# Would an impartial observer think belief in "God" is delusional? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [January 11, 2013, 3:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-an-impartial-observer-think-belief-in-god-is-delusional/646860 "2013-01-11T15:09:34Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 6\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![Weeping\_Wyvern](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/858c86/32.png) [@Weeping\_Wyvern](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Weeping_Wyvern)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2013, 1:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-an-impartial-observer-think-belief-in-god-is-delusional/646860/61 "2013-01-15T01:45:31Z")
> [@Lobohan](#): > > 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. But then God would know that your belief is feigned, so the coals of hell will burn even hotter for you. In modern Western culture, pretending to believe in God is a waste of time, whether he exists or not. Either believe, or don’t believe. ---
**Author:** ![Thudlow\_Boink](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/thudlow_boink/32/320_2.png) [@Thudlow\_Boink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Thudlow_Boink)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2013, 2:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-an-impartial-observer-think-belief-in-god-is-delusional/646860/62 "2013-01-15T02:02:21Z")
> [@BlinkingDuck](#): > > Back when I was young and very religious (I seriously looked into become a Catholic priest) I had come to the conclusion that most people, even the ones that went to church, didn’t REALLY believe in God. > > Their behavior was not consistent with belief in God. If they REALLY believed in heaven and hell they would take much better stock of their behavior. This reminds me of the [thread](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=616312) awhile back where we debated (and mostly rejected) the claim that nobody really believes in God. > [@](#): > > I think that is why many religiouspeople get so upset at atheists. They know there is no God but are trying to delude themselves. Being confronted with an atheist makes them realize their doubt and they overcompensate by over-reacting. If they truely believed in God they wouldn’t be upset but more pity the athiest. There may well be some truth to this in some people’s cases; but I’ve heard much the same argument (in reverse, but equally fairly) made about why many atheists get so upset at religious people. ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2013, 2:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-an-impartial-observer-think-belief-in-god-is-delusional/646860/63 "2013-01-15T02:11:09Z")
> [@Thudlow\_Boink](#): > > There may well be some truth to this in some people’s cases; but I’ve heard much the same argument (in reverse, but equally fairly) made about why many atheists get so upset at religious people. Atheists get upset at religious people because of the damage they do, because of the constant attempts to force religion on them, and because of the constant hatred and condemnation by the believers. The two situations aren’t remotely alike. ---
**Author:** ![PhillyGuy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ed655f/32.png) [@PhillyGuy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PhillyGuy)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2013, 2:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-an-impartial-observer-think-belief-in-god-is-delusional/646860/64 "2013-01-15T02:32:05Z")
> [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > Atheists get upset at religious people because of the damage they do, because of the constant attempts to force religion on them, and because of the constant hatred and condemnation by the believers. Most days on my commute home I have to go between a pair of ACLU recruiters on either side of a hallway in Philadelphia’s 30th Street Station. They try to catch my eye, and call out to me, usually something about supporting gay rights (even though the ACLU also has defended the civil rights of peaceable homophobes). If the ACLU isn’t there, environmentalists are. The JW’s are, by contrast, passive – offering literature but not calling out. I also get more people knocking on my door at home from liberal groups than from religious ones. They usually are environmentalists. ---
**Author:** ![eschereal](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/eschereal/32/18939_2.png) [@eschereal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/eschereal)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2013, 5:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-an-impartial-observer-think-belief-in-god-is-delusional/646860/65 "2013-01-15T05:55:32Z")
> [@chargerrich](#): > > Given all the above, why would an outsider think a belief in any supreme being as being any different than a belief in Unicorns or tooth fairies? (hence the delusional comment… and I say this with respect not trying to offend those that believe). Unicorns and faeries are physical entities for which the evidence of their non-existence (as magical beings) is rather strong and broadly accepted. If you were to express a serious, unwavering belief in their actual existence, as beings with magical powers, nearly every person in the world would consider you delusional (or, at the very least, eccentric). The Imperial Spirit of the Universe would be an extra-physical being, for which genuine evidence of its non-existence is not quite as strong. I, personally, find the famous proof that 1 = 2 to be a very compelling indication that any possible omni-god could not in any way be relevant to us, but some believers are content to say “Og works in mysterious ways, sometimes the answer to your prayers is ‘no’.” This kind of rationalization does put the believer pretty well deep into the forest of delusion, in the part where the light of reason rarely penetrates the canopy. When you have to stretch excuses over the holes in your beliefs, it seems like a good time for some alternative healing therapy for what ails your sense of reason. ---
**Author:** ![chargerrich](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chargerrich/32/5399_2.png) [@chargerrich](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/chargerrich)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2013, 1:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-an-impartial-observer-think-belief-in-god-is-delusional/646860/66 "2013-01-15T13:38:12Z")
> [@For You](#): > > Unicorns and faeries are physical entities for which the evidence of their non-existence (as magical beings) is rather strong and broadly accepted. If you were to express a serious, unwavering belief in their actual existence, as beings with magical powers, nearly every person in the world would consider you delusional (or, at the very least, eccentric). > > The Imperial Spirit of the Universe would be an extra-physical being, for which genuine evidence of its non-existence is not quite as strong. I, personally, find the famous proof that 1 = 2 to be a very compelling indication that any possible omni-god could not in any way be relevant to us, but some believers are content to say “Og works in mysterious ways, sometimes the answer to your prayers is ‘no’.” This kind of rationalization does put the believer pretty well deep into the forest of delusion, in the part where the light of reason rarely penetrates the canopy. When you have to stretch excuses over the holes in your beliefs, it seems like a good time for some alternative healing therapy for what ails your sense of reason. Interesting opinion. On the other hand though, I might argue that I can make a better or at least equally plausible argument for Unicorns existing. Unicorns are (generally speaking) white equines with a magical horn and sometimes with the ability to fly on magical wings (Unicorns, Pegasus you pick). Would the fact that equestrians do in fact exist be considered better evidence? Although not empirical, it is strong circumstancial evidence. Add to this, we can also find said animal in white and as silly as it sounds I have made a stronger case for Unicorns than one can for a supreme being (IMO of course YMMV). I guess to take the other side of the issue, I could quote Timothy Ferris who I believe coined “absence of evidence is not evidence of absence”. 😃 [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-an-impartial-observer-think-belief-in-god-is-delusional/646860.md?page=3)