“The fact that a believer may be happier than a skeptic is no more to the point than the fact that a drunk is happier than a sober man.”
This quote refers to Christianity, as I recall. How do you think it holds up? Personally I think it summarizes the whole Christian/Atheist debate quite tidily.
thats a good quote
the believer doesnt wake up with a hangover
the sceptic and the drunk repeatedly return to their ‘basis of reason’
the debate exists because of God
in a Godless world there are no atheists???
I’ve met quite a few "reformed " christians and born agains who left the church with enormous spiritual hangovers. And the debate exists because of the lack of a god as much as the existence of one. And in a godless world there are no religious wars, either. Or christians.
so we are polarised to agree
and i also have met people who suffer from spiritual abuse…the most powerful tool in the hands of some pastors and church leaders
your comment about religion is gratefully received…i think it stinks
but i do believe in God
i am not chuffed about how we interpret His existence into the diverse menu driven agendas of men and power.
thanks for your comment
its 9:00 am here and i am just getting going.
God bless
5pm here and thanks for your rational debate.
Or, perhaps Shaw got it backward. Perhaps atheists are like the prudish old schoolmarms who form Temperance Unions! Those old prudes looked with horror at people downing a beer or two, and launched crusades to stop people from doing what made them happy… all the while, of course, congratulating themselves for being above all that.
Mind you, those old ladies had never had a beer themselves, so they had no idea what they were talking about. They simply ASSUMED that anybody who took a drink MUST be a weak-minded fool or a pawn of evil forces. The idea that intelligent, decent people might actually enjoy a beer was alien to them!
Similarly, Rider assumes anyone who doesn’t think the way he does must be a fool, buying into an irrational delusion that makes him happy.
Problem is, Rider, Christianity isn’t ABOUT being happy. To put it crudely, it’s about BEING good, not feeling good. My faith DOESN’T always make me happy! Jesus’ commandments often make life difficult for his followers.
If you’ve read the Gospels and can’t put any faith in what Jesus said, well, you shouldn’t be a Christian, even if you like the idea of life after death. If you DO believe what you read, then you SHOULD be a Christian- just don’t kid yourself that it will always be easy (it wasn’t for Jesus!).
Can there be a certain high that comes with religion? Sure, just as there’s a dizzying, joyous feeling that comes with being in love. But there’s a lot more to love and marriage than those moments of giddiness, and there’s a lot more to being a Christian than holding hands and singing happy hymns.
It’s a lot easier to believe that what you already know is the truth than to admit that you don’t know the truth and to try to find it.
And then, there is the dilema of the “knowledge hypo-chondriac”. 
I think the middle road, as always, is the best.
But would Christianity have caught on to the extent that it has if it didn’t make its practitioners happy? (Or if not happy, at least enthusiastic about the prospect of eternal happiness in Heaven?)
Is eternal life in Heaven a selling point for Christianity? Sure- but lots of religions offer some kind of afterlife for a lot less effort. Jesus promises a lot, but he also demands a lot.
I concede one point: it would be silly to embrace a lifestyle or philosophy you don’t buy into, simply because it seems to make its adherents happy. Little children who believe in Santa Claus are undoubtedly happier at Christmas time than those who don’t, but that doesn’t prove they’re right. There’s SOME evidence that devout Christians recover from some illnesses more quickly than non-believers (faith may foster a positive attitude that aids in recuperation, or it may even have a placebo effect)- but again, that doesn’t prove the truth of Christianity.
So, we can all agree that a belief isn’t necessarily true just because it makes the believer happy. But neither is a belief invalidated by the fact that it makes the believer happy.
Look, it makes me happy to believe that my wife loves me, and I’ve been known to act rather silly in her presence as a result. A cynic (or someone who’s been burned by love before) may look at my behavior and think, “Geez, LOOK at that idiot. Look at that stupid grin on his face. Doesn’t he KNOW that love is an illusion? Doesn’t he KNOW relationships like that never last? I’m sure glad I’m too smart to act like that.”
Well, he MAY be right. But if love IS an illusion, I’m happy to fall for it. I’ll take what pleasure and happiness I can in the illusion, and I’ll let the cynic take whatever pleasure and happiness he gets from feeling superior to dumb schmucks like me. The atheist is welcome to feel happy and superior at our expense, too.
But we are living in a godless world.
I think that any one person that tries to summarize the debate on the existence of God in a clever one-liner is bound to fail.
Poor old George; no one understands him. He didn’t say believers are like drunks, and he didn’t say that belief is about being happy.
What he said was that HAPPINESS IS BESIDE THE POINT. It says nothing about which view he holds to, nor about which condition he considers desirable, and therefore contributes nothing to the Christian/Atheist debate.
It is an effective retort against those who try to use “spiritual joy” as a reason to believe. In that sense it has bearing on the debate, as I’ve seen exactly that argument before.
All the same, I think it’s a great quote.
Why would one need a retort against those who use spiritual joy as a reason to believe?
Because some people prefer to believe in things because they are true, not because it makes them happy.
Yes…but why would you need a retort against people who believe in things because it makes them happy? How does them believing what they believe affect you in any perceivable way that you need to actively defend against them?
The situation I had in mind was because they are evangelizing to me, and I’d like to get them to go away, shut up, or at least change the subject.
What about those who couldn’t give a whit about your eternal salvation (I would fall into this category)?