The Relationship between Technology and Religion

1. The Relationship between Technology and Religion Linda Dolan, Glenn Erski, Yury Getsin, Jennifer Gorga The College of Staten Island Steven Johnson Ph.D. ABSTRACT We present and interpret a sociological survey of the effects of new technology on religion among CUNY students. The topic of interrelating religion with science and technology has been examined by Drees, Roy, et al. in the journal Zygon. We intend to demonstrate that technology has impacted the role of religion in current times. We also intend to demonstrate that a CUNY student majoring in the physical sciences is less likely to be religious than a CUNY student majoring in the liberal arts. We will accomplish this through a survey which looks at practices that satisfy both of the following criteria: (1) a practice in conflict with religious doctrine (2) a practice created by technology or significantly modified in consequence as a direct result of technology. Introduction In this project, technology and religion are related in an attempt to see if we can draw a correlation between the two, in respect to two topics. These two topics are relating a college students major to his/her degree of religious belief, and secondly, whether or not technology has affected people’s stance on specific issues. A survey was designed to test these two potential connections. The idea behind this is that when a student chooses a major, you can make certain assumptions. A student majoring in the physical sciences is much more likely to pursue a career in those sciences than English majors. Conversely, a poet was more likely an English major than a Biochemistry major. So by looking at student’s major, we can speculate as to their current and intended lifelong involvement with science and technology. The next step is to of course relate this to their degree of religious belief. We are quantifying a person’s religious belief based on how religious they consider themselves, their active involvement in their religion, and how much they practice their religion. These three quantities are put together and each person is ranked on a simple scale in terms of how religious they are. Once a person is ranked, we can cross reference this to topics such as intended major and their religion’s effect on certain issues, thus answering our hypotheses. In regard to looking at the effect one’s religion has on a persons stance to issues influenced or changed significantly by technology, the survey asks this directly. This looks at whether people have formed opinions or changed them as a result of their religious doctrine. It also looks at whether people have formed opinions contrary to the religious doctrine they claim to follow. This can help us to understand whether or not there really exist a conflict between technology and religion. MATHEMATICAL AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS THE EFFECTS OF TECH ON RELIGION The RQ: Religion Quotient. Criteria: Survey question A of self-ranking of religiousness of the individual on scale of 1 - 7 Survey question B about how often the individual prays. Survey question C about participation in ones religious community. Explanation of Criteria: Survey Question A: is a self ranking of the individual’s religiousness based on a scale of 1 through 7. A ranking of 1 is the lowest ranking meaning minimal or no belief in and influence by religion. A ranking of 7 is the highest ranking meaning the most religiousness. Survey Question B: How often the individual prays over a period of one month. There were four choices here that we accepted for this RQ. Almost all the time, Once a week, Once or Twice, Never. Survey Question C: Active members in their religious community. The three choices here were No, Yes, and I am not a member of an organized religion. Combining the Criteria: The three criteria for the RQ were combined by a simple tree diagram. The first criterium with the seven ranked answers was given first priority. Criteria B was deemed the next important in determining religiousness, and survey question C was listed third. We then multiplied seven by the number of answers for the other questions by drawing a tree diagram. There are 84 combinations of answers to the three survey questions. We then ranked them from least to most, 1 being the least, 84 being the most religious. Converting the Rankings Into a range of 1-100 Let r = the ranking a person was given out of 84 Let n = their RQ. After setting up a proportion and solving for n: n = (100/84)r or 1.1905r. * if a value for n is a decimal value, it will be rounded to the nearest integer. If n < .5 it will be rounded down If n > or equal to .5 it will be rounded up. The TQ: Technology Quotient. Criteria: Survey Question of self-ranking of immersion in technology on scale of 1 - 7 Choice of Major Explanation of Criteria: Survey Question: is a self ranking of the individual’s immersion in modern technology based on a scale of 1 through 7. A ranking of 1 is the lowest ranking meaning little or no involvement with modern technology. A ranking of 7 is the highest ranking meaning largest immersion in technology. Choice of Major: each major choice was examined and put in a rank based on the amount of credits devoted to technology and science. The college of Staten Island 2003-2005 Course Catalogue was used as a reference point for degree requirements with the assumption that degree requirements are proportionally similar at other institutions. For example, excluding general education requirements, an English major at one university will generally have the same amount of technology or science criteria as any other given university as opposed to a biology or physics major in those same institutions. How we ranked the Majors: We divided science and technology courses into four main categories of study. They were 1) Computer and Engineering science 2) Lab Science: Physics, Biology, Chemistry, and Biochemistry classes that were strictly held in a laboratory setting. 3) Theoretical Science: Physics, Biology, Chemistry, and Biochemistry classes that focus on the actual theories and textbook information on the subjects. 4) Mathematics Then we tallied up the amount of required credits needed in each discipline for every major listed in the catalogue. All the credits, including all categories, were then added up for each major. The majors were then listed according to the amount of science and technology credits they required. We ran into a few examples of majors where the total amount of credits were equal in value. The ties were broken as follows: The value of 73 was given to Biology, Biochemistry, and Physics. We decided that the most important aspect of science technology was the category of theoretical science. We then ranked those three according to their theoretical science credit total. The value of 52 was given to Mathematics and Engineering Science. We followed the same criteria as we did before in the case of the 73 value. Most majors fell under the category of 11. We then discovered that their values for the four science and technology categories were equal. The next criteria we used for these was weather they were B.S. or B.A. The majors that were B.S. were then collectively assigned the same rank and the majors with a B.A. were collectively listed as the last grouping of majors. The Undecided Majors we then decided to place in between the grouping of 11 B.S. and 11 B.A. The 11 credits we had counted for those majors were general education requirements and we placed the undecided in between because we do not know weather they will move into a B.S. or B.A. discipline. Combining the Criteria: The two criteria for the TQ were combined by a simple tree diagram. The first Criteria with the seven ranked answers were given first priority in order to stay consistent with our criteria for the RQ. We then multiplied seven by the number of major rankings, which was 18. This gave us 126 possibilities. Converting the Rankings Into a range of 1-100 Let r = the ranking a person was given out of 119 Let n = their TQ. After setting up a proportion and solving for n: n = (100/126)r or 0.7937r. * if a value for n is a decimal value, it will be rounded to the nearest integer. If n < .5 it will be rounded down If n > or equal to .5 it will be rounded up. 1) Gender Male 141 (30.6%)Female 320 (69.4%) 2) What school or type of school do you attend? CUNY Honors College 167 (36.2%)CUNY 77 (16.7%)Honors Program at Religious University 4 (0.9%)Religious University 24 (5.2%)Honors Program at Non-Religious University 10 (2.2%)Non-Religious University 46 (10.0%)Other 133 (28.9%) 3) Intended Major Anthropology 4 (0.9%)Biology 52 (11.3%)Business 44 (9.5%)Chemistry 30 (6.5%)Computer Science 8 (1.7%)Economics 6 (1.3%)Education 23 (5.0%)Engineering and Physics 15 (3.3%)English, Speech and World Literature 19 (4.1%)History 8 (1.7%)Mathematics 11 (2.4%)Media Culture (Communications) 12 (2.6%)Languages 4 (0.9%)Nursing 11 (2.4%)Physical Therapy 9 (2.0%)Performing Arts 4 (0.9%)Political Science 14 (3.0%)Philsophy 5 (1.1%)Psychology 33 (7.2%)Sociology 12 (2.6%)Undecided 32 (6.9%)Other 105 (22.8%)4) Religious Affiliation Agnostic 29 (6.3%)Animism 0 (0.0%)Athiest 30 (6.5%)Buddhist 9 (2.0%)Christian-Catholic 126 (27.3%)Christian-Orthodox 28 (6.1%)Christian-Protestant 35 (7.6%)Christian-Other 35 (7.6%)Confuscianism 0 (0.0%)Hinduism 8 (1.7%)Jewish 95 (20.6%)Muslim 21 (4.6%)Rastafarian 1 (0.2%)Sikh 1 (0.2%)Scientologist 1 (0.2%)Shintoism 0 (0.0%)Spiritual with no affiliation 23 (5.0%)Wiccan 1 (0.2%)Other  18 (3.9%) 5) On a scale of 1 - 7, how religious do you rate yourself? (1 being the least and 7 the most) 1 82 (18.7%)2 59 (13.4%)3 65 (14.8%)4 86 (19.6%)5 73 (16.6%)6 43 (9.8%)7 31 (7.1%) 6) Would you consider yourself an active participant in your religious community? Yes 133 (30.3%)No 230 (52.4%)I am not a member of an organized religion 76 (17.3%) 7) How often do you pray/attend religious services over a period of one month? Almost every day 82 (18.7%)Most of the time 30 (6.8%)Half of the time 21 (4.8%)About once a week 44 (10.0%)Once or twice 92 (21.0%)Never 170 (38.7%) 8) How often do you ponder various aspects of your religion? More than once a day 79 (18.0%)Once a day 60 (13.7%)Once or twice a week 88 (20.0%)Once or twice a month 83 (18.9%)Less than once a month 71 (16.2%)Never 58 (13.2%) 9) On a scale of 1 -7, rate your immersion in modern technology. (1 being the least 7 being the most) 1 3 (0.7%)2 9 (2.1%)3 16 (3.6%)4 48 (10.9%)5 135 (30.8%)6 122 (27.8%)7 106 (24.1%) 10) Of the following practices listed below, which ones do you support? (Check all that apply) Abortion 256 (23.2%)Birth Control 381 (34.6%)Cloning 112 (10.2%)Embryonic stem cell research 320 (29.0%)None of these 33 (3.0%) 11) For the choices in the previous question, are your views on those subjects affected by your religion? (check all that apply) Abortion 145 (20.9%)Birth Control 71 (10.2%)Cloning 118 (17.0%)Embryonic stem cell research 88 (12.7%)None of these 271 (39.1%) 12) Do you feel that modern contraception has made you less opposed to engaging in sex outside of marriage? Yes it has 183 (41.7%)No it hasn't 256 (58.3%) 13) Do you believe that certain religious practices are now outdated due to technological advancements? Yes 241 (54.9%)No 198 (45.1%) 14) I think that the relationship between religion and technology is Mostly Conflicting 55 (12.5%)Sometimes Conflicting 157 (35.8%)Mostly Symbiotic (co-existing) 83 (18.9%)Somewhat Symbiotic 41 (9.3%)They are generally unrelated 103 (23.5%) Conclusion and results, rejection or affirmation of hypotheses References http://www.breathegroup.com/images/technology_main.jpg http://image.pathfinder.com/time/daily/newsfiles/religion/images/religion.jpg Kurtz, Paul,ed. Science and Religion – Are They Compatible? Amherst, New York: Prometheus Books, 2003. Roy, Rustum. “Religion/Technology, not Theology/Science, as the Defining Dichotomy” Zygon, vol. 37, no. 3(September 2002): 667-676. Drees, Willem B. “ ‘Playing God? Yes!’ Religion in the Light of Technology” Zygon, vol. 37, no. 3(September 2002): 643-654.