Deleted
Deleted Member
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 12, 2018 11:24:31 GMT
Children from religious families are less kind and more punitive than those from non-religious households, according to a new study. Academics from seven universities across the world studied Christian, Muslim and non-religious children to test the relationship between religion and morality. They found that religious belief is a negative influence on children’s altruism. “Overall, our findings ... contradict the commonsense and popular assumption that children from religious households are more altruistic and kind towards others,” said the authors of The Negative Association Between Religiousness and Children’s Altruism Across the World, published this week in Current Biology. “More generally, they call into question whether religion is vital for moral development, supporting the idea that secularization of moral discourse will not reduce human kindness – in fact, it will do just the opposite.” The report pointed out that 5.8 billion humans, representing 84% of the worldwide population, identify as religious. “While it is generally accepted that religion contours people’s moral judgments and pro-social behaviour, the relation between religion and morality is a contentious one,” it said. The report was “a welcome antidote to the presumption that religion is a prerequisite of morality”, said Keith Porteous Wood of the UK National Secular Society. “It would be interesting to see further research in this area, but we hope this goes some way to undoing the idea that religious ethics are innately superior to the secular outlook. We suspect that people of all faiths and none share similar ethical principles in their day to day lives, albeit may express them differently depending on their worldview.” According to the respected Pew Research Center, which examines attitudes toward and practices of faith, . In the US, 53% of adults think that faith in God is necessary to morality, a figure which rose to seven of 10 adults in the Middle East and three-quarters of adults in six African countries surveyed by Pew. Almost 1,200 children, aged between five and 12, in the US, Canada, China, Jordan, Turkey and South Africa participated in the study. Almost 24% were Christian, 43% Muslim, and 27.6% non-religious. The numbers of Jewish, Buddhist, Hindu, agnostic and other children were too small to be statistically valid. They were asked to choose stickers and then told there were not enough to go round for all children in their school, to see if they would share. They were also shown film of children pushing and bumping one another to gauge their responses. The findings “robustly demonstrate that children from households identifying as either of the two major world religions (Christianity and Islam) were less altruistic than children from non-religious households”. Older children, usually those with a longer exposure to religion, “exhibit[ed] the greatest negative relations”. The study also found that “religiosity affects children’s punitive tendencies”. Children from religious households “frequently appear to be more judgmental of others’ actions”, it said. Muslim children judged “interpersonal harm as more mean” than children from Christian families, with non-religious children the least judgmental. Muslim children demanded harsher punishment than those from Christian or non-religious homes. At the same time, the report said that religious parents were more likely than others to consider their children to be “more empathetic and more sensitive to the plight of others”. www.theguardian.com/world/2015/nov/06/religious-children-less-altruistic-secular-kids-study
|
|
|
Post by Elizabeth on Sept 12, 2018 14:37:42 GMT
Christianity is not a good study group. You've got thousands of different denominations there and all have different believes and actions and some are surely very evil while others aren't. Muslims don't have denomations though (I think). So only using a fixed group can work. Christianity is too variable because this group changes too much so results will be different from one household to the next.
|
|
|
Post by DKTrav88 on Sept 12, 2018 19:41:34 GMT
Christianity is not a good study group. You've got thousands of different denominations there and all have different believes and actions and some are surely very evil while others aren't. Muslims don't have denomations though (I think). So only using a fixed group can work. Christianity is too variable because this group changes too much so results will be different from one household to the next. There are different sects of Islam, but two main sects which are Sunni and Shi'a. But yes, Christianity varies from household to household. Also, I think this article is making a hasty assumption. It says religious belief is a negative influence on children’s altruism(selflessness), but it didn't prove that. What it did was basically make religion guilty by association. In other words, it is saying that because children of religious families are meaner, it means that religion is making them meaner. It's a logical fallacy. It is the same exact thing as saying "John is a con artist. John has black hair. Therefore, all people with black hair are con artists." which is a ridiculous assumption. To put it in the same format it would say "These children are mean. These children are religious. Therefore, religion is the reason for why they are mean.". Totally ridiculous. Then on top of the guilty by association fallacy, you have to take into account a generalization which is made by the article after that which is that all religious parents raise their children based on the doctrines of their religion, which is not true. There's also the issue with the amount of children of religious families in the sample verses children of non-religious families, which is 67% of religious families verses 27.6% of non-religious families. So naturally the children associated with religion are at odds. I see the article/study as being very biased and fallacious.
|
|
|
Post by fschmidt on Sept 12, 2018 20:47:58 GMT
This article is absolutely worthless. The procedure to test kindness is not described. I even went to the article and then to the original study which is fully of meaningless academic garbage but doesn't actually describe the test.
|
|
|
Post by Elizabeth on Sept 12, 2018 21:26:19 GMT
Christianity is not a good study group. You've got thousands of different denominations there and all have different believes and actions and some are surely very evil while others aren't. Muslims don't have denomations though (I think). So only using a fixed group can work. Christianity is too variable because this group changes too much so results will be different from one household to the next. There are different sects of Islam, but two main sects which are Sunni and Shi'a. But yes, Christianity varies from household to household. Also, I think this article is making a hasty assumption. It says religious belief is a negative influence on children’s altruism(selflessness), but it didn't prove that. What it did was basically make religion guilty by association. In other words, it is saying that because children of religious families are meaner, it means that religion is making them meaner. It's a logical fallacy. It is the same exact thing as saying "John is a con artist. John has black hair. Therefore, all people with black hair are con artists." which is a ridiculous assumption. To put it in the same format it would say "These children are mean. These children are religious. Therefore, religion is the reason for why they are mean.". Totally ridiculous. Then on top of the guilty by association fallacy, you have to take into account a generalization which is made by the article after that which is that all religious parents raise their children based on the doctrines of their religion, which is not true. There's also the issue with the amount of children of religious families in the sample verses children of non-religious families, which is 67% of religious families verses 27.6% of non-religious families. So naturally the children associated with religion are at odds. I see the article/study as being very biased and fallacious. Well, 2 is still less than thousands. What makes them differ? And I agree on the rest you said.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 12, 2018 23:11:04 GMT
This article is absolutely worthless. The procedure to test kindness is not described. I even went to the article and then to the original study which is fully of meaningless academic garbage but doesn't actually describe the test. The article is secular propaganda meant to rewire the future generations away from prior religions...and inevitably to a new one considering the human condition is by nature religious.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 12, 2018 23:15:01 GMT
Christianity is not a good study group. You've got thousands of different denominations there and all have different believes and actions and some are surely very evil while others aren't. Muslims don't have denomations though (I think). So only using a fixed group can work. Christianity is too variable because this group changes too much so results will be different from one household to the next. Muslims Sunni, Shia and Kharijite.
|
|
|
Post by Elizabeth on Sept 12, 2018 23:26:55 GMT
Christianity is not a good study group. You've got thousands of different denominations there and all have different believes and actions and some are surely very evil while others aren't. Muslims don't have denomations though (I think). So only using a fixed group can work. Christianity is too variable because this group changes too much so results will be different from one household to the next. Muslims Sunni, Shia and Kharijite. I just read that as Sunny, Shy, and Karate
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 12, 2018 23:34:41 GMT
Muslims Sunni, Shia and Kharijite. I just read that as Sunny, Shy, and Karate They do say "HI YA!" a lot during their prayers .
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 13, 2018 7:09:35 GMT
This article is absolutely worthless. The procedure to test kindness is not described. I even went to the article and then to the original study which is fully of meaningless academic garbage but doesn't actually describe the test. if you had red it in full , it did describe .
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 13, 2018 7:18:41 GMT
Muslims Sunni, Shia and Kharijite. I just read that as Sunny, Shy, and Karate Didnt surpise me , muslims were the most violent . im on to a local girl , who is very religious , but her voice is so fairy like that shakes up my soul, the only way to make her talk is to talk something controversial, as i spoke to her after 2 years she doesnt budge in normal conversation. so i shared this with her last night and ended up getting a call .. later on she apologized by starting on a rough note , that i made clear , i would pick up the call only if she is calm and also remarked religion causes u aggravation .. then after 30 mins of conversation we hugged it out went to sleep .. her voice wasn't fairy like when she is serious :(
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 13, 2018 7:20:07 GMT
This article is absolutely worthless. The procedure to test kindness is not described. I even went to the article and then to the original study which is fully of meaningless academic garbage but doesn't actually describe the test. They were asked to choose stickers and then told there were not enough to go round for all children in their school, to see if they would share. They were also shown film of children pushing and bumping one another to gauge their responses. The findings “robustly demonstrate that children from households identifying as either of the two major world religions (Christianity and Islam) were less altruistic than children from non-religious households”. Older children, usually those with a longer exposure to religion, “exhibit[ed] the greatest negative relations”. The study also found that “religiosity affects children’s punitive tendencies”. Children from religious households “frequently appear to be more judgmental of others’ actions”, it said. Muslim children judged “interpersonal harm as more mean” than children from Christian families, with non-religious children the least judgmental. Muslim children demanded harsher punishment than those from Christian or non-religious homes.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 13, 2018 7:24:16 GMT
Christianity is not a good study group. You've got thousands of different denominations there and all have different believes and actions and some are surely very evil while others aren't. Muslims don't have denomations though (I think). So only using a fixed group can work. Christianity is too variable because this group changes too much so results will be different from one household to the next. oh boy , u have no idea of so many denominations . why do u think Iran and Saudia are against each other , wait u dont care about politics ... John mentioned just few from tens and tens . In the holy book of Islam which is supreme like bible in Christianity , it clearly states dont classify yourself in sects, but they keep on doing sigh
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 13, 2018 14:13:12 GMT
Christianity is not a good study group. You've got thousands of different denominations there and all have different believes and actions and some are surely very evil while others aren't. Muslims don't have denomations though (I think). So only using a fixed group can work. Christianity is too variable because this group changes too much so results will be different from one household to the next. There are different sects of Islam, but two main sects which are Sunni and Shi'a. But yes, Christianity varies from household to household. Also, I think this article is making a hasty assumption. It says religious belief is a negative influence on children’s altruism(selflessness), but it didn't prove that. What it did was basically make religion guilty by association. In other words, it is saying that because children of religious families are meaner, it means that religion is making them meaner. It's a logical fallacy. It is the same exact thing as saying "John is a con artist. John has black hair. Therefore, all people with black hair are con artists." which is a ridiculous assumption. To put it in the same format it would say "These children are mean. These children are religious. Therefore, religion is the reason for why they are mean.". Totally ridiculous. Then on top of the guilty by association fallacy, you have to take into account a generalization which is made by the article after that which is that all religious parents raise their children based on the doctrines of their religion, which is not true. There's also the issue with the amount of children of religious families in the sample verses children of non-religious families, which is 67% of religious families verses 27.6% of non-religious families. So naturally the children associated with religion are at odds. I see the article/study as being very biased and fallacious. your opinion wont change the results provided through the study .. my own life experience . i find more religious Muslims to be mean .. u know why ,, caz of two reason .. first they think that they are closer to God than anyone else and view other ppl lower( oh look at them they dont practice religion ,, they will burn in hell) , this a very detrimental thinking towards the other God's children which brings me to the second reason, because they conclude only they will land in fictitious heaven , they dont even view other ppl as human beings and hence they are ok with delivering hate speech towards them or are meaner as the study quoted religiosity "affects children’s punitive tendencies" Having said that doesnt mean every religious fanatic is mean ,, in my whole life i just met one religious guy who had a very beautiful soul .. just one
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 13, 2018 14:14:37 GMT
Christianity is not a good study group. You've got thousands of different denominations there and all have different believes and actions and some are surely very evil while others aren't. Muslims don't have denomations though (I think). So only using a fixed group can work. Christianity is too variable because this group changes too much so results will be different from one household to the next. There are different sects of Islam, but two main sects which are Sunni and Shi'a. But yes, Christianity varies from household to household. Also, I think this article is making a hasty assumption. It says religious belief is a negative influence on children’s altruism(selflessness), but it didn't prove that. What it did was basically make religion guilty by association. In other words, it is saying that because children of religious families are meaner, it means that religion is making them meaner. It's a logical fallacy. It is the same exact thing as saying "John is a con artist. John has black hair. Therefore, all people with black hair are con artists." which is a ridiculous assumption. To put it in the same format it would say "These children are mean. These children are religious. Therefore, religion is the reason for why they are mean.". Totally ridiculous. Then on top of the guilty by association fallacy, you have to take into account a generalization which is made by the article after that which is that all religious parents raise their children based on the doctrines of their religion, which is not true. There's also the issue with the amount of children of religious families in the sample verses children of non-religious families, which is 67% of religious families verses 27.6% of non-religious families. So naturally the children associated with religion are at odds. I see the article/study as being very biased and fallacious. and one thing more nations which are least religious are most peaceful .. care to think why
|
|