|
|
WARNING LONG POST- Cliff Notes below:
I have read though this thread and noticed there is a lot of support for atheism, but no one has made the case for religion. There has to be a reason why much of the planet follows some sort of religion, so let me play devil's (god's) advocate (this may be a little disjointed because I am at work):
I am not going to comment on my own beliefs because for this argument, it doesn't matter. They are my subjective, anecdotal thoughts and feelings anyway and the discussion is trying to define an objective truth. Even though there are a number arguments for trying to prove the existence of god, I will start with the assumption that I cannot logically nor empirically prove god exists. I also will move beyond the "when I see a baby cry, I see god" type arguments, which are nice but not terribly persuasive. I am also going to gloss over examples of where the human "church" institutions have failed through history and brought great war and pain to humanity. Not that I don't think it is important, they are prime examples of a human created, imperfect system and its evil, selfserving abuse of a population's beliefs for personal gain, but only because I am only trying to see where the positives lie in the concept of religion.
In short, god exists because it is a human, biological characteristic to believe in him; that we are biologically wired, to various levels, to believe in a god concept. Throughout the history of recorded humanity, from cave drawings on, humans have created a concept of the supernatural. It goes beyond simply being ignorant of truths (the world is round, god must be lightning) to a biological need to have a "god", like the biological need to love or lust. For example, you can scientifically explain "love" as our biology responding to a need to mate and the joint exchange of pheremones. As another example (assuming most of the posters are men), try growing up and not somehow relieving your sexual tension when you are a teenager, you NEED to do something about it and your hormones affect all your thoughts until you do. Try to fight it and you may succeed for a while, but you are wired to be this way biologically and it is completely normal. The existence of prostitution to satisfy male needs and the biological existence of homosexuality are other examples; you can try to fight the urge to be promiscuous, but if you are wired to be promiscuous that is just the way is; for homosexuality, if you are gay you are gay. You can try to fight all you want, and you might even succeed (maybe to your detriment), but your biological wiring is dictating an action. For the sake of argument, consider that the need for religion rises to this level.
As a biological need, the biological "levels" of need for religion will vary by person just as they can vary in the examples. Some people may not need much or none at all because they are wired to be more intellectual, like Einstein or Darwin, others may have more of it, but it is still a need. The need can also vary based on nurture, so how you are brought up will have an influence. Someone who has the right intellectual, analytical, nutritional and educational experiences may have less of a need for religion, similar in concept to someone who is pre-puberty or old would not have their thinking influenced as heavily, or at all from hormones (i.e., right environment, less religious need, no hormones, no sexual need). Being athiest in this context would not necessarily indicate a lack of something, but actually a very fortunate amount of nuturing, stability and education which most people in the world do not share.
Now, why could it be a human "need"? Because there are subjective benefits to believing in god. Religious beliefs can of course explain what we don't understand, but they can also help a person deal with trauma, death, terminal illness, etc. They comfort a person with a feeling that everything will be alright, that there is someone looking after them in a time of need. These are good, measurable traits biology could select over time to continue in humans. Some posters have called this a weakness, maybe, but for that person it is a need and it helps them get through life.
Now for organized religion, meeting the religious "need" is a perfect collective, communal activity. Humans are social animals, and an individual can take comfort in the strength of a group all believing that life has meaning and a higher purpose. They may have a reason to think twice before hurting others which is good for society. The collective helps strengthen the individual and give them a backbone of higher identity in order to take on life's challenges. If it is a recognized religion versus a cult, the group will help guide the individual for their own betterment as an enhancement to their lives, not like a cult, which has as its goal the individual improving only the collective. Again, humanity can benefit from these qualities, and these qualities can be selected to continue since the collective would be in a better position to survive vs. nomad individuals. Some posters have argued that this makes the individuals "weak" for needing the collective. Again, maybe to some degree, but living in a collective under a similar belief system is hardly uncommon, unnatural or undesireable. Would it be "strong" to completely remove your self from all collective living and go live in the forest like grizzly adams, living off of the land and trying to be a completely independent person? The guy reported recently as trying to live without money tried to do that (It was a thread in the commune), and I found it interesting that even in his efforts to be free of society, he was living off of societies' garbage and the donations of others; hardly a full survival experience. We all need society, but just to varying degrees.
As mentioned, we can argue all day about whether God created this biological need or if it is completely contrived in nature, but neither viewpoint would change the conclusion that we are wired for it to varying degrees.
In Summary, if you happen to be athiest and you meet a deeply religous person, maybe you are both just wired differently like someone who is gay vs. straight or male vs. female. They have a greater religious "need" than you do. It is not wrong either way. Tthey will not change your mind, you will not change theirs; you are both the way you are based on your wiring and that it just the way it is.
CLIFF NOTES:
- Religion can be a positive influence too.
- Religion is a biological need to varying degrees; if someone believes in god, however they arrive at the specifics, they just do.
- Some people's religious needs are greater than others due to nature and nuture factors, and for some there may be little to no need at all.
- Community through religion can be a positive force for society.
|
***OFFICIAL GOD DISCUSSION***
Originally Posted by wufwugy
Reply With Quote
in all seriousness, i am not claiming that i know there is a god by saying i know there is a god.
