Intelligent People Less Likely to be Religious

I understood that it was not a colloquial definition, hence my use of quotes in "intelligent people." That also underlies my take on it. People who do exceptionally well on traditional measures do tend to be analytical, as the article and study themselves point out. I find such tendencies to be associated with poor insight and poor personal introspection. People with high EQ or intelligences not traditionally measured are the people who tend to have better insight.

At this point, I would like to point out that I am considered "traditionally intelligent," so I'm a little extra-wary of where my decision-making comes from, as a precaution.

I'm in the same boat. That's why I have to force introspection. Indeed, I introspect about introspection at times.

Then I have a drink.

Robear wrote:

"Belief in a god is irrelevent to the personal success of religion". Or is that maybe spirituality?

"I'm spiritual, but not religious," is kind of a cop out thing people say when they admit they believe in a god but don't attend church or subscribe to any particular religious doctrine.

Spiritual (adj form was easiest) describes things that pertain to aspects of the church, characteristics of sacred things, or perhaps a relationship based on communication between the souls or minds of the persons involved.

The situation I'm describing, where religion is a positive experience for people regardless of whether or not they believe in a god, could technically be described as spiritual. In service of my own point, I'd rather avoid words that are connotated with a belief in a god. I'd prefer to use words more related to Family, community, personal psychological health, and life satisfaction.

Short version: Spiritual? Maybe. I'd rather describe it differently.

I use spiritual in this sense to mean transcendent experiences and practices which are, for whatever reason, not tied to an organized religion. Prayer, reflection, meditation, out of body, etc. However, it also applies to transcendent experiences and practices within churches, as in "Christian spiritual practices".

I've had some pretty spiritual experiences on mescaline.

Robear wrote:

I use spiritual in this sense to mean transcendent experiences and practices which are, for whatever reason, not tied to an organized religion. Prayer, reflection, meditation, out of body, etc. However, it also applies to transcendent experiences and practices within churches, as in "Christian spiritual practices".

What bothers me is when people use the word as means to both have and eat cake.

I get fearful when religion begins to approach the usefulness of controlled substances - that is, elevated mental experience with no social responsibility. Which pretty much perfectly describes "spiritual" as I've seen it used.

Seth wrote:

I get fearful when religion begins to approach the usefulness of controlled substances - that is, elevated mental experience with no social responsibility. Which pretty much perfectly describes "spiritual" as I've seen it used.

Ehh, given religion's input into many social issues in the past, I'm not sure it's a "new" problem.

Valmorian wrote:
Seth wrote:

I get fearful when religion begins to approach the usefulness of controlled substances - that is, elevated mental experience with no social responsibility. Which pretty much perfectly describes "spiritual" as I've seen it used.

Ehh, given religion's input into many social issues in the past, I'm not sure it's a "new" problem.

Fair call I do admit it's just not "spiritual" people that try to divorce religion's positive aspects (elevated mental state, community bonds, possible heaven) with the responsibilities typically required in the texts (giving alms, tithing, community support, possible asceticism).

So in this case, being spiritual is probably a far site better than that "prosperity gospel".

Speaking of, anyone want to know how to turn Wiccan prayer chips, a flour jar, and a diaper into a cigar humidor? I am the MacGuyver of vices.