Although I don't doubt the result, the methodology matters a lot in a survey like this. Especially the sampling methods. If groups were sampled from different regions or socio-economic groups, that could have an effect. Why do they stick us agnostics with the atheists? That's almost like putting us with the Catholics. ;P Seriously, though, I'd like to see if there is a difference between the types of non-believers.The first study of Muslim Americans was fielded via telephone to Muslim Americans and a nationally representative sample of adults in the U.S. aged 18 and older. The Muslim-American sample was selected from self-identified Muslim Americans who agreed to be recontacted after participating in the Gallup nightly polling. The general population sample included landline as well as cell phone-only respondents. The survey was administered from Feb. 10, 2010-March 11, 2010, and featured a five-call design. Because of the low number of Jewish American respondents in the sample of U.S. adults, an oversample of the Jewish population was performed using recontacts from the Gallup nightly polling. The data were weighted to correct for disproportionalities in probabilities of selection and response propensities. The data were then weighted to targets for age, gender, region, race, ethnicity, and education from the U.S. Census Bureau. Final weights were applied based on self-identified religious affiliation using targets from the Gallup nightly polling. The response rate for the study was 21%.
Agnostic as commonly used means atheist who doesn't want to be called an atheist because of what people think of the name. Agnostic what? Deist, atheist, Christian, something else? If you don't mind telling.
Non-religious is probably most correct. People use the terms in different ways. Atheist strictly means not having a theology, but it is commonly associated with a belief that a god doesn't exist. That's why I often say agnostic. Many people understand it as a lack of belief one way or another.
No it isn't. The set {theist, atheist} is covering, so you have to be one or the other. Avoiding the question is fine though. It's a topic that often leads to pointless arguing. (Often of semantics, like I'm doing now ;)
The definition of agnostic is completely pointless. If someone was a theist or atheist, that would be what they would call themselves. If you go to the trouble of calling yourself an agnostic, you mean to say "I don't know one way or the other."
Not pointless, just answering a different question. An agnostic atheist would say "I don't know one way or the other, but I don't believe in a god". An agnostic Christian would say "I don't know one way or the other, but I believe in Jesus". Versus gnostic atheist you would say "I know for certain that exactly zero gods exist", or gnostic Deist who would say "I know for certain that one or more gods exist"
Hold up: according to Google (and my mind), an agnostic is "a person who believes that nothing is known or can be known of the existence or nature of God or of anything beyond material phenomena; a person who claims neither faith nor disbelief in God." As far as I am aware, it isn't a qualifier. It's a section unto itself, like atheist or theist.
It's one of those terms where the definition is very muddied. Certainly a lot of people use the term that way. That definition comes from an incorrect definition of atheist, which is incorrectly labelled as disbelief, when it is actually lack of belief. While similar, they are distinct. Take the case of a 2 day old baby. It isn't capable of comprehending the idea of a god in order to have disbelief. You can safely say that it lacks belief in a god though.
I definitely think these results are interesting, but I think that the article could do more in talking about why these results are what they are. They'd get bonus points for referencing other studies/statistics. I'm left here assuming that Muslim Americans are the most directly effected group, and that this impacts their votes, but I don't know this for a fact, and it doesn't account for the variance between other religions. What is it about their beliefs/demographics that influence them?
Gallup is a polling and data organisation; they typically keep speculation to a minimum. In America, since 9/11, asking a Muslim about targetting civilians is kind of like asking a German what they think of Jews. Few Germans were Nazi sympathisers, but history is a harsh mistress.the article could do more in talking about why
What is it about their beliefs/demographics that influence them?
Yeah, I guess I should have said that I'd be interested in hearing about why, sorry. Good point, though, don't know why that didn't cross my mind. I'm also curious about the other religions, too. How much of it is significant, and what factors influence their response, stuff like that.
I'd be more interested in an opinion graph of religiously liberal versus religiously conservative. The degree of conservatism is significantly more meaningful than the religion. Liberal Christians have more in common with liberal Muslims than they do with fundamentalist Christians. It's really not the same religion. It's the same book and the same symbols, but the meanings and beliefs are antithetical. For most religions, I'd wager.
Definitely interested, but I think this could possibly be covered in addressing different branches of each religion, specifically. A Methodist, Lutheran, and Presbyterian might all have different answers, but this graph groups them together. I'd also be interested in polytheistic religions, too.