http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1131778



There is a negative correlation between religiosity and academic performance even at the post graduate level.

Hmmm.... This is probably a gross simplification, but maybe people who think that this life here on earth is the only life we get and when we die, it's "poof" as GB might say, are more focused on making what they can of life here on all levels than those who think that we just go on and on and on. Religion is also a pretty big and complicated subject, If you are seriously into it I don't see how you'd have much time for anything else Or maybe too much religion just rots your brain

Well, here would be my problem. Is spirituality negatively correlated with educational attainment/learning, or religiosity? They're not the same thing. Yet it sounds to me like this study's researchers are conflating the two concepts/variables.

I think we need an operational definition of both terms. I would suspect religiosity does negatively correlate, but not necessarily spirituality, considering that many scientists claim their research fills them with a "spiritual" kind of awe over the sheer majesty of the universe.

That was pretty much my first reaction.

Another way to look it it was that he was really measuring those more predisposed to absolutism (ala religiosity). Spirituality can be very relativistic. But more to the point, the distinction between absolutism and relativism exists even in the purely material world.

What I would not be surprised about at all, is if there is a correlation between absolutism and predisposition to dogma (more like religiosity) and low learning rate. That is almost a tautology. Someone who prefers being given the answers, would probably not be "geared" to learning as their primary mode of knowledge acquisition.

I think it is interesting that it never occurred to me that there is a difference between spirituality and religiosity. It's embarrassingly obvious once it is pointed out. How come I don't see stuff like that for myself? Is there such a thing as being spiritually challenged?

Well, certainly you have met people who are "spiritual" but belong to no organized religion? That seems to make up the bulk of the New Age movement...

I think there are a lot of people who are tired of the exclusivism, hierarchy, and dogmatism of the organized religions, but still feel that there is a spiritual aspect to life and to the world ... I understand one of the largest growing affiliations of people in the UK are those who call themselves 'Jedi' ...

Mysticism is one way of pursuing the spiritual path, but mystics throughout history have often tried to escape and transcend narrow religious affiliations and creeds.

I probably have, I know I have, but I generally don't see it. I think it's maybe because spirituality in others is something that I really don't care much about one way or the other. I am interested in religion as a what...? I guess as an organizational construct. I'm interested in it in the same way that I am interested in different political movements and systems. I suppose I have my own spirituality, but it goes away whenever I think about it. How other people commune with the infinite, while occasionally interesting in passing, is ultimately a matter of indifference to me.

Organized religion is harder for me to be indifferent to, although I'd like to be. I see many organized religions as threats to my own personal rights and well-being, as well as those of others and to our secular Republic as a whole. I feel I need to learn about them, try to figure out what makes them tick and speak out against them when they start translating threat into action.

Some of the criteria used, such as frequency of church attendance and talking frequently aobout religion seem to be more measures of religiousity. A lot of the talking to others of different faiths may be attemps at proselytization. That, to me, is often a sign of low regard for other people's view points.

The best schools in the country are generally run by Jesuits. Pierre Tielhard de Chardin is a good example of a deeply spiritual man. He was one of the early defenders of evolutionary theory. He took what some considered a threat to Christianity and made it an allegory of God's continuing providence.

Compare that to the typical Creationist.

I don't think they're conflating so much as providing their own definition for a very vague term. They are quite explicit about the definition they are using, so you cannot accuse them of conflating the terms used by the general public.

I think it is an internal conflict which is directly related to dogma such as certain Creationists refuse to accept scientific discovery. Catholic church got over that along time ago with much controversy. That is, figuring out the Universe is to gain more understanding of the Creator's Universe. To put that in context, the Laws of Physics are also Laws of God. With absoluteness we cannot violate the Laws of Physics such as people trying to invent Perpetual Motion devices. As using the laws of physics we can apply concepts of conservation such as reducing unneeded accelerations driving a vehicle or shutting down individual cylinders for highway cruising. Of course taking the national speed limit back to 55mph would help too.

A universal law is the truth. Truth is an inalienable right which is practiced through religion and spirituality. Universalist Movement is based that all religious authority comes from the truth. Violating this universal law will have consequence, call it karma if you like.

Funny how some think it's ok to invent alternative realities, like "I did it for my Country". That is vanity or ego, nothing more. So rejecting scientific discovery is in my world the rejection of truth too. If people want to use their religious practice as excuse that is on them to me. In fact, I have accused some of hiding behind JC to sin. I get that from the ancient roots of the word blasphame itself.

Anyhow, that is my story and I am sticking to it.

Spiritual is a nonsensical term with no meaning. It's a way for the superstitious to avoid using the term religious, tied to faith in the irrational. Stick to the philosophical Sublime.