Pew report on Muslim world paints a distressing picture

The Pew Research Center just issued a report on Islamic beliefs: “The World’s Muslims: Religion, Politics and Society” (a one page summary here).  The researchers surveyed over 38,000 people in one-on-one interviews in 39 countries—all countries having more than 10 million Muslims.  Unfortunately, they left out Saudi Arabia and Iran, where, they note, “political sensitivities or security concerns prevented opinion research among Muslims.”  This alone suggests that including those countries would have given the data an even more extremist slant than they had.  Here’s where Pew surveyed:


For a quick overview, read the executive summary at the second link above; I suppose those who are both pro- and anti-Islam will find succor in that summary.  For example, here’s how the countries rank in how their inhabitants see the compatibility of science and Islam:
Picture 1
and this may reassure those people who argue that support for terrorism is not a majority Muslim view (I’ve never maintained that, by the way, only that supporters of terrorism aren’t a tiny fraction of Muslims):
Picture 1
(One could, however, question whether 13-40% is a “tiny minority” of extremists.) Overall, 8% of Muslims interviewed said that suicide bombing iseither often justified or sometimes justified to defend Islam, with numbers near 40% is Afghanistan and Palestine.
On the other hand, much of the data are like this, and not heartening at all:
Stoning, noted as proportion of those (see above graph) claiming that sharia should be “the law of the land”:
That’s scary in view of the high proportion of Muslims that think sharia should be the law. Equally scary are the data on how to treat  apostasy:
The morality of homosexuality, from among all Muslims surveyed:
The place of women (usually to STFU):
EqualityRemember again that these data exclude Saudi Arabia and Iran. There’s little doubt that adding those nations would increase the oppressiveness factor in these data.
But go and see the survey yourself, as the pdf is free, and those who see Islam as no worse than other faiths will be able to find something to support that view.
One things worries me about these results, and it’s not because I’m determined to find Islam as an pernicious faith (that’s already known). It’s that these data were obtained by face-to-face interviews rather than anonymous written questionnaires, and I suspect that people want to appear less extreme when they’re being asked to answer verbally.  What makes me think this is the disparity in the results of the Pew survey on the evolution-friendliness of Muslims with those of a previous survey conducted by written response.  Here’s the results from this Pew survey, which, frankly, surprised me:
Compare these figures with those published in 2008 by Salman Hadeed (Bracing for Islamic creationism. Science 322:1637 – 1638), with data taken from a 2007 study of Riaz Hassan (On being religious: patterns of religious commitment in Muslim societies. The Muslim World 97:437-478). The disparity is striking.  The Pew Survey shows 30% of Pakistani Muslims accepting evolution (and 38% creationists), while the Hassan survey shows only half that degree of evolution acceptance.  Pew shows that 37% of Malaysian Muslims are down with evolution; the Hassan survey’s figure is about 12%.
Hameed survey
The difference? Well, it could be how the questions were framed, but given the historically high resistance of Muslims to evolution, I suspect it reflects a difference between verbal interviews (Pew) and written questionnaires (Hassan). Indeed, Hassan’s survey concentrated on the Muslim elite. Hassan notes in his Appendix:
After considerable consultation with local colleagues, it was concluded that the only way to capture the elite dimension was to focus on highly educated groups occupying professional, economic, social, religious, cultural and bureaucratic positions in the mainstream social structures of their respective societies. The sample in each country was therefore stratified by those who were active in major legal religious organizations and highly educated respondents who were actively involved in professional, business, bureaucratic and cultural organizations. About 30 percent of each sample was chosen from the general public. In each group, between 20 and 45 percent of the respondents were women.
I’m not nearly as concerned with the effects of Islam on creationism as I am on other things, like oppression of women, enforcement of despotic sexual mores and other behaviors, and pervasive prosyletizing. The disparity in the evolution data makes me wonder if the other data given by Pew are really a good overview of Muslim belief.   (Do note that other surveys of Muslims show more extreme opinions than does Pew).
I’m also aware that these data aren’t compared to those of other faiths, but I doubt that as many Quakers or Catholics would like to see their religious dictates become law of the land, or would favor stoning for adultery or death for leaving the faith (Catholics just excommunicate you).
But I’ll leave it to you to read and interpret the data for yourselves.
h/t: Tona


  1. brianbuchbinder
    Posted May 8, 2013 at 8:55 am | Permalink

    Those Quakers might very much like to see their ‘dictates’ become law. “What’s so great about peace, love and understanding” anyway?

    • Posted May 8, 2013 at 7:36 pm | Permalink

      Quakers don’t have dictates. They have advices. Rather like the FSM’s “I’d rather you didn’ts”

  2. Mark
    Posted May 8, 2013 at 9:04 am | Permalink

    That level of ignorance, misogyny and homophobia is scary…I won’t be holidaying in any of thise countries…

    • Posted May 8, 2013 at 11:36 am | Permalink

      Oh… My wife and I will be holidaying in Egypt later this year…


      • Mark
        Posted May 8, 2013 at 7:39 pm | Permalink

        I’m gay and I make a point of not going to places that persecute gay and trans men and women…Egypt is on my list of places not to go…

  3. Dominic
    Posted May 8, 2013 at 9:07 am | Permalink

    Fascinating – particularly the anti-homsexuality views, when we heard today on the BBC about male rape being used as an instrument of torture & abuse in Iranian prisons…

    • notsont
      Posted May 8, 2013 at 12:02 pm | Permalink

      I read somewhere that in many muslim countries sexual acts between men aren’t really considered “homosexual” and in many cases sex with young boys is favored over sex with “icky” women. I did not quite grasp how they make the distinction between having sex with a man and being gay, but somehow they do make that distinction.

      • jay
        Posted May 8, 2013 at 4:04 pm | Permalink

        The ancient Greeks had a view like this.

        • Posted May 8, 2013 at 7:41 pm | Permalink

          “It’s not gay when you do the penetrating.”

          • muuh-gnu
            Posted May 8, 2013 at 11:53 pm | Permalink

            As far as I understand, they consider it to be gay only if the male assumes the role of the female, voluntarily or involuntarily. (Remember, for example, the recent anti-gay legislation where gays have been called “female-like creatures” by Putin’s goverment.)

            The male rapist also is not considered gay if he doesnt sexually enjoy the raping, if the rape is purely functional as a demonstration of power or punishment.

            On the other hand, _being raped_ is degrading for the raped male since it makes him look weak, more feminine and thus less worth in the eyes of other males observing the rape. Since in such male-dominated societies females have a perceived lower value than males, “being fucked like a woman” is the ultimate demotion a male can experience.

  4. Barry
    Posted May 8, 2013 at 9:27 am | Permalink


    It is standard acceptable methodology to conduct face-to-face interviews in countries where RDD technology is non-existent and there are no other ways to randomize a sample. All of the Gallup polls in Muslim countries deploy face-to-face interviews. You are absolutely right to point out that these tend to be less reliable because interviewer selection bias is still very much a factor even after weighting for the standard demographic factors. Employing highly trained and skilled interviewers can reduce some of the variance but it’s the best methodology given the circumstances. In truth, we don’t really know whether the Pew data is skewed or whether other data is skewed.

    • Posted May 8, 2013 at 10:01 am | Permalink

      Thanks for this. Granted, face-to-face interviews may be standard, but the second data show that the method is neither ubiquitous nor absolutely necessary. If questionnaires are more accurate (and, after all, that’s the aim), then they should try to overcome the difficulties. I’d suspect that questionnaires would indeed be more accurate, because people want to be “likable” in person, but I don’t know the sociology literature, nor how to independently assess peoples’ “true” opinions.

      I have no idea how Pew chose the subjects to be interviewed, or who interviewed them, and of course there’s the problem of the other survey that they asked only “elite” Muslims, whom, I suspect, are more liberal than their less elite countrymen.

      Regardless, I find even the Pew data disturbing.

      • Sunny
        Posted May 8, 2013 at 11:06 am | Permalink

        Are there surveys of Muslims living in the West on questions similar to the one in the Pew Survey?

        • Barry
          Posted May 9, 2013 at 6:33 am | Permalink

          Sunny – check the Gallup website. They have rich data on American Muslims.

      • Occam
        Posted May 8, 2013 at 11:42 am | Permalink

        Jerry, I suspect it may be a little more complex than that.
        Individual conformity to group normative pressure tends to be expressed differently in public and private contexts. Privacy is almost non-existent in some quarters.
        Depending on the degree and nature of social and cultural pressure, even an anonymous interview conducted under guarantees of strict confidentiality may be subjectively interpreted as a public act, allowing little room for dissent from the “party line”. Hence, a more orthodox stance may be prefered.

        This may also vary greatly between countries, regions, and social groups.

        • Cremnomaniac
          Posted May 8, 2013 at 9:51 pm | Permalink

          I was going to make the same point. The underlying assumption is that being seen as “less extreme” is preferable. Can we say that is a common social ethic for so many Islamic countries? I’m not so sure. I also think it belies JC’s own assumptions about social ethics, in which less extreme is better (which i agree). However, it does have the effect of skewing interpretation of the differences in reports.

          The principle effect that I would be concerned with is social desirability bias. This is the result of persons reporting in way that they believe is favored by others. There only needs to be a hint of public exposure to see the effect. It can be over reporting “good” behavior or under reporting “bad”. Again, this is based in social ethics. I will add that this is a bigger problem with questionnaires, so I would not completely agree that questionnaires are more accurate here.

          I would assume that the PEW has been doing it long enough to understand the interview bias and correct for it. Beyond that I don’t think we have sufficient information to draw any conclusions about skew in the results.
          I do agree that the results reflect some real ugliness with Islam whichever way you slice it. That is the bottom line.

          • Occam
            Posted May 9, 2013 at 3:10 am | Permalink

            If Pew knows how to measure and correct for this kind of bias, wouldn’t it be nice if we were told?

            And I agree with your bottom line. Allow me to put it more forcefully: I don’t care if someone says that I deserve to be blown up or stoned out of deep conviction or just out of social conformism. The public effect of this kind of “+1” is lethal, either way.

      • Barry
        Posted May 9, 2013 at 6:32 am | Permalink

        Two additional points. On the issue of questionnaires, these tend to be even less reliable than face-to-face interviews because they require a level of knowledge about literacy in sample selection that is non-existent in countries with no formal education system or where measured levels of literacy are so low. returned questionnaires will exhibit a strong bias that is unlikely to accurately reflect opinion. The second point relates to the conduct of face-to-face interviews and whether these are carried out “in the street” or “in the home”. Just consider, for a moment, a stranger approaching a muslim woman in public with the intent of asking her questions. It is inconceivable. For this reason reputable pollsters conduct interviews in the home. However, this creates all kinds of localized pressures particularly on the responses of women.

        Polling in many areas of the world presents these challenges and the shifts in opinion on key issues are difficult to attribute to a trend as they could equally be more likely the result of methodological variance. The very best we can do is to draw inference from polls conducted by the same pollster with the same methodology and questions to the same populations in the same regions and cities over time. Even then, our conclusions can never be more than highly provisional.

  5. Paul S
    Posted May 8, 2013 at 10:20 am | Permalink

    I find it disturbing that you would need to ask if stoning was an acceptable punishment let alone that anyone would say yes.

    • Posted May 8, 2013 at 10:55 am | Permalink

      The most disturbing part is not the question, but that so many say yes.

  6. Diana MacPherson
    Posted May 8, 2013 at 10:55 am | Permalink

    I wonder how many women answered yes to obeying husbands. I suspect the answer would be no different from men but it would be interesting if there were anonymous surveys that identified only gender for this one.

    Indeed, I’d be curious about a gender split for each category.

    • Sunny
      Posted May 8, 2013 at 11:04 am | Permalink

      Perhaps their husbands told them not to answer the survey; and they obeyed :).

    • steve oberski
      Posted May 8, 2013 at 12:14 pm | Permalink

      From the survey:

      In some, but not all, countries Muslim
      women are more supportive of women’s
      rights than are Muslim men. For example,
      in 12 of the 23 countries where the
      question was asked, Muslim women voice
      greater support than Muslim men for a
      woman’s right to decide whether to wear a
      veil in public. In the remaining 11
      countries, opinions of women and men do
      not differ significantly on this question.
      Similarly, when it comes to the issue of
      equal inheritance for sons and daughters,
      Muslim women in nine countries are more
      likely than Muslim men to support it. But
      in the 14 other countries where the
      question was asked, the views of women
      and men are not significantly different.

      • Diana MacPherson
        Posted May 8, 2013 at 1:58 pm | Permalink

        Interesting….would still like to see this reflected graphically though instead of generalized.

  7. Diane G.
    Posted May 8, 2013 at 11:26 am | Permalink


  8. ForCarl
    Posted May 8, 2013 at 11:45 am | Permalink

    I have seen two articles on a liberal blog site excoriating Ayaan Hirsi Ali for her hard line on Islam as being proof she is a “tool” for the right wing in American politics. If anyone of these people read her book Infidel, they might get an understanding of her positions. After all, she lived within a world that exhibited all these disturbing survey results.

    • Diane G.
      Posted May 8, 2013 at 2:00 pm | Permalink

      Everyone should read Infidel.

    • Diana MacPherson
      Posted May 8, 2013 at 4:59 pm | Permalink

      Wow that’s pretty bold of them to criticize her. Infidel was a very enlightening book.

  9. Posted May 8, 2013 at 11:51 am | Permalink

    It’s amusing how many of those Muslim countries believe in ToE more strongly than Frist-World, Predominantly Christian America…

    From Wikipedia:

    Young Earth Creationism 31%
    Belief in God-guided evolution 32%
    Belief in evolution without God 22%

    It’s economics, Jerry, not religion. In fact, within economics it has to do with poverty and income gap differentials. The flatter the wealth distribution in a society, the less religion and what religion there is becomes more and more liberalized (less toxic as a focus).

    The US, it should be noted, is the most ‘religious’ first-world country. It’s also has the greatest wealth inequity and maladaptive social-safety-net.

    Start at Wikipedia and work yourself up. I damn well know you’re smart enough to understand the data and arguments and the 500 years history you’ll need to familiarize yourself with.

    But it shouldn’t take that long…

    • steve oberski
      Posted May 8, 2013 at 12:20 pm | Permalink

      Got it all figured out, don’t you ?

      “Uncertainty is an uncomfortable position. But certainty is an absurd one.” ― Voltaire

      • Ernest
        Posted May 12, 2013 at 12:50 pm | Permalink

        Its time for the educated in society to get off the Voltairesk god fence and make up their bloody minds.

        Still mulling over if the earth is flat? Need me to drive you to the Burgess Shale and show you life 520 million years ago? Still wringing your hands in hope that magic and superstition is real? God, Zeus, Ishtar, Bixia Yuanjin is pulling strings from on high?

        Just make up your mind. How much frigging evidence do you need? There could be a Brown Betty teapot in orbit around the sun between Earth and Mars, gosh I just don’t know?! It could be true? Maybe we shouldn’t have an opinion? Or maybe we bloodywell should for the betterment of science, civilization, politics and policy.

        If you want to live in the dark ages then just bloody get on with it so I can think less of you.

    • Torbjörn Larsson, OM
      Posted May 8, 2013 at 12:33 pm | Permalink

      First, this looks arrogant and ignorant. Coyne has recently published a paper in Evolution, “SCIENCE, RELIGION, AND SOCIETY: THE PROBLEM OF EVOLUTION IN AMERICA”, that already covers this:

      “Paul’s results are supported by Rees (2009), who found, in a survey of 67 nations, a highly significant positive correlation between income inequality, as measured by the Gini index, and religiosity, as measured by the frequency of prayer among citizens. Income inequality, while having a significant effect on its own, was also highly correlated with other indices of societal insecurity, including low life expectancy, high infant mortality, and high levels of homicide. Rees concluded that either high religiosity leads to higher income inequality, or, more plausibly, that income inequality is causal, promoting greater insecurity and hence deeper faith.”

      Maybe you should start with Coyne and work yourself up. I hope you’re smart enough to understand the data and arguments and the 50 years of Coyne history you’ll need to familiarize yourself with.

      Second, I think Rosling shows what Paul originally found, the GDP/capita is among the 2-3 factors that decide dysfunctionality as the insecurity which make you breed more children. Everything else alike GDP/capita is the simpler, likelier (most often found) mechanism.

      • Torbjörn Larsson, OM
        Posted May 8, 2013 at 12:41 pm | Permalink

        I forgot: My 2-3 main factors are Rosling’s 2, social medicine and GDP/capita, adding democracy as an implicit factor behind both. (I know China does well in high functionality/low religiosity, but it isn’t the dictatorship it used to be.) I usually list all 3 for simplicity.

        • Occam
          Posted May 8, 2013 at 2:38 pm | Permalink

          …it isn’t the dictatorship it used to be…

          My Chinese friends will be thrilled to learn it isn’t. They had this false impression for so long.

    • Gary W
      Posted May 8, 2013 at 12:41 pm | Permalink

      Your link refers to a correlation between religiosity and average wealth (GDP per capita). Not between religiosity and inequality of wealth. Not the same thing.

      In the U.S. and Europe, income and wealth inequality have increased over the past few decades, but religiosity has declined. This contradicts your assertion.

    • Roo
      Posted May 8, 2013 at 1:43 pm | Permalink

      You know, this argument has been the source of much handwringing for me. When it comes to various factors (political, economic, historical, etc.) how can we ever know what is cause and what is effect in terms of religion? I’ve finally resolved this by saying that I can agree with most atheists about outcomes (fundamentalist religion in many places) and goals (increased secularization) even if I disagree on root causes regarding why some areas are more secular than others. Granted, this doesn’t resolve everything. If someone felt extremely convinced that religion is 100% the cause (and 0%) the effect of a dysfunctional society, and wanted to spend 100% of resources on secular education vs. improved health, education, safety, quality of life, etc, I would have a problem with that (and I think, really, that is the logical outcome if you see religion fully as the cause and not the effect.) I tend to think more secular societies do, certainly, have fewer religion based problems – but what accounts for them accepting secular ideas in the first place, when other countries have regressed into more fundamentalist ideologies? I suspect an interplay of beliefs (how harsh, for example, is the punishment for rejecting one doctrine vs another) and external circumstances like those I mentioned above.

    • jay
      Posted May 8, 2013 at 4:19 pm | Permalink

      The obsession with Gini indexes may itself be an artifact. There has been some research into WEIRD (Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich, and Democratic) and their differences with the rest of the world, One thing that stands out in game testing is this group is more likely to want to lower everyone’s wealth to bring down the ‘top dog’ than other cultures. It seems others were much less concerned about this.

      Personally I don’t really care how much money Bill Gates has relative to me, I’m more concerned with taking advantage of my own opportunities.

  10. dieter
    Posted May 8, 2013 at 11:51 am | Permalink

    “Humans evolved over time” is a meaningless statement, if we can’t assume familiarity with darwinism.

    Evolution literally means “change over time”. That could be lamarckian change, change in culture, society, fashion, etc. And it does not imply speciation at all.

  11. Torbjörn Larsson, OM
    Posted May 8, 2013 at 11:58 am | Permalink

    “Suicide Bombing” “Rarely/never justified”!?

    I spy a house fl… an accommodationist Pew interview yet again. As I was very impressed by Fairchild’s RDFRS piece (as well as Rizvi’s Puffho pieceho), I’ll quote:

    “To warrant the term “moderate” Muslims, particularly community leaders, must, in partnership with liberals, do the following:

    – publicly and vehemently condemn all those who accept any form of violence in response to apostasy – not merely condemn the violence itself – condemn those who say it is an acceptable action by others.
    – publicly and vehemently condemn any acceptance of violence in response to the satirizing of Islam or of Muhammad.
    – publicly and vehemently condemn any acceptance of violence in furtherance of the political aims of Islam.
    – state with vehemence that the Muslim community is failing to meet its moral obligations if 5% or more of Muslims in polling accept violence in the name of Islam. Muslim leaders who call themselves moderate must publicly condemn those Muslims who disagree with meeting this standard.

    Only the Muslims who embrace these steps can truly call themselves moderate.”

    If Pew considers itself moderate in all ways religious and secular, it has to redefine the bins accordingly. No fudging the stats!

  12. Sastra
    Posted May 8, 2013 at 12:10 pm | Permalink

    From the report:

    Most Muslims do not believe there is an inherent tension between religion and science.

    I think the statistics on this question don’t really get to the heart of the real question, though, since my guess is that most Muslims believe in popular pseudoscientific apologetics: modern science is only now catching up to the amazing truths revealed in the Quran. Plus, scientists are discovering that materialism and naturalism are false. Souls exist. Scientific fact. Yup. Islam is scientific.

    If your understanding of science is poor — both its methods and its conclusions — then no, you will not think there is any tension between religion and science. The people who sense a tension which needs to be dismissed through elaborate apologetics built on ‘different categories’ are usually pretty well up in where our discoveries have been leading.

    • Diana MacPherson
      Posted May 8, 2013 at 2:03 pm | Permalink

      I thought similar. Most likely there is no conflict because science is dismissed in favour of whatever the holy book says.

      It can be a good sign when there is conflict sometimes because at least agitation can lead to change.

  13. Filippo
    Posted May 8, 2013 at 4:51 pm | Permalink

    “Unfortunately, they left out Saudi Arabia and Iran, where, they note, “political sensitivities or security concerns prevented opinion research among Muslims.”

    I wonder if the “security concerns” include an ongoing effort to prevent the Saudi populace from making a late entry into “The Arab Spring.”

    U.S. congressional conservatives are making noises about doing something about Syria, and constantly bloviate about Iran, yet seemingly aren’t inclined to similarly bloviate about liberating Saudis – especially women.

    Possibly Iran would not be a present problem had the U.S. had the sense to leave Mossedegh (sp.?) alone in 1953.

    Have just finished watching the end of “Jeopardy,” a collegiate episode, including an MIT student. The “Final Jeopardy” question regarded “Famous Englishmen,” specifically the apology extended by the Church of England to this Englishman in 2009, the bicentennial of his birth.

    The answers given: Newton, More, Wilde.

  14. Timothy Hughbanks
    Posted May 8, 2013 at 5:21 pm | Permalink

    I wonder how many American Christian nutbags would say that bombing of abortion clinics or killing of doctors who perform abortions is justified.

    • Gary W
      Posted May 8, 2013 at 5:55 pm | Permalink

      Number of people murdered in 9/11 attacks: 2,996

      Number of people murdered in all attacks on U.S. abortion clinics and abortion providers combined: 8

      Source: Wikipedia

      • Nick Evans
        Posted May 10, 2013 at 9:04 am | Permalink

        Indeed. A closer comparison might be the number who consider drone strikes to be acceptable.

  15. LN
    Posted May 8, 2013 at 7:03 pm | Permalink

    At least we don’t have to worry about the price of t-shirts going up in the future.

    (Yes, that was in poor taste.)

    Actually, I’m a half glass full person, 37% of Malaysians believe humans evolved over time. That’s pretty good.

    (Even if 62% believe in the death penalty for leaving Islam, and 60% believe in stoning for adultery.)

  16. MikeN
    Posted May 8, 2013 at 8:30 pm | Permalink

    As far as I am aware, belief in evolution in general is not considered to be opposed by any accepted Muslim teachings. The line is drawn at human beings, who are said to be specially created

  17. Dela
    Posted May 9, 2013 at 12:48 am | Permalink

    Islamic culture is scary and confused .. their views are just hypocritical ..

  18. Posted May 9, 2013 at 6:52 am | Permalink

    The disparity in the evolution data makes me wonder if the other data given by Pew are really a good overview of Muslim belief. (Do note that other surveys of Muslims show more extreme opinions than does Pew).

    Heck, Pew shows more extreme opinions than Pew.

    In 2004 Pew survey, 41% of Pakistani Muslims felt suicide bombing was “Often/sometimes justified”.

    Go here:


    and scroll through the yearly data, and ask yourself whether we should give credence to this data and how it is presented. Pew appears to have at least a small agenda to present things as “improving” in the Muslim world.

    Ask whether we are to believe that a near absolute majority of Pakistani Muslims supported suicide bombing in 2004, and only 5% of them support it a few years later. What are the implications of that as regards the reliability of the polling, or, more ominously, whether attitudes about suicide bombing are rightfully so capricious in Muslim populations.

    And Pew, it seems, is the best data we got!

  19. Me
    Posted May 9, 2013 at 7:12 am | Permalink

    Fascinating data…Wow! is all i can say.

  20. Steve
    Posted May 11, 2013 at 12:21 am | Permalink

    Interesting but 2 things stand out-
    Why wasnt India included in the study? Considering that other south east asian countries were included the exclusion of India is a little surprising. Also India has the third largest Muslim population ( after Indonesia and Pakistan)
    What were the socioeconomic and educational backgrounds of those interviewed

    • Diane G.
      Posted May 11, 2013 at 10:18 am | Permalink

      I was able to find a lot of information at the report itself regarding demographic constraints, interviewing protocols, etc., but that was the first day this was posted, the appendices themselves are lengthy, and my memory’s not that sharp.

      Why don’t you try looking at the report itself (linked to above) to see if your questions are addressed there?

      • Steve
        Posted May 11, 2013 at 10:55 am | Permalink

        Yeah i did go through that (although i confess a little hurriedly). I didnt find any stats on education or socioeconomic status (i will go through more carefully when i have the time).
        As for the India question, they say that because of “political sensitivities or security concern” they didnt interview Muslims here.I really dont understand what they mean by that.

        • Diane G.
          Posted May 11, 2013 at 10:59 am | Permalink

          Sorry, didn’t think you’d looked–I shouldn’t jump to conclusions!

          Yes, I thought the same thing about “political sensitivities” etc.; which of course seem to intrude in just the places that might be most interesting to survey.

          But considering the substantial effort involved, I guess we have to be grateful for all they did get.

  21. Posted May 11, 2013 at 11:51 pm | Permalink

    Oh crap I thought the world was getting wiser!It seems we are still in 1680! Imagine giving Cromwell 10 Tanks, Caligula 100 flame throwers,Well the tallinuts have them. So much for 50 years of UN! Lets not even think of Muggaby. It all goes to show there aint no god …it could not be this stupid!(could it?)

  22. Socrates
    Posted May 12, 2013 at 11:27 am | Permalink

    “One things worries me about these results, and it’s not because I’m determined to find Islam as an pernicious faith (that’s already known). It’s that these data were obtained by face-to-face interviews rather than anonymous written questionnaires, and I suspect that people want to appear less extreme when they’re being asked to answer verbally.”

    In face to face interviews the responded is more likely to give what they think is the socially acceptable response than they might otherwise (assuming they are not aware that the beliefs of the interviewer may differ from their societal norms). So you might expect the results to be more oppressive in regions where there is a more and less where there is a less homogeneous population


4 Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. […] World’s Muslims: Religion, Politics and Society is the title of a new research study published by the Pew Research Center  – and it makes for grim […]

  2. […] World’s Muslims: Religion, Politics and Society is the title of a new research study published by the Pew Research Center  – and it makes for grim […]

  3. […] appropriated from a report recently released by the Pew Foundation (summary) which I, again, found via WEIT. The report consists of the results of 38 000 interviews with Muslims in 39 countries. Although […]

  4. […] and yet they may harbor views we would be hard put to categorize as “moderate.” A recent Pew survey of global Muslim attitudes yielded worrisome results, with distinct majorities in many Islamic […]

%d bloggers like this: