Have you ever asked a theist to describe the experience of God?
Not to oversimplify the complex, but I've come to see belief as roughly two forms: ideological and experiential.
I believe ideologically that we are made of star stuff based in the science of stars and elements, i.e., knowledge gained through scientific methods. I have no experience to tell my brain through my senses that iron is forged in dying stars, or even that there is iron in my blood, but I believe these things based on evidence revealed through science and available through education and information technology.
I believe ideologically that atoms are not "tiny, hard things," but that matter is made of empty space, movement, electromagnetic forces, etc. However, my senses tell me that a coffee table is a hard, solid thing. I can safely (and usefully) hold the erroneous belief that the coffee table is not made of empty space but of something solid and hard because my senses and my brain take pain very seriously as a real thing when I bang my knee on it. I mean, it's kind of crucial to survival that we operate this way.
I am interested in how our minds can create transcendent experiences, as real as any physical pain, of otherworldy presence, of massive restructuring of our reality, of a dissolving the perceived line between self and universe, and just how powerful such experiences can be, even for us atheists.
So I'm curious about how self-identified theists of organized belief systems and traditions describe the experience of God as opposed to offering a description from a story they've learned about what the magical, invisible entity called God is supposed to be like.
At the very least, this question will often reveal the belief to be merely a habituated story, and might inspire the theist to ask him or herself some questions, rather than continue defending an ideological identity.
(I believe, both ideologically and experientially
, in my world here in the US and in my travels around the interwebs and media, that most self-identified theists believe in belief, and wish to have some experience of an all powerful, all loving, presence. Ideological belief, while strong in animal brain-driven conditioning, tends to become quite flimsy in the face of such experiences, even when articulated in accordance with the ideology. Even for the irreligious, these experiences are inevitably articulated through learned cultural influences and institutions, not to mention personal bias and imagination. )
Perhaps we should poll our believer friends and see what kind of experiences inspire belief or what kinds of beliefs impinge on experience.
The video linked below, Derren Brown demonstrating experiential belief, serves as an excellent reference for this discussion. It does not address ideological belief, but after viewing it is easy to understand how witnessing such experiences in others in one's social in-group, along with suggestion and cultural stories, can result in "belief in belief" if one does not feel firsthand any kind of extraordinary experience.
I see this question of experience as central to our belief-related debates and yet it is rarely asked that I've ever heard. It is a personal question, after all, but if such personal beliefs are going to be leaking out all over politics, laws, and social norms that we all have to live with, then personal belief is public property as far as I'm concerned.
Edit: I do not offer any of this as evidence against the existence of God, but this understanding of ourselves does make such a concept utterly unnecessary for humanity to survive, thrive, adapt, find meaning, and transcend. That, itself, is more than enough "God" for humans, without needing a special name for it, much less attributing any kind of personhood to it, be it father, mother, guru, or goat-man.
[YOUTUBE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PqG0Ezxr0H4[/YOUTUBE]
Not to oversimplify the complex, but I've come to see belief as roughly two forms: ideological and experiential.
I believe ideologically that we are made of star stuff based in the science of stars and elements, i.e., knowledge gained through scientific methods. I have no experience to tell my brain through my senses that iron is forged in dying stars, or even that there is iron in my blood, but I believe these things based on evidence revealed through science and available through education and information technology.
I believe ideologically that atoms are not "tiny, hard things," but that matter is made of empty space, movement, electromagnetic forces, etc. However, my senses tell me that a coffee table is a hard, solid thing. I can safely (and usefully) hold the erroneous belief that the coffee table is not made of empty space but of something solid and hard because my senses and my brain take pain very seriously as a real thing when I bang my knee on it. I mean, it's kind of crucial to survival that we operate this way.
I am interested in how our minds can create transcendent experiences, as real as any physical pain, of otherworldy presence, of massive restructuring of our reality, of a dissolving the perceived line between self and universe, and just how powerful such experiences can be, even for us atheists.
So I'm curious about how self-identified theists of organized belief systems and traditions describe the experience of God as opposed to offering a description from a story they've learned about what the magical, invisible entity called God is supposed to be like.
At the very least, this question will often reveal the belief to be merely a habituated story, and might inspire the theist to ask him or herself some questions, rather than continue defending an ideological identity.
(I believe, both ideologically and experientially
, in my world here in the US and in my travels around the interwebs and media, that most self-identified theists believe in belief, and wish to have some experience of an all powerful, all loving, presence. Ideological belief, while strong in animal brain-driven conditioning, tends to become quite flimsy in the face of such experiences, even when articulated in accordance with the ideology. Even for the irreligious, these experiences are inevitably articulated through learned cultural influences and institutions, not to mention personal bias and imagination. ) Perhaps we should poll our believer friends and see what kind of experiences inspire belief or what kinds of beliefs impinge on experience.
The video linked below, Derren Brown demonstrating experiential belief, serves as an excellent reference for this discussion. It does not address ideological belief, but after viewing it is easy to understand how witnessing such experiences in others in one's social in-group, along with suggestion and cultural stories, can result in "belief in belief" if one does not feel firsthand any kind of extraordinary experience.
I see this question of experience as central to our belief-related debates and yet it is rarely asked that I've ever heard. It is a personal question, after all, but if such personal beliefs are going to be leaking out all over politics, laws, and social norms that we all have to live with, then personal belief is public property as far as I'm concerned.
Edit: I do not offer any of this as evidence against the existence of God, but this understanding of ourselves does make such a concept utterly unnecessary for humanity to survive, thrive, adapt, find meaning, and transcend. That, itself, is more than enough "God" for humans, without needing a special name for it, much less attributing any kind of personhood to it, be it father, mother, guru, or goat-man.
[YOUTUBE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PqG0Ezxr0H4[/YOUTUBE]
