It says that belief in gods addresses some basic human needs. It’s not the only way to address those needs, but maybe it’s the most obvious way: somewhere out there is a big person who does everything and will take care of everything. It’s not hard to see the appeal, especially for people living hundreds or thousands of years ago, where life must have seemed even more random and cruel than it does now. That doesn’t address whether or not the belief is accurate. It’s also easy to understand why people thought the world was flat and believed the sun went around the earth, but that doesn’t change the fact they were completely wrong.
Personally, I think it says that our brains evolved to expect cause and effect, and when we can’t understand the cause, we instinctively think “God did it”, where “God” can be anything that lies beyond our senses. Whether that is just another being much like ourselves, or some supernatural entity doesn’t really matter. But “supernatural entity” fits the bill nicely.
Ok, good look. I know theres some flaws in my thinking with regards to “Infinity.” I’ll check these out.
I have exchanged emails with both Jansen and Blackmore. Jansen now is willing to accept the possibility of the afterlife and Blackmore replied “it is not easy” when I asked her how she could ignore the info brought back by experiencers. I reviewed part of Jansen’s book for him. He admitted that he could not get experiencers to believe their experiences were anything but real. This is true of most experiencers. Most ignore like Blackmore the info experiencers bring back that would have been impossible for them to know. Pam also emailed me before she died. She was dead 30 minutes with no blood moving through her brain. It takes just 11 seconds for the brain waves to stop. She correctly reported the activity around her body while dead. Her eyes were taped shut. Keubler-Ross came to believe after she investigated many experiences, Raymond Moody did the same.
No skeptic has ever explained away the info they receive and why even the blind can see during a near death experience. There has never been a rational discussion on this board of near death experiences and the afterlife. Skeptics just don’t read the experiences.
Here’s a fun fact. If you have people guessing the number of M&Ms on a card, and ask half of them if there are more than 5 M&Ms in a jar and the other half if there are fewer than a million, the guesses between the groups will diverge wildly. My daughter has conducted this experiment in a behavioral economics class we teach, and you get statistically significant results with N = 20, which is amazing. It is called anchoring. Humans can be fooled very easily. Societies which assume that a god exists will have lots of members who assume god exists, and exactly the kind of god the society believes in. That is called default - the range of things you can think of is limited by your experience. After all, a generation or two after the king forcibly converts everyone to Christianity, the people believe in Jesus as fervently as they used to believe in their pagan gods.
I can explain it. Those people can’t actually do those things. The stories that they can are either delusional, sensationalized or simply lies told by people who are trying to fool you.
There has also never been a rational discussion of how the afterlife consists of people being rogered by a penguin with a magnificent boner.
11 seconds of what?
oh and, of course, cite?
I agree that there has never been a rational discussion of the topic on this board. On numerous occasions you have posted claims only to have others go to your sources and discover that your claims are not supported by those sources. It has never been a matter of “skeptics” “not reading” the evidence; it has always been a matter of you masking claims that are not in the texts that you claim they are in.
You are already under a ban to refrain from claiming that nonsense on your web page or blog are “evidence” of anything, (after years of linking to such nonsense only to have it fail to demonstrate what you claim). If you begin to make further claims such as the one that I have quoted, here, you will be prohibited from posting on the topic at all.
[ /Moderating ]
Does the fact that countless numbers of Greeks used to believe in Zeus mean anything?
It means that while they could be wrong, they’re probably not all stupidly wrong. I’m answering the OP, but this also holds true for Zeus.
Does that fact that, 400 years or so ago, most Europeans believed in witches mean anything?
Not sure I understand the experiment. How are there M&M’s on a card? Or how is the experiment similar/different than the one I posted?
In Lekatt’s defense, at least he is attempting to offer his own POV. [Especially with this crowd:) ] Of course, faith in God, no matter how many people believe is not going to provide sufficient evidence. I tried to make that clear in the OP. I appreciate people pointing out why it’s wrong, or reason as to why people think that way. But, in a way, I think it’s easier to point out the fallacies of faith than explore if it has any merit. What I am saying is the point has been made, and yet it still falls short of actually disproving faith. Faith is the one thing you cannot take away. If someone has it you can’t really say they are wrong. So that’s why I think that more attention should be paid in exploring the nature of it than simply discrediting it.
What does that look like? I don’t know. Malcolm Gladwell’s book “Blink” explores how our instincts can often be correct, before we actually put the pieces together. The Wisdom of the Crowds concept certainly has its flaws but it seems like a step in the right direction. This is where I think the believers would put their faith to good use if they could just give up the false answers that been given to them. Namely, Christianity, Islam, etc.. which rely on books that are obviously flawed.
Like I said, life is an experience and a mystery. Faith is similar in that it is an experience. Both are irrational in that we cannot adequately explain them. I cannot even logically prove that anyone else exists, yet it would be absurd for me to say otherwise.
My gut instinct tells me that I have a soul and millions of others experience the same emotion. Usually when I trust my instincts, I find it works out for me.
Is that you Storm? 
And he is welcome to participate in this and other threads. Making an accusation that other people, (who could reasonably be expected to include other posters), have failed to examine actual evidence is simply a short way to start a fight given the history of this board. From that he is expected to refrain.
[ /Modding ]
No.
It comes down to this: thinking is hard. And when you look at it, the function of thinking is to eliminate the need to think (once you have thought out a solution to whatever, you are now free to automate whatever according to your algorithm). When it comes down to metaphysical matters, thinking about such things can verge on migrainatory, so if someone comes by and hands you the formula, right there they have saved you a great deal of stress and pain. Who would not take such an offer?
Wow. That is a pretty awesome video. I guess I do sound a lot like Storm. I want to say that I am not anti-science in any way, shape or form. I can fully appreciate that Science has brought us every single convenience we have in life and we should use it at all times.
Two points though:
-
in the video, it states that science is what we can observe. Is faith not observed by the billions who profess it? Should we automatically assume that they are either lying or delusional? I don’t think so. I think we should rigorously study it. If religious institutions would pull their heads out of their asses and fund these endeavors they might actually get somewhere. Lord knows they got the money!
-
Do you think that life or reality will ever be explained? I don’t. So by your very logic, life is in fact Magic
Well, in my journey of life I realized a long time ago that it is not logical to think that they are **all **telling the truth.
We are knocking on the door of life.
http://thrillsblog.blogspot.com/2012/04/artificial-dna-called-xna-may-create.html
And after the Higgs boson was found, even the statement about reality is not as profound as you think.
Time for some Scooby Snacks.. 
No, faith is practiced. It is not observed in anywhere the same sense that science uses observation and measurement to test hypotheses and come to new understandings about reality.
I think science will explain more and more facts about life and reality. So I don’t see how life is then Magic merely because not every fact about it has been determined.
Why is it so hard to admit that we will never understand the universe? I’m sure we will continue to make advances, and we should. But to actually think we’ll grasp how we ever got here in the first place is just something I don’t see ever happening.
Maybe I should dial it back a notch. What does “faith” in a soul, god, the afterlife, etc… mean to you? Do you have it? If not, then what happens after you die and what is your rationale?