• Philosophy and Spirituality
    Welcome Guest
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
    Threads of Note Socialize
  • P&S Moderators: Xorkoth | Madness

New study links intrinsic religious motivation to higher-level patterns of thought

pharmakos

Bluelighter
Joined
Jun 15, 2008
Messages
36,397
My old habits would mean I just share this in the PD Social, but hey, let's try to build some new ones. P&S has long been my second favorite spot on BL after the PD Social. :)


Full text:

New study links intrinsic religious motivation to higher-level patterns of thought

by Eric W. Dolan May 22, 2021

New research provides evidence that specific forms of religious motivation are associated with higher-level patterns of thought. The findings, which appear in the Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, shed light on the cognitive underpinnings of the relationship between religion and meaning in life.

“I became interested in the psychology of religion after having taught it at a small liberal arts college I previously worked at,” said study author Jay L. Michaels, an assistant professor at the University of South Florida at Sarasota-Manatee.

“In preparing the course, I learned how hundreds of psychology and medical studies identified that people who are religious tend to have lower rates of heart disease, better outcomes following surgical procedures, and live longer. To me, this was interesting, as at the time it was unclear what exactly contributed to these health benefits.”

“So, I theorized that perhaps religion alters how people think,” Michaels said. “I specifically began testing Dr. Crystal Park’s (University of Connecticut) theory that religion enhances meaning in life, where sense of meaning is known to help people cope with stress. I theorized that if this is accurate, then religion should alter the underlying mental processes that contribute to perceived meaning. This particular article is based on this logic.”

In the study, 630 adults from from 48 countries completed a cognitive assessment in which they were asked to pick a phrase that best described a given behavior. They had the choice of picking a high-level description (which focused on why the action was performed) or a low-level description (which focused on mechanistic aspects of the action.) For example, one item asked whether “reading” was better described as “Gaining knowledge” or “Following lines of print.”

The participants also provided demographic information and completed surveys regarding their religious motivations and spiritual beliefs.

The researchers found that religious people with stronger intrinsic religious motivation and stronger extrinsic-personal religious motivation tended to also have stronger spiritual beliefs, which in turn was associated with thinking according to higher-level actions.

In other words, participants who agreed with statements such as “I have often had a strong sense of God’s presence” (intrinsic religiosity) and “Prayer is for peace and happiness” (extrinsic-personal religiosity) were more likely to describe reading as “Gaining knowledge,” and this relationship was mediated by the strength of spiritual beliefs, such as the belief that God is an all-pervading presence.

But extrinsic-social religiosity (“I go to church mainly because I enjoy seeing people I know there”) was unrelated to these patterns of thought. Moreover, among non-religious participants, there was no link between religious motivations and higher-order thought patterns.

“The main takeaway from this study is that people who are motivated to pursue religion or spirituality and integrate it fully into their life while finding it contributing to what they experience tend to think in more meaningful ways,” Michaels told PsyPost. “That is, religious as well as spiritual people tend to experience thought patterns that are more organized and provide deeper sense of meaning. This meaning can help be a sort of mental anchor during times of distress.”

The study, however, used a cross-sectional methodology, which prevents the researchers from drawing any strong conclusions about causality.

“As with any research, my study has flaws,” Michaels explained. “It used a survey method, which means we cannot conclude religion and spirituality cause people to think in a more meaningful way. It’s merely a relationship. Future work that uses experimental techniques are needed to identify if there is a cause-effect relationship.”

Approximately 62% of the participants reported following some form of religion, with Christianity being the most common.

“My study used people from Western Cultures,” Michaels said. “This means the data is from people who, if religious, are primarily Judeo-Christian. We need more research about people from other faiths. This is a big hurdle in the psychology of religion subfield.”

“My two coauthors were both undergraduate students at the time we worked on this study,” Michaels added. “I love having undergraduate students assist with my research. It provides them with a rewarding experience and often generates novel new ideas for my studies. I’m glad to note that my coauthors, Tiffany and John, have gone on to new success. Tiffany is now completing a graduate degree with Florida State University in Speech and Language science. John is now pursuing a career with our local school district.”

The study, “Individual Differences in Religious Motivation Influence How People Think“, was authored by Jay L. Michaels, John Petrino, and Tiffany Pitre-Zampol.

---------------

Back to phamakizing:

Note, of course, that being "spiritual" was the same as being "religious," as long as there was actually a focus on higher order thought that went along with it. And this part is imo the most important takeaway, for how this might affect public health if people actually ran away with the idea:

But extrinsic-social religiosity (“I go to church mainly because I enjoy seeing people I know there”) was unrelated to these patterns of thought. Moreover, among non-religious participants, there was no link between religious motivations and higher-order thought patterns.

You can't just "go through the motions" and expect it to work. You've gotta actually put in the mental effort.
 
Why would anyone call the propensity to adore a genocidal god and his homophobic and misogynous religion a higher thought pattern.

I would call that a lower class thinking pattern. You?

Regards
DL
 
Why would anyone call the propensity to adore a genocidal god and his homophobic and misogynous religion a higher thought pattern.

I would call that a lower class thinking pattern. You?

Regards
DL

Did you read the article? It clearly explains the line of thought. Also says that merely being "spiritual" brings the benefits as well.

Personally, tho, I am a Gnostic Christian. The homophobic and misogynistic stuff from the Bible did not come from Christ's mouth. Christ taught "love your neighbor like you love yourself" and "don't judge unless you want to be judged" as his main two messages. Anyone who claims Christianity is a hateful thing either misunderstands or is being intentionally disingenuous.

Gnostic Christians explain away a lot of the "evil" stuff by the belief that this physical universe wasn't created by the Alpha/Omega god, but rather by Yaldabaoth, the demiurge, the false creator god who made this universe on his own, purely through the urge to exist itself, without consulting with his divine aeon pair from the pleroma of the Godhead, Sophia, the aeon of Wisdom. Sophia was able to grant a spark of Pneuma (Divine wisdom / knowledge of the soul) to all mortal beings in this universe, tho, despite the fact that Yaldabaoth made the place without her...
 
Last edited:
Did you read the article? It clearly explains the line of thought. Also says that merely being "spiritual" brings the benefits as well.

Personally, tho, I am a Gnostic Christian. The homophobic and misogynistic stuff from the Bible did not come from Christ's mouth. Christ taught "love your neighbor like you love yourself" and "don't judge unless you want to be judged" as his main two messages. Anyone who claims Christianity is a hateful thing either misunderstands or is being intentionally disingenuous.

Gnostic Christians explain away a lot of the "evil" stuff by the belief that this physical universe wasn't created by the Alpha/Omega god, but rather by Yaldabaoth, the demiurge, the false creator god who made this universe on his own, purely through the urge to exist itself, without consulting with his divine aeon pair from the pleroma of the Godhead, Sophia, the aeon of Wisdom. Sophia was able to grant a spark of Pneuma (Divine wisdom / knowledge of the soul) to all mortal beings in this universe, tho, despite the fact that Yaldabaoth made the place without her...
My question was simple and I did not see it answered in your presentation.

What you say we Gnostic Christians believe, we do not, as we are not stupid enough to read our own myths literally.

As a Gnostic Christian, you will know that we wrote our myth to put against the Christian myth, when everyone knew better than to read myths as history.

We recognized that the Yahweh on offer was a genocidal prick and that is why we called him a demiurge.

This following may be of interest.

I hope you can see how intelligent the ancients were as compared to the mental efforts that modern preachers and theists are using with the literal reading of myths.

https://bigthink.com/videos/what-is-god-2-2

Further.
http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/03132009/watch.html

Rabbi Hillel, the older contemporary of Jesus, said that when asked to sum up the whole of Jewish teaching, while he stood on one leg, said, "The Golden Rule. That which is hateful to you, do not do to your neighbor. That is the Torah. And everything else is only commentary. Now, go and study it."

Please listen as to what is said about the literal reading of myths.

"Origen, the great second or third century Greek commentator on the Bible said that it is absolutely impossible to take these texts literally. You simply cannot do so. And he said, "God has put these sort of conundrums and paradoxes in so that we are forced to seek a deeper meaning."

Matt 7;12 So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets.

This is how early Gnostic Christians view the transition from reading myths properly to destructive literal reading and idol worship.



Regards
DL
 
Certainly not all Christians are homophobes or misogynistic, many are great examples of humans or at least appear so
Yes. You will know the good ones by their works and deeds.

Those Christians who do not walk the bible talk or follow their official religions dictates are good Christians.

If they follow the dictates of their religion, then they are evil. We can exempt the more left leaning sects. They have shown moral progress.

There are good reasons to why they say the only good Christians are Gnostic Christians.

We recognize that genocide, homophobia and misogyny are evils.

Regards
DL


Regards
DL
 
My question was simple and I did not see it answered in your presentation.

Your question was not simple. In fact, a working theodicy is one of the most difficult things to dream up, and you basically asked me to spit out a perfect one in the spot. You built a strawman and attacked it.
If they follow the dictates of their religion, then they are evil.
Explain this more thoroughly, with some citations, please. "Treat others how you want to be treated" (aka "don't be a hypocrite") and "don't be judgmental" are the two biggest beliefs that true Christians are supposed to hold.

You don't have to be a Gnostic Christian to be a good Christian. Sad that you must have met so many bad Christians in your life to feel that way. Promise that there are some awesome Christians out there walking a path just like Christ, Christians who are more likely to help a thief or a prostitute atheist than they are a hypocritical "believer."

Cheers, tho, I don't mind being challenged. :). Feel free to toss more at me haha.

As a Gnostic Christian, you will know that we wrote our myth to put against the Christian myth, when everyone knew better than to read myths as history.
This... Just isn't true tho. Elements of the Gnostic myth were around before Christ, and Gnostic Christianity arose right alongside what we now look back and consider as "real" Christianity. At the time of the writing of the books of the Bible, tho, there was a LOT of debating about what a Christian was or should be, Gnostics rose alongside that. You can even read much of these debates in the Bible itself.
 
Regarding the original post, this seems to be based on linguistic ability. But I'm not making myself clear in the simplicity of my response.

People who are religious (and not just attending) actually read a lot of the various religious texts. Despite content being questionable, the linguistic skills used by most scripture authors is above average not only for their time but often above a grade 5 reading level. The doesn't denote intelligence but may contribute to a more robust vocabulary.

Religions are the art of making simple things appear complex. All religious texts use verbose language to add emotion, the authors or this study seems to believe using more complex language denotes a higher pattern of thought.

This makes sense as long as you understand the actual increase in pattern of thought from simple mechanical descriptions (which point to a visual understanding being described) to a flowery verbose "higher pattern" of thought may not only be unnecessary but it may be, like many religious beliefs, hiding a lot of holes with flowery words.
 
Regarding the original post, this seems to be based on linguistic ability. But I'm not making myself clear in the simplicity of my response.

This is true. One could probably be practicing Klingon religion and still get the benefits, as long as they're actually having those deep, higher-order thoughts about the Klingon warrior's journey or whatever lol.
 
this vaguely reminds me of an article which claimed right wing conspiracy enthusiasts to lower levels of critical thinking

but conspiracies /=/ religion

just reminded me of it
 
Top