Inductivist

Do lower status whites enjoy nature? GSS respondents were asked if they've gone camping in the past year. Based on occupational prestige scores, I constructed 4 classes: lower, working, middle, and upper.

Percent who camp

Lower 41.6 (n = 269)
Working 46.5 (n = 376)
Middle 46.6 (n = 397)
Upper 53.3 (n = 260)

The share goes up a little among higher classes, but the differences are not statistically significant. Enjoying nature is common at all social levels.

While we're focusing on class, let's look at the belief among whites that the Bible is inerrant. In an earlier post, I looked at differences by education, but occupational prestige is a more direct measure of social class. I'm highly educated but far from upper class.


Percent who believe Bible is inerrant

Lower 37.8 (n = 1,345)
Working 34.0 (n = 1,725)
Middle 25.1 (n = 1,318)
Upper 17.9 (n = 751)

The lower and working classes are not significantly different, but all other comparisons are. The claim that Biblical fundamentalism is an middle- or upper-class movement is simply incorrect.

Half Sigma has observed that black folks don't enjoy nature. The General Social Survey asked Americans if they've gone camping in the past 12 months. Here are the percentages who answered yes by ethnic group:


Percent who camped in past year

Norwegian 66.7*
Dutch 52.9
Irish 52.4
Mexican 50.0
German 50.4
English/Welsh 46.7
Polish 46.2
Scottish 46.0
Italian 45.8
Russian 44.0
Jewish 40.6
Swedish 37.5
American Indian 13.3**
Blacks 10.7**

*significantly above average
**significantly below average


Blacks are at the bottom of the list. American Indians are next which is pretty ironic. Perhaps sleeping in a teepee isn't camping, it's home. 

Half Sigma also claims that working-class whites love nature. I think he's right. (My blue-collar parents practically live in the wild.) We'll look at the data next.

GSS respondents were asked whether they believed that: 1) nature is sacred because it was created by God; 2) nature is sacred in itself; or 3) nature is important, but not sacred (sample size = 3,505). Of the people who "know that God exists", 54 percent gave answer 1; 18 percent gave answer 2; and 28 percent answered number 3. In other words, most believers think nature is sacred because it is God's creation.

But here's the weird part: 13 percent of the 92 surveyed atheists said that nature is sacred because it was created by God. (Twenty-seven percent answered 2, and 60 percent answered 3). "Atheist" is defined as "not believing in God." Unless the 12 atheists who gave 1 for an answer are retarded (or perhaps there was some other type of miscommunication) they mean something else by "doesn't believe in God." I can imagine people interpreting the statement to mean "I don't follow or agree with God."

According to the GSS, only 2.6  percent of Americans say they do not believe in God. It might be the case that fewer actually do not believe in the existence of God.  

It's interesting too that atheists are less likely to give nature an elevated status. Sixty percent of them say that nature is important but not sacred, compared to 28 percent of believers. Perhaps a more secular term like "cherished" would have elicited more affirmative responses; perhaps atheists are less likely to give anything a really elevated value--I don't know.