In 2008, Sam Harris posted an online survey seeking the opinions of Christians and atheists on a wide variety of topics. The real aim was to design the survey for their subsequent laboratory research with properly phrased questions that would either polarize the two camps or show common ground. However, the raw data does show a few interesting things.
The section on religious beliefs has fairly predictable differences between atheists and Christians and merely illustrates that some of the questions are better phrased than others. To get the best results in the subsequent fMRI experiment requires that the subjects respond to clear and unambiguous statements.
However, the section on psychological beliefs - largely about oneself and one's social relationships - shows a large degree of commonality. Statements such as "I am a very analytical person", "I very rarely tell a lie", "I am a compassionate person" and so on, have a very similar distribution of answers between the believer and non-believers. The only statements that show any significant differences are those where an external doctrine can be felt edging its way in, such as,"I can live my life any way I want to." But on the whole, personal psychology and morality seem to have little to do with being either a believer or non-believer. And Christians love to claim that atheists have no morals?!
However, some huge differences start to emerge again in the section looking at social attitudes. Politically, the Christians come across as largely conservative, with the atheists predominantly liberal. But again, those statements that are purely personal show a common response, but replies to political and scientific questions brought religious doctrines back to the fore.
One amusing thing, though,"I am very sensitive to the suffering of other people" showed common agreement, and yet "Wives should honour their husbands as the head of the family" got overwhelming support from the Christians and huge thumbs down from the atheists. Perhaps being in a bad relationship doesn't count as suffering.
As I said, the real aim of this online survey was to avoid using ambiguous statements in the subsequent study on how the brain looks in states of belief and disbelief. Interesting that both sides look largely human as individuals yet poles apart on group issues. The tyranny of group-think.
Comments
Robert H Olley | 03/01/10 | 04:56 AM
Patrick Lockerby | 03/01/10 | 08:08 AM
I honestly don't see a difference between the short version of the statement and your longer explaination of it.
Who doesn't want to be respected indeed, but the man being responsible for the marriage and spiritual stuff, is not respectful of the wife.
And neither the short nor long version allow the woman to be a partner in the marriage, and it pretty much doesn't allow for marriages where the woman makes more money than the husband or single parent families of either gender adult.
Who doesn't want to be respected indeed, but the man being responsible for the marriage and spiritual stuff, is not respectful of the wife.
And neither the short nor long version allow the woman to be a partner in the marriage, and it pretty much doesn't allow for marriages where the woman makes more money than the husband or single parent families of either gender adult.
nina (not verified) | 03/01/10 | 17:49 PM
While we’re into “woman palaver”, here’s something that I would like Chinese readers to confirm or refute.

These two Chinese characters correspond to the expression “jù nèi”, which is the literary expression for hen-pecked. The first character means “fear” or “dread” – the heart radical on the left indicates that this means something to do with the emotions, while the author of the original article notes the similarity to the English expression “chicken” meaning “cowardly”. The right hand one means “inner”, because in traditional Chinese society the woman was supposed to stay at home while the man travelled outside.
The writer then went on to talk about Jezebel, and presented King Ahab as an example of a hen-pecked husband.
Physics Department
University of Reading
England

These two Chinese characters correspond to the expression “jù nèi”, which is the literary expression for hen-pecked. The first character means “fear” or “dread” – the heart radical on the left indicates that this means something to do with the emotions, while the author of the original article notes the similarity to the English expression “chicken” meaning “cowardly”. The right hand one means “inner”, because in traditional Chinese society the woman was supposed to stay at home while the man travelled outside.
The writer then went on to talk about Jezebel, and presented King Ahab as an example of a hen-pecked husband.
—
Robert H. OlleyPhysics Department
University of Reading
England
Robert H Olley | 03/01/10 | 16:50 PM










On a side random note: The man may be the head but the woman is the neck and she can turn the head when she pleases.