Not that I would take it as gospel (ha ha ha) as you could ask all sorts of questions about the validity of the test groups, the questions, precisely what is meant by religious (organized religion vs personal spirituality) etc etc.
Well it begs the question about the nature of it. I've read a similar study which claimed that a much larger percentage were not 'religious,' although there was a significant portion who held agnostic beliefs, which I think is an important distinction. I've heard of a lot of scientists dismissing any notion of a personal god, though they like to attribute reality's complexity to some ambiguous creator figure. I guess it depends on how you define 'religious,' but I suspect a lot of the scientists in that study who were marked off as 'religious' don't view themselves as such.
Comments 3
Reply
Not that I would take it as gospel (ha ha ha) as you could ask all sorts of questions about the validity of the test groups, the questions, precisely what is meant by religious (organized religion vs personal spirituality) etc etc.
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment