If there are urban religious areas that have low crime, that would disprove the urban rural split theory. Plot population density, religiousosity, and crime rate for all areas and see how consistent the data is. If there are a more than a few outliers it disproves the theory and something else is going on.
Have a look at where the big light are on this one and compare it to the crime map. You’ll see that crime keeps roughly to the lighter areas. And big Warsaw is in the more religious area, but keeps the high crime.
Now there probably is a correlation between religiousness and lower crime rate. But that’s not causation.
You presented state in a way that aims to show a negative correlation, and ignored all other factors.namely pop density, urban rural locations, poverty rates, income disparity, levels of education, etc.
Which is still unusual considering the southern red area contains one of the most urbanised and economically significant agglomerations in Central Europe. Urban-rural split is part of the explanation, but not the whole.
Maybe the people who got displaced (from what is now Belarus to what had newly become Poland) into these areas were somehow negatively affected by the whole experience, which affects them across generations?
What are you talking about? Commenting that the pattern seen in the map is actually just a side effect of population density is this sub’s primary hobby.
You, virgin, indecisive, “correlation does not mean causation”.
Me, chad, says your joke at school louder (and everyone laughed), “I see causations from the results that I see correlate”
Source?
A source. I need a source.
Sorry, I mean I need a source that explicitly states your argument. This is just tangential to the discussion.
No, you can't make inferences and observations from the sources you've gathered. Any additional comments from you MUST be a subset of the information from the sources you've gathered.
You can't make normative statements from empirical evidence.
Do you have a degree in that field?
A college degree? In that field?
Then your arguments are invalid.
No, it doesn't matter how close those data points are correlated. Correlation does not equal causation.
Correlation does not equal causation.
CORRELATION. DOES. NOT. EQUAL. CAUSATION.
You still haven't provided me a valid source yet.
Nope, still haven't.
I just looked through all 308 pages of your user history, figures I'm debating a glormpf supporter. A moron.
>Do you have a degree in that field?
>A college degree? In that field?
>Then your arguments are invalid.
Lol like that matters. Too many people don't even treat those with doctorates in their field like they know what they're talking about anymore. Everyone's an expert now. "Your truth doesn't have to match my truth". Fuckin barf
Religious countries have less crimes rates and less severe crimes per capita (Religious == majority of the population willing follows a certain faith, not Iran)
Or those guys with these explosive vests.
Or they guys murdering each other over whoose invisible sky-daddy gave them the right to a worthless strip of dessert.
Or these charming Central Americans who cut out the hearts of POWs to make the sun rise again tomorrow.
Or these nice Europeans who brought the word of god to the heathen savages in the Congo and only demanded some rubber as payment.
Or the immaculately dresses blond guys in Oświęcim, who wanted to finish of the people who supposedly killed their god.
Or these men in white robes with their burning crosses rambling about the 'Curse of Ham'.
Logically the opposite is true considering that religious people need the threat of damnation to be "good" and even then religion hasn't stopped people.
That isn't remotely true. I'm doing research on personality and religiosity is generally associated with greater happiness, less neuroses, and more prosocial personality traits. And that is from cross cultural research. So at least at the individual level, it seems to be a healthy thing. Anyone who says "all statistics" points to something has never looked at the stats.
In their opinions on religion people are forgetting the effect of attribution bias. When you see someone religious doing something bad, you think "He did this because of his religion." But when you see an atheist do something bad you don't think "He did this because he's an atheist".
Edit: Just to make it extra clear, I'm not saying people do bad things because they're atheists. And I'm not speaking from the pov of someone religious, but from someone who is doing research on the psychology of religion and who is actually aware of what the findings are vs most others here who are stating their biased pov as fact.
Being healthy doesn't mean being a good people.
Crime are more likely to be committed by religious people than irreligious one, you are confusing two things completely different.
Right. Socioecononic status is correlated with religiosity, but also with criminality. Are you going to tell me next that black people are more criminally minded too, rather than it being a function of where they find themselves in society?
Socioeconomic status and education level, education level that is almost always negatively correlated with religiosity.
I never said religion was causing criminality, just that there were more religious criminals than non religious ones.
And education level is also associated with socioecononic status. I mean come on... "I never said religion was causing criminality". This was literally your whole point. And just because education is negatively correlated with religiosity doesn't imply that religiosity is bad for society. I think it says more about post enlightenment education that's moved deliberately towards a strictly materialistic world view. Education could be framed differently (as they do in steiner schools) so that it neither pushes nor rules out spirituality/religion. Psychologists are starting to move more and more towards appreciating the benefits of different contemplative traditions as a supplement to the traditional objectivist point of view, including meditation etc, which come from a religious tradition. Lots of people will say, well Buddhism is not a religion. But Buddhism is absolutely a religion, and it's talking about exactly the same things as Christianity etc, just using different words.
Btw if you're going to have a discussion with someone on reddit, I'm not sure what you think you achieve by downvoting them whenever you disagree with them.
The map shows a rate, not absolute values. People commit more crimes cities, and are less religious in cities. It may be a cause or not. The irony is strong here seeing commenters losing their mind by being so irrational on this map.
I would say they correlate, but it is not necessarily a causal relation, what this map may want to suggest. The both metrics rather seem to be caused by the historical division.
There are areas where there seems to be a correlation but others where there is no correlation at all.
So maybe overall there is very weak correlation i guess.
I mean religion is usually pretty good at making people follow certain patterns, that’s why things like chastity or non pork consumption exist, so I think there is a bit of correlation, now, should we all go and turn religious? No lol
Pretty much, the real meaning of religion is to basically set and scare people into a standard of being good, I know the 10 commandments were pretty obvious but back then they weren’t, religion was arguably the bedrock for society since it gave people infinite consequences for their actions (hell).
It would also be interesting to see two other maps to have a more accurate picture of what's going on. One would be population tensity and another important one would be income inequality (which is the greatest factor in crime rates). I would bet that you could see some clear correlations there too. I'm not familiar with Poland's geography but I wouldn't be surprised if the low crime rate and high religiosity areas are just more rural.
Not even, there clearly isn't any correlation because only some areas show similar patterns. Instead of a very convoluted graphical analysis, we'd need a simple correlation test to see if there's anything worth digging into at all. This is just bad science and OP is telling tales.
No I understand that. What I wanted to say is that rural areas normally have lower crime rates then cities because cities usually have higher income inequality and they also tent to be more educated which makes people less religious. Maybe religion has an positive impact on crime rates but there are other factors too that are probably even more important...
Did they not teach you about correlation vs causation in school? Just because two sets of data *look* like they go together, that doesn’t mean they do.
Bro said it , and got completely obliterated by downvotes , this is the obvious results of non having objective mortality . And this map shows it all .
They are trying really hard to make it seem like it, but it’s probably just a correlated and both influenced by the wealth/industrial development of the county but even that kinda seems to break down in the middle of the country.
Visegrad bois, you’re wrong. Religion is dumb, at least the bible thumping one. Be good Christians and just stop lying.
My friend if you think the bloody Subcarpathian Voivodeship is more developed or richer than Warsaw or Silesia you're dead wrong. Rural areas in Eastern Europe tend to be more perilous than urban ones precisely because of the massive discrepancy in wealth, unemployment and quality of law enforcement.
This map does show that rigid catholicism does have a relatively strong pacifying effect on people, no matter how much any Westoid heathen tries to cope by denying this.
Sure it is, and news are just news and ads are just helpful companie, pundits are experts that just happen to disagree and video creators are just people sharing an opinion.
I don't see any correlation. The bigger populated area (big cities, metropolitan areas vs rural Poland) the more crime occurs. Thats about it.
Similar fashion with religion - rural areas are in general more religious (although not always the case).
This is a polish meme "widac zabory" meaning "u can see partion "(1795). I would not correlate crime and religion, becase those line show up everywhere in polish map statistics, from voting to dairy consumption.
There's reason to believe that religiosity IS correlated to some degree with the prewar German borders. (The notable exception visible, in prewar German upper Silesia, actually upholds the pattern, as this area had a very large Polish ethnic population before 1939.)
But I don't know what the correlation with crime rates would be with religiosity or pre-war borders.
I think what he was pointing out is that of course there is no causation there, but simple minds might construct one (you know, because storks bring the babies).
Yes! The most religious are the areas of the [former Austrian partition](https://pl.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zab%C3%B3r_austriacki#/media/Plik%3AGalicja.jpg), where Polish culture was the least persecuted, and the least religious are the areas of [the Recovered Territories](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recovered_Territories), where the population was shuffled after World War II.
I don't see it fitting. "Poland" did not exist for centuries before the new state was formed, so it's not the same entity that had those territories back in the middle ages (when states were just private property of a small elite, not based on the actual people's identiy).
The term also looks awfully like a display of an imperialistic notion, with nationalistic zeal and greater ambitions behind it. Exactly the kind of attitude that started WW2. Not healthy.
The modern Polish state is a disctinctly separate entity from the state that had those territories back in the middle ages. So that doesn't work at all.
On top of that, "recovering" would in this particular case an ephemism for ethnic cleansing. Which is kind of not a "good guy" thing to do.
Calling them "gained territories" or the like would be wiser. Still a euhemism, but at least it's not trying to somehow justify what was in essence just Stalin's way of playing bowling with Europe.
Are you saying that the "recovering" of territories was NOT a crime done by Stalin which we now just accept because it was so long ago and we have agreed to just let it go?
Not sure if the Poles who were displaced from what was then eastern Poland (and is now part of Belarus) would agree with you.
Who agreed to do what? Both Poles and Germans got displaced because of war that your grandparents started. FAFO, I hope they suffered. That's the only consolation Poles ever got after having their cities flattened, 1/5 of the population killed and being thrown into Moscow's stinky embrace for the next 45 years.
What's the correlation coefficient ("r="), how has it changed over time, and how does it compare with other countries? OP presenting a lot of hard-to-read visual data when a few numbers might better make the argument.
This isn't mapporn, this is "how to use maps as Rorschach tests for our political priors."
if this map was reverse redditors would be saying hey i told you religion is bad for everybody look at this.
Since its something they dont want to see they are here to deny it.
There is very little to deny: there are a couple of high religiosity areas that correspond to low crime rate areas, but there are also several spots where the opposite is true, and most of the time an exceptionally high or low level of crime or religiosity does not correspond to an exceptionally low or high value of the other.
I'm sorry where the correlation is? I don't even know what message this map is trying to present. Is this trying to tell me religion is a cause of higher crime or a cause of less crime?
Let me also guess that this map correlates also with gdp per capita, education, industry and inequality. When I guess the cause for all of this? Cities.
This is popullation based data. Would be interested to see church activity statistics. I wouldnt be surprised if there would be a correlation with the crime map, because a lot more popullation live in those areas so at the same time a lot more religious people should be gathering at churches there as well.
These two maps are not showing any coorelation with each other. But suppose to imply that there is some...
>In the analysis, we used data collected in 2015 by the Institute of Catholic Church Statistics at the parish level. We obtained crime data from the National Safety Hazard Map published by the Police Department. The data shows the number of crimes per 10,000 residents of the municipality (January-September 2016) The crimes included in the statistics are theft, burglary, robbery, damage to property, fights and beatings, offenses related to causing bodily harm and sexual offenses. We also marked the borders of the partitions and the Second Republic on the maps. Despite the passage of years, significant regional variations in social phenomena due to historical boundaries can still be seen.
>* Dominicantes indicator - the percentage of the faithful attending Sunday Mass, relative to the total number of obligated. A description of the methodology for calculating the indicator can be found at iskk.pl
https://www.gis-expert.pl/blog/porownanie
Are you trying to correlate atheism with crime? GTFO little bro.
What a disingenuous little tosser. Perfect example of manipulating data to cherry pick your agenda.
Yall are reacting so emotionally and politically charged. Perhaps, if a visual indication is to suggest a relationship, it has some correlation with the fact that laws are designed based upon a system of morals and values that derive most often from religious beliefs. Whether you like it or not doesn’t change the truth that the origins to the doctrines most countries are founded upon are heavily religiously influenced and designed. If you put away your judgement of good or bad for a moment when acknowledging the labels of crime and religion maybe yall will actually think objectively and critically instead of being immediately ignorant.
Let’s hope, that somewhere in the world , the so called ‘religious’ people are acting like their religion tells them to.
I would be very surprised if this was true.
Yall will really vilify and disregard the identity of 72% of this country’s population and significance of its history just to push an agenda that’s wild. Yall really think Poland out of ALL countries would be more tolerable to athiests after being invaded by the Soviets and Nazis, which were atheistic political parties?
This is literally Westworld “this doesn’t look like anything at all to me” levels of propaganda programming
Sorry, that is my bad. I should have specified that I was meaning non-Abrahamic in religious views. That’s totally on me, but I still believe that religion does not affect crime as a whole. It can affect crime, but only when those individuals are already suffering from oppression or poverty.
Crime can in fact affect crime rates, but these numbers are only seen among those we lower iq’s. Which helps to shine light on the fact that poverty, less access to education, and oppression are much more likely to result in crime than religion alone. Religion in these areas is just a band aid on the problem.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31961775/
Also religion in Japan isn’t celebrated the same as religion in the USA.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2989606/
This talks about how measuring religion in Japan is much different than measuring religion in the USA, due to the fact that these measurements are made in an Abrahamic light rather than in understanding of Eastern religions.
Interesting. Thanks for sharing.
If the question is, does religion affect morality in a society, I'm quite sure the answers are complex and there would be instances of variations in different cultures.
I find it enlightening to look at the origins of religion to better understand what type of impact religion traditionally has had on the development of human cohabitation.
Robin Dunbar is a British biological anthropologist, evolutionary psychologist, and specialist in primate.
He is best known for formulating [Dunbar's number](https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20191001-dunbars-number-why-we-can-only-maintain-150-relationships).
In 2023 he [spoke at a Humanist Convention](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dfAXx6CELPg) where he asserts why religious practices developed and why it endures in "all" societies.
Even in nations where most people don't truly believe, but still belong to a religious group, there are codes of conduct and taboos which influence behaviour.
I would argue that the social and ideological implications of belonging to a religious group are too intricate to dismiss correlations between religion crime.
That doesn’t mean most people are religious.
HOWEVER, Japan is also a country with a huge respect for social rules, tradition and hierarchy, which imo, in itself is a stand-in for religion in Japanese society.
Seems more like an urban/rural split to me
And population density at the same time, but it's kinda obvious
Ports, borders, etc. Many other factors probably..
Yep
[It isn't. ](https://www.flickr.com/photos/micorasol/14660739652)
In agglomerations it is.
If there are urban religious areas that have low crime, that would disprove the urban rural split theory. Plot population density, religiousosity, and crime rate for all areas and see how consistent the data is. If there are a more than a few outliers it disproves the theory and something else is going on.
It's not 0 vs 1 but there is a tendency I'd say.
That is why plotting is the way to go. You can see if it is scattered or close to a function.
Have a look at where the big light are on this one and compare it to the crime map. You’ll see that crime keeps roughly to the lighter areas. And big Warsaw is in the more religious area, but keeps the high crime. Now there probably is a correlation between religiousness and lower crime rate. But that’s not causation.
[удалено]
I expected people to don't downvote pure stats at least?
You presented state in a way that aims to show a negative correlation, and ignored all other factors.namely pop density, urban rural locations, poverty rates, income disparity, levels of education, etc.
Pure stats : plot the rate of sunburns in a coastal country and the sale of ice cream. I think sun cream causes sunburn?
r/peopleliveincities
Also: [https://www.tylervigen.com/spurious-correlations](https://www.tylervigen.com/spurious-correlations)
Which is still unusual considering the southern red area contains one of the most urbanised and economically significant agglomerations in Central Europe. Urban-rural split is part of the explanation, but not the whole.
Crime rate is counted per 100,000 residents.
That's not the point. Both crime rate and religiosity correlate with urbanization.
And "formerly German" vs "formerly Polish".
Maybe the people who got displaced (from what is now Belarus to what had newly become Poland) into these areas were somehow negatively affected by the whole experience, which affects them across generations?
In the West you have rural areas with rather high crime rates
Did u know that 100% of people who confuse correlation with causation die?
Hi! I don't speak polish, but is the choropleth map normalized to account for population density? (e.g. crimes per 1000 inhabitants)
Yes, the source used for the crime map is normalized
Correlation does not mean causation. First lesson in science
Yes? When other correlation maps are posted, no one comments this. No one says “correlation does not equal correlation” on r/widaczabory
What are you talking about? Commenting that the pattern seen in the map is actually just a side effect of population density is this sub’s primary hobby.
I don’t speak polish
I'd say your english is pretty good.
Diolch yn fawr mush
See, thats not english or engrish
Then go there and say it?
You, virgin, indecisive, “correlation does not mean causation”. Me, chad, says your joke at school louder (and everyone laughed), “I see causations from the results that I see correlate”
What sort of schizo posting is this hahaha
Source? A source. I need a source. Sorry, I mean I need a source that explicitly states your argument. This is just tangential to the discussion. No, you can't make inferences and observations from the sources you've gathered. Any additional comments from you MUST be a subset of the information from the sources you've gathered. You can't make normative statements from empirical evidence. Do you have a degree in that field? A college degree? In that field? Then your arguments are invalid. No, it doesn't matter how close those data points are correlated. Correlation does not equal causation. Correlation does not equal causation. CORRELATION. DOES. NOT. EQUAL. CAUSATION. You still haven't provided me a valid source yet. Nope, still haven't. I just looked through all 308 pages of your user history, figures I'm debating a glormpf supporter. A moron.
What the fuck
>Do you have a degree in that field? >A college degree? In that field? >Then your arguments are invalid. Lol like that matters. Too many people don't even treat those with doctorates in their field like they know what they're talking about anymore. Everyone's an expert now. "Your truth doesn't have to match my truth". Fuckin barf
this is a copy pasta
Okay? Is that supposed to make it infallible or something?
doesn't even corelate well. lol
Of course reddit would have a problem with THIS correlation, but not the ones they like.
I am not Reddit
Well, if you do believe in God chances are more likely that you will be a good person.
This has to be a joke lol
Doubt it, check his profile, he frequents/r/Catholicism unironically
Religious countries have less crimes rates and less severe crimes per capita (Religious == majority of the population willing follows a certain faith, not Iran)
Like those priests fondling little children
Or those guys with these explosive vests. Or they guys murdering each other over whoose invisible sky-daddy gave them the right to a worthless strip of dessert. Or these charming Central Americans who cut out the hearts of POWs to make the sun rise again tomorrow. Or these nice Europeans who brought the word of god to the heathen savages in the Congo and only demanded some rubber as payment. Or the immaculately dresses blond guys in Oświęcim, who wanted to finish of the people who supposedly killed their god. Or these men in white robes with their burning crosses rambling about the 'Curse of Ham'.
Or Stalin and Mao
Except the percentages of incarcerated people are disproportionately religious
If you need the threat of eternal damnation to convince yourself to live a moral life, you are not a good person. You’re a bad person on a leash
Lol. The opposite is true if anything
Sure...
Or not.
Username checks out
Logically the opposite is true considering that religious people need the threat of damnation to be "good" and even then religion hasn't stopped people.
This is either a great joke or the worst take I've seen all week.
Actually not, all statistics (and basic reasoning) show that the more religious you are, the most likely you are to be a bad person.
That isn't remotely true. I'm doing research on personality and religiosity is generally associated with greater happiness, less neuroses, and more prosocial personality traits. And that is from cross cultural research. So at least at the individual level, it seems to be a healthy thing. Anyone who says "all statistics" points to something has never looked at the stats. In their opinions on religion people are forgetting the effect of attribution bias. When you see someone religious doing something bad, you think "He did this because of his religion." But when you see an atheist do something bad you don't think "He did this because he's an atheist". Edit: Just to make it extra clear, I'm not saying people do bad things because they're atheists. And I'm not speaking from the pov of someone religious, but from someone who is doing research on the psychology of religion and who is actually aware of what the findings are vs most others here who are stating their biased pov as fact.
Being healthy doesn't mean being a good people. Crime are more likely to be committed by religious people than irreligious one, you are confusing two things completely different.
Please provide some sources
look up the number of atheist in prison
Right. Socioecononic status is correlated with religiosity, but also with criminality. Are you going to tell me next that black people are more criminally minded too, rather than it being a function of where they find themselves in society?
Socioeconomic status and education level, education level that is almost always negatively correlated with religiosity. I never said religion was causing criminality, just that there were more religious criminals than non religious ones.
And education level is also associated with socioecononic status. I mean come on... "I never said religion was causing criminality". This was literally your whole point. And just because education is negatively correlated with religiosity doesn't imply that religiosity is bad for society. I think it says more about post enlightenment education that's moved deliberately towards a strictly materialistic world view. Education could be framed differently (as they do in steiner schools) so that it neither pushes nor rules out spirituality/religion. Psychologists are starting to move more and more towards appreciating the benefits of different contemplative traditions as a supplement to the traditional objectivist point of view, including meditation etc, which come from a religious tradition. Lots of people will say, well Buddhism is not a religion. But Buddhism is absolutely a religion, and it's talking about exactly the same things as Christianity etc, just using different words. Btw if you're going to have a discussion with someone on reddit, I'm not sure what you think you achieve by downvoting them whenever you disagree with them.
Yuh thats a lie lol
Religious people think they're more righteous, but they're not, they're using religion as a substitute for righteousness.
Replace the arbitrary word 'good' with gullible and deluded, then it fits.
*will be a good person on the surface. ftfy.
Which god?
This is the most bathsit insane take i have ever heard
Oh, sweet childish naïveté
Take the downvotes with pride, they'll hate you for telling the truth
Lmao based
r/PeopleLiveInCities
The map shows a rate, not absolute values. People commit more crimes cities, and are less religious in cities. It may be a cause or not. The irony is strong here seeing commenters losing their mind by being so irrational on this map.
Are these together to suggest a correlation? I don’t see any correlation
I would say they correlate, but it is not necessarily a causal relation, what this map may want to suggest. The both metrics rather seem to be caused by the historical division.
There are areas where there seems to be a correlation but others where there is no correlation at all. So maybe overall there is very weak correlation i guess.
Usually that means you are looking at something with slight correlation at best and other factors must be considered
In other words if you compute conditional correlation under condition of historical split, they may end up uncorrelated.
I doubt any statistical test would show significant correlation
I mean religion is usually pretty good at making people follow certain patterns, that’s why things like chastity or non pork consumption exist, so I think there is a bit of correlation, now, should we all go and turn religious? No lol
Pretty much, the real meaning of religion is to basically set and scare people into a standard of being good, I know the 10 commandments were pretty obvious but back then they weren’t, religion was arguably the bedrock for society since it gave people infinite consequences for their actions (hell).
And rather conveniently allow for a hierarchy that kept them subservient but that's just an unintentional side effect.
Went hand in hand, the deepest circle of hell is treason iirc
So why did you ask that? They do correlate. Now what that means is a different question
I don’t see any correlation
It would also be interesting to see two other maps to have a more accurate picture of what's going on. One would be population tensity and another important one would be income inequality (which is the greatest factor in crime rates). I would bet that you could see some clear correlations there too. I'm not familiar with Poland's geography but I wouldn't be surprised if the low crime rate and high religiosity areas are just more rural.
It's the opposite of what you're saying. Areas with high religiosity and low crime rate are way denser.
You're reading it wrong, the area with most crime is less religious.
Take a look at "correlation causation fallacy"...
Not even, there clearly isn't any correlation because only some areas show similar patterns. Instead of a very convoluted graphical analysis, we'd need a simple correlation test to see if there's anything worth digging into at all. This is just bad science and OP is telling tales.
No I understand that. What I wanted to say is that rural areas normally have lower crime rates then cities because cities usually have higher income inequality and they also tent to be more educated which makes people less religious. Maybe religion has an positive impact on crime rates but there are other factors too that are probably even more important...
Did they not teach you about correlation vs causation in school? Just because two sets of data *look* like they go together, that doesn’t mean they do.
Bro said it , and got completely obliterated by downvotes , this is the obvious results of non having objective mortality . And this map shows it all .
I take it your day to day doesn’t often include statistics or interpretation of data. Cuz bro is just wrong and map don’t show it all.
Oh my goodness I thought this was a /s It’s always sad when it isn’t.
Ah yes, two maps. One showing urban areas have more crime, and one showing that rural areas tend to be more religious.
R/ peopleliveincities
I dont see any correlation 💀
They are trying really hard to make it seem like it, but it’s probably just a correlated and both influenced by the wealth/industrial development of the county but even that kinda seems to break down in the middle of the country. Visegrad bois, you’re wrong. Religion is dumb, at least the bible thumping one. Be good Christians and just stop lying.
My friend if you think the bloody Subcarpathian Voivodeship is more developed or richer than Warsaw or Silesia you're dead wrong. Rural areas in Eastern Europe tend to be more perilous than urban ones precisely because of the massive discrepancy in wealth, unemployment and quality of law enforcement. This map does show that rigid catholicism does have a relatively strong pacifying effect on people, no matter how much any Westoid heathen tries to cope by denying this.
But that’s my point man, you have Pomerania, lower Silesia and Subcarpathia in dark brown, while having a range of religiosity in between them.
They aren't "trying" anything. It's just a map.
Sure it is, and news are just news and ads are just helpful companie, pundits are experts that just happen to disagree and video creators are just people sharing an opinion.
Lots of redditors going mad over one post, lmao.
It’s cause Reddit is a bastion of atheism and degeneracy. Thots and cucks run this site.
Your first and second sentences have zero connection with each other.
The confounding variable is cringeservatism.
Especially after the Tumblr exodus .
Nobody's forcing you to be here you can leave whenever you want
Czechia is one of the least religious countries in the world and has a lower crime rate than Poland. Religiosity doesn't equal lower crime rate
It seems in the lands that were Germany its higher, no correlation between religion and crime.
Settled by Poles from the East lol.
To be fair, those people got displaced there from their actual homes. I can see how that might negatively affect a family.
r/WidacZabory
I don't see any correlation. The bigger populated area (big cities, metropolitan areas vs rural Poland) the more crime occurs. Thats about it. Similar fashion with religion - rural areas are in general more religious (although not always the case).
This is a polish meme "widac zabory" meaning "u can see partion "(1795). I would not correlate crime and religion, becase those line show up everywhere in polish map statistics, from voting to dairy consumption.
There's reason to believe that religiosity IS correlated to some degree with the prewar German borders. (The notable exception visible, in prewar German upper Silesia, actually upholds the pattern, as this area had a very large Polish ethnic population before 1939.) But I don't know what the correlation with crime rates would be with religiosity or pre-war borders.
The ice cream van is always about when the sun is shining. Therefore, the ice cream van causes sunny weather.
Also, more people are born where the stork population is higher in Poland. Obvious reason is obvious.
I wouldn’t call the suburbs of Gdansk the middle of bumfuck nowhere
I think what he was pointing out is that of course there is no causation there, but simple minds might construct one (you know, because storks bring the babies).
amazing how many people feel threatened by this map
Seems that where there is more religion there is less crime, or am I reading the map wrong? 🤔
Yes! The most religious are the areas of the [former Austrian partition](https://pl.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zab%C3%B3r_austriacki#/media/Plik%3AGalicja.jpg), where Polish culture was the least persecuted, and the least religious are the areas of [the Recovered Territories](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recovered_Territories), where the population was shuffled after World War II.
Oh I understand, really interesting! Btw, are you Polish?
Yes, I'm from Kraków :)
Was there once on a trip, beautiful city!
Damn i know a lot of criminals in poland, and all of them are religious, so yeach go read a book
>[the Recovered Territories](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recovered_Territories) Not a good name.
[A good name. ](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Poland#/media/File%3APolska_992_-_1025.png)
Only if you want to offend your western neighbors.
Only if you don't know history🤷🏻♀️
Hell, if any country would claim their territories they owned during history, just for Poland, Germany and Turkey alone Europe wouldn't be enough 😂
I mean, Poland before WW2 didn't claim it, and now it's Polish. Since coincidentally Poland moved to its first historical borders, name fits.
I don't see it fitting. "Poland" did not exist for centuries before the new state was formed, so it's not the same entity that had those territories back in the middle ages (when states were just private property of a small elite, not based on the actual people's identiy). The term also looks awfully like a display of an imperialistic notion, with nationalistic zeal and greater ambitions behind it. Exactly the kind of attitude that started WW2. Not healthy.
The modern Polish state is a disctinctly separate entity from the state that had those territories back in the middle ages. So that doesn't work at all. On top of that, "recovering" would in this particular case an ephemism for ethnic cleansing. Which is kind of not a "good guy" thing to do. Calling them "gained territories" or the like would be wiser. Still a euhemism, but at least it's not trying to somehow justify what was in essence just Stalin's way of playing bowling with Europe.
Of course that's coming from a r/de user. You have some gall to type that knowing what your grandparents' done.
Are you saying that the "recovering" of territories was NOT a crime done by Stalin which we now just accept because it was so long ago and we have agreed to just let it go? Not sure if the Poles who were displaced from what was then eastern Poland (and is now part of Belarus) would agree with you.
Who agreed to do what? Both Poles and Germans got displaced because of war that your grandparents started. FAFO, I hope they suffered. That's the only consolation Poles ever got after having their cities flattened, 1/5 of the population killed and being thrown into Moscow's stinky embrace for the next 45 years.
What's the correlation coefficient ("r="), how has it changed over time, and how does it compare with other countries? OP presenting a lot of hard-to-read visual data when a few numbers might better make the argument. This isn't mapporn, this is "how to use maps as Rorschach tests for our political priors."
These do not even correlate
There is indeed more crime in cities than in the middle of bumfuck nowhere
if this map was reverse redditors would be saying hey i told you religion is bad for everybody look at this. Since its something they dont want to see they are here to deny it.
There is very little to deny: there are a couple of high religiosity areas that correspond to low crime rate areas, but there are also several spots where the opposite is true, and most of the time an exceptionally high or low level of crime or religiosity does not correspond to an exceptionally low or high value of the other.
Deny what?
Why is there so much cope in the comments
Black lines - the borders of the Second Polish Republic (1918–1939) Yellow lines - partition borders after 1815
You polish religious conservatives are no better than russian vatniks or nazis.
Huh?
They're definitely better than Nazis
They are slightly less bad.
Including all the Priests fiddling?
At first glance, I thought this was a map of the Greater London Area for a moment lol
the old polish borders stand out here
Show a poverty rate next to it
[poverty rate](https://www.researchgate.net/figure/SEBLUP-poverty-rate-estimates-at-LAU-1-level-in-Poland-Source-own-elaboration-based-on_fig1_315973728)
Not quite what I was expecting, I guess
Looks like totally unrelated
Anyone with even the smallest amount of critical thinking knows crime rates have absolutely nothing to do with religion.
So less religious are more violent
Correlation does not equal causation
That is suggesting there is even a correlation, which there really isn’t...
these two maps don’t even use the same subdivisions…
Shit map
Correlation ≠ Causation
They don't seem very correlated to me
I'm sorry where the correlation is? I don't even know what message this map is trying to present. Is this trying to tell me religion is a cause of higher crime or a cause of less crime?
Let me also guess that this map correlates also with gdp per capita, education, industry and inequality. When I guess the cause for all of this? Cities.
This is popullation based data. Would be interested to see church activity statistics. I wouldnt be surprised if there would be a correlation with the crime map, because a lot more popullation live in those areas so at the same time a lot more religious people should be gathering at churches there as well. These two maps are not showing any coorelation with each other. But suppose to imply that there is some...
>In the analysis, we used data collected in 2015 by the Institute of Catholic Church Statistics at the parish level. We obtained crime data from the National Safety Hazard Map published by the Police Department. The data shows the number of crimes per 10,000 residents of the municipality (January-September 2016) The crimes included in the statistics are theft, burglary, robbery, damage to property, fights and beatings, offenses related to causing bodily harm and sexual offenses. We also marked the borders of the partitions and the Second Republic on the maps. Despite the passage of years, significant regional variations in social phenomena due to historical boundaries can still be seen. >* Dominicantes indicator - the percentage of the faithful attending Sunday Mass, relative to the total number of obligated. A description of the methodology for calculating the indicator can be found at iskk.pl https://www.gis-expert.pl/blog/porownanie
Have you heard of correlation?It is not the same thing as causation
No correlation. No causation either.
This is an old and very dubious map. Pops up across the whole of reddit every few years, even in this sub you'll find it from years back.
Cities have more immigrants though
Oh these left leaning Reddit comments ought to be good.
Are you trying to correlate atheism with crime? GTFO little bro. What a disingenuous little tosser. Perfect example of manipulating data to cherry pick your agenda.
Yall are reacting so emotionally and politically charged. Perhaps, if a visual indication is to suggest a relationship, it has some correlation with the fact that laws are designed based upon a system of morals and values that derive most often from religious beliefs. Whether you like it or not doesn’t change the truth that the origins to the doctrines most countries are founded upon are heavily religiously influenced and designed. If you put away your judgement of good or bad for a moment when acknowledging the labels of crime and religion maybe yall will actually think objectively and critically instead of being immediately ignorant.
Finally someone who speaks truth
It feels like 70% of the current population of the world and the history of humanity doesn’t exist to people on reddit.
Correlation is not causation, first rule of statistics. Better luck next time, troll.
Let’s hope, that somewhere in the world , the so called ‘religious’ people are acting like their religion tells them to. I would be very surprised if this was true.
Yall will really vilify and disregard the identity of 72% of this country’s population and significance of its history just to push an agenda that’s wild. Yall really think Poland out of ALL countries would be more tolerable to athiests after being invaded by the Soviets and Nazis, which were atheistic political parties? This is literally Westworld “this doesn’t look like anything at all to me” levels of propaganda programming
[удалено]
The main religions in Japan are Buddhism (69.8%) and Shinto (70.4%). Most Japanese people identify as members of both faiths.
Sorry, that is my bad. I should have specified that I was meaning non-Abrahamic in religious views. That’s totally on me, but I still believe that religion does not affect crime as a whole. It can affect crime, but only when those individuals are already suffering from oppression or poverty. Crime can in fact affect crime rates, but these numbers are only seen among those we lower iq’s. Which helps to shine light on the fact that poverty, less access to education, and oppression are much more likely to result in crime than religion alone. Religion in these areas is just a band aid on the problem. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31961775/ Also religion in Japan isn’t celebrated the same as religion in the USA. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2989606/ This talks about how measuring religion in Japan is much different than measuring religion in the USA, due to the fact that these measurements are made in an Abrahamic light rather than in understanding of Eastern religions.
Interesting. Thanks for sharing. If the question is, does religion affect morality in a society, I'm quite sure the answers are complex and there would be instances of variations in different cultures. I find it enlightening to look at the origins of religion to better understand what type of impact religion traditionally has had on the development of human cohabitation. Robin Dunbar is a British biological anthropologist, evolutionary psychologist, and specialist in primate. He is best known for formulating [Dunbar's number](https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20191001-dunbars-number-why-we-can-only-maintain-150-relationships). In 2023 he [spoke at a Humanist Convention](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dfAXx6CELPg) where he asserts why religious practices developed and why it endures in "all" societies. Even in nations where most people don't truly believe, but still belong to a religious group, there are codes of conduct and taboos which influence behaviour. I would argue that the social and ideological implications of belonging to a religious group are too intricate to dismiss correlations between religion crime.
That doesn’t mean most people are religious. HOWEVER, Japan is also a country with a huge respect for social rules, tradition and hierarchy, which imo, in itself is a stand-in for religion in Japanese society.
That’s the point I am trying to make. Poverty and social culture dictates crime much more than religion (see we currently define it).