Shock, Horror - Iona Institute Finds Religious People are "Happier" & "Healthier"

[oscartango]

Well, mind the carpet !

[tmesis2008]

Here's a section from the report, and it's exactly the sort of thing that you would write if you have come up with your conclusions before you do your research.

Faith healers use prayer and other religious techniques to treat disease. A sizeable number ofpeople (up to 20%) turn to them during illness - although this figure is derived from Americanstudies, and so may not be applicable to the Irish population. There is no consistent scientific evidence that faith healers influence the psychological well-being of those who visit them, despite anecdotal accounts of benefit. This does not necessarily mean that they are of no assistance, but simply that this is as yet unproven due to the paucity of studies.

Methodology: When there is any evidence at all that support my assertions then I will cite it. When there is no evidence, I will simply state that my assertions might just be true anyway.

This is compiled by the same woman who was roundly embarrassed in an exchange of letters in The Irish Times last year, when the head of a research unit whose study Prof. Casey was using to support her argument against gay marriage wrote to The Irish Times personally to state clearly that the research had nothing to do with gay marriage.

[oscartango]

KFC are bringing out new research next week proving that people who eat fried chicken do better in a recession.

[A_man_about_a_dog]

Can you prove the contrary? That non-religious people are happier than religious people?

It's not so much the claim about happiness I have an issue with, it's the "healthier" part of the survey which annoys me.

Fair enough.... a religious person might be happier because they believe that no matter what happens to them, it's all part of God's 'plan'. As a result, they are generally more accepting of things such as terminal illness or tragic accidents. They take solace from their religious convictions. Something which non-religious people are not in a position to do seeing as they don't have any religious convictions. They have to take the more 'realist' approach to the various situations which they face.

The claim about religious people being more healthy is, IMHO, complete and utter tripe. How can purely ideological belief system be beneficial to someone's physical health? It's impossible. Unless the researchers were including mental health (i.e. happiness) as a condition of physical health.

I'm sure we all know people, both religious and non-religious, who have suffered through horrendous illnesses or accidents. However the fact that some are religious while others are not has nothing to do with the fact that some recover while others don't. Some of the most religious people I know have suffered through horrendous illnesses yet they still suffered the same amount, and in some cases even more, than certain non-religious people I know who suffered with the same illnesses, etc. I accept the notion that certain religious beliefs might provide a kind of mental 'grip' which religious followers can hang on to in times of despair and suffering, however I believe that this 'grip' is merely something which the actor themselves have created rather than the actual religion itself. This 'grip' can provide great comfort to a religious person, however the non-religious person is just as likely to have his own 'grip' onto which his hopes can hang, however his will be a grip on the empirical reality.... not on a loose ideological notion about the existence of a higher being and what that being might have planned for us.

[Defeated Romanticist]

It's not so much the claim about happiness I have an issue with, it's the "healthier" part of the survey which annoys me.

Fair enough.... a religious person might be happier because they believe that no matter what happens to them, it's all part of God's 'plan'. As a result, they are generally more accepting of things such as terminal illness or tragic accidents. They take solace from their religious convictions. Something which non-religious people are not in a position to do seeing as they don't have any religious convictions. They have to take the more 'realist' approach to the various situations which they face.

The claim about religious people being more healthy is, IMHO, complete and utter tripe. How can purely ideological belief system be beneficial to someone's physical health? It's impossible. Unless the researchers were including mental health (i.e. happiness) as a condition of physical health.

I'm sure we all know people, both religious and non-religious, who have suffered through horrendous illnesses or accidents. However the fact that some are religious while others are not has nothing to do with the fact that some recover while others don't. Some of the most religious people I know have suffered through horrendous illnesses yet they still suffered the same amount, and in some cases even more, than certain non-religious people I know who suffered with the same illnesses, etc. I accept the notion that certain religious beliefs might provide a kind of mental 'grip' which religious followers can hang on to in times of despair and suffering, however I believe that this 'grip' is merely something which the actor themselves have created rather than the actual religion itself. This 'grip' can provide great comfort to a religious person, however the non-religious person is just as likely to have his own 'grip' onto which his hopes can hang, however his will be a grip on the empirical reality.... not on a loose ideological notion about the existence of a higher being and what that being might have planned for us.

It has been proved conclusively that well-being has an impact on health. Religious people are happier therefore religious people are healthier.

Nothing to do with faith healers.

[A_man_about_a_dog]

It has been proved conclusively that well-being has an impact on health. Religious people are happier therefore religious people are healthier.

Can I see some of this "conclusive" proof, please?

As far as I am concerned, there is no conclusive proof (from reputable sources, anyway) which proves that holding onto mental beliefs will improve your physical health.

Did you ever think that maybe there is some strange connection whereby religious people are more likely to eat a healthy, balanced diet? Or are less likely to smoke and drink, etc? Ever think that factors like these might be what makes people 'healthier' and not religion, in and of itself?

Nothing to do with faith healers.

Where did I mention faith healers?

[Utopian Hermit Monk]

I would have imagined it to be self-evident that most religious believers are happier and, therefore (since psychic wellbeing will normally have a positive influence on physical wellbeing) healthier than non-believers.

Of course, belief in religion does not necessarily imply belief in God, or acceptance of any particular religious doctrine. It may simply be a matter of believing that, in general, religion helps one to cope with life's difficulties.

Was Jade Goody helped to cope with her approaching death by her last-minute embracing of religion? Of course she was. Were her children helped by being told that their mother's death did not mean that she could not continue to love them and care for them? Of course they were.

Religion may involve grasping at straws. But most people really have nothing else to grasp at.

Few of us dwell on the fact that, in some respects, our physical decline and journey towards the grave or the crematorium furnace, begins in our late teens, accelerates in our 20s, takes a firm grip throughout our 30s and 40s, and openly mocks us in our 50s and thereafter.

The thought that all of life's efforts, ambitions, achievements, hopes, etc., will inevitably end in oblivion is hardly a laughing matter.

In less than half a century, most current p.ie posters will be dust. Many may succumb a lot sooner. If a little bit of religion helps them to cope with that fact, is that a bad thing? The important thing is to be as happy as possible for as long as possible, and anything that helps in that regard (religion, work, travel, music, politics, posting at p.ie ...) is surely to be welcomed.

[irish_bob]

McDonalds are bringing out a report tomorrow that claims people who eat hamburgers are happier than vegetarians.

I've certainly been happier in the decades since I ditched religion than before - and I've more money in my pocket.

maybe my experience is unusual but those who i know and who are religous are also very unhappy people

[Almanac]

Nice to see the last acceptable prejudice getting an airing, again.

Sorry fellas.

Even Jonathan Haidt, himself an extreme leftist, has admitted conservatives and the religious are happier.

5000 posts!!!

And a good post to score on.

[Almanac]

Silly season from the Iona people again. The only thing I want to see from those people is evidence that Christianity is true. Failing that, I'm not interested.

You are right Tmesis. That is the central question. If Christianity is not true it's pointless regardless of how happy it makes you feel. Religion is not a pragmatic or a utilitarian thing. But the other aspects are still interesting.

Fortunately Christianity is true. We know this because Jesus fulfilled in his person about 300 different Old Testament prophecies spread across centuries, including ones that He could not possibly have been conscious of such as his place of birth, the tribe he would be born into, the manner of his death. We know these could not have been forgeries since they have been carbon-dated back and some manuscripts date from hundreds of years before his birth.

We could also look at the saints produced in every age, including our own, the countless recorded miracles such as that at Fatima- the sun dancing in the sky- which was witnessed by thousands of people, including non-believers and cynics of every description, such as reporters there only to cover the story. Doubtless you will dismiss this as mass hallucination but such usually only occurs in people who are receptive.

You could also consider that a miracle is required for both beatification (blessed) and the further stage of canonisation (saint) in those deemed to have reached such unity with God. There are many applicants. The vast majority are dismissed so stringent are the requirements. A team of scientists composed of both non-believers and Catholics investigates each claim that is brought for examination (a process of deselection precedes this stage). They do not declare that a miracle has occurred but that science cannot explain the cure.