Census 2016

The order in which the religious options are listed depends on the answers given in the preceding census - the most-selected option in the 2011 census will be the first listed in the 2016 census, the second-most -selected option will be second listed, and so forth. The only exception to this rule is that the “other (write in)” and “no religion” options will appear last, mainly because that is where users will expect them to appear.

Magicbastarder is right to say that “no religion/atheist/agnostic” is the second largest group, if we treat them as a single group. But we don’t need to do this; “no religion” on its own is the second largest group - 269,811 people; we don’t have to roll in the atheists and the agnostics. In fact the numbers identifying as atheists and agnostics are tiny; in the 2011 Census there are fewer self-identified atheists (3,905) than there are Hindus (10,688); there are fewer Agnostics (3,521) than there are Buddhists (8,703). (One of the striking things about the census return, in fact, is how few unbelievers seem willing to own a label like Agnostic or Atheist.)

Could we argue, then, that “no religion” should appear second in the list? We could. I think the obvious objection is that putting “no religion” second a list of five religions creates the impression that we regard being of no religion as, in itself, a religion - a view which many people of no religion would take exception to. By putting it at the end of the list, it looks at bit more as if we are treating it as not just another option, but a sort of “none of the above” rejection of all the options offered which, on balance, makes more sense.

(Interestingly, the UK Census form puts “no religion” at the top of the list of options. One consequence of this is that the “no religion” answer is separated on the page from the “other - write in” box, with the result that very few people write in “atheist”, “agnostic” or similar qualifications of unbelief. So if Ireland was to do this, a possible outcome would be even fewer self-identified atheists or agnostics than we already have.)

If enough people write-in a particular identification that it comes in the top five, then next time round that identification will appear in the printed list. That is how “Orthodox” and “Islam” made it into the list. The converse also happens; that is how “Methodist” disappeared. It used to be listed but, in 2011, if you wanted to identify as Methodist you had to write it in.

So, yes, if enough people write “Fenianism” in the box, it will appear in the census reports. And if enough write it in so that it makes it to the top five, it will be printed on the next census form as an option. (Unless they change their policy.)

It’s unlikely that they can be persuaded to change the form of the question to “what religion do you practice”, for three reasons. First, who decrees that religion is primarily a matter of practice rather than, say, belief? That is a controversial topic, including on this board where I have argued with atheists who insist that religion is a matter first and foremost of belief. Different religious traditions take a different position on whether religion is a matter of practice or belief. This is a theological dispute which the Central Statistics Office will wish to stay out of. Secondly, State agencies generally don’t care about religious practice, as opposed to religious identification; if they don’t need the information why would they collect it? And, thirdly, every change in the census questions reduces the validity or reliability of comparisons between one census and another, because people are answering different questions in different years. Consequently they don’t make changes without good reason.

I suspect they’d say that if you want information on religious practice in Ireland, there’s plenty of qualitative research on that out there, and you are always free to commission more.

On edit: corrected the figures in this post, some of which, first time round, were mistakenly taken from the 2006 census results.

Shrap wrote: »

Simplest way to ask the question would be:

Are you a member of any religion?

Yes _
No _

If yes, state religion
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

That would lose you the information we currently have regarding the number of unbelievers who identify as agnostics or atheists. Plus, with it's talk of "membership" it treats religion as participation in an organisation as opposed to say, following a way of life or expressing a philosophy - which, again, embroils the CSO in theological/ecclesiological controversy.

The main reason for listing the more popular options is actually for the convenience of the CSO. If people are not "guided" towards established classifications, then you are faced with problems like "do we aggregate 'Church of Ireland' and 'Anglican' into a single category, or are they distinct categories?" "Is everyone who puts 'Catholic' a Roman Catholic?" "What about the people who just write 'Protestant'?" You still have this problem to some extent with respondents who use the 'write-in' box, but it's greatly reduced by the fact that about 95% of respondents choose one of the printed options. Only 3.4% fill out the write-in box. (The remaining 1.6% do not answer the question.)

I'm still not seeing any good case being made as to why there needs to be any change to the question at all. What's wrong with the present question? It's showing a dramatic increase in unbelief in Ireland, and even stronger percentage rises (if not absolute rises) in the numbers identifying as atheist and agnostic. Do people believe that that's misleading? What exactly is the problem here?

Orion wrote: »

The question should be
12. Do you have a religion Yes / No
If No - skip to question 14.

13. What is your religion:
a) b) c) etc.

14. Whatever the next topic is ...

This feedback was given by AI and others after the last census.

That does imply, though, that you have no interest in knowing how many or what proportion of non-religious people hold atheist or agnostic views or, at any rate, you don't think the census should attempt to capture that information. Is that in fact the case?

Shrap wrote: »

But it doesn't tell us accurately anyway. I consistently tick "no religion", in answer to the actual question and do not fill in the "other" box as my atheism is NOT a religion. So although I identify as an atheist, I do not show up in those statistics.

Yes, I get that. The absolute number of atheists, per the census count, is certainly much smaller than the number of people who, if asked "are you an atheist?" would answer "yes". Ditto for agnostics.

My point, though, is that the growth in the number of atheists showing up in the census, incomplete thought that number is, is still relevant, interesting, useful and valid information. But maybe I'm attaching too much information to that, and it's information that we could better collect through more focussed research and surveys rather than through the census.

In which case, yes, the AI suggestion for how this question should be handled looks like a sound one.

I think the State probably doesn't greatly care how many unbelievers identify as atheist, agnostic or something else, which is why the form is not really set up to elicit that information.

But I would think atheists - and certainly atheist organisations, like AI - might care. Presumably it would add some weight to AI's lobbying efforts if they could claim to be representing the position of a largish chunk of the 270,000 or so "no-religionists" identified in the census.