(I do have an official Marvel Zombie card and number.)
The Invisible Pink Unicorn analogy troubles me, because the very name contains a contradiction – how can you be invisible and pink at the same time? I also am sympathetic to the complaint that it’s an ad hoc concept, made up solely for the purpose of argument.
This is why I prefer to use Zeus and Odin as examples instead. They aren’t just made up for sake of argument; they really were believed in by millions, for centuries. They’ve got “street cred” as gods.
They, for me, are the best answer to Pascal’s Wager. If I profess belief in Jehovah, I risk angering Zeus and/or Odin.
Oddly enough, if I profess belief in Zeus, this does not anger Odin. So, if you’re trying to maximize your return from the “Wager,” go with an open, inclusive, friendly pantheon.
The standard concept of God is also full of paradoxes, thanks to its followers insistence on attributing so many infinite and absolute qualities to it.
Also, an invisible object can be meaningfully said to be pink, if it’s pink when it’s not invisible; rather like how one can say that Marvel’s Invisible Woman is a blonde even when she’s invisible. It’s just never not invisible; just like God-believers attribute all sorts of qualities to their god that would be easy to perceive if it ever showed up, which it never does.
It’s a mystery! Just like the Trinity - which is no less nonsensical.
All those using the good effects of religion as a justification for believing don’t seem to really believe that worshipers of Zeus and Odin were just as devout as they are.
Just to name a few examples of illusionary/delusional beliefs that aren’t religion-based or from an otherwise serious mental disorder like schizophrenia.
For the sake of Pascal’s Wager maybe, but that’s a load of hogwash anyway. If you think the concept of God is silly, an invisible pink unicorn is an excellent comparison.
If there is a Supreme Being who knows all things even before they happened, then I would think prayer was not necessary and even a lack of trust. I would never hold back anything I knew for sure would be good for my children, nor give anything that would be harmful. I would expect a Supreme Being to be better than Me.
True. And to enhance the effect humans are seriously into confirmation bias. It’s a one-two punch in the face of reality. But are we better off for it?
It seems many religious folk beat themselves up a lot over their faith and it causes a lot of unnecessary anguish, grief and depression particularly the conservative ones that still preach a fiery hell that awaits all that don’t believe.
Whether a believer or non-believer, what helps me is realizing what I/we/anyone believes doesn’t matter or change the outcome one iota in the end. Theology, mostly conservatives thinks it does matter and that they can will themselves through prayer or beliefs for a certain outcome that will change the events by simply thinking or wishing it to be so.
Which is an attitude I find ridiculously common among fervent believers. I used to be there when I was young, and the fear of eternal hell, guilt and shame this outlook brings you is almost unbearable.
Which is another reason I think they’re so zealous and cloyingly encouraging one another within it. It’s not so much to help them through life’s usual hardships and issues, it’s to cope with the fear and guilt of continual failure to meet their own impossible expectations of righteousness. It might also explain proselytizing, since misery loves company.
When I shed all that, holy shit, I can’t tell you the relief. I’ve never been so happy.
Especially with alcoholism or drug addiction. How many actually believe they can quit anytime vs. those that painfully admit to themselves they’ve got a serious problem?
I’m not an academic on the subject, and I haven’t thought enough about it to come to any great conclusions (my inflated ego assures me that I will, despite all evidence to the contrary;)). But just from observation, it seems to have served a purpose for us as a species. Belief in magical sky daddies of all sorts hasn’t stopped great civilizations from growing out of humble beginnings. The cohesion and success of any group–an entire civilization or a clan or a business–seems to depend on belief in a greater purpose for the group. That belief can be as irrational as an invisible pink unicorn, but as long as it doesn’t threaten its survival, the group seems to benefit from it.
Individually, I could believe irrationally in God, but as long as it doesn’t compromise the decisions that my survival depends on, I won’t be hurt by it, and will benefit from it if it makes me feel better. And if my ego demands that I feel better about myself than I really am so I can get along in life, who am I to argue?
Maybe a better question is, Can we do without it? I have an uneducated hunch that our irrationality is a natural and unavoidable consequence of our existential conundrum: we’re born into a universe without any inherent purpose for our existence but we need a reason for living, so we invent philosophical stuff that gives us some relevance in the world and allows us to continue on our merry way.
These death issues are the most offensive thing for me with the religious. It’s a most natural thing, the only thing to fear is pain. But having survived numerous hangovers in my college days some 30-40 years back, even that can’t be so bad.
Good example, but the overconfidence effect seems to apply to everyone, even if they have no personal issues to deal with. It might even be necessary for a good healthy ego.
My reply to that is: Do animals question their purpose for existence? Does not questioning their place in the universe prevent them from thriving in it?
So while creating (and discarding along the way) all kinds of beliefs has been our M.O., I’m not entirely sure it’s been a net benefit to humanity. Perhaps we strive to survive in spite of this particular trait?
