Heavy stuff. But it’s a general rule in statistics that correlations don’t necessarily imply causation. While Mr. Paul himself cautions that he isn’t attempting to present a “definitive study that establishes cause versus effect between (sic) religiosity, secularism and societal health,” the disclaimer gets lost amidst everything else. (You can read the article at http://moses.creighton.edu/JRS/2005/2005-11.html).
It’s a good thing I did more research. I almost fell into the trap of taking the study too much at face value, along with the journal that published it. As it turns out, Mr. Paul’s credentials and academic affiliations are in question. A bit of digging reveals that he is not a social scientist. He is a paleontologist and independent researcher as well as an accomplished dinosaur illustrator. Critics of the study point to this as de facto evidence of a lack of credibility on Mr. Paul’s part.
But despite raising legitimate credibility issues, by itself this isn’t a slam-dunk excuse to reject the study out of hand. Mr. Paul may not be a social scientist. But he still is a scientist.
More problematic is the Journal of Religion & Society. Although it claims all articles are peer-reviewed and refereed to determine eligibility for publication, it seems strange that they weren’t at least aware enough of Mr. Paul’s background to offer a context for the study, in the interest full disclosure. What could have been a nuclear bomb turned out to be mostly harmless.
Unsurprisingly, the aggressively religious among us have pounced on Mr. Paul and the study, denouncing it as a transparent, ultimately unsuccessful attempt to discredit religion. Better yet, some have pointed to studies showing a link between health and religiosity.
Health and Religion
In God for the 21st Century, excerpted at http://www.beliefnet.com/story/68/story_6858_1.html, Dale Matthews, an associate professor of medicine at Georgetown University, writes of “more than three hundred scientific studies [that] demonstrate the medical value of religious commitment:These benefits include enhanced prevention and treatment of mental disorders, medical and surgical illnesses and addictions, reduced pain and disability, and prolonged survival. In addition, spiritual treatment enhances recovery.”
Not everyone agrees, of course, such as Dr. Richard Sloan, the director of Columbia University’s Department of Behavioral Medicine. Along with Dr. Emilia Bagiella, an assistant professor at Columbia, he “extensively reviewed the literature and determined that these claims are greatly exaggerated, providing little support for making religious activities adjunctive medical treatments.
“In publications in the Lancet and the New England Journal of Medicine, they identify significant methodological failures of papers that purport to demonstrate health benefits of religious activity. They also identify significant ethical problems raised by attempts to bring religious activity into clinical medicine.” (http://nypisys.cpmc.columbia.edu/AR2000/Research/Behavioralmedicine.html)
You Bet Your Faith
Suggesting that people should believe in God because it will make them healthy is as disingenuous as Pascal’s Wager (if you disbelieve in God and he does exist, you lose and go to hell, but if you believe and, at worst, he doesn’t exist, you lose nothing.) Even if we grant religion the beneficial effects claimed by Dr. Matthews and others, this doesn’t validate any particular belief system.
In this respect, it doesn’t really matter whether the studies are correct because it isn’t the belief in itself that might result in healthy benefits but how that belief is put into practice.
Going to church or sharing in a religious ritual is a means of building community and bonding with people. It creates a support network that people can rely on in times of need.
But religion isn’t the only means for achieving these things. Studies have shown that petting soft, furry animals can be beneficial to reducing stress, for example. And people can have strong familial and friendly bonds outside of church. In any case, the studies point not so much to religion but to spirituality, to the fact that humans need meaning to their lives. They are happier when they have it.
Contrary to religious prejudice, it is possible to not believe in God and still find meaning in life.