Comments on: Scientists claim the way a person answers simple math problem is a good predictor of their belief in a religion http://boingboing.net/2012/04/26/scientists-claim-the-way-a-per.html Brain candy for Happy Mutants Thu, 23 May 2013 07:51:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.4.1 By: Ito Kagehisa http://boingboing.net/2012/04/26/scientists-claim-the-way-a-per.html#comment-1410710 Ito Kagehisa Tue, 01 May 2012 20:07:00 +0000 http://boingboing.net/?p=157007#comment-1410710  I guess you didn't know that only some religions say that the universe was created by 'God'?  I'd say less than half the religions I've studied make that particular claim. Perhaps you should not make sweeping statements about things you haven't bothered to research, eh? Because, wouldn't that be <i>faith-based reasoning?</i>    I prefer the scientific method, myself.  I guess you didn’t know that only some religions say that the universe was created by ‘God’?  I’d say less than half the religions I’ve studied make that particular claim.

Perhaps you should not make sweeping statements about things you haven’t bothered to research, eh?

Because, wouldn’t that be faith-based reasoning?    I prefer the scientific method, myself.

]]> By: Misty Mountain Stoll http://boingboing.net/2012/04/26/scientists-claim-the-way-a-per.html#comment-1410384 Misty Mountain Stoll Tue, 01 May 2012 16:00:00 +0000 http://boingboing.net/?p=157007#comment-1410384  I'm not a math person. Ask me a question in art instead... haha!  I’m not a math person. Ask me a question in art instead… haha!

]]> By: Ito Kagehisa http://boingboing.net/2012/04/26/scientists-claim-the-way-a-per.html#comment-1409433 Ito Kagehisa Mon, 30 Apr 2012 16:01:00 +0000 http://boingboing.net/?p=157007#comment-1409433  That's a misapplication of Ockham's principle of parsimony. If no God exists, then you have to posit billions of incorrect analyses by other sentient beings.  Ockham specifically dealt with this; if you apply the razor as he intended, you can say "it is <i>possible</i> that the  majority of humans that ever lived were incorrect about the existence of God, but it's <i>more likely</i> that you are the one making the mistake, so check your work and watch out for the inquisition".  That’s a misapplication of Ockham’s principle of parsimony.

If no God exists, then you have to posit billions of incorrect analyses by other sentient beings.  Ockham specifically dealt with this; if you apply the razor as he intended, you can say “it is possible that the  majority of humans that ever lived were incorrect about the existence of God, but it’s more likely that you are the one making the mistake, so check your work and watch out for the inquisition”.

]]> By: Ito Kagehisa http://boingboing.net/2012/04/26/scientists-claim-the-way-a-per.html#comment-1409355 Ito Kagehisa Mon, 30 Apr 2012 14:22:00 +0000 http://boingboing.net/?p=157007#comment-1409355 Sounds like you are describing yourself - you've decided that you know everything about faith and are not willing to question that idea. Several religions glorify questioning, and have tremendous faith in the scientific method.  I've heard several sermons on the subject. Sounds like you are describing yourself – you’ve decided that you know everything about faith and are not willing to question that idea.

Several religions glorify questioning, and have tremendous faith in the scientific method.  I’ve heard several sermons on the subject.

]]> By: FrodeSvendsen http://boingboing.net/2012/04/26/scientists-claim-the-way-a-per.html#comment-1409255 FrodeSvendsen Mon, 30 Apr 2012 08:13:00 +0000 http://boingboing.net/?p=157007#comment-1409255 Also, is English your first language? Because it was only when I actually translated the sentence into Norwegian that I found I could read the answer directly from the text (I first used algebra to find the answer). And I consider myself fluent in English.. Also, is English your first language? Because it was only when I actually translated the sentence into Norwegian that I found I could read the answer directly from the text (I first used algebra to find the answer). And I consider myself fluent in English..

]]> By: Fnordius http://boingboing.net/2012/04/26/scientists-claim-the-way-a-per.html#comment-1409245 Fnordius Mon, 30 Apr 2012 07:45:00 +0000 http://boingboing.net/?p=157007#comment-1409245 I don't see this as claiming intelligence as much as reflection/scepticism versus intuitive approaches. In other words, if a person is distrustful and takes the time to reflect on whether the question is misleading, then the odds are high that said person will tend to be more dogmatic. Note also that there can be dogmatic atheists. I also don't see this as accusing religious leaders of dumbness. Maybe of being pied pipers, but even that is inferred, not implied. I don’t see this as claiming intelligence as much as reflection/scepticism versus intuitive approaches. In other words, if a person is distrustful and takes the time to reflect on whether the question is misleading, then the odds are high that said person will tend to be more dogmatic. Note also that there can be dogmatic atheists.

I also don’t see this as accusing religious leaders of dumbness. Maybe of being pied pipers, but even that is inferred, not implied.

]]> By: Fnordius http://boingboing.net/2012/04/26/scientists-claim-the-way-a-per.html#comment-1409242 Fnordius Mon, 30 Apr 2012 07:38:00 +0000 http://boingboing.net/?p=157007#comment-1409242 It's not the mathematical ability that is being measured but whether the test subject takes the time to reflect upon the question, avoiding the intuitive answer that the question is designed to mislead toward. The whole "hey, wait a minute" is what the testers were looking for. It’s not the mathematical ability that is being measured but whether the test subject takes the time to reflect upon the question, avoiding the intuitive answer that the question is designed to mislead toward. The whole “hey, wait a minute” is what the testers were looking for.

]]> By: Brad Zimmerman http://boingboing.net/2012/04/26/scientists-claim-the-way-a-per.html#comment-1408988 Brad Zimmerman Sun, 29 Apr 2012 21:26:00 +0000 http://boingboing.net/?p=157007#comment-1408988 I think the only thing his proves is that math nerds are pedantic jackasses.   I initially answered "$10", saw that the answer is apparently "$5 for the ball" and now insist that someone prove to me a that it can't be "anywhere between $0.01 and $9.99 for the ball since the bat is then definitely $100 MORE than the ball which surely could be priced at anything between $0.01 or $9.99." and until someone does prove this to me without me wanting to punch their lights out for being pedantic language/math nerds, they (the math nerds), the religious nutters, the militant atheists, the language nerds, and basically everyone else can just piss off. I think the only thing his proves is that math nerds are pedantic jackasses.  

I initially answered “$10″, saw that the answer is apparently “$5 for the ball” and now insist that someone prove to me a that it can’t be “anywhere between $0.01 and $9.99 for the ball since the bat is then definitely $100 MORE than the ball which surely could be priced at anything between $0.01 or $9.99.” and until someone does prove this to me without me wanting to punch their lights out for being pedantic language/math nerds, they (the math nerds), the religious nutters, the militant atheists, the language nerds, and basically everyone else can just piss off.

]]> By: TWX http://boingboing.net/2012/04/26/scientists-claim-the-way-a-per.html#comment-1408743 TWX Sun, 29 Apr 2012 07:14:00 +0000 http://boingboing.net/?p=157007#comment-1408743  Depeche Mode is my Personal Jesus...  Depeche Mode is my Personal Jesus…

]]> By: TWX http://boingboing.net/2012/04/26/scientists-claim-the-way-a-per.html#comment-1408742 TWX Sun, 29 Apr 2012 07:12:00 +0000 http://boingboing.net/?p=157007#comment-1408742  I don't think that's accurate really.  Most of the stupid people that I've known since I actually started critically thinking about religion are essentially apostates.  They might have been raised a religion, but they do not practice it nor do they have anything to do with it in their lives except perhaps on special occasions because they're reminded externally to participate. For them religion is a spectator sport, and in my humble opinion they need to be reminded of that daily to get them to either go study the religion they claim to adhere to in order to get some damn morals, or they need to accept that they're not part of it and move on with their lives.  I don’t think that’s accurate really.  Most of the stupid people that I’ve known since I actually started critically thinking about religion are essentially apostates.  They might have been raised a religion, but they do not practice it nor do they have anything to do with it in their lives except perhaps on special occasions because they’re reminded externally to participate.

For them religion is a spectator sport, and in my humble opinion they need to be reminded of that daily to get them to either go study the religion they claim to adhere to in order to get some damn morals, or they need to accept that they’re not part of it and move on with their lives.

]]> By: TWX http://boingboing.net/2012/04/26/scientists-claim-the-way-a-per.html#comment-1408741 TWX Sun, 29 Apr 2012 07:08:00 +0000 http://boingboing.net/?p=157007#comment-1408741 Yeah, I'm pretty sure that most Atheists aren't going to think this way either.  Now that I've had a chance to wrap my brain around it, I get it, but it's still a very convoluted question and I'm sure that the vast majority of single-variable algebra students who are fresh with the discipline would fail too. Yeah, I’m pretty sure that most Atheists aren’t going to think this way either.  Now that I’ve had a chance to wrap my brain around it, I get it, but it’s still a very convoluted question and I’m sure that the vast majority of single-variable algebra students who are fresh with the discipline would fail too.

]]> By: Ipo http://boingboing.net/2012/04/26/scientists-claim-the-way-a-per.html#comment-1408565 Ipo Sat, 28 Apr 2012 21:13:00 +0000 http://boingboing.net/?p=157007#comment-1408565  That's why I have such an "athier than thou" attitude.  Many are just somewhat athi-ish compared to me.   That’s why I have such an “athier than thou” attitude. 
Many are just somewhat athi-ish compared to me. 

]]> By: CharlesAnthony http://boingboing.net/2012/04/26/scientists-claim-the-way-a-per.html#comment-1408507 CharlesAnthony Sat, 28 Apr 2012 18:33:00 +0000 http://boingboing.net/?p=157007#comment-1408507 I guess the best conclusion we can make from this is that when you read something that starts with "Scientists claim...." you know it is probably nonsense.  I guess the best conclusion we can make from this is that when you read something that starts with “Scientists claim….” you know it is probably nonsense. 

]]> By: Will http://boingboing.net/2012/04/26/scientists-claim-the-way-a-per.html#comment-1408489 Will Sat, 28 Apr 2012 17:57:00 +0000 http://boingboing.net/?p=157007#comment-1408489  You divided by 0 in your little problem. That's how you can get 2=1, (a-b) = 0 since a=b  You divided by 0 in your little problem. That’s how you can get 2=1, (a-b) = 0 since a=b

]]> By: Guest http://boingboing.net/2012/04/26/scientists-claim-the-way-a-per.html#comment-1408474 Guest Sat, 28 Apr 2012 17:22:00 +0000 http://boingboing.net/?p=157007#comment-1408474 I think most people on this forum are familiar with the positions involved, so simply re-asserting one of them doesn't really advance the discussion. I think most people on this forum are familiar with the positions involved, so simply re-asserting one of them doesn’t really advance the discussion.

]]> By: YourMessageHere http://boingboing.net/2012/04/26/scientists-claim-the-way-a-per.html#comment-1408451 YourMessageHere Sat, 28 Apr 2012 16:06:00 +0000 http://boingboing.net/?p=157007#comment-1408451 Yes, everyone does.  It breaks quite often, though.  Mine is broken and won't budge from philosophy. Yes, everyone does.  It breaks quite often, though.  Mine is broken and won’t budge from philosophy.

]]> By: SpainLogic http://boingboing.net/2012/04/26/scientists-claim-the-way-a-per.html#comment-1408361 SpainLogic Sat, 28 Apr 2012 10:04:00 +0000 http://boingboing.net/?p=157007#comment-1408361  Hello, here is my "Spanish Atheist View": (in the sports shop)--Hello, i want a baseball and a bat, ¿how much is it?  --    $110.  The bat costs $100 more than the ball --Oh, then I want the bat only, please, because it's $5, no more.--    ...security, come here, please...LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL another "Mathematical fallacy" (source: Wikipedia) that will make you doubt your "infernal devil's atheistic and beliefs" of a "bad at math" atheist:  2=1 a=b a²=ab a²-b²=ab-b² (a-b)(a+b)=b(a-b) a+b=b b+b=b 2b=b 2=1 In Spain, the 95% of the TV and Radio media are ultra-conservative far-right or Catholic fundamentalist, so we are careful to check where it came from the information that reaches us, so that they not lied to us. ¿really that research comes from a public university? Sorry for my english  Hello, here is my “Spanish Atheist View”:

(in the sports shop)–Hello, i want a baseball and a bat, ¿how much is it?  –    $110.  The bat costs $100 more than the ball
–Oh, then I want the bat only, please, because it’s $5, no more.–    …security, come here, please…LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL
another ”Mathematical fallacy” (source: Wikipedia) that will make you doubt your “infernal devil’s atheistic and beliefs” of a “bad at math” atheist:  2=1

a=b
a²=ab
a²-b²=ab-b²
(a-b)(a+b)=b(a-b)
a+b=b
b+b=b
2b=b
2=1

In Spain, the 95% of the TV and Radio media are ultra-conservative far-right or Catholic fundamentalist, so we are careful to check where it came from the information that reaches us, so that they not lied to us.
¿really that research comes from a public university?
Sorry for my english

]]> By: dawdler http://boingboing.net/2012/04/26/scientists-claim-the-way-a-per.html#comment-1408284 dawdler Sat, 28 Apr 2012 04:12:00 +0000 http://boingboing.net/?p=157007#comment-1408284 So weird.  Even after doing the equations in two variables $5 still doesn't FEEL right. ;) So weird.  Even after doing the equations in two variables $5 still doesn’t FEEL right. ;)

]]> By: lewis_stoole http://boingboing.net/2012/04/26/scientists-claim-the-way-a-per.html#comment-1408221 lewis_stoole Sat, 28 Apr 2012 01:07:00 +0000 http://boingboing.net/?p=157007#comment-1408221 what if i answered "i don't know" as others have pointed out, it seems more like a test as to whether one remembers elementary algebraic word problems, which is why i question their correlation. that being said, the question i have, and i am directing this to the psychologists who ran the study, since i question their proposed results, does that make me more likely to be an atheist or a person of faith?   please do respond based only on the information i have provided.  what if i answered “i don’t know”
as others have pointed out, it seems more like a test as to whether one remembers elementary algebraic word problems, which is why i question their correlation. that being said, the question i have, and i am directing this to the psychologists who ran the study, since i question their proposed results, does that make me more likely to be an atheist or a person of faith?   please do respond based only on the information i have provided. 

]]> By: Kaiser Spacelard http://boingboing.net/2012/04/26/scientists-claim-the-way-a-per.html#comment-1408178 Kaiser Spacelard Fri, 27 Apr 2012 23:57:00 +0000 http://boingboing.net/?p=157007#comment-1408178 It's not a math problem, it's a semantic analysis.  Also, calling people religious or non-religious or broadly applying a label you invented over the ability of your audience to pay precise attention to the words you say makes you an asshole. It’s not a math problem, it’s a semantic analysis.  Also, calling people religious or non-religious or broadly applying a label you invented over the ability of your audience to pay precise attention to the words you say makes you an asshole.

]]> By: Antinous / Moderator http://boingboing.net/2012/04/26/scientists-claim-the-way-a-per.html#comment-1407948 Antinous / Moderator Fri, 27 Apr 2012 20:42:00 +0000 http://boingboing.net/?p=157007#comment-1407948 <blockquote>I would think non-Euclidean geometries and Godel's theorem would have gotten across to everyone that there isn't one correct form of "mathematics</blockquote>All I got out of it was that I shouldn't sail the South Pacific after a big earthquake.

I would think non-Euclidean geometries and Godel’s theorem would have gotten across to everyone that there isn’t one correct form of “mathematics

All I got out of it was that I shouldn’t sail the South Pacific after a big earthquake.

]]> By: trent moranz http://boingboing.net/2012/04/26/scientists-claim-the-way-a-per.html#comment-1407936 trent moranz Fri, 27 Apr 2012 20:34:00 +0000 http://boingboing.net/?p=157007#comment-1407936 I find it interesting that this problem (which is a paradox actually), is being used to prove a question of belief.  The paradox lies in this: $100 + $10 = $110, you can take that to the bank; the algebra version simply proves that a closed system (the langue of mathematics) can make sense if you stick to the rules (of that system) which is exactly  what makes religion work!  So in a sense it's more about whether you believe what is real/tangible (110 oranges minus 10 oranges equals the number of oranges a bank teller working at a bank that takes fruit would agree is your total deposit), against what is really more of a parlor trick than a proof that the universe acts a certain way.   This is why statistics can be manipulated, and why the .0001% has most of the trading tokens... think Three Card Monty.   So these researchers haven't proved anything, except that some people trust their eyes and their gut over a system of scrutiny that has some interesting flaws that can be proved through logic.  Or possibly that some people are just not familiar with the language of algebra to see any other solution than the tangible one.    My conclusion?  Perdiddle! I find it interesting that this problem (which is a paradox actually), is being used to prove a question of belief.  The paradox lies in this: $100 + $10 = $110, you can take that to the bank; the algebra version simply proves that a closed system (the langue of mathematics) can make sense if you stick to the rules (of that system) which is exactly  what makes religion work! 

So in a sense it’s more about whether you believe what is real/tangible (110 oranges minus 10 oranges equals the number of oranges a bank teller working at a bank that takes fruit would agree is your total deposit), against what is really more of a parlor trick than a proof that the universe acts a certain way.  

This is why statistics can be manipulated, and why the .0001% has most of the trading tokens… think Three Card Monty.  

So these researchers haven’t proved anything, except that some people trust their eyes and their gut over a system of scrutiny that has some interesting flaws that can be proved through logic.  Or possibly that some people are just not familiar with the language of algebra to see any other solution than the tangible one.   

My conclusion?  Perdiddle!

]]> By: relawson http://boingboing.net/2012/04/26/scientists-claim-the-way-a-per.html#comment-1407919 relawson Fri, 27 Apr 2012 20:25:00 +0000 http://boingboing.net/?p=157007#comment-1407919 I'm a $10 athiest and I approve this message I’m a $10 athiest and I approve this message

]]> By: chgoliz http://boingboing.net/2012/04/26/scientists-claim-the-way-a-per.html#comment-1407838 chgoliz Fri, 27 Apr 2012 19:27:00 +0000 http://boingboing.net/?p=157007#comment-1407838 So you're the athiest atheist? So you’re the athiest atheist?

]]> By: chgoliz http://boingboing.net/2012/04/26/scientists-claim-the-way-a-per.html#comment-1407834 chgoliz Fri, 27 Apr 2012 19:26:00 +0000 http://boingboing.net/?p=157007#comment-1407834 replying to Melanie If the ball costs $10, then the bat would have to cost $110 in order to be $100 more. If the ball costs $5, then the bat would have to cost $105 in order to be $100 more. $10+$110=$120 $5+$105=$110 replying to Melanie

If the ball costs $10, then the bat would have to cost $110 in order to be $100 more.

If the ball costs $5, then the bat would have to cost $105 in order to be $100 more.

$10+$110=$120
$5+$105=$110

]]> By: Petzl http://boingboing.net/2012/04/26/scientists-claim-the-way-a-per.html#comment-1407788 Petzl Fri, 27 Apr 2012 18:59:00 +0000 http://boingboing.net/?p=157007#comment-1407788  What words are appropriate for believers in a 6000 year old world?  I guess we could go with "blessedly ignorant"?  What words are appropriate for believers in a 6000 year old world?  I guess we could go with “blessedly ignorant”?

]]> By: Ryan Eanes http://boingboing.net/2012/04/26/scientists-claim-the-way-a-per.html#comment-1407772 Ryan Eanes Fri, 27 Apr 2012 18:51:00 +0000 http://boingboing.net/?p=157007#comment-1407772 I had to convert the thing to algebra to get the right answer. I really don't like the question at all and I somehow doubt that it actually "predicts" anything at all. For those who are curious (in case someone beat me to it), here's what I did: If a baseball (call it L) and bat (call it T) cost $110 (L+T=110), and the bat costs $100 more than the ball (T=L+100), how much does the ball cost (L=?) ? L+T = 110 L+(L+100) = 110 2L + 100 = 110 2L = 110-100 2L = 10 2L/2 = 10/2 L = 5 I had to convert the thing to algebra to get the right answer. I really don’t like the question at all and I somehow doubt that it actually “predicts” anything at all.

For those who are curious (in case someone beat me to it), here’s what I did:

If a baseball (call it L) and bat (call it T) cost $110 (L+T=110), and the bat costs $100 more than the ball (T=L+100), how much does the ball cost (L=?) ?

L+T = 110
L+(L+100) = 110
2L + 100 = 110
2L = 110-100
2L = 10
2L/2 = 10/2
L = 5

]]> By: Everything Buddhism http://boingboing.net/2012/04/26/scientists-claim-the-way-a-per.html#comment-1407687 Everything Buddhism Fri, 27 Apr 2012 18:12:00 +0000 http://boingboing.net/?p=157007#comment-1407687 The problem is that when I am browsing The Internets I am constantly just skimming, doing an incredibly-surface read of stuff, with only about 2 of my billions of brain CPU cores active, and they are only running at about 2%.  Then only pausing when something is deeply interesting  -- who or what, exactly, is the I, that I keep referring to -- or deeply stimulating -- Kate Upton dancing!   :)   Math problems -- not so much. The problem is that when I am browsing The Internets I am constantly just skimming, doing an incredibly-surface read of stuff, with only about 2 of my billions of brain CPU cores active, and they are only running at about 2%.  Then only pausing when something is deeply interesting  — who or what, exactly, is the I, that I keep referring to — or deeply stimulating — Kate Upton dancing!   :)   Math problems — not so much.

]]> By: johnathan http://boingboing.net/2012/04/26/scientists-claim-the-way-a-per.html#comment-1407598 johnathan Fri, 27 Apr 2012 17:33:00 +0000 http://boingboing.net/?p=157007#comment-1407598 Womp womp, I got it wrong. Interesting(?) note, I was religious until I was in my early 20s and did not grow up in a particularly religious family. Womp womp, I got it wrong. Interesting(?) note, I was religious until I was in my early 20s and did not grow up in a particularly religious family.

]]> By: wysinwyg http://boingboing.net/2012/04/26/scientists-claim-the-way-a-per.html#comment-1407563 wysinwyg Fri, 27 Apr 2012 17:13:00 +0000 http://boingboing.net/?p=157007#comment-1407563  Again, this is a different type of "intuitive" than the one meant in the study.  Pretty much anyone who is analytical will end up with "intuitive" on the MBTI.  Again, this is a different type of “intuitive” than the one meant in the study.  Pretty much anyone who is analytical will end up with “intuitive” on the MBTI.

]]>