Will's Blog

Warning: Declaration of categories_plugin::SkinTag($params) should be compatible with Plugin::SkinTag(&$params) in /home/scher3/public_html/blogs/plugins/_categories.plugin.php on line 0

I recently stumbled upon an article from the NY Times entitled "Why is America so Religious?" I found it interesting, because it describes what we have seen so far in Europe, a loss of religion. Religion, specifically Christianity, here in the UK is more of a cultural phenomenon than it is religious. People wish you a "Merry Christmas" and do not care about Christian signs, like happens in the US. It is more akin to someone who is a "Jew" by birth that makes the same choices as the culture around them and does not go to synagogue.

I found the NY Times article particular funny on its bent on publishing it and analysis. The article stated,

"The chart shows that the wealthier a country is, the less important religion is to that country. The one exception: The United States."

I always find the use of statistics and studies in the news to be particularly interesting, because it usually is only presented to shape an opinion. A flashy graph or tally is usually lifted from a study and then the media gives you an analysis that is flawed, due to being only partial story or one way to look at a data set. Mark Twain was made famous by saying, "There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics."

Take this study for instance. The graph shows two axis, wealth and a "religious %". Wealth is pretty easy to quantify, but religious percentage is harder. Do you take in anyone whom fills in a box or is it another quantifier? For arguments sake, lets say we believe the "religious %" and the nice little resulting chart. It seems to me that the point of the NY Times article is to lead you to the conclusion that the US is an anomaly, where we should be less religious. Why, America should follow what Europe is doing! (And not those stupid 3rd world countries.)

Now here is the kicker is statistics and studies that is never presented in articles that try to lead the reader to a conclusion, interpretation. Leaving out information can lead to readers making "conclusions" (which the writer intends), that do not take in all of the facts. First, the countries that are listed at the bottom of the slope are also monarchies or feudal systems at some point in time (or still are). Two, most are socialist systems. Third, a case can be made that "religion" has been replaced by a non-deity entity (like government, monarchy, etc). Fourth, There are plenty of more arguments to make (or study) to find out a cause. One could also draw the conclusion or headline "Socialism leads to loss of religion."

Next time you hear a poll that tauts a point of view or conclusion, assume that the writer WANTS you to make that conclusion. Throw it out the window, re-look at the facts, and try to determine if there are other equally valid conclusions to make. Chances are the writer is trying to shape you opinion in some way:) Think of any type of media as "propaganda."

Full study is on our server for download.