I think that generally speaking, access to knowledge is dangerous to religions and a threat to the perpetuation of religious beliefs. By knowledge I mean information beyond that provided, or approved of, by a religion. Unrestricted access to information. The concept is pretty simple, if people aren't aware that there is an alternative, or aren't aware of the details of an alternative (or many alternatives) they're less likely to question what they've been taught. Exposure to broader knowledge can cause doubt and doubt weakens faith which, as I understand it, requires certainty to achieve effect. I'm probably doing a terrible job of explaining/clarifying this but I think what I'm saying is obvious. I'll probably improve my wording if the thread continues so please be generous and don't try to tie me down on something horribly nitty unless it improves the conversation in some way.
Since the internet provides access to knowledge on a previously unimaginable scale, I've often wondered if the internet would have an adverse effect on religious beliefs. This study seems to suggest that it does:
Study: Using The Internet Is Directly Proportional To Losing Faith
Does anyone think that this is a false correlation? I believe the specific logical fallacy is called
Post hoc, ergo propter hoc. Does anyone have anything to add to the very loose idea that unrestricted access to information is likely to have an adverse effect, (again, generally speaking) on the holding of religious beliefs? There's also a negative correlation claimed between levels of education and religious belief, which would fit the model.
I doubt that we could prove this either way right now but I'm curious about whether other people share my suspicions or not.