I originally posted this to another message board, but thought I might get some additional insight here.
Hypothesis: Even if there is no actual god, there is still a benefit to believing.
Forget about all of the social benefits and liabilities of believing – church socials, Stalinist Russia, community stabilty, Talibanesque oppression – from a purely personal standpoint, there is still a benefit.
A few points in support of this (I am well aware of the many many arguments against):
-There has been shown some evidence that prayer has benefit. It is good for the central nervous system. (Meditation has the same result.)
-We create God in our own image – the mere act of wishing makes it so. (Admittedly this is pretty weak.)
-As a species, we have an inborn need to believe. To deny this need is like denying our need to grieve over lost loved ones, or to occasionally laugh, or to breathe.
-Another view – there is a benefit to believing in Santa Claus. Even though we “know” that such a person does not exist, it does our hearts good to suspend our disbelief every December. And to tell a small child that Santa does not exist is not so much truthful as it is cruel.
I’ve never had the ‘belief’ gene. It always struck me that espousing a belief in something that I felt didn’t exist (or rather that there is no concrete evidence for existing) would by hypocrisy of the highest order. Right up there with believing the world is flat or some such.
So whatever the (dubious) potential health benefits are (and I’d like some evidence there) to prayer and such I think I value my own core self-respect more. And that means not being a hypocrite.
As a youth I spent much time agonizing over the fact that I didn’t, or couldn’t, believe. I came to accept it. Some can, some need to believe. Not all of us do. I can laugh. I can grieve. I cannot believe.
OK, on the flip side, is there anything to be gained (or lost) from pounding “the truth” in to those that do have the belief gene?
I can’t cite any particular study, nor can I even remember the book where I read this, but it was a very popular book in the late 70s. It sort of brought the idea of meditation out of the mystical realm of Asia and into the practical world of Mr. and Mrs. Middle America. The idea is that stress increases risk of heart disease and stroke, usually by keeping the parasympathetic nervous system in high gear. Meditation helps by invoking the sympathetic nervous system (I might have the two mixed up – sorry), reducing the harmful effects of stress. And not just during the course of meditation, but throughout the day.
Supposedly, prayer has the exact same effect.
That’s the best I can do for a cite, but I can give you an amusing anecdote: I tried TM for a while. Perhaps a coincidence, but around that time people started asking me questions like “Did you start jogging?”, “Did you get taller?”, and “Did you finally quit that stressful job?”
“Believing in a non-God”? Is that like not believing in not not-God?
Seriously, though. We say “I don’t own a car”. We don’t say “I own a non-car”. Did you have any reason for stating a negative as a positive, other than to try to characterize it as something it’s not?
And to answer your question, I do not have the ability to choose what I believe. If I find a thing to be true, I believe it. If I don’t find it to be true, I don’t believe it. It isn’t a conscious choice. I can’t will myself to believe in God any more than I can will myself to believe that 2+2=5.
I can’t speak for others, but mostly I’m just fighting back at those who would attempt to force their beliefs on me*. I once heard a believer complain that other philosophies weren’t treated with the disrespect given to Christianity. My answer is that I’ve never been accosted in a parking lot and asked if I’ve accepted Immanuel Kant as my personal Lord and Savior.
*OK, it doesn’t always look like it on these boards. Y’all’re just lucky, I guess.
Yeah, well, you get my point. If you can think of a better thread title, I’m all eyes.
Sure you can. Do you ever find yourself, in some small and insignificant way, believing in Santa Claus on Dec. 24? Have you ever watched a movie and believed, if only for a moment, that the characters were real people? Not in your rational mind, of course – but somewhere in the deep recesses of your primitive lizard brain? I’ll bet you have.
I don’t know about physical effects, but I feel in a better and more emotionally stable place.
For the record, I suppose I technically do believe in a non-God. I’ve never held the view that god is a sentient creature. I don’t think anyone creates god of their own image, unless they have a poor understanding and a bad imagination. We may personify aspects of god, but that is largely for the sake of our tiny minds and restricted vocabulary that can’t express the concept well enough.
I don’t think this is true. I think most people believe because they feel the effect of god on their lives.
If you want to take a new-age “non-God,” you are more than welcome to. I personally have felt and seen that my and others’ beliefs have been of great benefit in times of trouble. Whether this exchange of “self-dellusion” for security is worth it is entirely up to the person.
I don’t believe that you can get a religious experience out of just “deciding” to be religious. It is something you have to find. Otherwise, you can practice meditation and even do something wacky like talk to spirits, and knock yourself out, but you’re getting into the grey area of what religion is.
Then why do so many atheists take it upon themselves to post in purely religious threads and devise intricate proofs that god can’t exist, frequently resorting to calling anyone who dares to have a belief structure an insane sheep? I’ve seen far more people attacking religion than atheism on these boards. Is it some kind of revenge? Do you just hate religion? What is the difference between someone discussing religion with you to convert you to their thinking, than someone discussing politics to convert you to their thinking?
One thing that’s worth keeping in mind is the cost/benefits analysis of the OP – specifically, “Do the benefits of believing in (a) god outweigh the drawbacks of believing?”
I mean, sure, believing in (a) god might help in recovery and provide emotional comfort during crisis, but is that worth it given that religious belief can also be used to promote ignorance, intolerance, or unquestioned following to authority figures?
That’s an unfair way of putting it. Believing in ANYTHING can lead you down that road - politics, religion, science (as demonstrated admirably by Science Girl).
You make that a case against religion? FFS, you just described Slashdotters to the letter… not to mention yourself, with ignorant and intolerant generalizations about religion in general. I’ll give you a brownie point for not unquestioningly following authority figures, though.
No! I didn’t say that at all! What I meant was that some of us hold wonky beliefs in the remote backwoods of our brains, while theists hold those thoughts front and center!
Sure, how about “Are there benefits to believing in God?” That’s actually the question you are asking. The way you asked it betrays an agenda.
You are confusing believing with imagining. However, I did believe in Santa Claus (as well as the Tooth Fairy and the Easter Bunny) when I was a small child, but now know that I was wrong. I was able to believe those things because I didn’t know they were fictitious. Now that I know they are, I am incapable of believing in them.
This question’s pretty close to the one addressed in another recent GD thread that asks whether it’s worse to believe in a non-existent God or to deny the existence of a God who does exist.
Talking about the benefits to believing (or disbelieving) in God is way too vague and general a question, unless you specify what God, or what you believe about God. For instance, it matters whether you’re talking about a God who takes an active role in the world or a God who, after creating the universe, just sits back and lets it go. It matters whether you believe in a God who loves you or in a God who’s out to get you. It matters whether you believe in a God who loves everybody or in a God who only loves members of certain groups, or people who do certain things.
I failed to address the question because I can’t really say that I have an answer. While I agree that there are probably benefits on a psychological level to believing, I couldn’t say if they are there for someone who is only pretending to believe for the purpose of receiving those benefits. I think that there have been some good conjectures here about the trade-off between the benefits of believing and the costs of hypocrisy, but, if there’s no benefit to pretending to believe then it’s all cost and no benefit. Certainly there are benefits to being a part of a caring community, but that can happen without religion; it just may be easier to find it with religion as the uniting factor.
Not an agenda, but I wanted to target it to the right people. A better (but clumsier) way might be “Are there benefits for atheists to pretend to believe in God?”, or “Are there benefits to believing in Santa Claus?”
You are confusing believing with imagining.
[/QUOTE]
Very well. Are there benefits to imagining that you believe etc.?
But to cut stright to my agenda, here is the real real question – Does God actually exist? Does it matter either way?
One thing I always enjoy about public prayers is that when everyone else bows their heads, we atheists can glance quietly around the room and become casually acquainted.
Science Girl’s “science” has already been thoroughly debunked by others, so she’s hardly a credible source, I’d wager. And yes, you can make similar arguments for cost/benefit analysis for belief in other things as well.
Lovely.