06 Sep 12
Originally posted by FMFPerhaps and now your evidence in the case of other denominations.
Perhaps Jehovah's Witnesses as a group earn less because they enter higher education in far less numbers proportional to most other groups because they are, for all intents and purposes, counselled not to.
06 Sep 12
Originally posted by robbie carrobieIt was a question about what you said. I don't need "evidence" to ask you to explain how you can extrapolate a deduction about "materialism" from stats about "wealth" in the light of you having declared that "materialism is not dependent upon wealth".
your evidence please.
06 Sep 12
bump for FMF,
why can't it also be applied, for example, to the 13% of Evangelicals or the 16% of Mormons or the 19% of Catholics etc. etc. who also earn over $100,000 a year?
Indeed, why cant it, what evidence do you have that it is also applied in this case to
other denominations.
06 Sep 12
Originally posted by robbie carrobieWhich of the denominations cited in the OP actively discourage their congregation from going into higher education apart from the Jehovah's Witnesses? None as far as I am aware. I am right about Jehovah's Witnesses counselling its members against going on to higher education, right?
your evidence please for the other denominations,
06 Sep 12
1 edit
Originally posted by FMFif you have no evidence then we are free to dismiss any assertions of why cant it be
It was a question about what you said. I don't need "evidence" to ask you to explain how you can extrapolate a deduction about "materialism" from stats about "wealth" in the light of you having declared that "materialism is not dependent upon wealth".
applied to other denominations and until you do provide evidence of it being applied to
other denominations I will continue to assert, without contradiction, that the disparity
exists because Jehovahs witnesses are actively counselled to lead a simple life, for
which i have much evidence. You s far in the case of other denominations have provided nothing. No surprise.
06 Sep 12
Originally posted by FMFIndeed, the matter of education is a personal decision, we counsel or advise people to find something vocational and to take part time work if possible, this does not rule out higher education, but only education which may be necessary to sustain a ministry, after the example of the apostle Paul, who despite having a higher education, worked part time as a tent maker.
Which of the denominations cited in the OP actively discourage their congregation from going into higher education apart from the Jehovah's Witnesses? None as far as I am aware. I am right about Jehovah's Witnesses counselling its members against going on to higher education, right?
06 Sep 12
Originally posted by robbie carrobieIt is you who is not applying your pronouncements to the other denominations. You looked at the data about "wealth" in the OP and declared that they show that Jehovah's Witnesses are the least "materialistic". But then, when pressed about the "wealth" of the 9% of the JWs who earn over $100,000, you also declared that "materialism is not dependent upon wealth". If this is true, then the data about "wealth" in the OP do NOT show that Jehovah's Witnesses are the least "materialistic". You can't have it both ways.
Indeed, why cant it, what evidence do you have that it is also applied in this case to
other denominations.
06 Sep 12
1 edit
Originally posted by FMFIt was you who asserted that it may be valid in the case of other denominations,
It is you who is not applying your pronouncements to the other denominations. You looked at the data about "wealth" in the OP and declared that they show that Jehovah's Witnesses are the least "materialistic". But then, when pressed about the "wealth" of the 9% of the JWs who earn over $100,000, you also declared that "materialism is not dependent upon wealth". t Jehovah's Witnesses are the least "materialistic". You can't have it both ways.
evidence, nil. Here are your words, again,
why can't it also be applied, for example, to the 13% of Evangelicals or the 16% of Mormons or the 19% of Catholics etc. etc. who also earn over $100,000 a year?
06 Sep 12
Originally posted by robbie carrobieWell if Jehovah's Witnesses are counselled not to go into higher education then them adhering to this counsel could well be an explanation for their lower proportion of people earning the higher salaries mentioned in the OP.
Indeed, the matter of education is a personal decision, we counsel or advise people to find something vocational and to take part time work if possible, this does not rule out higher education, but only education which may be necessary to sustain a ministry, after the example of the apostle Paul, who despite having a higher education, worked part time as a tent maker.
06 Sep 12
Originally posted by FMFagain, you have provided no evidence , what are we supposed to do, just believe you because you say so.
Well if Jehovah's Witnesses are counselled not to go into higher education then them adhering to this counsel could well be an explanation for their lower proportion of people earning the higher salaries mentioned in the OP.
06 Sep 12
Originally posted by robbie carrobieBut the stats in the OP are about "wealth" and not "materialism", as you acknowledged when you said "materialism is not dependent upon wealth". So why and how are you extrapolating an assertion about "materialism" from the stats in the OP? It requires you to contradict yourself when you do so.
...I will continue to assert, without contradiction, that the disparity
exists because Jehovahs witnesses are actively counselled to lead a simple life, for which i have much evidence.
06 Sep 12
Originally posted by robbie carrobieIs it your contention that people who go into higher education are not more likely to earn the higher salaries mentioned in the OP than those who don't?
again, you have provided no evidence , what are we supposed to do, just believe you because you say so.
06 Sep 12
Originally posted by FMFIn the case of Jehovah witnesses yes, as for the other denominators, I cannot say and until you provide evidence to the contrary, then there is no contradiction for it was not intended to be applied to any other denomination, until there is evidence to the contrary, too bad for you and tour inane attempts to drum up some silly arguments from nothingness, which is your want and reminiscent of your posting style, yawn.
But the stats in the OP are about "wealth" and not "materialism", as you acknowledged when you said "materialism is not dependent upon wealth". So why and how are you extrapolating an assertion about "materialism" from the stats in the OP? It requires you to contradict yourself when you do so.