The high level of irrationalism, superstition and acceptance of authority in our society is without doubt. I grew up with people who simply refused to believe that the earth is more than 6,000 years old and before I went to college a majority of the people I knew, who were not Catholic, in my little doubt refused to accept that homo sapiens could be related biologically (through variation, through descent, through DNA) to other species. This kind of thinking is harmful.
But... but... I knew people who were fundamentalists who were not infected with the common superstitions of middle class intellectuals... like, for example, that "the United States" is by definition good, and never acts aggressively, and cannot be a terrorist state. Maybe this is because in my early adult hood I knew a fair number of Quakers and Mennonites. Quite frankly I would rather live with the superstitions of these folks than the superstitions of the average sociologist.
Is the superstition of patriotism questioned by the marketeers that perform these surveys, in the same way that these elitists focus on the superstition of Biblical literalism? And how about the liberal intellectuals who are now exemplars of skepticism? Bertrand Russell in his essays on skepticism and irrational belief always pointed to nationalism and patriotism as the main danger of our time. For Russell modern nationalism was the great irrational belief system of the age and for the most part religion was subservient to it. But our latter day saints of 21st century skepticism, rarely focus on anything but religious beliefs. Even when they oppose jingoism (as Dawkins surely does) they rarely point out that it is an irrational belief system except when nationalism is motivated by religion. What I am saying is that when you take Dawkins seriously what you find is that he has dropped a good portion of the critique of skepticism, to focus on religion, and unlike Bertrand Russell, they don't focus on the major forms of superstition and irrationalism of our time. The superstition of the intellectuals, the irrational belief systems of the middle class college educated are simply ignored, mostly because they share in the superstitions of the intellectuals.
But I want to defend the "excluded middle" comment of Ravi's. Most of these polls are set up as either/or. It doesn't matter what kind of poll it is.
So what if you asked me about _Anna Karenina_ -- "Is Tolstoy's _Anna Karenina_ (1) the literal truth, (2) the inspired narrative of the muse, or (3) a collection of made-up stories?"
What you have done is given me _three_ excluded middles to choose from, not just one... instead of one excluded middle. In formal systems like mathematics P V ~P, excluding the middle works. But you can't say of _Anna Karenina_ it is "either" the literal truth or not the literal truth; or it is either inspired by the muse or not inspired by the muse; or it is either a collection of stories or not a collection of stories. I simply do not find the correct answer to define my relationship to _Anna Karenina_ my favorite novel, in these three "excluded middles" that a polster might present me with. But if I had to choose I would say either (1) or (2) fit my emotional relationship to _Anna Karenina_ more than (3)... but that (3) is probably closer to the "literal truth", what ever that means.
I find polls on these subjects meaningful from a marketing point of view only. They show how to market to people who are not organized in the first place. But they don't get to the nub of anything that people want to do with their lives. It displays their top of the head opinions of everyday superstition. As usual the marketeers who construct such polls will usually find ways to focus on other people superstitions and marketing choices, but will not survey their own superstitions, if they even see them.
Jerry
> The inverse correlation between education (by which I am sure is
> > implied formal education)
>
> Not implied, expressed. The educational categories were the
> conventional ones: HS or less, some coll, coll grad, postgrad.
>
> Doug
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>