Thoughts of God Make Us Slackers, Study Suggests


ironsides
Avatar
#1
Thoughts of God Make Us Slackers, Study Suggests


Here is a thought: "If the students believe that God controls their destiny, trying to be better isn't going to help them actually be better, resulting in less effort. This entire thought process seems to be unconscious, but just the presence of these God-conjuring words or images could alter behavior."

--


As for my opinion, only a somebody very weak would throw up their hands and leave something to fate or a deity if they could do something positive about it. Look, if all else fails you can always fall back on anything that helps you through the problem.
 
petros
+2
#2
Or is it TV?
 
gerryh
+2
#3
Quote:

The researchers think the lack of effort in the "religious-primed" group could be dictated by a belief that --. If the students believe that God controls their destiny, trying to be better isn't going to help them actually be better, resulting in less effort. This entire thought process seems to be unconscious, but just the presence of these God-conjuring words or images could alter behavior.

and the highlighted words are THE most important part of their "results".
 
ironsides
#4
Quote: Originally Posted by petrosView Post

Or is it TV?

TV and X-Box are not far behind.
 
Cannuck
#5
Quote: Originally Posted by petrosView Post

Or is it TV?

It's Faux news or CNN depending on your political slant
 
ironsides
Avatar
+1
#6
Quote: Originally Posted by gerryhView Post

and the highlighted words are THE most important part of their "results".

It's only theoretical research, can't be proven either way. Think is what gets us in trouble.
 
nitrox
+1
#7
Quote: Originally Posted by ironsidesView Post

Thoughts of God Make Us Slackers, Study Suggests


Here is a thought: "If the students believe that God controls their destiny, trying to be better isn't going to help them actually be better, resulting in less effort. This entire thought process seems to be unconscious, but just the presence of these God-conjuring words or images could alter behavior."

--


As for my opinion, only a somebody very weak would throw up their hands and leave something to fate or a deity if they could do something positive about it. Look, if all else fails you can always fall back on anything that helps you through the problem.

The study and the test sounded stupid to me anyway. There is to much proof the other way, that those who put God first in there lives tend to be high achievers.
 
Cliffy
Avatar
+1
#8
Quote: Originally Posted by nitroxView Post

The study and the test sounded stupid to me anyway. There is to much proof the other way, that those who put God first in there lives tend to be high achievers.

Higher achievers of what? What are they achieving and why? Your blanket statement is ludicrous at best and meaningless at worst. A belief in god (which one?) has nothing to do with anything in academic or scientific circles. Although, a belief in the new god, MONEY, does cause over achievement in some circles, but may leave the achiever bereft spiritually.
 
B00Mer
Avatar
#9
aaah, Yawn.. Think I'll go to Church today. nah. maybe next week.. it's true. I'm such a slacker.
 
Cliffy
Avatar
#10
Quote: Originally Posted by B00MerView Post

aaah, Yawn.. Think I'll go to Church today. nah. maybe next week.. it's true. I'm such a slacker.

No, I think you are just bored. This could explain why you keep resurrecting negro threads.
 
B00Mer
Avatar
#11
Quote: Originally Posted by CliffyView Post

No, I think you are just bored. This could explain why you keep resurrecting negro threads.

LoL, think you meant necro.. white boy

 
L Gilbert
Avatar
#12
Quote: Originally Posted by petrosView Post

Or is it TV?

More like Twitter these days. People have a problem so they text it to their pals and see which answer they want to run with.
 
gerryh
#13
Quote: Originally Posted by B00MerView Post

LoL, think you meant necro.. white boy

It's called a Freudian slip.
 
L Gilbert
Avatar
#14
Quote: Originally Posted by gerryhView Post

and the highlighted words are THE most important part of their "results".

Those words are also used in discussions of religions and gods, though. The difference is that research is based upon evidence and belief isn't.
 
gerryh
Avatar
+1
#15
Quote: Originally Posted by L GilbertView Post

Those words are also used in discussions of religions and gods, though. The difference is that research is based upon evidence and religions base their thing on thought and emotion.


That particular study and it's conclusions are NOT based on any kind of "evidence", hence the use of the words I highlighted 6 months ago.
 
L Gilbert
#16
Quote: Originally Posted by nitroxView Post

The study and the test sounded stupid to me anyway. There is to much proof the other way, that those who put God first in there lives tend to be high achievers.

Would you mind showing the proof?
 
Niflmir
Avatar
+3
#17  Top Rated Post
Quote: Originally Posted by gerryhView Post

and the highlighted words are THE most important part of their "results".

The alternative to a causal relation is that people who are lazy are more likely to believe in God.
Quote: Originally Posted by gerryhView Post

That particular study and it's conclusions are NOT based on any kind of "evidence", hence the use of the words I highlighted 6 months ago.

Not sure what you mean by this, but in her paper she explains her methodology, and she certainly did perform experiments. --
 
L Gilbert
Avatar
#18
Quote: Originally Posted by gerryhView Post

That particular study and it's conclusions are NOT based on any kind of "evidence", hence the use of the words I highlighted 6 months ago.

lol Youi just stated your impression of what were the most important aspects.
Research follows evidence and theory postulates what the evidence is saying. Did you read the actual research paper to see what the researchers based their observations on?
 
gerryh
Avatar
+1
#19
Like I said, the use of the words "think", "could" and "seems" do not make for a definitive conclusion of any kind.
 
Tonington
Avatar
+1
#20
Quote: Originally Posted by NiflmirView Post

The alternative to a causal relation is that people who are lazy are more likely to believe in God.


Not sure what you mean by this, but in her paper she explains her methodology, and she certainly did perform experiments. --

I'm a big fan of RTFP too, or Read The Fukcing Paper.

Quote: Originally Posted by gerryhView Post

Like I said, the use of the words "think", "could" and "seems" do not make for a definitive conclusion of any kind.

Science is falsifiable. Her results, of which there were many, could be over-turned by future investigations. Could, seems, apparent, these are common words in a scientist's lexicon. Caveats abound.
 
gerryh
#21
I just love studies that start out with a predetermined outcome.
 
Niflmir
Avatar
+1
#22
Quote: Originally Posted by gerryhView Post

I just love studies that start out with a predetermined outcome.

Ah. Now I understand why you seem to hate this study. Since it did not have a predetermined outcome.
 
L Gilbert
Avatar
#23
Quote: Originally Posted by gerryhView Post

Like I said, the use of the words "think", "could" and "seems" do not make for a definitive conclusion of any kind.

Of course not, but why would you assume that words like that are the most important aspects rather than the actual evidence leading to the tentative conclusions?
What you seem to propose is that people should reach a conclusion and then find evidence to back it up rather than assessing the evidence to find the conclusion.

Quote: Originally Posted by gerryhView Post

I just love studies that start out with a predetermined outcome.

Evidence suggest things. A tentaive result is not a conclusion either BTW. The paper does say tthe evidence suggests something rathet than just proclaiming a definitive conclusion. Did you read the paper to see what the evidence was?
 
gerryh
Avatar
#24
Quote: Originally Posted by NiflmirView Post

Ah. Now I understand why you seem to hate this study. Since it did not have a predetermined outcome.


The study authors stated what they expected the study to show. In other words they did NOT go in with an open mind but instead already had determined what the results would be. To me, this suggest the possibility of slanting the study towards a predetermined result.
 
L Gilbert
Avatar
#25
Quote: Originally Posted by gerryhView Post

The study authors stated what they expected the study to show. In other words they did NOT go in with an open mind but instead already had determined what the results would be. To me, this suggest the possibility of slanting the study towards a predetermined result.

Expectation is not necessarily causal to bias. I can expect a glass of water to be wet, too. Is that a biased expectation?
If I do a simple experiment on the effect of gravity and friction on a ball bearing and place the ball bearing on an inclined plane, would it be a biased expectation that the ball roll down the slope?
 
Niflmir
Avatar
#26
Quote: Originally Posted by gerryhView Post

The study authors stated what they expected the study to show. In other words they did NOT go in with an open mind but instead already had determined what the results would be. To me, this suggest the possibility of slanting the study towards a predetermined result.

If I acknowledge that caffeine could cause liver damage, which is why I do a certain study, that is not presupposing that it does. All studies are done because a possibility of an effect exists. The authors state what may happen and then propose an experiment designed to negate said hypothesis, that is how science works.

For your particular argument, you are basically going in the direction of saying that "A double blind experiment is superior to a direct trial," but you need to keep in mind that observer bias, while a distinct possibility, isn't necessarily a given.
 
gerryh
Avatar
#27
Quote: Originally Posted by L GilbertView Post

Evidence suggest things. A tentaive result is not a conclusion either BTW. The paper does say tthe evidence suggests something rathet than just proclaiming a definitive conclusion. Did you read the paper to see what the evidence was?


If all the paper is, is a "suggestion", then it is not worth the paper it was written on and in fact was a complete waste of money. It, in fact, isn't proof of anything. The OP title of "Thoughts of God make us slackers" is very definitive in it's statement.
 
L Gilbert
Avatar
#28
Quote: Originally Posted by gerryhView Post

If all the paper is, is a "suggestion", then it is not worth the paper it was written on and in fact was a complete waste of money. It, in fact, isn't proof of anything. The OP title of "Thoughts of God make us slackers" is very definitive in it's statement.

Then the suggestion that once said that the planet revolved in orbit around the sun was worthless as well.
 
gerryh
Avatar
#29
Quote: Originally Posted by L GilbertView Post

Then the suggestion that once said that the planet revolved in orbit around the sun was worthless as well.


If the "suggestion" that there is a God is worthless, why would any other "suggestion" not be also?
 
L Gilbert
Avatar
#30
Quote: Originally Posted by gerryhView Post

If the "suggestion" that there is a God is worthless, why would any other "suggestion" not be also?

I wouldn't actually call the suggestion about gods existences as worthless. I think faith actually helps some people.
But if you are thinking that I adopt an either/or, all-or-nothing POV, you'll be disappointed.
 

Similar Threads

no new posts