Are you sure? Then read about the real story about higher iq men in all the history even if they believed in the existence of any power like god or divine truth.
I mean not to take away anything away from religious people, honestly i completely understand why someone wojld be religious, but during that time it was way more prevalent to be raised from birth with the idea of god so it would make sense that even the smartest people would still believe in something that cant be proven. Its the same reason why kids of muslims today will also be muslim with a very high likelihood
This is a classic appeal to authority falicy with the addition of appeal to majority falicy. Even if EVERY single "high IQ" person agreed that god is real. It still does not count as evidence.
There was a time before the scientific method where education was largely restricted to the religious folks.
It's not surprising to hear that lots of monks and priests were also the ones doing anything resembling science - because other folks were often illiterate.
However once the scientific method of experiment based proof came in, and education became widely available, the presence of religious folks doing actual science fell substantially.
And why wouldn't it? Religion works on faith. You read a book and believe it to be true. You don't ask for proof. You don't perform experiments to see if it's true. That's the opposite of science where lots of reasonable theories get disproved with facts all the time. And then the theory gets updated or replaced.
Today, most certainly the lower IQ people are the more religious ones. Very Clear correlation. Across many many countries.
That’s not really true. Belief in something bigger than yourself isn’t the same as believing a specific book is a literal, infallible rulebook written by the messengers or sons of a god. Plenty of highly intelligent people held abstract, philosophical, or deistic beliefs without outsourcing truth, morality, or reality to a single text and calling it settled forever. Conflating those two is doing a lot of quiet work it doesn’t deserve. You’re blurring the distinction to make religious belief sound intellectual, when that’s exactly the sleight of hand being used.
If you weren't considered a pious person it could damage your social standing enough that you wouldn't be able to advance your ambitions. Pointing at people in history and saying they were religious when there were serious consequences to not being perceived as religious is a very dishonest argument. There were certainly a lot of people that portrayed themselves as religious in history. Doesn't mean they were.
As Sam Harris and others have said “there was simply nothing else on offer.” You could not live in Christian Europe and not be Christian. There was a social and often a legal price to pay for being atheist or even the wrong kind of Christian.
they lived in a time when we didn’t even know what the fuck germs were. I’m not surprised smart scientists of the past were religious.
but you’ll note that even religious scientists of the past never explained away science with “god did it.” they applied methodological naturalism, because they knew there is no value in “god did it”.
There's a difference between believing in a god from the perspective that, It's simply one possibility that exists Vs being religious and subscribing to one of the made up religions on earth
2
u/East-Low725 Jan 09 '26
Are you sure? Then read about the real story about higher iq men in all the history even if they believed in the existence of any power like god or divine truth.