Good article, but more question-begging.  What kinds of  education lead to
religious decline ? Obviously education for anything and you spend a great  
deal
of time in skills mastery and learning professional content. If there is  
zero 
religious knowledge in that content, religion will become less important 
in terms of time-budgeting.
.
This probably is irrelevant in terms of MA programs and higher, but  
undergrads
can always minor is some field that  includes religion-relevant content. 
But how to get the idea across that religion IS relevant to ordinary life  ?
Many ways :  Family success, health advantage, good  cultural choices, 
moral clarity, relationships with others, problem solving, etc. And  yeah,
ability to recognize that others say important things that should be  
heeded.
Speaking personally, it is something to be thankful for.
.
However, if religion is defined exclusively in terms of devotionalism  and
privatism, there is no relevance academically and religion loses  status.
Things don't need to stay this way.
.
Billy
.
.
.
_________________________________________________
 
 
 
from the site :
epiphenom
 
 
Is education the main reason why some countries 
are less religious? 
 
By Tomas Rees on _Thursday, December  13, 2012_ 
(http://epiphenom.fieldofscience.com/2012/12/is-education-main-reason-why-some.html)
  
 
 
There's no shortage of hypotheses for why some countries are religious and  
others are not. Sometimes it seems like everyone has a different idea - 
coming  up with hypotheses is easy. It's testing them that's the tricky bit!  

Part of the problem is that you need a lot of data for a rigorous test,  
but many of the data we have are not very good. You can, if you look hard  
enough, pull out huge numbers of different datasets with information that might 
 possibly be relevant, but how do you figure out which ones to choose. 
Whatever  you do is going to be arbitrary.

Claude Braun, a psychologist at  Université du Québec à Montréal has 
approached this problem basically by pulling  together a vast mound of 
information, and then engaging in a kind of statistical  fishing expedition to 
see what 
bites.

He begins by listing out 16  different explanations that have been put 
forward to explain variations in  religiosity - things like material wealth and 
security, cultural factors such as  freedom and permissiveness, birth rate, 
gender equality and education.  

For each of these, he put together a selection of potentially relevant  
measures, and then tested to see which, if any, correlated with  religion.

He found that almost all the different variables, and hence all  the 
different explanations, correlated in the expected way with national  
variations 
in religious fervour. The exceptions were 'prophylaxis' (the idea  that 
religion impedes risky health behaviours) and 'the value of human life'  
(taking 
in factors like suicide rates, capital punishment, abortion and  murders).

But of course correlations can occur for all sorts of reasons.  The 
question is, which of them really matter? Braun tackled this question in two  
ways.

Firstly, he used a technique called factor analysis. This picks out  
variables that tend to vary in unison, and lumps them together in one or more  
"factors".

Doing this, he found the most important factor, which  explained around 
half the variation of religion around the world, was made up of  Global 
Mortality, Child Mortality, Education, and Purchasing Power. He called  this 
factor 
"material/intellectual wealth".

The second factor was made up  of variables like Religious freedom, 
Empowerment, Workers rights and Political  prisoners. But this factor, which he 
called "liberty/justice", explained only  15% of religious variations.

The third factor was relatively unimportant  (7% of the variation), and was 
made up of a mixed bag of variables (Inequality  of purchasing power 2012, 
Ratio of men to women, Armed conflict, Religious  freedom and Purchasing 
power). Pretty hard to interpret what that means -  probably nothing, in my 
opinion.

The other technique Braun used was  multiple regression. Basically you 
start with the strongest single correlation,  and then keep adding in other 
variables to see if you can make the correlation  stronger (and then check to 
see if you can take any of the earlier variables  out.

Doing this, he found that 70% of the international variation in  religion 
can be explained using just three variables. In order of importance  they 
are: Education, Fertility and Worker rights.

What to make of  this?

Well, for a start, this is easily the most comprehensive analysis  of 
possible explanations for global differences in religion that has ever been  
published. And it shows that education is clearly the single strongest  
correlate.

This certainly supports the idea that, although things like  wealth, 
security and freedom are relevant, education and intellectual  development is 
the 
most important factor. That's interesting, because that's a  hypothesis that 
has fallen out of favour in recent years.

I do have some  niggles with this analysis. The idea that fertility 
"causes" religion in the  same way that education "causes" non-belief is a bit 
silly. So including it in  the analysis could be obscuring things a little. A 
few of the other explanations  Braun includes suffer from the same confusion.

Then too this is, at the  end of the day, a fishing exercise. You will 
always find one variable that is  more strongly correlated than others with the 
topic of interest, but you can  never really be sure why that is (perhaps 
it's just that education is a better  measure of material security than things 
like average wealth, or social  spending).

But on the whole this is a really strong analysis, simply by  virtue of the 
fact that it is so comprehensive and methodical.

So the  observation that education is such a potent predictor of 
international  differences in religion has surely got to give even the most 
opinionated  internet pundit pause for thought!

-- 
-- 
Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community 
<[email protected]>
Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism
Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org

--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.


Reply via email to