Are humans genetically 'hard-wired' to believe in god?

Hee hee, Setanta! Lest Portal Star take my words the wrong way, you always do play nice, PS. Now joefromchicago, if you have a different take on what rufio has presented here, please share, and don't hide behind that snide exterior of yours. Also, this thread is about a theory of human genetics, lest we forget, not 'my god can beat up your god'.

I have absolutely no interest in the topic under discussion, and I didn't mean to imply that you or anyone else had misunderstood rufio or that I had anything noteworthy to contribute to the discussion. Rather, I have a different take on the way that rufio and her contributions should be handled. Sorry if there was any confusion.

And cav, I trust that your "snide" remark was made in jest. I wouldn't want to think that there's no love lost between us.

Most of my posts are in jest joe. I'm just not quite sure why you joined the conversation if you have no interest in the topic. As to how rufio's contributions should be handled, well, there is always a better way to do most anything, so I would agree with you there. I'm personally quite willing to stop discussing any member of A2K publicly here if everyone else will. Have a problem with a member, contact a moderator. I personally have no problems with anyone, and would like to return peacefully to the topic. Thanks in advance.

I should apologize for making public remarks about another member--i just want that member to stop responding to my posts. Perhaps i will attain that consumation so devoutly desired.

Otherwise i have no problem with people at this site . . . excluding, of course, law dogs from Illinois and jumped-up Canajun cooks . . .

Heh heh, takes a lot to get me jumped-up, unless I'm cookin' West Indian. As for Illinois law dogs, I suspect they jump up frequently, as dogs are wont to do. I believe I just digressed my own thread....

Plenty (in fact most) theists don't hide behind God, they use him as some sort of moral arbitor to tell them when they're wrong and for that reason are probably more responsible than most - they have a self-inflicted outside (if imagined) second conscience. Plenty of non-theists do that too, and plenty of non-theists would also be happy to blame their problems on other people. Theism and non-theism have nothing to do with level of responsibility. If you assume that they do, than it's just that - an assumption.

And if I really am upsetting your Old Boys Club here, why don't you get me banned? Stop pretending to be egalitarian, or that this is an "open forum". It isn't.

I don't think any one can get you banned rufio, you have to do it,

I do agree in part with your opposition to Setanta's statement and I to would be frustrated with Setanta's reluctance to clarify as well, though I'm not privy to Setanta's and rufio's personal interactions, and anyone of us can choose to not interact with whom we wish.

Setanta's statement is not an uncommon counter to theism in general, but I think it's full of holes, for many reasons, some of which you have mentioned. However I think that issue is peripheral to this thread of cav's.

And several other people have commented on it as well but only I get flamed.

Typical.

rufio

The incessant "you people are all picking on me" blather is really getting stale.

One of the things that happens in these forums -- is that people defend their positions. Sometimes, if you happen to be on the opposite side of several people with coinciding positions -- you get battered.

I've been on the receiving end of many batterings here in A2K -- and over in Abuzz.



A person either handles it -- or tucks their tail between their legs and gets the hell out.

Stick up for what you suppose is correct -- and let the others stick up for what they suppose to be correct.

But stop the goddam whining. You sound like a child.



Good luck with the rest of your endeavor here. I hope you give it your best -- and that you prevail on something so that you can feel better about what is going on.

Re: Are humans genetically 'hard-wired' to believe in god?
I would be very surprised if there turned out to be such a gene. Apart from the fact that many people are not religious at all, there are several godless religions out there -- Buddhism being the most prominent. It strikes me as highly unplausible to assume that Buddhists are genetically different from Non-Buddhists, whose "God-gene" is supposedly intact. I think the god gene is esotherical mumbo-jumbo.

Thank you for bringing this thread back on topic, Thomas. I concur with what you say.

Uh, I really hate quoting scripture but in Jeremiah 31; 31-35 a very strange thing is said. Occasionally I read it, over & over, since Taylor Caldwell quoted it one of her books decades ago. It's the reason I can't give up on "God" and that god can and will be explained scientifically in some future time.

Were that so, i would strongly suspect that said god would not resemble what is believed by contemporary theists.

The only thing we're hard-wired for is sex.

It's all soft wire as far as I am concerned.

aHUM!

Some more theory:

http://mobigen.com/~chopin/ezboard/ezboard.cgi/db=brain_debate&action=read&page=1&num=7&dbf=200303250000&depth=0

I can't help but ask how do we have people who don't believe in God, IF we are possibly hard wired to believe in God?
I don't think this is a rational belief that we might be hard wired. Even from the authors viewpoint. Did you say he was an atheist? Then why doesn't he believe in God? He defeats his own theory. If he is an atheist, how can he be one, IF he imagines we are hard wired to believe in God. Doesn't that make sense to anyone?

Problem is, re; the link,……god beliefs have probably resulted in more human deaths not less, so belief in gods may not have an evolutionary advantage.

Interesting article, cav. I guess I'd better change my ways if I want to live a healthier and longer life.