• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

Why would a reasonable person believe in God?

To fit in i.e. to be a sheeple and stand out as some odd-ball.

Then for science aspect it is merely molding their definition of God to pass a science test.

Ex God = Universe = Cosmos etc......
 
rrr6 said:
To fit in i.e. to be a sheeple and stand out as some odd-ball.

Then for science aspect it is merely molding their definition of God to pass a science test.

Ex God = Universe = Cosmos etc......
Click to expand...

Give the man a candy bar! Spot on!
 
Sheeple

To not stand out as some odd-ball.

Tho the opposite could be true also just to get attention that way.

Placebo efffect---previously mentioned

And now I forget the other one.

My cosmic heirarchy is all inclusive so all of the above are included in it.

"U"niverse > Universe > universe{s} > I-verse < you-verse < we-verse < them-verse

God{ ess } = Universe imho


angelo said:
rrr6 said:
To fit in i.e. to be a sheeple and stand out as some odd-ball.

Then for science aspect it is merely molding their definition of God to pass a science test.

Ex God = Universe = Cosmos etc......
Click to expand...

Give the man a candy bar! Spot on!
Click to expand...
 
rrr6 said:
To not stand out as some odd-ball.

Tho the opposite could be true also just to get attention that way.

Placebo efffect---previously mentioned

And now I forget the other one.

My cosmic heirarchy is all inclusive so all of the above are included in it.

"U"niverse > Universe > universe{s} > I-verse < you-verse < we-verse < them-verse

God{ ess } = Universe imho


angelo said:
Give the man a candy bar! Spot on!
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

Placebo the same thing to say it was the best.

Sheeple I don't think that the company has a great day.

The pies; the.

Pies.
 
In reality, I'm amazed at the otherwise intelligent people who believe in magic, and astrology, medical quackery, psychics, little green/grey men, conspiracy theories, and believing there's such a thing as free lunch, let alone a deity!
 
If ego-bubble-syndrome is best Talk-Free-Ridicule has to offer humanity, our specie has not chance of survival.

My cosmic heirarchy is all inclusive and that includes those with ego-bubble-brain-syndrome.

"U"niverse > Universe > universe{s} > I-verse < you-verse < we-verse < them-verse

God{ ess } = Universe imho

Still waiting for rational, logical common sense to counter the sad lack of moral and intellectual integrity from bubble-brains.

The truth exists for those with sincerity of heart, and some effort to find it. Even bubble-brains can change and evolve.

They may not know this fact as there are many the are cluess too. Sad :(



r6
 
angelo said:
In reality, I'm amazed at the otherwise intelligent people who believe in magic, and astrology, medical quackery, psychics, little green/grey men, conspiracy theories, and believing there's such a thing as free lunch, let alone a deity!
Click to expand...

Newton, one of the smartest humans in history believed in alchemy and probably killed himself with lead poisoning due to all those alchemical experiments. If one of the smartest of us could kill himself with his own stupidity, why is it so hard to believe that non-geniuses can be more wrong about more things?
 
Underseer said:
angelo said:
In reality, I'm amazed at the otherwise intelligent people who believe in magic, and astrology, medical quackery, psychics, little green/grey men, conspiracy theories, and believing there's such a thing as free lunch, let alone a deity!
Click to expand...

Newton, one of the smartest humans in history believed in alchemy and probably killed himself with lead poisoning due to all those alchemical experiments. If one of the smartest of us could kill himself with his own stupidity, why is it so hard to believe that non-geniuses can be more wrong about more things?
Click to expand...

You're correct of course. But you would think they would or should know better.
 
angelo said:
Underseer said:
Newton, one of the smartest humans in history believed in alchemy and probably killed himself with lead poisoning due to all those alchemical experiments. If one of the smartest of us could kill himself with his own stupidity, why is it so hard to believe that non-geniuses can be more wrong about more things?
Click to expand...

You're correct of course. But you would think they would or should know better.
Click to expand...
People in any time period believe that they have it all figured out. I often wonder which of the things we now accept as obviously true will be laughed at in another couple hundred years.
 
When the dude proposed that mesons should exist, Feynman is purported to have yelled from back of room or dudeince somehwere, 'in a pigs eye'. Some months, year or so later, mesons were observed. Feyman had to eat his pig rap comments ;--D

r6

rrr6 said:
If ego-bubble-syndrome is best Talk-Free-Ridicule has to offer humanity, our specie has not chance of survival.

My cosmic heirarchy is all inclusive and that includes those with ego-bubble-brain-syndrome.

"U"niverse > Universe > universe{s} > I-verse < you-verse < we-verse < them-verse

God{ ess } = Universe imho

Still waiting for rational, logical common sense to counter the sad lack of moral and intellectual integrity from bubble-brains.

The truth exists for those with sincerity of heart, and some effort to find it. Even bubble-brains can change and evolve.

They may not know this fact as there are many the are cluess too. Sad :(



r6
Click to expand...
 
In a June 2002 Gallup survey*, Gallup asked respondents to rate the statement, " I have had a profound religious experience or awakening that changed the direction of my life," on a scale from 0 to 5, with 0 standing for "does not apply at all" and 5 for "applies completely." Forty-one percent of Americans -- which projects to about 80 million adults nationwide -- said the statement completely applies to them.

Here may be part of the answer.

There is lots of things that can be part of this set of experiences, Maslow's peak experiences, NDEs, hypnogogic dreams and more. With such a large range of anomalous mental states, it is no wonder religion got started and persists.
 
Cheerful Charlie said:
In a June 2002 Gallup survey*, Gallup asked respondents to rate the statement, " I have had a profound religious experience or awakening that changed the direction of my life," on a scale from 0 to 5, with 0 standing for "does not apply at all" and 5 for "applies completely." Forty-one percent of Americans -- which projects to about 80 million adults nationwide -- said the statement completely applies to them.

Here may be part of the answer.

There is lots of things that can be part of this set of experiences, Maslow's peak experiences, NDEs, hypnogogic dreams and more. With such a large range of anomalous mental states, it is no wonder religion got started and persists.
Click to expand...

I think your right, and one can see a parallel between these experiences and people who think they have had extraterrestrial experience that has them convinced they were visited.
 
Kidnapping by little grey mean with bulging eyes was a favourite. Now it's moving into the new religious experience of "climate disruption."
 
OLDMAN said:
Cheerful Charlie said:
In a June 2002 Gallup survey*, Gallup asked respondents to rate the statement, " I have had a profound religious experience or awakening that changed the direction of my life," on a scale from 0 to 5, with 0 standing for "does not apply at all" and 5 for "applies completely." Forty-one percent of Americans -- which projects to about 80 million adults nationwide -- said the statement completely applies to them.

Here may be part of the answer.

There is lots of things that can be part of this set of experiences, Maslow's peak experiences, NDEs, hypnogogic dreams and more. With such a large range of anomalous mental states, it is no wonder religion got started and persists.
Click to expand...

I think your right, and one can see a parallel between these experiences and people who think they have had extraterrestrial experience that has them convinced they were visited.
Click to expand...
The OP should be asking why a rational person would ever "invent" a god, not merely believe in one. Why would a brain do that?

My experiences have led me to the conclusion that the whole idea of gods proceeds from what we today would recognize and categorize as behavior marked by mental illness. So I think that's how gods came to be part of our psychology. Religion and it's use of gods is simply a legacy of those times.
 
The invention of god was part of our evolution. Apes and all other close relatives in the animal kingdom's conciousness have not evolved to the same level as Homo Sapiens.
 
angelo said:
The invention of god was part of our evolution. Apes and all other close relatives in the animal kingdom's conciousness have not evolved to the same level as Homo Sapiens.
Click to expand...

Exactly. The apes are much more evolved.
 
DrZoidberg said:
... I refuse to believe that belief in God isn't psychologically useful somehow. .... The belief acting as a tool in order to strengthen the believers life somehow. If not, I can't see how this belief could have possible survived. ... What is the function of theism? .... jump straight to whatever boon they get from the faith itself, without bothering about whether the hypothesis is true or not ... So what is the benefit from holding ... belief? The actual benefit.
Click to expand...

Seems to me you are not talking about reason at all. Rather it seems you are asking what is the benefit of making presumptions or assuming some marker for what isn't known. That goes way before reason. It is demonstrated as beneficial that a living thing use inputs outside themselves. For instance, they see and seeing has become ever more prominent in the story of living things over time. Obviously it is reasonable that seeing has benefits.

Yet those who first possessed sight had not the ability to reason which is why I deconstructed your post the way you see above.

If it is not reason that drives living things act according to inputs outside themselves it must be explained another way because organisms all do that and they are still here proliferating. Perhaps it is the result of acting in a certain way to signal events that leads one's to progeny succeeding more than others.

We have evidence that this is true. Some maximize probabilities based on what information they have at hand others optimize using the same information. Both patterns exist in most species. It may be as simple as that, generational experience leads to certain probabilistic behaviors. From there to pantheism thence religion is not a leap. It is another mechanism developed over generations for organizing behavior in both solitary and social species. Religion is nothing more than group behavior IAC with successful patterns in groups. Its even evident that this or that religion is or is not successful given the same evolutionary presumptions.

Which religion is going to become dominant given humans are recognizing all individuals contribute to social success regardless of personal habits. Stay tuned.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom