# Christians: Why are scientists more likely to be non-believers? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [July 1, 2013, 6:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christians-why-are-scientists-more-likely-to-be-non-believers/662322 "2013-07-01T06:22:17Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![JohnClay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/c37758/32.png) [@JohnClay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JohnClay)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2013, 6:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christians-why-are-scientists-more-likely-to-be-non-believers/662322/1 "2013-07-01T06:22:17Z")
There was a Q & A session at a church about whether there is one way to God/Heaven and I asked why scientists, who supposedly seek the truth objectively, would be more likely to conclude that Christianity isn’t true. The pastor said that he didn’t know. I asked if it could be the devil leading them astray… He said maybe and also suggested that the scientists might be more reluctant about giving their whole life over to Jesus. I’m starting to think that maybe that is true… maybe scientists like independence rather than dogma. (On the other hand scientists might say that we “know” that evolution is true, etc) What do the Christians out there think? There was only one other “question”. It was from an 18 year old that I’ve been told has a mind of an 8 year old. He said something about there being no suffering, etc, in Heaven. I thought it was interesting that the skeptical question would involve a lot of intelligence while the believer just showed a child-like faith. After the service I suggested to the pastor that maybe it was about faith vs evidence or something… e.g. even though the doubting Thomas was provided proof, Jesus said that blessed are those who believe without the same kind of evidence. I also mentioned that Jesus quoted scripture about not putting God to the test when tempted by the devil. On the other hand scientists like to do repeatable tests. Now I recall a verse about human wisdom being foolishness in God’s eyes… i.e. though scientists may be “wise”, they might be wrong (“foolish”) about God. BTW recently I have been considering about praying to God to reveal himself but I haven’t done it yet… maybe because I don’t feel ready to commit my life to God. I used to be a young earth creationist but now I am an agnostic. So Christians - why would people who are very intelligent and supposedly objective be more likely to be non-believers? ---
**Author:** ![JohnClay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/c37758/32.png) [@JohnClay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JohnClay)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2013, 6:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christians-why-are-scientists-more-likely-to-be-non-believers/662322/2 "2013-07-01T06:27:42Z")
> **[1 Corinthians 1:25 - The Message of the Cross](https://biblehub.com/1_corinthians/1-25.htm)** > > For the foolishness of God is wiser than man's wisdom, and the weakness of God is stronger than man's strength. “For the foolishness of God is wiser than human wisdom, and the weakness of God is stronger than human strength.” > **[1 Corinthians 3](https://biblehub.com/1_corinthians/3.htm)** > [@](#): > > 18Let no man deceive himself. If any man among you thinks that he is wise in this age, he must become foolish, so that he may become wise.19For the wisdom of this world is foolishness before God. For it is written, “He is THE ONE WHO CATCHES THE WISE IN THEIR CRAFTINESS”;20and again, “THE LORD KNOWS THE REASONINGS of the wise, THAT THEY ARE USELESS.”21So then let no one boast in men. For all things belong to you, ---
**Author:** ![JohnClay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/c37758/32.png) [@JohnClay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JohnClay)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2013, 6:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christians-why-are-scientists-more-likely-to-be-non-believers/662322/3 "2013-07-01T06:29:29Z")
It reminds me a bit about: > **[I know that I know nothing](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_know_that_I_know_nothing)** > > "I know that I know nothing" is a saying derived from Plato's account of the Greek philosopher Socrates: "For I was conscious that I knew practically nothing..." (Plato, Apology 22d, translated by Harold North Fowler, 1966). It is also sometimes called the Socratic paradox, although this name is often instead used to refer to other seemingly paradoxical claims made by Socrates in Plato's dialogues (most notably, Socratic intellectualism and the Socratic fallacy). > This saying is also connected or... Socratic paradox - “I know that I know nothing” or “I know one thing: that I know nothing” ---
**Author:** ![Knorf](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/58956e/32.png) [@Knorf](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Knorf)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2013, 6:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christians-why-are-scientists-more-likely-to-be-non-believers/662322/4 "2013-07-01T06:34:08Z")
God deliberately fucks with people who are able to use reason and logic to reach conclusions, by providing them with false data that leads them to erroneous conclusions. Nice God. Charming, really. ---
**Author:** ![JohnClay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/c37758/32.png) [@JohnClay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JohnClay)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2013, 6:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christians-why-are-scientists-more-likely-to-be-non-believers/662322/5 "2013-07-01T06:36:26Z")
Like I suggested earlier it could be the devil it is doing this… that way God is still the good guy. (it says that the devil is the father of all lies and Jesus is the truth [and the way and the life]) ---
**Author:** ![JohnClay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/c37758/32.png) [@JohnClay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JohnClay)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2013, 6:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christians-why-are-scientists-more-likely-to-be-non-believers/662322/6 "2013-07-01T06:41:03Z")
This article from the Institute for Creation Research has a lot of relevant verses: > **[The Foolishness Of Human Wisdom](https://www.icr.org/article/1577/)** > > “Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools” (Romans 1:22). >   > The Lord Jesus, in Matthew 5:22, warned His disciples against calling anyone, “Thou fool,” since we can only judge by outward acts. Yet the Scriptures, in general, and... “Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools” (Romans 1:22). “The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God” (Psalm 14:1) “I will destroy the wisdom of the wise” (I Corinthians 1:19) ---
**Author:** ![thicksantorum](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/65b543/32.png) [@thicksantorum](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/thicksantorum)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2013, 7:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christians-why-are-scientists-more-likely-to-be-non-believers/662322/7 "2013-07-01T07:18:47Z")
> [@JohnClay](#): > > Like I suggested earlier it could be the devil it is doing this… that way God is still the good guy. (it says that the devil is the father of all lies and Jesus is the truth [and the way and the life]) So, either evil or incompetent. ---
**Author:** ![Nava](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/da6949/32.png) [@Nava](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nava)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2013, 7:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christians-why-are-scientists-more-likely-to-be-non-believers/662322/8 "2013-07-01T07:26:41Z")
Sorry, **JohnClay** , but where are you getting this notion that scientists are less likely to be believers? You may not even be asking the right question. ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2013, 7:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christians-why-are-scientists-more-likely-to-be-non-believers/662322/9 "2013-07-01T07:31:07Z")
> [@JohnClay](#): > > “The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God” (Psalm 14:1) And the usual response to this is: “And the wise will proclaim it aloud.” BTW, when a scientist says something like he knows evolution is correct, he means that he has seen direct evidence that evolution happens. There are many cases of speciation observed, both in the wild and in the lab. However all knowledge in science is provisional, and strong enough evidence will eventually modify even the strongest theory. Consider that Newton’s Laws were even more accepted than evolution, and the combination of the theory of Einstein and its confirmation through experiment caused them to be modified. ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2013, 7:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christians-why-are-scientists-more-likely-to-be-non-believers/662322/10 "2013-07-01T07:35:04Z")
> [@Nava](#): > > Sorry, **JohnClay** , but where are you getting this notion that scientists are less likely to be believers? You may not even be asking the right question. IIRC various studies say so, especially in certain disciplines like biology. Highly educated, technically inclined believers tend to be engineers rather than scientists. Some mention of it on Wikipedia [here](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_atheism#Geographic_distribution) for example. > [@](#): > > A study has shown atheism in the West to be particularly prevalent among scientists, a tendency already quite marked at the beginning of the 20th century, developing into a dominant one during the course of the century. In 1914, James H. Leuba found that 58% of 1,000 randomly selected U.S. natural scientists expressed “disbelief or doubt in the existence of God” (defined as a personal God which interacts directly with human beings). The same study, repeated in 1996, gave a similar percentage of 60.7%. Expressions of positive disbelief rose from 52% to 72%. (See also relationship between religion and science.) This survey is not without criticisms however. ---
**Author:** ![Mangetout](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mangetout/32/19_2.png) [@Mangetout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangetout)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2013, 7:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christians-why-are-scientists-more-likely-to-be-non-believers/662322/11 "2013-07-01T07:42:05Z")
In order to be successful as a scientist, you have to be prepared to accept answers you don’t like, and you have to be prepared to _look everywhere_ for them. Those are two things believers often (not always, but more often than non-believers) have a problem doing. ---
**Author:** ![JohnClay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/c37758/32.png) [@JohnClay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JohnClay)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2013, 7:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christians-why-are-scientists-more-likely-to-be-non-believers/662322/12 "2013-07-01T07:50:28Z")
> [@Mangetout](#): > > In order to be successful as a scientist, you have to be prepared to accept answers you don’t like, and you have to be prepared to _look everywhere_ for them. > > Those are two things believers often (not always, but more often than non-believers) have a problem doing. A while ago most scientists in Europe were Christians… BTW creation “scientists” believe that the evidence points to God and creation… either the evidence really does point to a non-God explanation or the devil is behind this… I mean why else would agnostism/atheism infiltrate the scientific community in somewhat recent times? ---
**Author:** ![Rune](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e68b1a/32.png) [@Rune](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rune)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2013, 8:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christians-why-are-scientists-more-likely-to-be-non-believers/662322/13 "2013-07-01T08:13:05Z")
1. You first need to establish that scientist are more likely to be non-believers. 2. What kind of scientist. Are we talking “gender scientist” drunk of Foucault and other useless nonsense. Or real scientist. 3. Why scientist should be a particular interesting segment. Just because you know a hell of a lot about artic ice core sampling, pulsars, battery technology, Roman 2nd century poets, or whatever don’t give you any particular insight into existential issues. ---
**Author:** ![Kenm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/bc79bd/32.png) [@Kenm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kenm)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2013, 8:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christians-why-are-scientists-more-likely-to-be-non-believers/662322/14 "2013-07-01T08:35:16Z")
> [@JohnClay](#): > > There was only one other “question”. It was from an 18 year old that I’ve been told has a mind of an 8 year old. He said something about there being no suffering, etc, in Heaven. I thought it was interesting that the skeptical question would involve a lot of intelligence while the believer just showed a child-like faith. Like believing in a Santa Clause-like god. Thinking like an eight-year-old is good if you’re six. > [@](#): > > BTW recently I have been considering about praying to God to reveal himself but I haven’t done it yet… maybe because I don’t feel ready to commit my life to God. I used to be a young earth creationist but now I am an agnostic. Go ahead and pray. But be aware of confirmation bias — like finding presents under the tree from Santa Claus. But that would mean you think like an eight-year-old, so you wouldn’t understand confirmation bias, and that’s better. So forget it. > [@](#): > > So Christians - why would people who are very intelligent and supposedly objective be more likely to be non-believers? Obviously I’m no Christian, but people who are very intelligent, or even mildly so, looked at the question in more depth and more objectively than a pastor, who makes his living from the collection plate and who may not believe — depending in no small part on his intelligence — or an eight-year-old. > [@](#): > > Like I suggested earlier it could be the devil it is doing this… The grinch! (Remember, you’re eight.) > [@](#): > > that way God is still the good guy. Except when he tells you to smash babies’ heads against rocks, of course. > [@](#): > > (it says that the devil is the father of all lies and Jesus is the truth [and the way and the life]) Of course it (the bible) does. It’s a sales pitch. What else could it say? That Jesus is a fraud? > [@](#): > > A while ago most scientists in Europe were Christians… Most _professed_ to be Christians. If not, they and and their families would starve or worse. And before the word science was coined and the term natural history relegated to the trash heap. > [@](#): > > BTW creation “scientists” believe that the evidence points to God and creation… either the evidence really does point to a non-God explanation or the devil is behind this… In the words of the sainted Jack Benny, [**I’m thinking it over**](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y6j7l4_VlqU)! > [@](#): > > I mean why else would agnostism/atheism infiltrate the scientific community in somewhat recent times? The church stopped burning heretics? ---
**Author:** ![JohnClay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/c37758/32.png) [@JohnClay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JohnClay)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2013, 8:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christians-why-are-scientists-more-likely-to-be-non-believers/662322/15 "2013-07-01T08:53:04Z")
> [@Rune](#): > > 1. You first need to establish that scientist are more likely to be non-believers. See: > **[Demographics of atheism | Geographic distribution](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_atheism#Geographic_distribution)** > > Though atheists are in the minority in most countries, they are relatively common in Europe, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, East Asia and present communist states. It is difficult to determine actual atheist numbers. > In 1916, 1,000 leading American scientists were randomly chosen from American Men of Science and 41.8% believed God existed, 41.5% disbelieved, and 16.7% had doubts/did not know. When the study was replicated 80 years later using American Men and Women of Science in 1996 results we... “A study has shown atheism in the West to be **particularly prevalent among scientists** ” If that is misleading you can edit Wikipedia if you can provide sufficient evidence. > [@](#): > > 1. What kind of scientist. Are we talking “gender scientist” drunk of Foucault and other useless nonsense. Or real scientist. A real scientist. “What percentage of Scientists/Astronomers are Atheist?” > **[Yahoo Search - Web Search](https://search.yahoo.com/)** > > The search engine that helps you find exactly what you're looking for. Find the most relevant information, video, images, and answers from all across the Web. > [@](#): > > \*\*You asked what percentage of scientists are atheists, so I’ll summarize the results of the two studies. > > The first one says that 52% of scientists have no religious affiliation, compared to 14% of the general public. (“No religious affiliation” isn’t exactly the same as being an atheist.) This survey questioned scientists at “elite research universities.” > > The second one surveyed “greater” scientists (defined as those belonging to the National Academy of Sciences). It found that 65% of biological scientists expressed a “disbelief in a personal God”, and 79% of physical scientists. Most of the others were agnostics. Only 7% expressed a “belief in a personal God.”\*\* > [@](#): > > 1. Why scientist should be a particular interesting segment. Just because you know a hell of a lot about artic ice core sampling, pulsars, battery technology, Roman 2nd century poets, or whatever don’t give you any particular insight into existential issues. Scientists should be knowledgeable about whether the evidence points to the universe being created or whether it looks like stars and planets formed by themselves. They should be knowledgeable about whether it looks like species were created or emerged by themselves. They should be able to find evidence about whether the universe is about 6000 years old (which I believe is what the Bible seems to say) or whether it is billions of years old. Scientists that are biologists or astrophysicists are of particular interest. BTW I’m talking about fundamentalist Christianity in particular… not about some kind of theism like deism where God stays somewhat hidden. Is that enough of an answer? Now if you’re a Christian could you reply to the question? ---
**Author:** ![JohnClay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/c37758/32.png) [@JohnClay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JohnClay)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2013, 9:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christians-why-are-scientists-more-likely-to-be-non-believers/662322/16 "2013-07-01T09:56:51Z")
> [@Rune](#): > > 1. You first need to establish that scientist are more likely to be non-believers. > 2. What kind of scientist. Are we talking “gender scientist” drunk of Foucault and other useless nonsense. Or real scientist. > 3. Why scientist should be a particular interesting segment. Just because you know a hell of a lot about artic ice core sampling, pulsars, battery technology, Roman 2nd century poets, or whatever don’t give you any particular insight into existential issues. BTW 1 and 3 are helpful if someone was to write some kind of persuasive essay about this… ---
**Author:** ![DrFidelius](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/drfidelius/32/3447_2.png) [@DrFidelius](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrFidelius)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2013, 10:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christians-why-are-scientists-more-likely-to-be-non-believers/662322/17 "2013-07-01T10:05:21Z")
The better question is why “scientists” tend to not be members of the types of churches where the flock worries about why other people are not members. ---
**Author:** ![JohnClay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/c37758/32.png) [@JohnClay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JohnClay)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2013, 10:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christians-why-are-scientists-more-likely-to-be-non-believers/662322/18 "2013-07-01T10:06:56Z")
[http://www.circleofchristianwomen.com/how\_demons\_enter.htm](http://www.circleofchristianwomen.com/how_demons_enter.htm) > [@](#): > > Demon Groupings represents patterns experienced in actual deliverance sessions\*\* (Pigs in the Parlor --p.113-114-see reference) > > …Mind Idolatry - Intellectualism, Rationalization, Pride, Ego ---
**Author:** ![JohnClay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/c37758/32.png) [@JohnClay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JohnClay)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2013, 10:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christians-why-are-scientists-more-likely-to-be-non-believers/662322/19 "2013-07-01T10:09:50Z")
> [@DrFidelius](#): > > The better question is why “scientists” tend to not be members of the types of churches where the flock worries about why other people are not members. Well the pastor of that church didn’t seem particularly worried - he didn’t seem to put much effort into answering the question. Anyway it seems Christians have a very hard time with this question so I think it is a good one… perhaps Rune is a Christian and they didn’t even hint at what their answer might be. ---
**Author:** ![JohnClay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/c37758/32.png) [@JohnClay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JohnClay)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2013, 10:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christians-why-are-scientists-more-likely-to-be-non-believers/662322/20 "2013-07-01T10:39:48Z")
From Answer in Genesis’s article about debates about Creationism: > **[What’s the Best “Proof” of Creation?](https://answersingenesis.org/evidence-for-creation/whats-the-best-proof-of-creation/)** > > How presuppositions for and against God's Word directs the creation and evolution debate through facts, evidence, interpretation, and worldview. > [@](#): > > If one agrees to a discussion without using the Bible as these people insist, then we have allowed them to set the terms of the debate. In essence these terms are > > 1. “Facts” are neutral. However, there are no such things as “brute facts”; all facts are interpreted. Once the Bible is eliminated from the argument, the Christians’ presuppositions are gone, leaving them unable to effectively give an alternate interpretation of the facts. Their opponents then have the upper hand as they still have their presuppositions. > > 2. Truth can/should be determined independently of God. However, the Bible states: “The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom” (Psalm 111:10); “The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge” (Proverbs 1:7); “But the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned” (1 Corinthians 2:14). > > A Christian cannot divorce the spiritual nature of the battle from the battle itself. A non-Christian is not neutral. The Bible makes this very clear: “The one who is not with Me is against Me, and the one who does not gather with Me scatters” (Matthew 12:30); “And this is the condemnation, that the Light has come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than the Light, because their deeds were evil” (John 3:19). [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christians-why-are-scientists-more-likely-to-be-non-believers/662322.md?page=2)