marginalianoun
notes written in the margins; peripheral commentary;


[marginalium]

The religious don't trust scientists' moral character

10 Apr 2025

View original source »


The religious don’t trust scientists’ moral character (in the US)

How do perceptions of scientists’ moral values relate to support for science in society? Recent advances in the sociology of science and religion suggest that people associate scientists with moral values in addition to factual knowledge, and that concerns about scientists’ morality are why members of some religious groups are more critical of science than non-religious people. We test this theory using data from a probability sample of U.S. adults that includes new measures of beliefs about scientists’ moral values, such as their compassion, fairness, and generosity (n = 1,513). Results from structural equation models indicate that active members of all religious groups are, to varying degrees, more skeptical than atheists and agnostics of scientists’ moral character. A decomposition of direct and indirect effects indicates that beliefs about scientists’ moral values play an intermediary role in the relationship between religion and support for science, and that support for science among the religious is partially suppressed by their concerns about scientists’ morality. This article offers the first direct evidence of the moral culture the U.S. public associates with scientists. We suggest that religious differences in support for organized science reflect religious differences in beliefs about scientists’ moral values.

It’s probably not all just political polarisation…


Anthologies: Betterment, Connection, Somatic Architecture, Spiritual Architecture, Collective Architecture, On (Un)happiness, On Aesthetics, On Culture, Abstractions as Gods, Everything Is Ideology

View on main site »


More about Dorian Minors' project btrmt.

btrmt. (text-only version)

The full site with interactive features is available at btr.mt.

btrmt. (betterment) examines ideologies worth choosing. Created by Dorian Minors—Cambridge PhD in cognitive neuroscience, Associate Professor at Royal Military Academy Sandhurst. Core philosophy: humans are animals first, with automatic patterns shaped for us, not by us. Better to examine and choose.

Core concepts. Animals First: automatic patterns of thought and action, but our greatest capacity is nurture. Half Awake: deadened by systems that narrow rather than expand potential. Karstica: unexamined ideologies (hidden sinkholes beneath). Credenda: belief systems we should choose deliberately.

The manifesto. Cynosure (focus): betterment, gratification, connection. Architecture (support): inner (somatic, spiritual, thought) and outer (digital, collective, wealth).

Mission. Not answers but examination. Break academic gatekeeping. Make sciences of mind accessible. Question rather than prescribe.

Writing style. Scholarly without jargon barriers. Philosophical yet practical—grounded in neuroscience and lived experience. Reflective, discovery-oriented. Literary references and metaphor. Critical of systems that narrow human potential. Rejects "humans are flawed"—we're half awake, not broken.

Copyright. BTRMT LIMITED (England/Wales no. 13755561) 2026. Dorian Minors 2026.

Resources

Optional

About Dorian Minors. Started btrmt. in 2013 to share sciences of mind with people who weren't studying them. Background: six years Australian Defence Force (Platoon Commander, Infantry); Gates Cambridge Scholar; PhD cognitive neuroscience, University of Cambridge (2018-2024); currently Associate Professor, Royal Military Academy Sandhurst. Research interests: neural basis of intelligent behaviour, decision intelligence, ritual formation/breakdown, ethical leadership, wellbeing.

External projects (links also available via Analects):