First let me preface by stating that I am agnostic and while I am trying to be unbiased, I am certainly not.
Second let me say that an impartial observer IMO could not be anyone on our planet. However if some intelligent race from another world were to observe human society and all the various religious beliefs, historic holy wars, killings in the name of a God, suffering, starvation, disease and violent crimes to children… would they not think of the human race as delusional for such a belief?
There are approximately 20-30 major world religions and most if not all believe that “their views” are correct and everyone else is wrong. Guess what? only 1 can be right unless you think all the various Gods exist in some form of “heavenly council”… which actually be another religion
There is ZERO empirical evidence of any “all mighty” being but tons of circumstantial evidence that was all created by man.
By asking humans this question I am in fact going to get biased responses but I am curious what others think.
Yes. There’s no evidence for any such god, claims about it/them contradict physical laws, the claims made about gods are mutually contradictory, and it’s all as blatantly made up as you can get.
I would think to be impartial, you must be removed from even the idea of religion.
Given that most (all) “people” are either A) religious B) have been religious or C) have been exposed to religion in some way that makes “humans” biased on some level (IMO).
I’m not so sure I’d go so far as “delusional”, but my guess is that impartial aliens would probably see that we have enough publicly accessible facts that most people should realize that gods are mythical and it’s strange that most do not.
When I was young and becoming an atheist, I was afraid to say so because I was hedging my bets. A natural Pascal’s Wager. I was afraid that if I was wrong, I’d go to hell forever.
I assume many believers are just playing a part. Pretending they believe, so that they don’t go to hell, just in case.
I think some of the most religious people have the most doubts, just like the guys who are the most anti-gay are actually sucking off homeless dudes at truckstops.
It does look very silly from the outside. I’m agnostic but I recognize that there are three areas of experience most applicable to assigning special meaning.
The internal world is pretty amazing. Tweak the brain slightly with desert exhaustion, special plants, or lucid dreaming, and you basically have a holodeck. If you are not well adjusted you could create a petty deity, but really if you put any thought into the idea at all, it’s ridiculous to believe in an ideal being who wants people to kill each other over minutia and natural urges.
Nature is pretty breathtaking and awesome, but ultimately indifferent behaving.
The edges of the universe, the beginning of time, and the fabric of space at quantum scales are all places where our normal conceptions of reality break down. But they just don’t bear much relevance to our day to day lives or lend themselves to the anthropomorphic part of a supreme being.
All of these things do naturally lead to wondering about great powers, even possibly entities. I could see an outside society appreciating certain philosophies like the Tao or perhaps Brahman. But religions with petty vengeful childlike dieties, and complicated self contradictory rules that go against our own nature, and meaningless squabbles between factions would definitely seem ridiculous and immature.
Back in the past (and not so very far, back in the sweep of things) it was perfectly rational to believe in a god or gods, and everyone did, even the smartest, most skeptical, and best informed people. These days, with the advance of science, there is no longer a strong rational case to be made in favor of the existence of any god, and a fairly good (though far from watertight) one to be made against it, so many people, especially those better informed about the relevant science, do not believe. No delusions need be involved in belief, however: at worst, some ignorance and some poor reasoning. (I do not deny that some believers do take things to a delusional level, but many do not, and it is certainly not necessary to do so in order to be a believer.)
I think that anyone who believes that majority of the wars, especially World Wars or wars since WW2, were about religion is mildly delusional. It is a good motivator, for sure (many things are) but the war, in its core, is not driven by religious belief. It will use religious belief to sustain it but is not the cause of it.
No, I don’t an impartial observer would think belief in “God” is delusional? I think it is human nature to refer to things we don’t understand as being controlled by “God”, however you define that. We sort of mentally lump everything we don’t know together under the heading, “stuff God does.”
Where an impartial observer might start to think we are delusional is when we start anthropomorphizing that god and adding details to about his behavior that we couldn’t possibly know.
Believing in the possible exist of a “higher power” is not delusional, and hoping that one exists is not either. It would be the height of arrogance to proclaim that our current understanding and perception of the Universe and reality is all there is.
On the other hand, people who literally believe the teachings of organized religion are delusional. There is no better word for it. If this were a small group of people, instead of the majority of the population, we’d say they were mentally ill. It is related to whatever mental dysfunction leads people to embrace crackpot conspiracy theories: they accept their belief “on faith”, and simply twist every piece of evidence so that it supports their blind certainty.
I actually once had a group of fundamentalist Christians tell me that the lack of evidence for God makes their belief stronger. If that is not delusional mental dysfunction I don’t know what it is.
That is, I am perfectly well aware that there are many things in reality that I don’t understand and that no-one understands at this time. It is even possible that there are things that human beings will never understand, due to physical limitations possibly. But admitting that has no bearing at all on whether I believe in the possible existence of a higher power. Humans are indeed finite and fallible. That does not require the existence of an infinite, infallible being.
To the OP: I don’t think you can assume that alien cultures would be immune to the same forces that drive humans to believe in deities. Some might be ruthlessly logical, like Vulcans were supposed to be, but I think it is more likely that any evolved creature would have a primitive analog to our “lizard brain” which is virtually immune to logic. Fear, and the will to power, are strong motivators even of the technologically advanced.
Roddy
Hope is never delusional, because it is different from expectation. Actual belief in a higher power, in the absence of evidence, is at least slightly delusional, acting on it is more so. And I suspect no atheist scientist believes that our current understanding of the universe is all there is - this has nothing to do with religion.
I’m fine with this, but I can extend it to even non-literal beliefs. Agreed that not every word in Genesis is true. But, if you base your moral code at least partially on commandments handed down to a Moses who certainly didn’t exist, you are being just as delusional. Independently deriving some of them is fine, but the first commandment is a bit hard to support.
I think almost any rational person would agree that the various Nativity stories are made up. Yet we have a mass national craze to celebrate Christmas on a day that has nothing to do with the birth of Jesus, have important pundits attack anyone holding back, and an economy that depends on the myth. We grow out of belief in Santa Claus but not out of belief in the manger and the Magi. That seems way delusional to me.
To be honest I used the adjective based on a line used in the movie “Contact” when Matthew McConnawhatever uses it in talking with Jodie Fosters character.
Oh, I agree. I specifically used the term “higher power”, not God, for this reason, but I didn’t mean to imply that even a limited, fallible, finite higher power must exist.
So by “unbiased” you mean “could not be more predisposed towards the atheist side if he were provided with an instruction manual”. Par for the course in these threads.
You’re putting forward two different statements here: that in order to be unbiased, you must not be from Earth, and that you must not be human. I don’t think they are the same thing. I agree that it must not be human, but I disagree re: Earth. Now, we’re not at the point where we could have theological discussions with an ape or a dolphin, but that doesn’t rule out that we could some day.
