All Channels

Religion tends to suppress analytical thinking in our brains, says study

A study conducted by the Case Western Reserve University and Babson College have concluded that the history long clash between religion and science stems from a clash within two networks in our brains.

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
DixieNormS2443d ago

Church teaches common sense. "Don't kill, steal, cheat" etc. If you lack common sense then church will have its doors open for you.

shadowraiserx2443d ago

They teach it when its convenient for them, remember the inquisition and the hunt of witches they forget to teach them "Don't kill, steal, cheat" etc.

sonic9892444d ago (Edited 2443d ago )

we will continue to be fed this kind of garbage every once in a while .
the desire driven materialistic societies are coming sooner than i expected .
its not a surprise by any means, but you know the critical thinking methods are very rare these days every body is follower even the ones who claim to be scientific, did they test these theories did they prove it i mean THEMSELVES or just took the word from the scientists as its you know the whole truth, btw who is funding them big corporations or the governments or maybe both .
if we continue at this rate the whole concept of morals and ethics will be questioned saying that it has no use if it doesnt bring benefits ( material benefits because people these days lack any kind of proper short or long term attention span and are only material thinking the maximum level of conscious thinking they have is the desire which mostly in their case translates to SEX nothing else ) so if it has no benefits then i shall only follow what my desire asks me to do so .
i remember i believe 5 years ago i said if the term SEX becomes the main thing in our lives then we cant really proceed as a civilization and we are in that direction everyday, and please understand when i say SEX or desires i do not only mean the sexual interaction ONLY no i mean what we consider as entertainment or fantasy which we would like to make it a reality in a world that supposed to be govern by great examples not desires .

2443d ago Replies(1)
wakeNbake2443d ago

Better than blindly following a stone age fairytale.

bouzebbal2443d ago (Edited 2443d ago )

Denying existence of a greater power because you can't see it is like me denying the existence of your mom for the same reasons (i never saw her). But by faith i know she gave you birth.
Same logic applies everytime.
You walk in the heart of a jungle and you find a pen on the floor you will directly think human has been there. Same thing applies to human. Nothing comes from nothing, and EVERY design has a designer. You deny this point you deny existence of science and logic in general since this is one of the foundations of logical rational thinking.

This article is completely moronic.. The writer obviously has no open mind.

chadwarden2443d ago


Difference is he can prove to you with hard evidence that his mom exists i.e. a picture/video/call/etc of her. Can you prove the existence of a greater power like this?

Spenok2443d ago

Pretty much my thought process as well. I stopped reading when it said, "the history long clash between religion and science."

For one it hasn't been that long that religion and science have been against each other in the public eye. It wasn't until the late 1800's that happened. Religion and science go hand in hand which many don't understand. Not to mention anyone who believes in God believes in science just as equally.

sonic9892443d ago (Edited 2443d ago )

correct .
and just to a little bit more to your comment .
researching the background and history of those people responsible for that shift might actually reveal something .
you know something bigger than a financier for example .
in short motives to make that a reality

hazelamy2443d ago

actually, one of the few thing somic said that was correct was that there's beena clash between science and religion for a long time in history.

like that church putting Galileo on trial in the 1600s for saying the earth orbited the sun.

and the church has continued to persecute scientists who contradicted the bible ever since.

sonic9892443d ago

in fact what i said was in support of Spenok not against his opinion .
but @hazelamy
did you go to space or you are taking the things you learnt in school for granted as the 100% truth .
just curious dont worry i wont respond i just would like to know.
final note : LOL at few things no seriously LOL .

The 10th Rider2443d ago

The idea that Galileo and the Church were at odds tends to be grossly exaggerated. There was a lot more at play. Galileo's heliocentric views weren't taken seriously by philosophers, theologians, or the scientists of his day. Galileo's second trial and subsequent house arrest was only after he published his book with the help of the Pope Urban VIII (who liked Galileo,) and he basically insulted the Pope in it.

freshslicepizza2443d ago

there are still people who don't believe the earth is round. there are also religious beliefs that will put their children and others at risk because they don't believe in science or what doctors can do.

how are they any better than the followers of terrorism? it is all based on beliefs and how they were brought up.

SephirothX212443d ago (Edited 2443d ago )

Explain exactly how transubstantiation and science go hand in hand please? The whole concept of God came about to explain things that we couldn't explain. For example, why is there night and day? How did the Earth come about? Why are there thunderstorms? Through science we have answered these questions and as a result, God has become less and less important. There is absolutely no reason to believe that there is a God or an intelligent creator of the universe. There is a greater chance that there is a multiverse. Science is based on evidence. Religion is based on faith and the definition of faith is to believe in something without evidence. Thus, science and religion do not go hand in hand. Religion is a psychological poison that will eventually be eradicated.

Another thing, religion and morals are completely different. If Christians got their morals from the Bible, they would then think it was okay to kill people who worked on the Sabbath day. The fact that people pick and choose what parts of the Bible they take their morals from shows that we can develop a sense of morality independent of religion. Religion serves no purpose other than providing false hope and comfort to undereducated individuals. If religious people spent time educating themselves rather than wasting it in a church, the world would be a much better place.

The 10th Rider2443d ago (Edited 2443d ago )


The idea of transubstantiation is compatible with Aristotelian metaphysics, which is compatible with modern science. In the earlier days of science, it went hand in hand with religion because good theology compliments good science which compliments good philosophy, etc...

Many great thinkers have been those who, through a love of God and his creation, have sought to seek a deeper understanding of how the world works.

Not to say there aren't a ton of blind religious, but you can't blanket all religious under that one category anymore than someone can blanket atheists as Machiavellian opportunists,

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 2443d ago
jukins2443d ago

Lol you ask if the scientists proved or tested their theories then immediately go and predict the future kinda funny

2443d ago
MEsoJD2442d ago

While religion is a part of most societies evolution, it's benefits dropped significantly once the scientific method is discovered/implemented. Today it's a hindrance in industrialized society and our progress as a whole. The problem is that religion highly relies on conditioning/indoctrination. Get members that are young or desperate and adhering to our survival instincts promising eternal life or death to through illogical practices to the point that they are not as capable in life when it comes to critical thinking scenarios that contradict said belief. That's not to say that believers can't be good contributing members of society.

Morals/ethics stem from our survival instincts on a basic level and is further molded/conditioned by society. We are simply animals (hence the fossils, dna, tail-bone, etc) who stem from a common ancestor of chimpanzees that was fortunate enough to have our evolution be focused on intelligence. Every action (or the majority) you make on a conscious and un-conscious level is in one way or another is cost vs benefit (though conditioning can negect/cloud inherent genetic traits).

Those that understand how the scientific method/critical thinking works should be able to deduce bad science when it is presented to them. Science is ever changing and is checked and tested by peers. When one submits a journal, others can test and see if they get the same results. It's pretty fool proof.

Anyway, religions relevance is dying day by day. Why? The improvement of technology, the outcry of liberal ideals, and free flow of information to name a few. It isn't safe from criticism. Basically, it's poison and it's not needed to love and support your fellow man.

ramble ramble night.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 2442d ago
2pacalypsenow2443d ago

Because believing we come from monkeys is more believable than believing we were created by a greater being

Spenok2443d ago (Edited 2443d ago )

Believing we came from nothing actually. Nothing exploded, created everything, and over time the earth formed, it rained a lot(not sure where the water magically came from), and the water and rocks had sex and HURRAH! The first cell poofed into existence. From there you have to contort your brain and body into a human pretzel of WTF to get that that one cell magically grew extra parts, all at different times and lengths etc, all for different purposes to make everything different on our planet.

Yep. That's much more believable.

wakeNbake2443d ago (Edited 2443d ago )

At least theyre tested theories built on physical patterns and tangible evidence unlike the ramblings of mad men that comprise the majority of scripture. Anyone who honestly believes theres an evil red goat man who grills souls for eternity under the Earth's crust is a moron plain and simple.

2pacalypsenow2443d ago (Edited 2443d ago )

You read books written by men you've never seen, and beleive this "Proof" you've never seen in person. How is that different from believing stuff we read from a book written by men we've never seen and proof we've never seen? Now I beleive in most science but if this science is proven then why does it always changes over the years I mean at one point people thought the earth was flat because scientists said so with their "proof".

FlameBaitGod2443d ago (Edited 2443d ago )

Society turned the image of the devil to look like an "evil red goat", because if you actually read the bible it says that Lucifer was one of the most beautiful angels, anyways as time goes by the gov seems to eliminate the word god from everywhere and even famous artist have said that major record labels don't want any lyrics that have to do with god.

What I find amazing is that the majority of people don't see the consequences of this, morals keep dying because of this and people say AH! you don't need to be religious to have morals and that's TOTALLY TRUE BUT crime statistics keep growing,we are not getting any better. Anyone saw the statistics of crime when praying was removed from public schools? This is all documented people, you can look this up.

1. For 15 years before 1963 pregnancies in girls ages 15 through 19 years had been no more than 15 per thousand After 1963 pregnancies increased 187% in the next 15 years.

2. For younger girls, ages 10 to 14 years, pregnancies since 1963 are up 553%.

3. Before 1963 sexually transmitted diseases among students were 400 per 100,000. Since 1963, they were up 226% in the next 12 years.

4. Before 1963 divorce rates had been declining for 15 years. After 1963 divorces increased 300% each year for the next 15 years.

5. Since 1963 unmarried people living together is up 353%

6. Since 1963 single parent families are up 140%.

7. Since 1963 single parent families with children are up 160%.

8. Since 1963 violent crime has increased 544%.

9. The nation has been deprived of an estimated 30 million citizens through legal abortions just since 1973.

The more people fight against banning God the worst we get and most people don't seem to get this. Are money doesn't even say In God we trust anymore lol, whats funny about this is that the federal reserve is not even owned by the Government, its private and its owned by a Jewish family(Rochchild), major record labels owned by what ? Jewish people, major TV networks ? owned by Jewish people LOL. They really don't want God in anything even after all these years.

Ol_Boy2443d ago (Edited 2443d ago )


If you're talking about human evolution, there's no tangible evidence or physical patterns. The man who came up with the theory even said it's incorrect and changed his opinion on it. On a side note it takes just as much "faith" to believe in unproven theories as it takes to believe in God and just as you call the writers of the Bible "mad men", some of the most revolutionary scientists, astronomers, physicists were are also called mad men.

DivineHand1252443d ago

@FlameBaitGod The statistics you posted are interesting, however, on of the things most people seem to ignore when posting those numbers is that the global population has increased significantly since those 1963 so of course those numbers would increase as well.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 2443d ago
FlameBaitGod2443d ago (Edited 2443d ago )


That's totally true BUT if you look at any of them before 1963, they where either declining OR going up in really small rates before 1963. Each year after that rates grew more than normal and even declining rates started to fade.

The 10th Rider2443d ago

Correlation does not equal causation. I'll say first hand that there's a lot of religious people that let 'blind faith' rule their thinking, and that's just idiotic. However there's been two thousand years of religious scientists who have made enormous contributions to science: Galileo, Mendel, Lemaître . . . The list could go on.

I'm sure if you looked at the likes of theologians and philosophers such as Augustine, Aquinas . . . etc, you'd find that they're more likely to use the analytical parts of their brains. A sample of random religious people is bound to turn up with a lot of duds.

On a side note: Wouldn't the flipside of this study be saying that non-religious people are less empathetic?

Muadiib2443d ago (Edited 2443d ago )

Christians and Jews have produced many of the best scientists over the millennia (possibly the best), not to mention the artists, theologians and scholars etc that these two groups have produced.

Certainly Islam does hinder analytical thinking though, you only need to look at their history to see that in action.

GFahim2443d ago

yes lets all look at Islam's 'awful history' when it comes to 'analytical thinking' from Muslims:

MWH2443d ago

the west tend to purposely avoid crediting any Islamic contribution to science advancement and humanity in general. add to it the relentless media crusades and the continues suppression to anything Islamic.

sonic9892443d ago (Edited 2443d ago )

the west think they are superior to everyone .
they think they know better about religions that came from a region they cant speak all of its ancient or current languages and nearly know nothing about except what they are told to believe like you are the best we have only taken the best of that region and gave it to you they worth nothing really except their language is way superior to ours but who needs that .
even worse they use their languages to directly translate from powerful huge languages like arabic which is AT LEAST 25 times bigger than english so you can explain things in a detail that is unmatched by the simplistic latin languages for example .
the amount of hoaxes and lies we see on the media today is enormous but thanks to the lack of investigation and blind assumption we are getting people who lack the basic knowledge of reason or the motives of other entities and people they are programmed they give you the impression that they are for the truth and facts yet they see facts up to a certain end then they stop purposefully .
example they surely do not understand how the moon landing happened but they believe it because the government said so, the same government that told lies to stretch russia and exhaust them .
in other words naive people

Grap2443d ago (Edited 2443d ago )

this gau is a troll, who no nothing about history and he bash islam in every comment as much possible.

sonic9892443d ago

did you know all of what we call science today came from muslims .
europe was in the dark ages when muslim empires were the ones teaching others .
i am not going to say the whole but some key european figures didnt like it because islam and especially quran exposed their dirty schemes before they see its realization how they manipulated altered and modified the holy books to the point where the original form isnt known any more .
on the other hand god said he will protect the quran and preserve it, 1400 years later its still the one and only book not altered not only that but the language it came with is still alive and studied unlike aramiac and ancient hebrew which both of them died long time ago .
and before we speak much all these religion came from the same place the middle east yet some people believe they know better while they live in europe for example did they think who brought christianity to them the jews did and before they do they must have shaped it the way they want it .
want a proof where is the original bible .
but then again there are some wonderful christian people and wonderful jewish ( religious ) people it depends on the person .
in fact its so appearant its not even funny.

MWH2443d ago

only few people have the courage to learn and accept the truth sonic.

Rute2443d ago (Edited 2443d ago )

No, today's science has roots in ancient Greece, more specifically the Ionian enlightenment which in turn has roots in ancient Egypt and Babylonia. Check out Hippocrates, Anaxagoras, Pythagoras, Thales, Archimedes...

This tradition was rediscovered in the dark middle ages when Greek intellectuals fled the suppressive Islamistic rule of conquering Ottomans.These Greek scholars settled in Italy and were in key role initiating the Renaissance.

For a more lengthy explanation, check out

sonic9892443d ago (Edited 2443d ago )

i am sorry but really no one has the right to be mentioned as the root of a specific science especially in the undocumented history .
for all we know there might have been civilizations we havent even heard about which caused all this ( very possible ) .
i am calling the modern science of today which unfortunately is being used to deceive and ruin people's lives was IN HUGE measures discovered by muslims .
ALgebra for example is an arabic word, it went so deep that even names were taken from the language, the word camera is actually Qumrah in arabic even the concept of Qumrah is very identical to the camera with exception of the size of course .
or the word asthma which is a pure arabic word which has the same meaning and the same pronunciation
anyway i wont waste much time i have important things to do .
everybody is free to believe what they want to believe .

Rute2443d ago

The Islamic Golden Age did bring many advancements in science when Europe was backwards and going through its early middle ages. But their success comes from basing their science on early Greek, Roman, Persian, Indian, Chinese, Egyptian, and Phoenician texts that were translated into Arabic. It was like an Arabic version of Renaissance.

The main point here is that your claim "all of what we call science today came from muslims" is quite simply put wrong. I'm not saying that their scientific contributions weren't important, just that the basis of empirical science is to be found elsewhere.

sonic9892443d ago (Edited 2443d ago )

"The Islamic Golden Age did bring many advancements in science when Europe was backwards and going through its early middle ages. But their success comes from basing their science on early Greek, Roman, Persian, Indian, Chinese, Egyptian, and Phoenician texts that were translated into Arabic. It was like an Arabic version of Renaissance. "

Yes i have researched that long time ago and have actually studied their contributions in some cases it was a complete remodeling of what was known .
its true that people like to expand their horizons especially when they have the right principles and motivations to back them .
but today everything is a fight as if its me and only me something i've got to cope with but what would i do i still live with people who believe their votes at an election would make a difference facepalm yet they believe they know the ins and outs of everything because they were told by the TV .
thanks man for being objective and science is not owned by someone or some entity which i believe thats what you meant if yes then yeah very true .

MWH2443d ago (Edited 2443d ago )

@Rute I salute you on your patience and on your open mind.

the main point is that Islam as a religion did not suppress the advancement of humanity as advertised and history is the witness extremist and anti-islamists work daily in a futile attempt to bury it.

if Islam was the suppressor and the oppressor the media keeps on fueling the masses everyday, knowledge would be destroyed, cities would be burnt to ashes under its rule and if so I assure you Europe and the world would be a completely different place than it is today. but the exact opposite happened, knowledge was preserved and carried on, sciences has leaped significantly, cities flourished and people lived safely together, Muslims and non-Muslims.

Islam didn't enslave the peoples minds, it freed them and it changed the face of the world when it was practiced the way it was delivered.

@sonic well said.

Rute2443d ago


I don't hold the Islamic world in high regard when we're talking about the eras before and after the Golden Age.

If the Ottoman empire had succeeded in conquering the whole of Europe, I doubt there would have been any Renaissance.

MWH2443d ago (Edited 2443d ago )

@Rute you would if what you know is mostly from the controlled media and very little from history if at all. it's true however that the conditions today pales in comparison but there are reasons.

what amazes me is the amount of hate toward Islam from the other 2 celestial religions believers while Islam is the only religion that validates both. it is the only religion that accept and respect all the prophets and their messages from Noah, Abraham, Moses and Jesus.

what boggles me even more is how most Christians sympathize and support the Jews knowing that they denied him and orchestrated his crucifixion, while Islam accepted Jesus same as Moses. even today the Jews mock him and many other prophets for that matter and yet they get all the love and support while the only religion that supports their rights, Islam, is being attacked relentlessly.

about the Ottoman Empire, it's known that it was among the few unique empires, if not the only one, that successfully took all people from different races and religions under its wing. they flourished because they were builders not destroyers and they established a model state of law and order. whether Europe would be different, 100% it would, a good or a bad change is a subject of debate but I lean toward the good based on how things were.

+ Show (5) more repliesLast reply 2443d ago
MajorLazer2443d ago

Another mindless basher who knows **** all about Islam other than what the media feeds him/her.

Show all comments (61)
The story is too old to be commented.