Is belief in a God a human survival mechanism?

yup

Welcome to A2K

The advent of consciousness in people created not only a future in time, but also the illusion of a substantial center of being, an ego or soul. Then the fate of that soul became of enormous concern, something that animals never had to deal with. That point of consciousness became the beginning of religion, the moment of "expulsion from Eden."

Consciousness is both a blessing and a curse.
When the mind became advanced enough that we became conscious and could think of a future, then anxiety set in. Were wild animals, by some miracle, to attain consciousness, they would all go crazy from the anxiety. Animals can cope with constant danger because they live in the moment and can't conceive of the dangers of a future.

I suppose this is what you're saying, more or less, alikimr. This is a great topic, because it involves both religion and science. I expect some good responses from JLNobody and others.

For the moment, Coluber, I can only agree with Alikimr's and your statements. They pretty much wrap it up. I hope I will be available to add to the thesis.

Yes I think "belief in God" is a "survival mechanism"...didn't you see the Matrix movies, lol, "hope", the greatest weakness and the greatest strength, that was the Architect talking.

If we don't have hope that we are not the only one on "our team"...well things look pretty hopeless as soon as you start looking at all the factors...

Abraham, against hope believed in hope...

The trouble with hope is that it leads people to fly in the face of reason in destructive ways too...buying lottery tickets etc...

The trouble with God is that it takes people a long time to conceive of ONE GOD...in that case no person has priority over any other, in "His Name"...He being "no respecter of persons"...

Most of the time when someone says "god" what they mean is they have the divine right to dominate YOU....so they think...and it's en garde to see who's daddy is the strongest...king of the mountain and all that...

But the nice thing about God...is that...you are not alone...and there is more to "reality" than what is apparent in this short run.

Belief in a monotheism is not essential to societal survival; a society-wide religion probably is, to some degree. In other words supernatural ideologies (whether they be beliefs in nature spirits, ancestor guardians, polytheism, monotheism, etc.) serve to explain that which cannot be understood naturalistically make life a bit more secure psychologically. And, sociologically, a society-wide shared ideology, whether it be regarding the Hebrew Exodus, the Azec arrival at Tenochitlan, or whatever, serves to unite the community of beievers into a more solidary and cohesive unit, more able to close ranks against alien aggressors.

The First Book of Bokonism

Verses 2-4 : In the beginning, God created the earth, and he looked upon it in His cosmic loneliness.

And God said, "Let Us make living creatures out of mud, so the mud can see what We have done." And God created every living creature that now moveth, and one was man. Mud as man alone could speak. God leaned close as mud as man sat up, looked around, and spoke. Man blinked. "What is the purpose of all this?" he asked politely.

"Everything must have a purpose?" asked God.

"Certainly," said man.

"Then I leave it to you to think of one for all this," said God.

And He went away.

Verse 5: Live by the foma that make you brave and kind and healthy and happy.

appears to me that coluber is right. us mud as men can't fathom consciousness without a reason for it to be at all.

Is belief in a God a human survival mechanism?

Yes, absolutely. Well, sort of. We have society to set moral boundaries. Ethics comes from within. Religion is just window dressing.

I struggle with this, having been raised in the church. But once I left home for college, I studied other religions.

I think people believe in a God because they're afraid not to. Metaphorically, it takes a hefty ego to say I'm It, there's no one else, so to speak.

But after studying all the other major religions (self interest, I don't have a degree in it), I reached the conclusion they are basically the same. Do Unto Others, etc. The mechanics are different. The rituals vary, even within the Protestant faiths. But the underlying tenets are all very similar. And patriarchal, except for mostly Hinduism. I don't have a beef with it. Just furthers the theory that religion is man made.

I also have trouble with the whole Cook Kids Table theory. My God is Better Than Your God.

I'm not ready to say I'm It. I believe there's something bigger out there than me on an existential level.

But I will never believe the God I was raised to worship would otherwise banish to hellfire and damnation billions of people because they call their faith something other than Christianity. And don't get me started on the Catholic phenomenon.

Back to the survival mechanism, people need solace. They often find it most completely in religious faith.

I think in essence my view is the same as the thesis you've put forward. Douglas Adams wrote a short article on this subject that can be found in the book "Salmon of Doubt" (a collection of his writings published after his death, he was a vehement atheist - author of "The Hitchiker's Guide to the Galaxy"), the article follows much the smae line of thinking and is interesting reading.

I've been brought up in a Christian faith, but do not hold Christian beliefs as my own (at least not entirely or solely). I agree with a few points buffy made about not supporting the superiority of one religion or moral system.

I'd like to think that there is something more than what I can percieve - but thats just it. It scares me to think that one day I will just wink out of existence and never be conscious ever again. It won't be sad because I won't be there to think sad thoughts. For myself, the world will cease to exist because I am not there to experience it.

I don't want to believe there is no God, and even if that IS the case (more than likely?..), i will probably go on believing in the falsity - if only for my own peace of mind. (Ignorance may indeed be bliss.)

As coluber said:

I have thought about God being a by-product of some of our cognative processes for some time - and I don't think this follows most by-product patterns.

Such as - a by product of the adaptive process of African's is to be immune from Yellow Fever - and a by product of that immunity CAN be Sickle Cell Anemia.

Many of the by products of our evolution give us tendacies - not certainties.

So I think the fact that every human seems born with the concept of a god inherent in them (or at the very least a search for an 'other') seems to contradict our other patterns of tendacies.

If comfort is our argument - the idea that I am a millionaire is comforting as well - but we all do not have this idea. If the argument is that millionaire status goes against every emperical data that we have about out our lives - the athiest would say the same thing about God.

I don't think you can reduce the God theory to simple comfort.

I know it is not the best argument and certainly not without it's problems - but it is as good as the opinions that it is a survival mechanism.

TF

Also Taynt:

I fear that you have taken the affirmative to Pascal's Wager - which I am not sure is the best reason to believe in an 'other'.

It seems if faith is to be defined as 'belief in something without any good reason' that Pascal's wager goes against this definition by giving you a good reason to believe.

Buffy:

I read a quote by a Sikh guru the other day that said (God was talking to him here) That God created all faiths but man created all religions.

I think Lewis said it well in the Screw Tape Letters that one sure way to get you away from God is to get you to focus on the people in the religion. I try to seperate them whenever I can. Because not to is to hate Calculus because its inventor was a coke addict.
TF

Ahh---com'on people:

Man simply could not tolerate the thought of death so he created a religion and the soul. The religion very obligingly created a place for man to travel on to after death in the form of the soul. Man is very creative----where there is a need man will devise an acceptable solution.
Consciousness merely provided the means.

Leibniz was a coke addict? Or was Newton?

Can one simply choose to believe in God, in order to place one's bets according to Pascal's Wager? I could not take the theist position even if I wished to. And the other side of the wager is this: if a God does not exist, one has given up a substantial portion of the intellectual freedom of his ONE life on a false hope. A poor wager indeed.

By the way, TF, being a millionaire is not a comforting thought to a billioniare.

I could send you the 4 page paper I wrote showing the futility of Pascal's Wager if you like, but take my word for it, it's a poor analysis.

My gf is Christian and she presented me with this notion: what theists lose in their false belief in the existence of God, they gain in the happier life they lead. Obviously, this does not apply to every single theist, but it does to most.

What she's/I'm trying to say is that sure they live their life believing something that is false (don't we all have false beliefs?), but this false belief causes them to live a happier life (thinking some infinite being is out there watching over them). People gain hope, happiness, and confidence from the belief of God (once again, in most cases), which is something I believe outweighs the negatives of the false belief. If this is your only life, better to lead it happily thinking there is an afterlife and a God that cares for you rather than knowing that once you die you're done.

You can state cases where someone lives a shorter life (etc) because of their belief in God to counter this, but I think that's rare. We're not in Roman Times anymore so no being fed to the tigers .

Having said all this, I'm still agnostic .

Edit: Yes, I believe it is a survival mechanism/comfort mechanism. The thought of this life being it is scary to a lot of people (including me). Some choose to believe in an afterlife etc to counter their fear. Whatever floats their boat...

Perception:

Any proof for this concept of yours or just a belief???

Joe:

Sorry, Newton and my sorry butt should have been more specific.

JL:

Volitionism I agree seems weak. This is another weakness in Pascals wager. One it is self refuting and this is assuming that one can volit ones beliefs.

However, if God is simply a survival mechanism - a volitionism is not a valid position - then it cuts both ways - you cannot then will yourself to make up God to make you feel better. If you have no evidence - then to invent God would simply be a known lie.

Hodge:

I have always had trouble with that aspect. It seems like you are taking the 'what do you have to loose?' approach when you travel down these paths... I don't know.

TF

when, one day, homo sapiens realized that there were some things that were 'unknowns' - questions that no one in it's tribe knew the answers to - fear of this 'unknown' caused it to 'create' deities, to explain all these nasty little problems.

Thus was 'religion' born; does it help us to survive.

Hell no!

It is the biggest adversary to rational, and peaceful lives.
- the cause of most wars
- the cause of most hatred
- the cause of most ignorance
- the cause of overpopulation
- the basis of the vast majority of humanities problems

[to be fair, human nature must share the blame, but then that was the origin of religion! ]

Cocaine was only isolated from the coca leaf in the 1850s. And coca leaves were never exported to Europe in any quantity prior to then. It is, therefore, highly unlikely that someone like Newton could have been a "coke addict" in the seventeenth or eighteenth centuries.

Joe:

Newton was a manic depressive who took amphetamines and other drugs to deal with his depression. I thought that he took a coca based amphetamine - but am finding no suporting documentation on the internet.

I know that he admited not sleeping for weeks at a time and he invented apile of his calculus in one summer. But that could have been simply a manic phase.

I will go further and tell you what I find - if anything.

So for now - I retract my quip until I can substantiate my claim.

TF