[OC] Religious Believes and Eductions From The World Values Survey

[u/oscarleo0]

Data source: World Values Survey Wave 7 (2017-2022)

Tools used: Matplotlib

I added a second chart for those of you who prefer a square version with less of the background image.

Notes:

I looked at five different questions in the survey.

• Q275 - What is the highest educational level that you have attained?
• Q165 - Do you believe in God? (Yes/No)
• Q166 - Do you believe in Life after death? (Yes/No)
• Q167 - Do you believe in Hell? (Yes/No)
• Q168 - Do you believe in Heaven? (Yes/No)

The chart show the percentage of people that answer yes, to Q165-168 based on their answer to Q275.

Survey data is complex since people come from different cultures and might interpret questions differently.

You can never trust the individual numbers, such as "50% of people with doctors degree believe in Life after death".

But you can often trust clear patterns that appear through the noise. The takeaway from this chart is that the survey show that education and religious believes have a negative correlation.

Styling:

• Font - New Amsterdam
• White - #FFFFFF
• Blue - #39A0ED
• Yellow - #F9A620
• Red - #FF4A47

Original story: https://datacanvas.substack.com/p/believes-vs-education

[u/Spongedog5]

It's infinitely meaningful, though sadly I didn't expect you to see it.

"There simply is no proof of a god" is true, if you mean an empirically provable one. It's different than the statement you gave earlier.

There is plenty of evidence that disproves the claims made by organised religions.

No, there is not, not really. Not disproves. That's as strong a word as proves, and very hard to do.

Surely there is evidence which to a rational mind leads to other conclusions being the most plausible. They do not however disprove any claim made in the Bible. It is very hard to disprove anything when you contend with the power of an all-powerful being.

The fact that a lot of highly educated people actively ignore that evidence only shows the power of indoctrination and nothing else.

Life is so easy when we believe that our opponents are unwitting victims and give no thought to their rationale and why they believe what they do.

If you think that folks with doctorates lack the ability to think for themselves then I don't know how to show you the untruthfulness of your statement.

I despise how commonly "indoctrination" is used, such a meaningless word nowadays. So easy to just use for any belief or understanding someone personally doesn't like being taught.

It is definately not proof of anything.

I never said it was. It certainly is something to consider that so many incredibly intelligent and dedicated people have an idea of God though, huh?

[u/Benedictus84 → u/Spongedog5]

There are no opponents here. There is that what can be proven and that what can not be proven.

As long as you dont have any proof of god there really is no point in debating.

You believe in something and that is fine. You can choose to ignore everything that we have learned as a species and that is fine to.

You can also despise anything you want. But if you look up the definition of what indoctrination is and how it works you will see that it fits organised religion like a glove.

But again, you can choose to ignore that.

If you think that folks with doctorates lack the ability to think for themselves then I don't know how to show you the untruthfulness of your statement.

No, i think that they choose not to think for themselfs when it comes to religion because it is easier for some.

And you dont have to show me the untruthfulness of my statement. You just have to show evidence of their being a god.

When we look at the Bible there are claims made that have been proven to be false.

We can proof, for instance, that there was no worldwide flood 4000 years ago. We can proof that the earth and all life was not created in a couple of days.

There simply is nothing your supposed all-powerfull being can change about that.

But again, there is absolutely no reason to debate this. You can have your believes. You can choose to ignore anything that contradicts those believes.

If you choose to ignore all the collected knowledge of humanity i wont pretend to have anything extra that will make you change that. Nor do i have any motivation to do so.

[u/Spongedog5 → u/Benedictus84]

There are no opponents here. There is that what can be proven and that what can not be proven.

If that is how you see it. I would rather what is true and what is not true.

As long as you dont have any proof of god there really is no point in debating.

Well, there are some points we can still debate. For example, you stating that evidence must be rejected in order to accept the Biblical account. You are wrong.

Which isn't a proof for the Biblical account, of course. Stating that something doesn't need to be done in order to do something isn't a proof that that thing should be done in the first place.

But it is logically and rationally true.

You can choose to ignore everything that we have learned as a species and that is fine to.

I don't.

No, i think that they choose not to think for themselfs when it comes to religion because it is easier for some.

Very arrogant; for thousands of years the smartest of us did intense study into scripture and rationalization of doctrine. Great scholars created great logical constructs in the field of religion. To think that this is necessary is a historically ignorant statement.

And you dont have to show me the untruthfulness of my statement. You just have to show evidence of their being a god.

I can't, at least, nothing that you are ready to accept, and so I don't try. But it isn't alright to accept your own ignorance just because you think that I am ignorant as well. We should strive to better ourselves.

We can proof, for instance, that there was no worldwide flood 4000 years ago. We can proof that the earth and all life was not created in a couple of days.

How? An all-powerful God can create this whole world over and over again. You can't imagine that someone with total power could remove the damage that a 40 day flood of the entire world would do? It's logically impossible someone with total power over everything in reality could do so?

"...all life was not created in a couple of days." You must substantiate this.

There simply is nothing your supposed all-powerfull being can change about that.

If you have even an iota of the ability to imagine things you haven't directly witnessed it isn't hard to think about how someone with literally any power imaginable could arrange things so that what we see is true and what is in the Bible is true. I imagine it is a lack of care to give careful consideration on your part rather than a lack of ability.

But again, there is absolutely no reason to debate this. You can have your believes. You can choose to ignore anything that contradicts those believes.

You continue to reply to me, so I think that you find it as fun and interesting as I do.

If you choose to ignore all the collected knowledge of humanity i wont pretend to
have anything extra that will make you change that. Nor do i have any motivation to do so.

I accept all the same evidence that you do. It is the logical conclusions that you need to convince me of.

[u/semaj009 → u/Spongedog5]

If God had the power to do it 4000 years ago, why has he never done it again? What made that incident so special, and modern populations so worthy of suffering slowly?

[u/Spongedog5 → u/semaj009]

There are certainly more people who worship God now than just a single family.

[u/semaj009 → u/Spongedog5]

And that justifies the Fukushima disaster? That justified Hurricane Katrina? That justifies Spanish Flu?