the god need, a myth?

Post Reply New Topic

To assign a gender to something that must, in it's omnipotence, transcend biological limitations seems to embody humanity's need to anthropomorphize everything.

Exactly. In the past there were so many phenomena that didn't seem to have a definite cause that the notion of a god seemed plausible. Now the idea only persists because it's passed on through generations.

The glorious thing about evolution is that nothing useless survives, peoples relationship towards god/chi/energy/karma/the force that is in all life and matter that moves the universe, causes growth governs what is and connects all things, is bound to change as we learn more about it which is the drive behind all human pursuit be it art, science, religion, social theory, phillosophy or any other act of seeking and worship. Faith is the belief in a higher truth beyond the immediatly percieved reality and the notion of a god as a grandfather in the sky figure is just one small aspect of that, no more or less important than the countless other ways people seek to gain connectedness and greater understanding with reality, I believe that that need is inate and channeled by all people in their own ways and always will be in increasingly sophisticated forms, we're already coming to realise how interconnected the disiplines/faiths are, in particular look at the notion of prayer and the latest in quantom physics on how human thought and intent impacts on energy at a molecular level. Check the random number generating eggs, they're especially interesting.

IMO Religion is the result of the human habit of anthropomorphizing inanimate things (like giving sinister intentions to a malfunctioning gadget) and the forces of nature.

Yes, humans tend to anthropomorphize the things they don't understand. We are programmed to think in terms of causality, so when our knowledge is inadequate to explain something in causal terms we assign a deity as the cause.

Also, in a harsh reality, angry and vengeful deities are preferred over cold and indifferent nature. At least the deities can be appeased and reasoned with.

not "habit", which is learned/acquired/conditioned behaviour, but a hard-wired tendency as a result of neurological developments in last 50,000 years giving an advantage in survival, involving changes in cognitive functioning; "fluid intelligence", concerned with pattern recognition, finding meaning in confusion, attributing agency and cause etc, as joybob says, and which in combination with mental isolation as consequence of an impaired or reduced "theory of mind",( inclination to incorrectly imagine what anyone/thing is thinking), may result in inclination to certain kinds of religious belief in a certain (! !) minority of white western people. ( nb: asian races are known to have higher frequency of genes for intelligence tuned to making judgements about relative values, whereas white brains are better at making judgements about absolutes, and poorer about relative values).

Marshall, you seem to think that these days we are less confronted by the inexplicable than before..... Umm....let's see; the debate about the causes of aspergers/autism....

My own personal angle on this is that god hasn't decided yet ! ! i like this perspective, ..and in what way does it prevent me thinking rationally, seeing clearly, and enjoying scientific progress? god is still writing.

I love this theory. It makes so much sense, and finally makes it reasonable for me to believe in god, it is a kind of cognitive therapy for my particular neurological condition, both my cognitive "dysfunctioning" and "hyper functioning". The biggest danger is that those who find it useful/uplifting etc start thinking that everybody needs it.

This is a common misconception. The word "vestigial" proves this quite succinctly:

(emphasis mine)

I'm not trying to be mean; you seem intelligent and I hate seeing smart people spout falsehoods.

I agree with your other points, however. The one thing I am concerned about is the implied massive psychic connection humanity has, or that our subconsciousness is shared between all. While an interesting theory, it is virtually impossible to prove or disprove (like most theology).
I am a materialist, in the philosophical sense. That is, I believe that physical matter is the only reality and that everything, including thought, feeling, mind, and will, can be explained in terms of matter and physical phenomena. This depressed me at one point, but I actually felt exalted once I recognized that physical phenomena can be understood, whereas metaphysics, by definition, cannot. The fact the the human brain is capable of comprehending such incredible ideas as quantum mechanics negates the need for a god, at least for me. I do not understand why anyone would want to insult human intelligence by saying something is "inexplicable." But I can see where that laziness comes from.

Current scientific thinking, even at most advanced edges of research, is unable to satisfactorily explain what causes aspergers or autism. At the moment my aspergers is inexplicable. I can choose to "believe", as a matter of faith, that it is the result of genes , ( which ones not known), OR environment,( could be any one, or two, or more, of a thousand things) or a blend of the two, or of three if include "gene expression" as distinct factor. Or i can remain in a state of suspense, hanging on for the verdict/denouement. All my senses hyper-alert, fight-or-flight on constant standby, until i know.

I can carry on banging my head against this actual brick wall of "absence of clearly identifiable cause", or "uncertain cause", OR i can try switching off my hyperactive cognitive tendency to seek agency and cause for everything which concerns me/which i encounter in life. How do i do this?

i have discovered, very recently, that i can do it in the space of a few seconds by believing in god. This does not mean i am now blind to scientific fact, to scientific advance, discoveries etc. it means i can relax, because the mysterious rustling in the bushes is god, thinking.
I can even make myself smile, by imagining that the reason we don't know YET is because god hasn't decided yet.

Laziness? Well, perhaps, in that if i'd been capable of getting my act together sufficiently 25 years ago i might have done the study necessary to become a researcher in neurology. But i didn't. I was on another planet. And I am not putting myself through some sort of course now either. Is that what you meant by laziness?

PS: don't quite get where in that there is a psychic connection to the rest of humanity?

Last edited by ouinon on 27 Jan 2008, 5:06 pm, edited 1 time in total.

I'm sorry, I meant "permanently inexplicable." ASDs can eventually be explained by science. Faith is temporarily comforting, but unnecessary in the long run.



I can understand that. It certainly makes living with uncertainty easier. And I don't think any less of you for it, because you understand reason.



My apologies, I didn't mean to offend you. The idea of resorting to "god did it" for everything, without even trying to understand, was what I was referring to.



See:

Shared subconsciousness is what I got out of that; I could be mistaken.

As far as i am aware there have always been things that could not be explained,( different things at different times). I think it is probable that there will always be the "inexplicable", at any epoch. After all, did neolithic man wonder what caused autism? No, he wondered about something else. I suspect that because we still have the same brains, in the same bodies, more or less, we will tend to understand about the same amount of our perceived environment, and experience as inexplicable the same amount of it too.

My impression is that it is the people who do not try to understand, who don't ask questions, who actually aren't that bothered about god. That it is people who try their hardest to understand who have over the millenia developed an effective cognitive tool for putting a stop to endless fruitless searching for answers when data is simply not there.

PS: Your belief that ASDs will eventually be explained by science is an example of faith.

Last edited by ouinon on 27 Jan 2008, 5:26 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Good call.

And I agree, there always have been and always will (should?) be things that we cannot explain with reason. But I would rather try than attribute it to a deity. The question of "why?" is, I think, the very essence that makes us human--and living life worthwhile.

Sherlock Holmes said, " It is a capital error to theorise without data". So what do you do when you are driven by your over-active cognitive tendencies to attribute agency and cause but you have no data, or not enough?

Belief in god feels like being able to log out, step back, leave the game a moment, and the system can take a rest.

Last edited by ouinon on 28 Jan 2008, 2:40 am, edited 1 time in total.

Does theorizing with incomplete data qualify as a "capital error"? I think that is what a great deal of us function on socially, theologically, and emotionally. I am not sure I am capable of suspending my constant need to attribute reasons for everything, and this may be what the OP was getting at. I doubt this means atheists are more highly-evolved than religious people, or vice versa. That is like saying people with ASDs are more highly-evolved than NTs. Where is the proof?

This does make me wonder, though: could a sentient machine develop a belief in god, independent of human intervention? (this is assuming a lot, but most thought experiments do anyway). Where does the barrier for intelligent assumptions and irrationality lie?

in soviet russia, god needs YOU!

I think people in general have a hard time believing that they toil for no reason whatsoever. I also think that the idea of a watchful god is pretty good for getting everyone into line.

People need something to believe in, and most do believe in a type of God.