In particular, the second study. There were four statements of a patient’s condition after a traumatic injury:
1) David is healthy and fully recovered.
2) David passed away.
3) David died, was embalmed at the morgue, and is now in the cemetery, in a coffin, underground.
4) David is in a persistent vegetative state.
Group A rated the cognitive function on options 1, 2, and 4. Group B rated the cognitive function on options 1, 3, and 4. Non-religious folks—i.e., materialists—did not rate 2 and 3 equally relative to 4. It seems reasonable to conclude that the more detailed phrasing of option 3 “reminded them” to look at the situation from a materialist perspective.
Here’s a piece of supporting evidence for your theory: http://www.economist.com/node/21526321
In particular, the second study. There were four statements of a patient’s condition after a traumatic injury: 1) David is healthy and fully recovered. 2) David passed away. 3) David died, was embalmed at the morgue, and is now in the cemetery, in a coffin, underground. 4) David is in a persistent vegetative state.
Group A rated the cognitive function on options 1, 2, and 4. Group B rated the cognitive function on options 1, 3, and 4. Non-religious folks—i.e., materialists—did not rate 2 and 3 equally relative to 4. It seems reasonable to conclude that the more detailed phrasing of option 3 “reminded them” to look at the situation from a materialist perspective.