On Fri, 26 Jan 2001, Chuck Huff wrote:
> It is also useful for the student to recognize that many
> psychologists are quite hostile to investigations in this area. If
> you look at the attitudes of academia, it appears that social
> scientists (and psychologists in particular) are the least religious
> academics. Natural science faculty are among the most religious.
> The student will need to persevere in the face of this, if their
> interest is strong.
My understanding of the literature was that we were indeed among
the least religious, but that Humanities were the most, and
Natural Scientists in between. I don't have the source handy
(assuming there was one), but I thought the figures for Natural
Scientists were something like 40% believers for Natural Sciences
overall, but with the percentage being much lower for eminent
Natural Scientists, such as members of selective organizations
(10%). I vaguely recollect that Humanities (or some Humanities
... English?) might be as high as 80% believers.
Although correlational, I do think the relationships (if my
memory is correct) are strong enough to permit some tentative
conclusions about some degree of incompatibility between
religiousness and certain professional activities. Obviously a
lot more data would be valuable. It would be interesting to
know, for example, whether the atheism preceded scientific and
psychological endeavors or followed. That would permit some
determination as to whether selection or
educational/developmental factors accounted for observed
differences.
Best wishes
Jim
============================================================================
James M. Clark (204) 786-9757
Department of Psychology (204) 774-4134 Fax
University of Winnipeg 4L05D
Winnipeg, Manitoba R3B 2E9 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
CANADA http://www.uwinnipeg.ca/~clark
============================================================================
