RELIGIOSITY’S NEGATIVE EFFECTS ON AMERICAN SOCIETY

1. Running head: RELIGIOSITY’S NEGATIVE EFFECTS ON AMERICAN SOCIETY Negative Effects of Religiosity on Aggression and the Education/Intelligence Of Native-Born and Foreign-Born Residents of the United States ThatyanaBurcl Argosy University - Psychology Dept. In partial fulfillment of the requirements for PSY492 March 23, 2010

2. Review Paper Formulated Questions The hypotheses that have been previously proposed are : How does religiosity negatively affect aggression in native-born and foreign-born residents of the United States? What are the negative effects of religiosity on the education and intelligence of United States? What is the correlation between levels of aggression and intelligence levels in pious believers?

3. Review Paper Focus Points Examining U.S. Society The purpose of this review paper is to analyze the negative effects of religiosity on the psychology of people living in a modern, developed country, such as the United States. The International Social Survey Program (ISSP) included various comparisons of the U.S. along with other progressive, modern nations – such as Sweden, Japan, Denmark, France, Germany, Great Britain, and Norway (Paul, 2009). What Research Provides In order to explore such questions and other issues related to religiosity, various studies have drawn out comparisons between the U.S. and other developed nations in relation to how religiosity affects various aspects of life within what is supposed to be a modern, progressive nation. The factors, again, are aggression and education/intelligence.

4. Reflecting on the purpose for review paper The essential research questions examine various aspects that could definitely use improvement in American society. Though, the U.S. is a modern nation, it is lacking in progressive standings. This nation is failing to keep up with other truly progressive nations due to its high rate of crime and violence, political unrest, prejudice/racists citizens, wasteful culture, and addiction to capitalism. The main objectives of the research hypotheses would be to demonstrate the negative influences of religiosity in the factors that contribute to the country’s downfall.

5. Gregory Paul’s Research Study Among the various studies performed, researcher Gregory Paul’s (2009) findings demonstrated evidence, through the Successful Societies Scale, to explain the correlation that secularism has with the progress of nations and how religiosity has negative effects on socioeconomic structure and societal dysfunction. This type of study (which included the United States) strongly supports the view that religiosity has a negative overall impact on various crucial requirements of a ‘civilized’ population. Gregory Paul’s (2009) argument lies in that the actual production of a valid study comparing cross-nationally social and economic conditions based on a wide-range set of factors is very essential. The researcher found the urgency of this matter to be very critical since the United States’ policies seem to be leaning towards being more influenced by the secular-progressive process; which in turn has led to a divide among the people and controversies attacking atheists and non-religious believers (Paul, 2009). His knowledge and research most certainly leads in a very convincing manner to its hypothesis. This is due to the fact that it addresses its purpose clearly and emphasizes its focus on the nature of the topics being examined.

6. Opposition of Paul’s Research The research article by Gregory Paul expands its credibility by reviewing both sides of the debate. The side involving secular and religious supporters mentions how popular literature holding religion at high-esteems has been produced by supporters like Coulter and O’Reilly (Paul, 2009). A strong focus in their text and other publicized religious beliefs lies in tearing down the economical and social standing of progressive, liberal nations with secular views (Paul, 2009). The article explains how the moral-creator socioeconomic hypothesis is based on religious worship leading to prosperous economic and social standing, wealth and prosperity (Paul, 2009). However, the opposite side carries the prevailing argument, which states the secular-democratic socioeconomic hypothesis as, the more secular a democracy, the closer it is to equating to the best social and economic conditions nationwide (Paul, 2009). In order to further the investigation of previous hypotheses, the focal points of this research are based on “origin, mental basis, popularity, and societal efficacy of mass religion versus secularism” (Paul, 2009).

7. What Else Can Be Derived From This Interesting Research Study Further development of such a study can be accomplished by asking questions that would compare the U.S. to other extremely religious nations that differ in the commanding religion. More specifically, take for instance, a question comparing the effects of Christianity on American society to the effects of the Muslim religion on Iranian society.

8. The Research of Bushman, Ridge, Das, Key, and Busath Researchers Bushman, Ridge, Das, Key, and Busath (2007) conducted their studies based on how believers of God and the Bible have increased aggression due to the fact that it is allowed through the scriptures of their God. The studies displayed how believers of God and the Bible have increased aggression due to the fact that it is allowed through the scriptures of their God (Bushman, Ridge, Das, Key, and Busath, 2007). This type of research addresses more specifically how religiosity influences aggression. The researchers’ argument is clearly regarding the negative effects religion can have on the religious; leading to negative events that jeopardize the well-being of everyone. The researchers were inspired to focus on this topic due to the lacking information regarding the influences of literature on aggression and violence.

9. What Else Can come From this Type of research Further development can be accomplished in this area of study by asking questions involving how the rivalry of religious groups results in violence. For example, more precise questions could investigate how participants react to aggression found in another religion such as an American Catholic’s reaction to aggressive passages from the Koran and a Muslim American’s reaction to aggressive passages from the Bible. Such questions could address more specifically how religiosity influences aggression; which would lead to scientifically demonstrating the dreadful consequences that religion creates.

10. The Research By Lynn, Harvey, and Nyborg The studies performed by Lynn, Harvey, and Nyborg (2009) were based on the negative correlations between religion and education along with levels of intelligence; which explained that the more religious individuals are, the less likely that they’ll be keen for knowledge. The objective of their main argument involved displaying the kind of negative effects religiosity can have on important human aspects, such as intelligence (Lynn, Harvey, and Nyborg, 2009). Their arguments clearly stand by secular views equating to higher intelligence and pious views equating to lower intelligence (Lynn, Harvey, and Nyborg, 2009). According to Lynn, Harvey, and Nyborg (2009), “Evidence is reviewed pointing to a negative relationship between intelligence and religious belief in the United States and Europe” (Abstract section).

11. What The Gallup Poll Displays The Gallup poll’s (2009) prevailing argument displayed a clear divide in the United States among those who believe in evolution and those who do not believe in evolution; which turned out to be that many still don’t believe in evolution (Van Bockstaele, 2009). Nevertheless, the argument supports that progress is being made regarding Americans’ views of science because 39% of Americans now believe in evolution (Van Bockstaele, 2009). Other objectives that the argument of the Gallup poll carried included that the younger individuals are, the more they tend to believe in evolution; also, the more often people attend church, the less they are likely to believe in evolution and the more likely they are to completely disbelieve in evolution (Van Bockstaele, 2009). Consequently, all these findings have focused on the improvements that remain to be made.

12. This pie chart demonstrates that among surveyed Americans 39% of them believe in evolution. While that is the largest group, it is still evident and significant that many people in the U.S. – which is supposed to be a progressive nation - don’t even want to consider it as a topic of discussion or are completely against it (Van Bockstaele, 2009). “Do You, personally, believe in the theory of evolution, Do you not believe in evolution, or don’t have an opinion either way?” (Newport, 2009)

13. Unbelievable! Not Surprising… “Only 4 in 10 Believe in Evolution” (Newport, 2009, headline). GALLUP POLL – BY FRANK NEWPORT GALLUP POLL – BY FRANK NEWPORT

14. References Bushman, B., Ridge, R., Das, E., Key, C., and Busath, G. (2007). When God sanctions killing: Effect of scriptural violence on aggression. Psychological Science, 18, 204-207. Lynn, R., Harvey, J., and Nyborg, H. (2009). Average intelligence predicts atheism rates across 137 nations. Science Direct, 37 (1), 11-15.doi: 10.1016/ j.intell.2008.03.004 Newport, F. (2009). Gallup poll: On Darwin’s birthday, only 4 in 10 believe in evolution. Retrieved April19, 2010, from http://www.gallup.com/poll/114544/Darwin-Birthday- Believe-Evolution.aspx Paul, G. (2009). The chronic dependence of popular religiosity upon dysfunctional psychosociological conditions. Evolutionary Psychology Journal, 7 (3), 398- 441. Retrieved from http://www.epjournal.net/ filestore/EP07398441_c.pdf Van Bockstaele, B.B. (2009). Gallup poll: Many people still do not believe in evolution. Retrieved March 23, 2010, from http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/ 267117