Fear of God - It's what makes us nicer: Study

[Underseer]

I still put forth the assertion that social influences are much more powerful than most of us realize, certainly more powerful than any of us is conscious of at any given time.

In talking about subconscious drivers, we seem to forget that more subtle equates to more powerful. It's easy to avoid the obvious. Not so much the subconscious.

An example I like is Church Lady from SNL. Remember her? Watching her (Dana Carvey), we can laugh and understand that clearly we are not so petty in our judgments of others, or so nosy, or so repressed. Clearly that's a base mentality not worthy of self aware, self respecting, intelligent humans like us. And of course most of us are not going to be so obvious. Yet, even the best of us are often petty and judgmental, only we tend to do it in more subtle, socially acceptable ways.

We're slaves to herd mentality to the extent that we think we're not (get it? subconscious), and to the extent that we don't understand or accept or look at or admit when it's driving us. Human herds are not always physically together moving in herds in an obvious fashion.

Our influences are subtle and complex and constant, and therefore our self reflective habits should also be subtle and complex and constant if we want to overcome whatever undesirable behaviors arise from subconscious drivers.

I'm going to turn everyone into cognitive science geeks if it's the last thing I do!

There has been quite a bit of research on this, and yes, the group affects our decisions far more than most of us realize.

 

[Angry Floof]

I still put forth the assertion that social influences are much more powerful than most of us realize, certainly more powerful than any of us is conscious of at any given time.

In talking about subconscious drivers, we seem to forget that more subtle equates to more powerful. It's easy to avoid the obvious. Not so much the subconscious.

An example I like is Church Lady from SNL. Remember her? Watching her (Dana Carvey), we can laugh and understand that clearly we are not so petty in our judgments of others, or so nosy, or so repressed. Clearly that's a base mentality not worthy of self aware, self respecting, intelligent humans like us. And of course most of us are not going to be so obvious. Yet, even the best of us are often petty and judgmental, only we tend to do it in more subtle, socially acceptable ways.

We're slaves to herd mentality to the extent that we think we're not (get it? subconscious), and to the extent that we don't understand or accept or look at or admit when it's driving us. Human herds are not always physically together moving in herds in an obvious fashion.

Our influences are subtle and complex and constant, and therefore our self reflective habits should also be subtle and complex and constant if we want to overcome whatever undesirable behaviors arise from subconscious drivers.

I'm going to turn everyone into cognitive science geeks if it's the last thing I do!

There has been quite a bit of research on this, and yes, the group affects our decisions far more than most of us realize.

Yes, I know! It just seems that a lot of people don't apply this knowledge to themselves, believing that our conscious experience of being a rational actor responding consciously and lucidly in all our decisions is an accurate reflection of reality. That is only partially true, and more likely just the tip of a vast iceberg than a the complete picture our minds tell us it is.

 

[fromderinside]

The problem is the iceberg. Let me illustrate. Which iceberg? Where? When? .....

 

[another1]

Neat video and I like his voice. I heard people can influence each other from thousands of miles away. Maybe because of power lines or satellites or whatever.

I'd ask the guy how much mania would ensue if the authentic wiring of receiving structure, helpful convention and predictability through natural conformity were replaced by supposed nonconformity in the name of avoiding tyrannical group opinion and loss of self authenticity. I wonder if there is a magic tuning fork that would crack and open the gates of hell if inborn conformity traits were abandoned in a way the narrator was saying. Not small groups of people, I mean everyone. Some people are too stupid to have their own opinion. I'm sure you would agree and so would the golden voiced man in the video. Denying the stupid people the right to form their own twisted opinions about their own reality could be as dangerous as allowing them to have them, once the tuning fork was silenced. They would gather in the streets and wave misspelled signs, or worse yet invade our homes and harm our pets. I'm kiddin, but are you 100 on this or do you see a titanic wreck possible, if by some miracle there are enough people willing to take something seriously for once? I'm just wondering. The more we talk about it, the more I'll agree apparently.

 

[Philos]

I still put forth the assertion that social influences are much more powerful than most of us realize

hy,

You said "most". I can buy that. I'm thinking that when a person makes the decision to live as a loner, they may be well aware of the power of social influences, indeed it may be social influence that has driven the decision.

"People keep us away from the world" - Albert Camus

"Hell is other people" - John Paul Sartre

I'm thinking that these philosophers note that we are often dragged into other people's agendas and psychologies and much time and effort is wasted in the process. A core part of the philosophical journey (IMHO) is to find that place in ourselves where we can live undisturbed by others. Some fortunate people can do this in a crowd, but others have to make great efforts, even physically moving to isolation. This kind of freedom is not easily won.

I can remember as a teenager, always having to be with someone, and rarely going out without a friend. These days I am liberated and think nothing of sitting in a cafe or pub alone with my thoughts, my diary, or chatting with a stranger. My wife finds this much harder, probably due to the social conformity that you have mentioned, Hy.

Alex.

 

[Angry Floof]

I still put forth the assertion that social influences are much more powerful than most of us realize

hy,

You said "most". I can buy that. I'm thinking that when a person makes the decision to live as a loner, they may be well aware of the power of social influences, indeed it may be social influence that has driven the decision.

"People keep us away from the world" - Albert Camus

"Hell is other people" - John Paul Sartre

I'm thinking that these philosophers note that we are often dragged into other people's agendas and psychologies and much time and effort is wasted in the process. A core part of the philosophical journey (IMHO) is to find that place in ourselves where we can live undisturbed by others. Some fortunate people can do this in a crowd, but others have to make great efforts, even physically moving to isolation. This kind of freedom is not easily won.

I can remember as a teenager, always having to be with someone, and rarely going out without a friend. These days I am liberated and think nothing of sitting in a cafe or pub alone with my thoughts, my diary, or chatting with a stranger. My wife finds this much harder, probably due to the social conformity that you have mentioned, Hy.

Alex.

Alex, I only say "most" because I can't know for sure that someone somewhere is not completely aware of everything that influences them. I doubt that, but who knows.

Whenever I mention the fact that we are all influenced by things we're not conscious of, someone responds by talking in terms of what they are conscious of. Cracks me up every time.

 

[Thomas II]

What are they calling "fear"?

If I recall (and I might get ambitious enough later to look it up), it's the belief in a presence that watches everything you do and is with you observing you all the time that has an effect on behavior.

Fear, on the other hand, can and does affect cooperative behavior, or at least conformative behavior, but not necessarily nicer behavior. Fear hijacks a brain's resources and the frontal lobes have the brains, not the brawn, and so it can't just take back from the limbic system the blood, oxygen, etc., it needs to do its problem-solving thing.

Fear makes problems worse, makes divisive beliefs stick, can paralyze to inaction or misfire action... a state of fear is not your friend unless the danger is physically imminent. If you're in a perfectly safe office or living room or bean bag right now, there is nothing for the flight or fight response to actually respond to, so it just sits there, turned on medium to high, scanning the virtual imagery for threats that might come true right out of our monitors at us, and there's not much energy for intelligent analysis.

Personally, I think that religious indoctrination, with all its "fears", should be considered a form of child abuse.

 

[iolo]

I should think that belonging to any group that concentrates on behaviour is bound to have an effect, and that imagined beings have very little really to do with the matter.

 

[Philos]

Folks,

I've been thinking a little more about the OP title. The word 'fear' is a strong one on the scale of discomforts. I think of this existentially.

So do I have -

Fear of God? I would say No.

Fear of other people? I would say No.

Fear of myself? Yes.

I do fear the damage I could to others and the damage I could do to myself. Does this fear make me nicer? Yes, in a way I think it does. Learning to not beat up on others and not beat up on myself has been a good path, but a very hard one to follow.

Alex.

 

[bilby]

hy,

You said "most". I can buy that. I'm thinking that when a person makes the decision to live as a loner, they may be well aware of the power of social influences, indeed it may be social influence that has driven the decision.

"People keep us away from the world" - Albert Camus

"Hell is other people" - John Paul Sartre

I'm thinking that these philosophers note that we are often dragged into other people's agendas and psychologies and much time and effort is wasted in the process. A core part of the philosophical journey (IMHO) is to find that place in ourselves where we can live undisturbed by others. Some fortunate people can do this in a crowd, but others have to make great efforts, even physically moving to isolation. This kind of freedom is not easily won.

I can remember as a teenager, always having to be with someone, and rarely going out without a friend. These days I am liberated and think nothing of sitting in a cafe or pub alone with my thoughts, my diary, or chatting with a stranger. My wife finds this much harder, probably due to the social conformity that you have mentioned, Hy.

Alex.

Alex, I only say "most" because I can't know for sure that someone somewhere is not completely aware of everything that influences them. I doubt that, but who knows.

Whenever I mention the fact that we are all influenced by things we're not conscious of, someone responds by talking in terms of what they are conscious of. Cracks me up every time.

There are no unconscious influences on my behaviour, as far as I'm aware.

 

[bilby]

What are they calling "fear"?

If I recall (and I might get ambitious enough later to look it up), it's the belief in a presence that watches everything you do and is with you observing you all the time that has an effect on behavior.

Fear, on the other hand, can and does affect cooperative behavior, or at least conformative behavior, but not necessarily nicer behavior. Fear hijacks a brain's resources and the frontal lobes have the brains, not the brawn, and so it can't just take back from the limbic system the blood, oxygen, etc., it needs to do its problem-solving thing.

Fear makes problems worse, makes divisive beliefs stick, can paralyze to inaction or misfire action... a state of fear is not your friend unless the danger is physically imminent. If you're in a perfectly safe office or living room or bean bag right now, there is nothing for the flight or fight response to actually respond to, so it just sits there, turned on medium to high, scanning the virtual imagery for threats that might come true right out of our monitors at us, and there's not much energy for intelligent analysis.

Personally, I think that religious indoctrination, with all its "fears", should be considered a form of child abuse.

Sure, but only because it IS a form of child abuse.

Until quite recently, beating children with sticks wasn't considered to be child abuse; it was believed to be normal and even beneficial to the child. Indeed, that's still the belief in many societies - coincidentally, mostly devoutly religious ones.

Only a few hundred years ago, it was considered acceptable to take a wife at the age of twelve or thirteen years; today in the developed world, the consummation of such a marriage would be a serious crime attracting a long jail term.

Civilisation is slowly dawning on mankind; but we still have a VERY long way to go.

 

[jimrich]

The cops

Scientists have found a long-awaited explanation as to why humans have for centuries maintained orderly societies: the fear of an angry god.

Fear of the cops followed by fear of our parents are the other factors that cause obedience and "nice" behavior.

 

[Eric H]

Fear of the cops followed by fear of our parents are the other factors that cause obedience and "nice" behavior.

How would fear of parents stop murder? Fear of getting caught by the cops might be a barrier, but criminals often hope to get away with their crime. If you truly feared God, then you would understand there is no place to hide, and at some point, you would have to stand before God.

 

[bilby]

Fear of the cops followed by fear of our parents are the other factors that cause obedience and "nice" behavior.

How would fear of parents stop murder? Fear of getting caught by the cops might be a barrier, but criminals often hope to get away with their crime. If you truly feared God, then you would understand there is no place to hide, and at some point, you would have to stand before God.

I don't truly fear my parents, because they are both nice people with my interest at heart; but I doubt either of them would cover up a murder were I to commit one.

I don't truly fear God, because while I have plenty of evidence that my parents (and cops) exist, I have no such evidence for God, and fearing a fictional character seems pretty silly.

If people truly feared Chewbacca, they would always let the wookie win. But that statement is hardly relevant to reality, and nor is yours.

 

[Angry Floof]

How would fear of parents stop murder? Fear of getting caught by the cops might be a barrier, but criminals often hope to get away with their crime. If you truly feared God, then you would understand there is no place to hide, and at some point, you would have to stand before God.

I don't truly fear my parents, because they are both nice people with my interest at heart; but I doubt either of them would cover up a murder were I to commit one.

I don't truly fear God, because while I have plenty of evidence that my parents (and cops) exist, I have no such evidence for God, and fearing a fictional character seems pretty silly.

If people truly feared Chewbacca, they would always let the wookie win. But that statement is hardly relevant to reality, and nor is yours.

It's the same for believers as well, most if not all of them. You can tell by the things they get caught doing in the sight of their supposedly all-seeing, all-knowing God, but don't actually stop doing until other humans hold them accountable.

 

[Eric H]

How would fear of parents stop murder? Fear of getting caught by the cops might be a barrier, but criminals often hope to get away with their crime. If you truly feared God, then you would understand there is no place to hide, and at some point, you would have to stand before God.

I don't truly fear my parents, because they are both nice people with my interest at heart; but I doubt either of them would cover up a murder were I to commit one.

I guess if you committed a murder in front of your parents, they would be a witness, and as you say, they might not cover for you. But how would your parents stop you committing murder if you were ten miles away from them?

Sadly there is too much injustice in this world, if someone is murdered, their life is taken away from them, the victim will never have justice. If the killer is caught, he is then punished, but how does punishing the killer help the dead victim?

God has the power to restore people to a greater good life after death, if there is no God, then there can be no real justice for the victims of this world.

 

[Eric H]

It's the same for believers as well, most if not all of them. You can tell by the things they get caught doing in the sight of their supposedly all-seeing, all-knowing God, but don't actually stop doing until other humans hold them accountable.

I think Oscar Wilde had it right when he said, I can resist everything................Except Temptation!

We all struggle in some way.

 

[Angry Floof]

It's the same for believers as well, most if not all of them. You can tell by the things they get caught doing in the sight of their supposedly all-seeing, all-knowing God, but don't actually stop doing until other humans hold them accountable.

I think Oscar Wilde had it right when he said, I can resist everything................Except Temptation!

We all struggle in some way.

True. Just not all of us proclaim moral superiority while spreading an ideology that creates more struggle.

 

[bilby]

I don't truly fear my parents, because they are both nice people with my interest at heart; but I doubt either of them would cover up a murder were I to commit one.

I guess if you committed a murder in front of your parents, they would be a witness, and as you say, they might not cover for you. But how would your parents stop you committing murder if you were ten miles away from them?

Well, of course they could not.

But any God worth the name could - and yet people still get murdered. Even infants who surely have done nothing wrong.

I would try to prevent such a murder if I knew about it and had the ability to act agonist the murderer - yet Gods never do. That makes me more moral than any Gods that exist (although as none do, that's not saying much. But if a God does exist, he is either a monster, a wimp, or an ignoramus, as demonstrated by every murdered infant ever).

Sadly there is too much injustice in this world, if someone is murdered, their life is taken away from them, the victim will never have justice. If the killer is caught, he is then punished, but how does punishing the killer help the dead victim?

It doesn't.

And yet theists of almost all kinds seem to think that post-hoc punishment is sufficient to absolve their Gods from their inaction. Odd, that.

God has the power to restore people to a greater good life after death, if there is no God, then there can be no real justice for the victims of this world.

Indeed.

But that's no reason to think that there is a God. Appeal to Consequences is a logical fallacy.

Some people do awful, awful things, and get away with it. I'm not happy about that, but pretending it isn't so won't help one iota, and nor will imagining that their victims get some kind of postmortem restitution (as if any restitution could make things better), so in the absence of any Gods, it's up to us to do what little we can to mitigate the awfulness. Or maybe we can pretend that there is a God to punish the wrongdoers, and then we can be satisfied to watch the carnage while doing nothing. Thus does religion make good men do nothing, and allow evil to triumph.

 

[Eric H]

I would try to prevent such a murder if I knew about it and had the ability to act agonist the murderer
.

That explains your impotence and mine, we do not have supernatural powers.

- yet Gods never do. That makes me more moral than any Gods that exist (although as none do, that's not saying much. But if a God does exist, he is either a monster, a wimp, or an ignoramus, as demonstrated by every murdered infant ever).

God has given you the freedom to be a wonderful moral and caring atheist, presumably this is the freedom form God that you want. I could not imagine that you would want God to make you a theist against your will. If you want some kind of freedom, then everyone else should have freedom, even if they are not as moral as you.

Thus does religion make good men do nothing, and allow evil to triumph.

Evil people aim to win with guns and bombs, if good people retaliate with guns and bombs, they too can become evil. I don't think you could truthfully apply the self defence argument; when you look at how America and Britain invaded Afghanistan and Iraq.

I think mahatma Gandhi tried to end conflict in a peaceful way, and Nelson Mandela possibly tried to use peaceful ways after he was released from prison. Peace making can be a risky business, Neville Chamberlain didn't have much luck trying for peace with Adolph.