Analytic thinking, Genderbread v2.0 скачать в хорошем качестве

Analytic thinking, Genderbread v2.0

Analytic Thinking Can Decrease Religious Belief, Study Shows ScienceDaily A new University of British Columbia study finds that analytic thinking can decrease religious belief, even in devout believers. The study, finds that thinking analytically increases disbelief among believers and skeptics alike, shedding important new light on the psychology of religious belief. "Our goal was to explore the fundamental question of why people believe in a God to different degrees," says lead author Will Gervais, a PhD student in UBC's Dept. of Psychology. "A combination of complex factors influence matters of personal spirituality, and these new findings suggest that the cognitive system related to analytic thoughts is one factor that can influence disbelief." Researchers used problem-solving tasks and subtle experimental priming -- including showing participants Rodin's sculpture The Thinker or asking participants to complete questionnaires in hard-to-read fonts -- to successfully produce "analytic" thinking. The researchers, who assessed participants' belief levels using a variety of self-reported measures, found that religious belief decreased when participants engaged in analytic tasks, compared to participants who engaged in tasks that did not involve analytic thinking. The findings, Gervais says, are based on a longstanding human psychology model of two distinct, but related cognitive systems to process information: an "intuitive" system that relies on mental shortcuts to yield fast and efficient responses, and a more "analytic" system that yields more deliberate, reasoned responses. The study involved more than 650 participants in the U.S. and Canada. Gervais says future studies will explore whether the increase in religious disbelief is temporary or long-lasting, and how the findings apply to non-Western cultures. Recent figures suggest that the majority of the world's population believes in a God, however atheists and agnostics number in the hundreds of millions, says Norenzayan, a co-director of UBC's Centre for Human Evolution, Cognition and Culture. Religious convictions are shaped by psychological and cultural factors and fluctuate across time and situations, he says. Depending on what you folks have to say after checking this out and reading the rationale below, I'll be updating the Breaking through the Binary article and uploading a printer-friendly version of the new graphic.  But first, let's rationalize. Let's break this thing down. Sam wants to see this model replace all instances of the old one.  He states that it's more accurate, more inclusive, and still just as accessible (adorable).  He calls it the "-Ness" Model. Sam sees this model as More accurate Men are from Mars and women are from Venus is a funny expression (and scientifically dubious), but it actually nails down the strength of this model.  Two planets, not two poles of one planet.  Placing man/masculine/male on one end of something (continuum, 2D plot, etc.) and woman/feminine/female on the other (as with the old model) creates and reinforces a fallacy central to gender misunderstanding: to be more of one, you need to be less of the other.  That's incorrect.  You can have both.  You can have your genderbread and eat it, too. He continues, This model allows one to define gender in a way that accounts for varying intensities of -ness.  Identifying with aspects of femininity doesn't make you less masculine, it makes you more feminine.  To understand gender, and in turn create a safer space for people of all genders, we need to realize that feminine and masculine aren't in a tug of war, they're separate arenas. Sam finds this model more inclusive What was lacking in the old Genderbread Person was the ability to define intensities of identification, or the amount of -ness one possesses. Let's take "Attraction" for our example.  We know that most people aren't 100% straight or gay.  A continuum of gay to straight leaves us with bi- in the middle.  What about folks who are pansexual?  Asexual?  Mostly asexual?  Hypersexual?  None of those identities can be mapped on our old model. The amount of -ness is, in many cases, as crucial to one's identity as which -ness they possess.  A man who is hypersexually attracted to women and a man who is attracted to women both may identify as "straight," but there is no question that they are two different men. GenderQueer Atheist Reader http://paper.li/AndyTehNerd/1334406724 GenderQueer Atheists on FaceBook   / 257889894257845   GenderQueer Atheists YouTube    / genderqueeratheists   GenderQueer Atheists on Atheist Nexus http://www.atheistnexus.org/group/gen... Music by Kevin MacLeod http://incompetech.com/