Psychologist's take on religion: human need for significance

[Treedbear]

People want to feel like their life is meaningful, and that they are important, whether that's through God, a shiny car, or even being useful to someone or something. So yea.. this hypothesis makes total sense to me. If we are not biologically inclined to believe we are important for some reason, why have kids, why go to work, why buy things, why seek out experiences?

What I mean is.. of course there are reasons to enjoy life for it's own sake, but evolution is usually going to ensure that psychologically we believe we are relevant and important, by whatever means. So religion is probably indeed a by-product of our neural wiring.

Feelings are the result of the level of harmony or conflict within our brain. Harmony feels good because it expends less energy and leads to efficiency. Conflict indicates a problem that requires resolution and effort in order to achieve a dynamic equilibrium. Feeling meaningful requires the mind to be in harmony with itself (and usually with its environment), and feeling important is a part of thinking one is fulfilling one's purpose by virtue of striving to be in harmony with things that provide meaning. That can include all the ways you mentioned as examples. Most of the things we find important are culturally acquired, while some are deductively arrived at, and a few are biologically based with no assembly required. My opinion is that religion satisfies the first and sometimes afterwards the second paths, rather than the third.

 

[Copernicus]

Is there anything beyond a deity that does that? It seems to me that it varies considerably with individuals, but a big part of our existence is our relationships with other people and also with domesticated animals. People are evolved to form social relationships. Virtually all religions invent deities or spirits that believers form imaginary relationships with--the  imaginary friend phenomenon. It is probably reasonable to think of religion as a natural outgrowth of our need to form intimate social relationships. To many believers, atheism does seem to threaten the loss of a very significant aspect of their lives. So I can see why the experimenters thought to look at that kind of bonding as a vector for religious thinking.

Religion is a cultural adaptation for survival, similar to things like patriotism and racism. They are ways of controlling societies in order to promote their own existence. They come and go or adapt to changing environments quicker than genetic mutations. So they have been a source of meaning and purpose, but I fail to see anything metaphysical in them. If anything it is religions that rely on the paranormal. Nature is filled with more wonder and awe than any of religion's supernatural seductions. I've never had an imaginary friend as described in your link.

I wasn't trying to imply anything metaphysical about religion, just that it is intertwined with social relationships. Deities are socialized beings with human and animal traits. So are imagined aliens and other kinds of spirits. One can exchange thoughts with them. As for the imaginary friend phenomenon, it is well-attested and widespread, although not everyone has an imaginary childhood friend. The point is that we populate our lives with all sorts of imaginary beings. The real ones are those who periodically provide us with evidence that they are not as we imagine them to be.

People want to feel like their life is meaningful, and that they are important, whether that's through God, a shiny car, or even being useful to someone or something. So yea.. this hypothesis makes total sense to me. If we are not biologically inclined to believe we are important for some reason, why have kids, why go to work, why buy things, why seek out experiences?

What I mean is.. of course there are reasons to enjoy life for it's own sake, but evolution is usually going to ensure that psychologically we believe we are relevant and important, by whatever means. So religion is probably indeed a by-product of our neural wiring.

That is my feeling, as well. Human beings do not think or behave rationally. They operate on a kind of emotional autopilot. Logic and reason play an important role, but mainly as an afterthought--a mental cleaning up operation that allows people to tweak their everyday autopilot. To make it more internally consistent with accumulated experiences.

 

[Treedbear]

Religion is a cultural adaptation for survival, similar to things like patriotism and racism. They are ways of controlling societies in order to promote their own existence. They come and go or adapt to changing environments quicker than genetic mutations. So they have been a source of meaning and purpose, but I fail to see anything metaphysical in them. If anything it is religions that rely on the paranormal. Nature is filled with more wonder and awe than any of religion's supernatural seductions. I've never had an imaginary friend as described in your link.

I wasn't trying to imply anything metaphysical about religion, just that it is intertwined with social relationships.

Sorry, it was an issue brought up in your quote from Routledge:
"... those [athiests] who reject the metaphysics of more traditional religious systems."

Deities are socialized beings with human and animal traits. So are imagined aliens and other kinds of spirits. One can exchange thoughts with them. As for the imaginary friend phenomenon, it is well-attested and widespread, although not everyone has an imaginary childhood friend. The point is that we populate our lives with all sorts of imaginary beings. The real ones are those who periodically provide us with evidence that they are not as we imagine them to be.

I don't expect extraterrestrial beings to certify my belief anytime soon. But this is quite different from imaginary dieties because the evidence at Puma Punku requires that an intelligent being created it. That might be the main difference between the two types of belief. Ever since the Enlightenment there has been less and less for a God to do.

 

[Copernicus]

I wasn't trying to imply anything metaphysical about religion, just that it is intertwined with social relationships.

Sorry, it was an issue brought up in your quote from Routledge:
"... those [athiests] who reject the metaphysics of more traditional religious systems."

Ah, now I understand. I just took Routledge to be referring to metaphysical spiritualism (Cartesian dualism). Atheists tend to be materialists usually, so there is a metaphysical divide there.

Deities are socialized beings with human and animal traits. So are imagined aliens and other kinds of spirits. One can exchange thoughts with them. As for the imaginary friend phenomenon, it is well-attested and widespread, although not everyone has an imaginary childhood friend. The point is that we populate our lives with all sorts of imaginary beings. The real ones are those who periodically provide us with evidence that they are not as we imagine them to be.

I don't expect extraterrestrial beings to certify my belief anytime soon. But this is quite different from imaginary dieties because the evidence at Puma Punku requires that an intelligent being created it. That might be the main difference between the two types of belief. Ever since the Enlightenment there has been less and less for a God to do.

Actually, those stones at Pumapunku are extremely unlikely to have been put there by aliens. Archaeologists and anthropologists have some pretty decent theories on such engineering feats in prehistoric times. The stones at Easter Island have been convincingly accounted for, and the Aymara/Quechua civilization quite likely used similar techniques. Nevertheless, I am skeptical that atheists are prone to believing in alien civilizations because that adds more meaning or significance to our lives. In my experience, religious folks (i.e. most people) are just as interested, if not more so, in fanciful speculation about alien visitors and ghosts.

 

[Jobar]

Most of the atheists I know are skeptics; we're from Missouri, and you've gotta show us. Not universally true- I recently met a woman who seemed to believe in crystal power, who was still an atheist. But such people are somewhat rare. Atheism is skepticism applied to god(s), and so it seems unlikely that atheists will not apply skepticism to other aspects of their lives.

But religion is not the same as theism, despite the fact that Western religions tend to be theistic. Religion is a social phenomenon of which god(s) are only an aspect.

Given how universal some form of religion is among all human societies, it obviously has a powerful social function. I think it's that religion serves as an ingroup which is difficult to fake; it provides badges, passwords, and secret signs that enable identification of other members of the ingroup. The fact that dogmas are hard to believe, or rituals difficult or expensive, allows members to tell how dedicated and sincere other members are.

Religion is similar to the tail of the peacock, in that it's a liability in many ways- but its function as an ingroup identifier is beneficial enough to overcome those liabilities.

 

[sharon45]

Is there anything beyond a deity that does that?

I would hope so, as this so-called deity is fancied.

It seems to me that it varies considerably with individuals, but a big part of our existence is our relationships with other people and also with domesticated animals. People are evolved to form social relationships.

Of course, because we are social animals.

Virtually all religions invent deities or spirits that believers form imaginary relationships with--the  imaginary friend phenomenon.

Again with the term "phenomenon." If anything, religion is just a very minute segment from the social phenomenon known as "rewarding bad behavior," and hardly worth bothering to write an article on something we've realized since early childhood.

It is probably reasonable to think of religion as a natural outgrowth of our need to form intimate social relationships.

Instead, it is the contrary. Religion is the running away and hiding from relationships and of our personal selves.

To many believers, atheism does seem to threaten the loss of a very significant aspect of their lives.

Yes, atheism does actually endanger their belief system.

So I can see why the experimenters thought to look at that kind of bonding as a vector for religious thinking.

Right, like the social bonding of addicts sharing needles.

@sharon45: I'm sorry that you felt I was being too dismissive, but I'm really not interested in bashing religion and believers.

I'm not here to simply knock around religion either, I want to point a lot further towards the truth about it.

I'm more interested in understanding the phenomenon of religion and why it plays such an important role in human cultures.

Well, first grasp that it is not a phenomenon or major component on its own, as mentioned above.

 

[sharon45]

I wasn't trying to imply anything metaphysical about religion, just that it is intertwined with social relationships.

Obviously, since our relationships have both good and bad aspects.

One can exchange thoughts with them. As for the imaginary friend phenomenon, it is well-attested and widespread, although not everyone has an imaginary childhood friend.

Not everyone has heard of Santa either.

The point is that we populate our lives with all sorts of imaginary beings.
The real ones are those who periodically provide us with evidence that they are not as we imagine them to be.

Yes, and even some from out of different religions provide plenty of evidence that they are not as most imagine them.

People want to feel like their life is meaningful, and that they are important, whether that's through God, a shiny car, or even being useful to someone or something. So yea.. this hypothesis makes total sense to me. If we are not biologically inclined to believe we are important for some reason, why have kids, why go to work, why buy things, why seek out experiences?

What I mean is.. of course there are reasons to enjoy life for it's own sake, but evolution is usually going to ensure that psychologically we believe we are relevant and important, by whatever means. So religion is probably indeed a by-product of our neural wiring.

That is my feeling, as well. Human beings do not think or behave rationally. They operate on a kind of emotional autopilot. Logic and reason play an important role, but mainly as an afterthought--a mental cleaning up operation that allows people to tweak their everyday autopilot. To make it more internally consistent with accumulated experiences.

Yet religions are really a denial of self.

 

[sharon45]

Given how universal some form of religion is among all human societies, it obviously has a powerful social function. I think it's that religion serves as an ingroup which is difficult to fake; it provides badges, passwords, and secret signs that enable identification of other members of the ingroup. The fact that dogmas are hard to believe, or rituals difficult or expensive, allows members to tell how dedicated and sincere other members are.

Considering that there are literally billions of fakers, I think this clearly demonstrates that it is very easy to deceive.

 

[ronburgundy]

This Psychologists has an incorrect causal theory about why more non-religious people believe in UFOs. He is suggesting that when people cannot find "meaning" in traditional religion they turn to things like UFOs. While maybe partly true, a major reason for the negative correlation between religion and UFO belief is that many religions get people to reject UFOs on faith because its incompatible with their religion. UFOs contradict the religious notion of human specialness, and ghosts contradict many Christians notions of heaven and the afterlife.
If science found definitive evidence of either UFOs or life on other planets, these same religious rejecters of UFOs would reject that science.

IOW, it isn't that non-theists fill the void with UFOs. IT is that many people find the idea of UFOs and ghosts compelling, but if they want to also hold a particular traditional religious view, they must reject those ideas for irrational and faith based reasons.