Do statistics mean anything? What about Human Development & "Belief"?

I think that they do. Yes one can "Lie" with them but if one acknowledges that then there are indicators that can tell us about ourselves.

An examination of Worldwide Human Development would suggest that the most highly developed (As argued with what we can measure, not by pure anecdotal evidence) societies have much higher levels of what one might call “organic atheism/agnosticism”.

Many of the following statistics are extracted from the Human Development Report 2004 which is derived from numerous sources such as the OECD, World Bank, UN, national sources, etcetera. It’s a fascinating collection of indicators that most people are completely unaware of.

What I have added below has been compiled from those Human Development indicators with “belief” stats. Now let the fun begin:

Consider the Human Development Report (2004), commissioned by The United Nations Development Program. This report ranks 177 nations on a “Human Development Index,” which measures societal health through a weighing of such indicators as life expectancy at birth, adult literacy rate, per capita income, and educational attainment.

According to the 2004 Report, the five highest ranked nations in terms of total human development were Norway, Sweden, Australia, Canada, and the Netherlands. All five of these countries are characterized by notably high degrees of organic atheism. Furthermore, of the top 25 nations ranked on the “Human Development Index,” all but one country ( Ireland) are top-ranking non-belief nations, containing some of the highest percentages of organic atheism on earth. Conversely, of those countries ranked at the bottom of the “Human Development Index” -- the bottom 50 -- all are countries lacking any statistically significant percentages of atheism.



· Concerning infant mortality rate specifically (number of deaths per 1,000 live births), irreligious countries have the lowest rates, and religious countries have the highest rates. According to the CIA World Factbook (2004), out of 225 nations, the top 25 nations with the lowest infant mortality rates were all nations containing significantly high percentages of organic atheism. Conversely, the 75 bottom nations with the highest infant mortality rates were all very religious nations without any statistically significant levels of organic atheism.



· Concerning international poverty rates, the United Nations’ Report on the World Social Situation (2003) found that of the 40 poorest nations on earth (measured by the percentage of each nation’s population that lives on less than $1.00 a day), all but one (Vietnam) are highly religious nations with statistically minimal or insignificant levels of atheism.



· Concerning homicide rates, Fajnzylber et al (2002), looked at 38 nations (excluding those in Africa) and found that of the top ten nations with the highest homicide rates, all but one (United States) were highly religious nations with statistically insignificant levels of organic atheism. Conversely, of the bottom ten nations with the lowest homicide rates, all but one ( Ireland) are highly secular nations with high levels of atheism. Fox and Levin (2000) looked at 37 nations (again excluding Africa), and found that of the top ten nations with the highest homicide rates, all but two (Estonia and Taiwan) were highly religious nations containing statistically insignificant levels of organic atheism. Conversely, of the bottom ten nations with the lowest homicide rates, all but two ( Ireland and Kuwait) were relatively secular nations with high levels of organic atheism.



· Concerning suicide rates, this is the one indicator of societal health in which religious nations fare much better than secular nations. According to the 2003 World Health Organization’s report on international male suicides rates (which compared 100 countries), of the top ten nations with the highest male suicide rates, all but one (Sri Lanka) are strongly irreligious nations with high levels of atheism. It is interesting to note, however, that of the top remaining nine nations leading the world in male suicide rates, all are former Soviet/Communist nations, such as Belarus, Ukraine, and Latvia( viii ). Of the bottom ten nations with the lowest male suicide rates, all are highly religious nations with statistically insignificant levels of organic atheism.



· Concerning literacy rates, according to the United Nations’ Report on the World Social Situation (2003), of the 35 nations with the highest levels of youth illiteracy rates (percentage of population ages 15-24 who cannot read or write)( ix ), all are highly religious nations with statistically insignificant levels of organic atheism.



· Concerning gender equality, nations marked by high degrees of organic atheism are among the most egalitarian in the world, while highly religious nations are among the most oppressive. According to the 2004 Human Development Report’s “Gender Empowerment Measure,” the top ten nations with the highest degrees of gender equality are all strongly organic atheistic nations with significantly high percentages of non-belief. Conversely, the bottom ten are all highly religious nations without any statistically significant percentages of atheists. According to Inglehart and Norris’s (2003) “Gender Equality Scale,” of the top ten nations most accepting of gender equality, all but two (United States and Colombia) are nations marked by high levels of organic atheism; of the bottom ten (those least accepting of gender equality), all are highly religious nations marked by statistically insignificant levels of organic atheism( x ). According to Inglehart (2003), countries with the most female members of parliament tend to be countries characterized by high degrees of organic atheism (such as Sweden, Denmark, and the Netherlands) and countries with the fewest female members in parliament tend to be highly religious countries (such as Pakistan, Nigeria, and Iran).

In sum, countries marked by high rates of organic atheism are among the most societally healthy on earth, while societies characterized by non-existent rates of organic atheism are among the most destitute. Nations marked by high degrees of organic atheism tend to have among the lowest homicide rates, infant mortality rates, poverty rates, and illiteracy rates, and among the highest levels of wealth, life expectancy, educational attainment, and gender equality in the world. The only indicator of societal health mentioned above in which religious countries fared better than irreligious countries was suicide.
======================================================================

Oh and as an aside just to poke and prod non-believers are tied for the lowest divorce rates (with Methodists) here in America according to Barna. That could just be due to suicides though;-)

This doesn't mean that there is no "god" "God" or "gods", just that it seems apparent that the societies that provide a decent social safety system seem to lose their believers and/or the "beliefs" begin to become less powerful, ie. less absolute.

It’d be real neat to not have to do this but…It seems to me that the Right already understands this and most on the Left do not. That's why they wish to destroy the security that Social Security provides, to wipe-out HUD, to make life, well, scary so people will do what appears to be a natural thing, run to the churches screaming.

They understand that the better a culture/society is the less people they will be able to confuse with Abortion, Gay, Women's Rights and "Faith" arguments.

Of course there are still religions and beliefs, just that the ones that prey on weakness and scarecity are weakened themselves.

PS~ This is something of a fleshing out of what is, and always has been, the Great Right Wing Conspiracy. They've always understood these things which is why they're Conservatives in the first place. Those damned Women git all uppity when they lose their grip.

I would conclude that it's the irreligiosity that leads to the societal health, rather than the societal health that leads to the irreligiosity as you suggest. It's less of a conspiracy theory that way.

then a desire to figure out why something happens. The problem with statistics is that they can lead to a conclusion without questioning the cause. It is easy to say that because there is a relationship that one causes another but what about the idea that they are both a result of something else. Education, especially universal education, raises the standard of living that people live at through increasing human capital. Education also seems to cause people to at the very least question religion if not replace it with a new one; science.

:kick:

Actually that'd be my first but whatever...

"I think that they do. Yes one can "Lie" with them but if one acknowledges that then there are indicators that can tell us about ourselves."

'Lie' is a strong word. 'Mislead' would be much more appropriate.

However the wealth of indicators available make what I posted originally a fairly solid analysis.

At least from the POV of the data sources.

to express a causal relationship you need more then just statistics. The two things that you stated as being related to each seem to be a result of higher levels of education. Education is to many people a substitute for religion and also increases the level of wealth a country has.

Test those relationships.

The basic flow of statistical research on social issues, is one requiring patience and caution.

The patterns you mention seem to me to be in the "detecting something interesting/preliminary association" stage.

Confounders in social research are often overly abundant, and hasty generalization is a trap for those pushing for accreditation of their own subgroup's dogmas.