Pew Global Attitudes Survey

Every time I see one of these charts, it is always obvious that the US is anomalous in having both high religiosity and high income. The two are normally clearly nearly incompatible. It is like looking at a H-R diagram of stars and finding a blue hypergiant. They exist, but you rarely actually find one because they don't survive very long compared with other stars. It just is not a very stable configuration.

So the deeper question is "how can the US manage to sustain both such deeply contrary-to-reality levels of religiosity together with high average income?"

My deep suspicion is that on the medium to long term, the answer is "it can't". One or the other will give. Either the level of religiosity will fall to match the level of "realism" required to sustain the economic level, or the average income will fall to match the level of "unreality" required to continue to posit that "magic man done it" is a credible answer to physical questions in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary.

My deep suspicion is that on the medium to long term, the answer is "it can't".

The USA is an outlier in a lot of ways including demographics too for that matter. Even those that move to the US from other countries, including from the EU, have more kids than their compatriots back home.

Social scientists have a hard time explaining the USA. Period. There's probably a place in a good model for us, but its not as straight forward as people think.

Don't pronounce doom and gloom because its different! ;)

How was the curve calculated? Intuitively it looks like the right-hand end is higher than it should be, starting about 20,000 income or even lower. Did Kuwait throw everything off?

I'd like to see the same chart with median income on the x axis... I have a hunch that both Kuwait and the U.S. would get much closer to the curve.

Even those that move to the US from other countries, including from the EU, have more kids than their compatriots back home.

do you have data on this? i did a quick check and the TFR in sweden is 1.65, but for non-hispanic whites in the USA it is 1.80, not that big of a diff. in france is around the USA value too for whites from what i recall (if a touch lower).

We can expect from the typical atheist a deluge of derision about superstitious African bumpkins. Just you wait...

It's easy to see who to let into the EU from Turkey -- the elite of Istanbul are very good-looking (at least the females; you figure the males are too since dimorphism takes awhile to emerge). Ha, the world's first "hot or not" test for citizenship.

So my sense was that it's more or less accepted these days that the secularization thesis is untenable. On the other hand, just look at that inverse relationship! What is your sense of this?

So my sense was that it's more or less accepted these days that the secularization thesis is untenable. On the other hand, just look at that inverse relationship! What is your sense of this?

1) just because european nations are more secular doesn't mean that they are mostly atheist. they're not.

2) the secularization hypothesis' strongest brief is in europe and developed nations overall.

3) but most of the world is not economically developed, so of course religion has not ended.

4) the problem with the secularization hypothesis is that catchall arguments like this tend to elide over the countervailing dynamics, where the real action is probably going to occur....

The inverse relationship between income and religiosity is so strong that I'd say that's where the "real action" is. Yes, there are exceptions and outliers, so obviously there's more to it than just wealth. But wealth all by itself is a pretty strong indicator of the basic level of religiosity of a culture. If you want to keep a culture religious, keep it poor.

D,
I don't know where you got the idea that "it is more or less accepted these days that the secularization thesis is untenable." I see no evidence that that is the view of more than a minority of social scientists working in the field. But I suppose it depends on exactly what you mean by "the secularization thesis."

The US is more religious than Europe for a very simple but powerful reason. In the US we have a 'capitalism' of religions. All religions compete against all others in a marketplace of spirituality. The weak churches wither, the strong grow and then reproduce.

In Europe and many other countries there is one state religion. Eventually a religious vocation became just another job. Look at British Anglicans and how impoverished their Christianity is. They are not even identifiable as Christians.

The major religions flourish because they provide a reasonable explanation for the world we see around us. If science or atheism can meet human needs better than religions then they will increase. If not, not.

In the US we have a 'capitalism' of religions. All religions compete against all others in a marketplace of spirituality. The weak churches wither, the strong grow and then reproduce.

this is rodney stark's thesis, and it seems to have been falsified in eastern europe. you can look up the literature on this.

tom bri,

The religious marketplace in most western European nations today is just as competitive as it is in the U.S., perhaps even more so. The vestigial state churches that still exist in some of those nations have no real power or advantage. The people of France and Britain and Sweden and Germany have just as much freedom to choose between different churches and religions as Americans do. The difference you are describing just doesn't exist.

A more plausible explanation for the American exceptionalism in this area (to the extent that that exceptionalism is real rather than just cosmetic) is America's vast size and unusual political decentralization, which have allowed distinct religious communities to survive and protect their traditions and values, and to resist assimilation into the broader national culture, to a much greater extent than they would be able to in any European nation. Think of the Mormons in Utah, the evangelicals and fundamentalists in the south, or the Amish and Mennonites in the midwest. Of course, this is now unravelling, and America is on the same secularizing trajectory as the rest of the developed world. It's just a bit behind the curve.

But in Eastern Europe and China, at least in the past, religion (of the God sort) was officially discouraged, while it is officially encouraged in say, the Middle East. How much does 'toeing the party line' contribute?

And yeah, the US is -not- Europe. The continental US and Hawaii are about a third as densely populated as the EU, though Florida, New England, and California are comparable.

What the heck is that curve supposed to be? It looks like its going to infinity at 0 GDP. That doesn't make sense. There's no reason to assume any such relationship.

Is there a point to plotting countries at all? Why should sweden and kuwait get a data point equivalent to the US? If Western Europe gets split up into six data points then why shouldn't the US be split up too? How about a datapoint for every US state? I think that's why the data points are color coded by geographical region. There's only seven data points total (South America was excluded for some reason).

Within regions it appears that there's a correlation within West Europe and Latin America but not for Middle East, or Africa or Asia. It looks like Eastern Europe wouldn't have a correlation either except for the single most wealthiest data point. North America only has two data points and Jewish nations only have one data point.

Neziha, the northern EU states have lower population densities than the US and they're even less religious than the EU average. (I remember an American exchange student who had endless fun pointing out that the closest "city" to my home town had a population density lower than the state of Utah...)

Jason, Sweden doesn't have a state church anymore (of course the big church still has a massive advantage, but it's not in the law). As usual, most of the north is going to follow Sweden eventually. More importantly, one thing Americans don't tend to realize is that the state churches often work as cover organizations for various groups eg. exactly the same stuff you might find in America as different Protestant churches competing for souls might exist here as sub-branches of the Lutheran church competing for souls. The "market" is free as long as you're acting within the state church - so, Catholics have been blocked from competing efficiently, but that shouldn't matter for the difference to the US, since the US hasn't kept its religiousity because of Protestants turning Catholic or anything like that.

I think it's supposed to be the banal presence of the state religion in schools and life that makes people turn away. When you're automatically part of an organization, you take it for granted, and then you ignore it.

The US is a statistical outlier when it comes to religiosity and income. Doesn't really mean much; any country you'd care to pick is highly likely an outlier in some respect and for US this (and a few other variables) is it.

There's a famous practical demonstration of this in the field of ergonomics. About a thousand army recruits were assembled on a courtyard, and the reasearchers started reading the normal measurement ranges for various body measures - shoe size, weight and so on - off a list. Any recruit who didn't fit the range was asked to step away. After less than a dozen variables they had just a couple of recruits left. Just about everybody was an outlier in one common physical measure or another.

The problem worsens when traits aren't truly distributed evenly, but are linked dependently.

razib, thanks for the note. I will check it out.

Europe is a lot more free now, which may explain the talk I hear from various missionary groups of the growth of smaller religious communities. The old line churches are not doing so well, but the new churches seem to be. Sorry, no hard data, and it may all be just hopeful wishing.

Interesting, that I read recently that one of the North Korean government's big fears is Christianity among the lower ranks of the military. Some sort of mass conversion is going on there, but it is of course hard to get any real information. Christianity certainly has its main appeal among the poor and oppressed.

Christianity certainly has its main appeal among the poor and oppressed.

this is not true, especially in korea.
http://scienceblogs.com/gnxp/2007/05/modernization_religion_in_sout_1.p…

Western religions are adopted by the East in strange ways. I'm not sure any statements about how Christianity plays out in the West can be helpful when we're looking at Korea, Japan, or China.

I'm not sure any statements about how Christianity plays out in the West can be helpful when we're looking at Korea, Japan, or China.

christianity spread in the roman empire among the urban 'middle class' (not the elites, but not the lowest orders). there are some detailed dynamics re: christianity in europe which americans might find confusing. e.g., in many catholic countries anti-clericalism was a major force amongst the working classes, so church affiliation is a middle class badge, so you can get a positive SES correlation out of that. this is true for many latin american countries too, though the lower classes there are often converting to charismatic protestantism (chile is a good case study of this).

the best current argument for xtianity's appeal to lower classes in the third world btw is south asia. many dalits have converted in india so that the older non-lower caste christian community of kerala is at great pains to distinguish themselves, and most of the christians of pakistan converted from lower caste hindus.

"the best current argument for xtianity's appeal to lower classes in the third world btw is south asia"

I myself suspect this is more about dissatisfaction among the lower castes with Hinduism than about the intrinsic appeal of Christianity. There have also been significant conversions to Buddhism and Islam or Sikhism.

Jason -

My sense is that the earlier emphasis on secularization (not atheism per-se, just the declining significance of organized religions in society, specific as opposed to fuzzy beliefs etc) as a theme of modernization, with America as an exception, has been challenged to the point it is no longer fashionable. Sort of like the whole Dark Ages thing...

Of particular interest are the non-decline of religious institutions in East Asia, the possibly rising significance of religions in South America, and Africa, the success of movements like Pentecostalism, and of course the data-point of the US itself. Look at google scholar on religion and "European Exceptionalism" (the term itself is revealing) for examples.

I myself suspect this is more about dissatisfaction among the lower castes with Hinduism than about the intrinsic appeal of Christianity. There have also been significant conversions to Buddhism and Islam or Sikhism.

yeah.

Of particular interest are the non-decline of religious institutions in East Asia, the possibly rising significance of religions in South America, and Africa, the success of movements like Pentecostalism, and of course the data-point of the US itself. Look at google scholar on religion and "European Exceptionalism" (the term itself is revealing) for examples.

1) east asia is a weird case, it has had a long history of loose affiliation. secularization hypothesis makes little sense since east asia was largely secular to begin with compared to the west.

2) i don't think religion is really more significant in south america or africa. there has been a switch across religions (e.g., tribal to world religion in africa).

3) the united states is getting more secular in the past generation. there's several lines of data on this (look at younger people, or look at the rising number saying they have "no religion" and activley hostile toward religion).

it's more complicated than secularization vs. non-secularization.

Tom bri,

My sense is that the earlier emphasis on secularization (not atheism per-se, just the declining significance of organized religions in society, specific as opposed to fuzzy beliefs etc) as a theme of modernization, with America as an exception, has been challenged to the point it is no longer fashionable.

I don't really know or care whether it's "fashionable." The important question is whether it's true. There is overwhelming evidence that it is true. Even the supposed counterexample of the United States is now rapidly secularizing. The process just started later in the U.S., and is perhaps proceeding more slowly, than in most of Europe.

Of particular interest are the non-decline of religious institutions in East Asia, the possibly rising significance of religions in South America, and Africa, the success of movements like Pentecostalism, and of course the data-point of the US itself.

I see no credible evidence of a rise of religion in South America. All the evidence I have seen suggests that religion is declining there as in most of the rest of the developed world. Africa and much of Asia are still desperately poor and underdeveloped, and we would not expect them to be secularizing yet.

the united states is getting more secular in the past generation.

It's been going on for much longer than a generation. See the tables in this document, for example:
http://www-news.uchicago.edu/releases/04/040720.protestant.pdf
which draw on findings from the three largest studies of religiosity in the U.S., and which provide some time-series data going back to the beginning of the 20th century. The cohort data is especially instructive. For example, the percentage of Americans claiming no religion increased steadily from 3.2 for the pre-1910 cohort to 19.1 for the 1970s cohort. The percentage of Americans who were not raised in a religion increased steadily from 1.7 for the pre-1910 cohort to 9.9 for the 1970s cohort. The findings for the post-1980 cohort show a further increase in secularism, and the trend suggests that the secularization of America is accelerating.

I see no credible evidence of a rise of religion in South America. All the evidence I have seen suggests that religion is declining there as in most of the rest of the developed world

what data? and did you mispeak when implying that south america is part of the developed world? perahps argentina, chile and uruguay, but not most of the rest (and uruguay is notoriously secular). there has been ongoing process of conversion to protestantism by marginal catholics for the past generation.

Africa and much of Asia are still desperately poor and underdeveloped, and we would not expect them to be secularizing yet.

which is why china is so religious ;-) really, be careful about generalizing here.

what data?

Not much data, but see this piece, for example. Quote:

Belief in God is as widespread in Brazil as in the United States, says Antônio Flávio Pierucci, a sociologist at the University of São Paulo, but religious practice is close to Europe's wan levels. The numbers saying they are of no religion is small but growing. Some in the Catholic church fear that it is losing its grip over public morality. Local governments in Buenos Aires and Mexico City have recently legalised gay unions; the latter legalised abortion last month. Brazil's health minister has called for a plebiscite on the issue.

The rise of pentecostalism in South America does not represent the growth of religion, just a movement from one religion to another. Almost all of them are defections from the Catholic Church.

which is why china is so religious ;-)

I don't understand your point.

The rise of pentecostalism in South America does not represent the growth of religion, just a movement from one religion to another.

to some extent, but many of the switchers are going from being lax and nominal catholics toward enthusiastic church goers. what you're seeing in latin america is probably the polarization you're seeing in the USA.

I don't understand your point.

china and south korea are becoming more religious as they develop. or, more specifically, religious affiliation is increasing. singapore seems to have erosion of those from the "no religion" category toward christianity as well over the past generation.

while taiwan and japan seem to have stayed as secular, or become more secular, as they developed. so general trends are hard to spot here.

Benjamin Franz : "My deep suspicion is that on the medium to long term, the answer is "it can't". One or the other will give. Either the level of religiosity will fall to match the level of "realism" required to sustain the economic level, or the average income will fall to match the level of "unreality" required to continue to posit that "magic man done it" is a credible answer to physical questions in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary."

The problem that I see with your hypothesis relates to the fact that the report was quite crude in correlating religiosity directly with income. I suspect that the determinant of correlation with religiosity is really educational level. The US lags behind other wealthy Western nation in its educational standards, and this matter is not improved by the resistence of religious parents to educational elements that might promote the teaching of scientific critical thinking.

I think that secular thinking follows closely upon the heels of a good education.

Caledonian:

I think it's supposed to be the banal presence of the state religion in schools and life that makes people turn away. When you're automatically part of an organization, you take it for granted, and then you ignore it.

This is not necessarily limited to state religion. Eg. in Finland, the schools will organize teaching for any religion as long as there are enough kids belonging to the same religion (and as a kid you must belong to the religion of one parent). So, there are classes in Islam, Orthodox Christianity and so on. Most likely, they're just as impossibly dull as Lutheran classes, but it doesn't seem to kill minority religions.

...but one obvious benefit (from the atheist perspective) of state religion is that it exposes would-be clergy to a liberal education. I've known a few country boys who were full of fiery sermons against evolution, gays, non-submissive women and all that and would've been eager to do all that in church, until they found out that to become a priest you need to go through an university education where you're forced into stuff like debates on whether Jesus actually existed and listening to all sorts of liberal theologists. And then there's student life...