverio)
Subject: Re: THE MIND OF THE BIBLE BELIEVER
Reply-To: cj@sgi.com
Organization: SGI TechPubs
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 92 23:21:38 GMT

---
In article <1992Dec28.212253.19558@arden.linet.org>, joeb@arden.linet.org writes:
|npm@dale.cts.com (Nancy Milligan) asks:
|>Why don't Christians hate fortune tellers and psycis [sic] with the same
|>ferocity as they do homosexuals.[...]

|*I* don't hate homos nor do any Christians I know!  Prehaps you are confusing
|our rage that our children are being taught in public school that its
|acceptable behavior and we have to pay for it!

Liar.

People like you are why I despise much of Christianity.

---
cj@eno.esd.sgi.com      C J Silverio/Brahms Gang/Berkeley CA 94720
"Oh, you're a bigot all right, you just feel that saying you have the 
right to be one means you're liberal.  If it didn't happen so often, 
it would be funny."  Mark Sobolewski, in talk.religion.misc
From: alanf@tekig6.PEN.TEK.COM (Alan M Feuerbacher)
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
Subject: Re: Violence in the bible?
Date: 30 Dec 92 11:12:02 GMT
Organization: Tektronix, Inc., Beaverton,  OR.

In article <1992Dec29.214650.8703@nwnexus.WA.COM> pcrayne@halcyon.com (Peter C. Crayne) writes:
| ......
|angnostic. I was relating the story of some prophet or other who, after
|communing with god in the wilderness comes back into town, wherupon he
|is teased by children. The prophet calls upon god to punish them, and
|god send wild animals to kill them, and they are devoured.
|My friend claims "I've read the whole bible and that story isn't in it".
|I am pretty sure it is, but I'm not really qualified to dispute him. I
|don't seem to have a bible anymore, and rejected church & sunday school
|at an early age. My bible knowledge is therefore fairly thin.
|Can anybody nail this one down for me?

2 Kings 2:23-24:  From there he [Elisha] went up to Bethel.  As he
   was going up the road, some little boys came out of the town and
   jeered at him, saying, "Go away, baldhead!  Go away, baldhead!"
   He turned around and looked at them and cursed them in the name
   of the LORD.  Thereupon, two she-bears came out of the woods and
   mangled forty-two of the children. (Tanakh)

Alan Feuerbacher
alanf@atlas.pen.tek.com

Newsgroups: alt.atheism
From: iikkap@mits.mdata.fi (Iikka Paavolainen)
Subject: Re: iq<->religion: connection?
Organization: Microdata Oy, Helsinki, Finland
Distribution: world,public
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1992 12:42:39 GMT

In article <1992Dec30.001651.20995@jcnpc.cmhnet.org> mam@jcnpc.cmhnet.org (Mike A. McAngus) writes:
>
>NONONONONONO!  You made the claim that Atheists are more intelligent than 
>Xians.  The sole support you've offered for this assertion is an anecdote.  Mr.
>Doe and I have challenged the limited nature of your sample.  So put up or shut
>up.  We are not making a claim, you are.  We simply doubt the accuracy of your 
>observations.

I'm not making a claim either. 
BTW, every observation has its limits, that's why I'm here to hear more.

>-- 
>Mike McAngus 			 | As if I needed Another time consuming hobby.
>(mam@jcnpc.cmhnet.org)		 | 
>The Truth is still the Truth	 | This Post exploits illiterates.
>Even if you choose to ignore it. | 


--
 __/|_  ,  ,--------------------------------------------------------------,
/o    \/:--| Iikka Paavolainen / iikkap@mits.mdata.fi, in Espoo, Finland  |
\__~__/\:--| "I won't have a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent."    |
   `    `  `--------------------------------------------------------------'
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
Subject: Re: iq<->religion: connection?
From: Stafford@Vax2.Winona.MSUS.EDU (John Stafford)
Date: 22 Dec 92 17:12:30 -0600
Followup-To: alt.atheism
 <1992Dec17.040551.8750@timesink.chi.il.us> <s!V=jTC@engin.umich.edu> <1992Dec19.224717.1993@prime.mdata.fi>
Distribution: world
Organization: MSUS

In article <1992Dec19.224717.1993@prime.mdata.fi>, iikkap@mits.mdata.fi
(Iikka Paavolainen) wrote:
> 
> Am I seeing wrongly, or is there a connection between one's IQ and one's
> religiousness? Of all people I know, I know only about 8 exceptionally smart
> people (IQ>125), and all of them happen to be atheists. On the contrary, the 
> dumbest people I've seen (eg. unable to use a remote control) are the most
> religious. 

Consistent in my experience, too.  However, I do find among some of the
brightest (and intellectually brave) a compelling interest in
transcendental consciousness or the idea of a greater 'mind' but not
the conventional notion of a god.
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
From: pcrayne@halcyon.com (Peter C. Crayne)
Subject: Re: Violence in the bible?
Organization: The 23:00 News and Mail Service
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1992 21:46:50 GMT

Hi all. I am posting without first reading the FAQ! At least nobody on
this newsgroup is likely to tell me that I'll be smitten down with flame
for it. :-) (Except virtual flame, perhaps).

Anyway, I was recently discussing religious matters with a friend who is
semi-religious. I havn't decided whether I'm a weak athiest or an
angnostic. I was relating the story of some prophet or other who, after
communing with god in the wilderness comes back into town, wherupon he
is teased by children. The prophet calls upon god to punish them, and
god send wild animals to kill them, and they are devoured.
My friend claims "I've read the whole bible and that story isn't in it".
I am pretty sure it is, but I'm not really qualified to dispute him. I
don't seem to have a bible anymore, and rejected church & sunday school
at an early age. My bible knowledge is therefore fairly thin.
Can anybody nail this one down for me?

TIA,
-Pete
pcrayne@halcyon.com
Did you ever notice that a cold pancake feels a lot like what clammy,
dead skin probably feels like?

Newsgroups: alt.atheism
From: darice@yoyo.cc.monash.edu.au (Fred Rice)
Subject: Re: iq<->religion: connection?
Organization: Monash University, Melb., Australia.
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1992 04:48:27 GMT

In <2934646808.0.p00168@psilink.com> p00168@psilink.com (James F. Tims) writes:

>Here is a brief summary of some studies, which I am sure will interest
>no one on this thread.  For every study there is the counterargument
>that it proves nothing. 

[...list of studies deleted...]

Some comments on these studies (trying to provide the counterarguments
that they prove nothing, or at least not as much as others might have
them prove...):

Just as background, many of the studies cited purportedly showed a
negative correlation between religiosity and IQ, except for a couple of
them in which no correlation was found.

Some things to note:

1. Most of the studies cited, I assume, were done in the USA (this is
only stated in some of the citations, in other citations it is not
stated where the studies were done).  Thus, most likely where
"religiosity" is mentioned, it means Christian religiosity (except for
the one study on Orthodox Judaism).  This is not extendable, then, to
other religions, or even to Christianity in other societies, i.e.
American culture and impressions of Christianity in that culture could
play a fundamental role in the results of these studies.

2. Another explanation can be found for the negative correlation found
in many of these studies between "religiosity" and IQ other than it
being a relationship between religiosity and IQ per se.  For example,
perhaps it is more likely for people with high IQ to be willing to
challenge the norms of their society, and to have a likelihood to move
against the flow.  Since the society in which these studies were taken
is presumably a predominantly Christian one, according to this thesis
those with high IQs would tend to leave or oppose Christianity.
According to this thesis, if the studies cited by the previous poster
were taken in predominantly atheist societies, those with higher IQs
would be the religious.

Some evidence (not necessarily hard evidence, but at least evidence that
can be investigated further) relevant to the 2 above comments:

In many Islamic countries over the past 20 or so years, there seems to
have been an "Islamic revival".  This seems to have been largely led by
the university educated and by students, rebelling against the period of
widespread "Westernization" and Arab socialism (in some places) that
occurred in many Islamic countries in the preceding decades.  Women
university students, for example, have taken up wearing headscarves (as
specified by Islam) where their mothers had discarded them.  This
example seems to be a counter-example to the negative correlation
between religiosity and IQ purportedly found in the studies cited by the
previous poster, and perhaps some positive evidence for my two points
made above.
 
 Fred Rice
 darice@yoyo.cc.monash.edu.au   

Newsgroups: alt.atheism
From: dmcanzi@watserv1.uwaterloo.ca (David Canzi)
Subject: Re: IQ scores
Organization: University of Waterloo
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 02:23:46 GMT

In article <11008@vice.ICO.TEK.COM> bobbe@vice.ICO.TEK.COM (Robert Beauchaine) writes:
>    I don't have clue one as to my IQ score other than knowing it's
>    probably higher than that of the average german shepherd.

Not necessarily.  If a human's IQ is defined by comparison to the
intellectual performance of an average human, then a dog's IQ should be
defined by comparison to the average dog, no?  Since the average German
shepherd is an above average dog (an uberhund, perhaps?), it then
follows that the average German shepherd has a higher IQ than the
average human.

(Nevertheless, if I needed an accountant or lawyer, it would be my
speciesistic prejudice to prefer a human.)
-- 
David Canzi
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
From: iikkap@mits.mdata.fi (Iikka Paavolainen)
Subject: Re: iq<->religion: connection?
Organization: Microdata Oy, Helsinki, Finland
Distribution: world,public
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1992 23:09:54 GMT

In article <1992Dec28.194627.15692@nmsu.edu> sdoe@nmsu.edu (Stephen Doe) writes:
>>
>>Here is a brief summary of some studies, which I am sure will interest
>>no one on this thread.  For every study there is the counterargument
>>that it proves nothing. 
>
>[Long list of studies deleted]
>
>Now *that's* more like it.  You could learn from this guy, Iikka--he
>actually went out and found something to substantiate this position.
>Also, he takes due note of the fact that counterarguments exist to
>these studies.
>
>Why couldn't you go do this, Iikka?  Why did you need to flame and
>insult instead?

I'm sorry, but I have a tendency to laugh at people like you. *You* should
take example to this person, as this is what I wanted as replies to my post.
Contrary to your beliefs, not everyone is like you. 

What I don't understand, why you have to make up such things that I insulted
or flamed you. I have no intention whatsoever to insult people in discussions
as it is both naive and just creates a lot of junk posts. As you probably
notice, you haven't been much of a benevolent factor in this discussion. Well,
I suppose I have all the info I need on this subject.

>
>SD


--
 __/|_  ,  ,--------------------------------------------------------------,
/o    \/:--| Iikka Paavolainen / iikkap@mits.mdata.fi, in Espoo, Finland  |
\__~__/\:--| "I won't have a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent."    |
   `    `  `--------------------------------------------------------------'
Xref: sparky alt.atheism:24475 talk.religion.misc:24726