Your metaphysical beliefs are a defense against existential anxiety - thought experiment

[modernPrimitive2]

Claim: Your metaphysical beliefs are a defense against existential anxiety.

I've seen a ton of arguments accusing theists that their beliefs form a sort of psychological defense against facing the implications of a lack of belief, with which I of course agree. However, I would argue that atheism is not a "lack of belief" (as is often argued) as I have never encountered as much "certainty" as I have in my discussions with atheists / materialists. I know that atheism is not the same as materialism, however a large proportion of atheists are materialist and the absence of a belief in gods does not imply a complete absence of ALL belief. So I propose that whether one believes in a kind of metaphysical idealism (reality is the mind of a supreme being of sorts) or an metaphysical materialism, theistic or non-theistic or even an agnosticism - that these are all psychological defense mechanisms aimed at displacing existential anxiety.

Why is this important? Because if we are really in search of truth rather than having some alternative unconscious agenda then we are required to see through our own belief. Materialism is to me (and I assume to most) a kind of intuitive, innate belief. Even if we drop belief in gods it is very difficult to not believe in the "material solidity" of the chair which holds up my weight, so I would belief, albeit intuitive is still present.

So my claim is fairly easy to demonstrate, at least subjectively. Simply examine your own mental / emotional activity by asking the question "What if my belief is not true?" or alternatively "What if the X belief actually IS true". For this to work it's necessary that one can for some brief moment truly entertain that possibility using one's imaginative faculties.

For example, what if my thoughts can influence reality (some form of philosophical idealism)? What if I am driving down the motorway and I have a thought about my vehicle's tyre bursting? What anxieties emerge here? Follow through with the imaginative implications and keep going...

I believe this will demonstrate my hypothesis fairly successfully provided one is able to truly suspend one's current belief and entertain the belief in question for a brief moment. If we are really to call ourselves skeptics then I believe this method of inquiry into our own bias to be crucial. It would be interesting to hear other people's experience with this. Looking forward to some feedback!

 

[GenesisNemesis]

There are other ways to reduce existential anxiety than with metaphysical beliefs, like accepting what is not in your control. Moreover, individual temperaments are influenced by a wide variety of factors other than metaphysical beliefs, such as upbringing, or one's social environment.

 

[modernPrimitive2]

GenesisNemesis - Now there's a name I haven't seen since the days of the Internet Infidels!

There are other ways to reduce existential anxiety than with metaphysical beliefs, like accepting what is not in your control.

Agreed, but it's generally not the default position. One would generally have to go through a process of facing existential anxiety in learning to let go of control.

Moreover, individual temperaments are influenced by a wide variety of factors other than metaphysical beliefs, such as upbringing, or one's social environment.

Yeah but which comes first and does it even matter? One's metaphysical belief must necessarily be some form of adaptation to social or genetic disposition.

Most importantly thought, have you done the thought experiment?

 

[Juma]

Claim: Your metaphysical beliefs are a defense against existential anxiety.

I've seen a ton of arguments accusing theists that their beliefs form a sort of psychological defense against facing the implications of a lack of belief, with which I of course agree. However, I would argue that atheism is not a "lack of belief" (as is often argued) as I have never encountered as much "certainty" as I have in my discussions with atheists / materialists. I know that atheism is not the same as materialism, however a large proportion of atheists are materialist and the absence of a belief in gods does not imply a complete absence of ALL belief. So I propose that whether one believes in a kind of metaphysical idealism (reality is the mind of a supreme being of sorts) or an metaphysical materialism, theistic or non-theistic or even an agnosticism - that these are all psychological defense mechanisms aimed at displacing existential anxiety.

Why is this important? Because if we are really in search of truth rather than having some alternative unconscious agenda then we are required to see through our own belief. Materialism is to me (and I assume to most) a kind of intuitive, innate belief. Even if we drop belief in gods it is very difficult to not believe in the "material solidity" of the chair which holds up my weight, so I would belief, albeit intuitive is still present.

So my claim is fairly easy to demonstrate, at least subjectively. Simply examine your own mental / emotional activity by asking the question "What if my belief is not true?" or alternatively "What if the X belief actually IS true". For this to work it's necessary that one can for some brief moment truly entertain that possibility using one's imaginative faculties.

For example, what if my thoughts can influence reality (some form of philosophical idealism)? What if I am driving down the motorway and I have a thought about my vehicle's tyre bursting? What anxieties emerge here? Follow through with the imaginative implications and keep going...

I believe this will demonstrate my hypothesis fairly successfully provided one is able to truly suspend one's current belief and entertain the belief in question for a brief moment. If we are really to call ourselves skeptics then I believe this method of inquiry into our own bias to be crucial. It would be interesting to hear other people's experience with this. Looking forward to some feedback!

If you can show evidens of any god then you simply has shown that there is, at least one, god. Belief is not needed.

 

[Lion IRC]

Is the Op predicated on the notion that atheism is itself a belief - about the metaphysical
non-existence of God(s)?

In other words, is there an implication that if the theist uses God/afterlife as a security blanket for existential angst, that the atheist also might be somehow putting their 'metaphysical' head in the sand for a similar reason, albeit in the other direction?

 

[fromderinside]

Is the Op predicated on the notion that atheism is itself a belief - about the metaphysical
non-existence of God(s)?

In other words, is there an implication that if the theist uses God/afterlife as a security blanket for existential angst, that the atheist also might be somehow putting their 'metaphysical' head in the sand for a similar reason, albeit in the other direction?

So the other direction is ....

or this

pardon the obvious photo shopping but a point is being made here.

 

[Lion IRC]

I don't think those photos add much to the discussion.

 

[modernPrimitive2]

If you can show evidens of any god then you simply has shown that there is, at least one, god. Belief is not needed.

An absence of belief in gods does not imply an absence of ALL beliefs. We seem have a very innate and intuitive belief in material existence simply because it is our experience that we seem to "bump up" against a supposed material reality - it appears rather "solid" so to speak. I would argue that creationists and philosophical idealists at some level are materialists too, despite their conscious position to the contrary. Remove the one layer of belief and another underlying belief emerges.

 

[Juma]

If you can show evidens of any god then you simply has shown that there is, at least one, god. Belief is not needed.

An absence of belief in gods does not imply an absence of ALL beliefs. We seem have a very innate and intuitive belief in material existence simply because it is our experience that we seem to "bump up" against a supposed material reality - it appears rather "solid" so to speak. I would argue that creationists and philosophical idealists at some level are materialists too, despite their conscious position to the contrary. Remove the one layer of belief and another underlying belief emerges.

Solidity of materials isnt a belief. It is supported by evidens. That materials are mostly empty space when seen at the scale of elementary particles doesnt mean that they arent solid in macro scale.

 

[modernPrimitive2]

Is the Op predicated on the notion that atheism is itself a belief - about the metaphysical
non-existence of God(s)?

In other words, is there an implication that if the theist uses God/afterlife as a security blanket for existential angst, that the atheist also might be somehow putting their 'metaphysical' head in the sand for a similar reason, albeit in the other direction?

Not exactly. I would agree that by a strict definition atheism is actually a lack of belief. However, it's all the corresponding and associated metaphysical beliefs (or emergence of underlying beliefs) that may displace existential anxiety. For example strictly speaking certain forms of Buddhism are a form of atheism but may retain ideas about philosophical idealism as opposed to the more common form of atheism in the West which typically corresponds to metaphysical materialism. It's the metaphysical belief that I would question.

 

[modernPrimitive2]

Solidity of materials isnt a belief. It is supported by evidens. That materials are mostly empty space when seen at the scale of elementary particles doesnt mean that they arent solid in macro scale.

How do you know this? Is the belief primary or the "evidence" for "solid matter" primary? By that I mean, suppose we entertain the idea of metaphysical idealism and we say that reality is made of the "mind stuff" of a supreme being (aka God) of which we are merely individual manifestations, where potentially thoughts could alter our physical reality (telekinesis etc). In such a reality, if you beliefs (and your corresponding thoughts) were aligned with the idea of a material "solid" reality, which in turn affected the very solidity of the reality you experience (because thoughts affect reality) - then how would you know the difference between this and an actual real material reality?

Do you see the circular reasoning?

 

[Juma]

Solidity of materials isnt a belief. It is supported by evidens. That materials are mostly empty space when seen at the scale of elementary particles doesnt mean that they arent solid in macro scale.

How do you know this? Is the belief primary or the "evidence" for "solid matter" primary? By that I mean, suppose we entertain the idea of metaphysical idealism and we say that reality is made of the "mind stuff" of a supreme being (aka God) of which we are merely individual manifestations, where potentially thoughts could alter our physical reality (telekinesis etc). In such a reality, if you beliefs (and your corresponding thoughts) were aligned with the idea of a material "solid" reality, which in turn affected the very solidity of the reality you experience (because thoughts affect reality) - then how would you know the difference between this and an actual real material reality?

Do you see the circular reasoning?

no it is not circular.
1) What would the difference be?
2) what evidens do you have of this supreme being?

 

[Lion IRC]

Is the Op predicated on the notion that atheism is itself a belief - about the metaphysical
non-existence of God(s)?

In other words, is there an implication that if the theist uses God/afterlife as a security blanket for existential angst, that the atheist also might be somehow putting their 'metaphysical' head in the sand for a similar reason, albeit in the other direction?

Not exactly. I would agree that by a strict definition atheism is actually a lack of belief. However, it's all the corresponding and associated metaphysical beliefs (or emergence of underlying beliefs) that may displace existential anxiety. For example strictly speaking certain forms of Buddhism are a form of atheism but may retain ideas about philosophical idealism as opposed to the more common form of atheism in the West which typically corresponds to metaphysical materialism. It's the metaphysical belief that I would question.

I think atheism entails at least some degree of belief with respect the existence (or non-existence) of God.
Whether or not other beliefs or perspectives emerge from that starting point is interesting, but if you think God doesn't exist, then that belief cannot itself be called "the absence of belief". That would be an oxymoron.

I've never seen a satisfactory rebuttal of the idea that - if religion is invented by people who wish God was real -then atheism is invented by people who wish He is not real.

If humans invent God in their own likeness, imagining the sort of God they wish were true, then the corrolary would be that atheists invent the sort of 'god' they wish - impotent, irrelevant, invisible.

 

[rousseau]

I don't understanding the argument that materialism is another form of avoidance. Materialism is the belief in that which is knowable, whereas theism is the belief in that which is unknowable.

If anything, anybody calling themselves a 'materialist' are likely the exact opposite of what you propose, they are interested in uncovering the world around them so they better understand it. They most certainly aren't hiding from anything.

 

[GenesisNemesis]

I've never seen a satisfactory rebuttal of the idea that - if religion is invented by people who wish God was real -then atheism is invented by people who wish He is not real.

The rebuttal is that the people who don't believe in God aren't convinced by the arguments for one. Whether you refuse to accept that or not is up to you.

 

[fromderinside]

I don't think those photos add much to the discussion.

... other than suggesting atheists may be rationalist without being empiricist. All I was suggesting is that such atheism is not productive nor is it based on other than speculation, that a philosophy of atheism is actually a belief. How that can be the case when one is being objective, being an observer, is a non sequitur.

 

[fromderinside]

I don't understanding the argument that materialism is another form of avoidance. Materialism is the belief in that which is knowable, whereas theism is the belief in that which is unknowable.

If anything, anybody calling themselves a 'materialist' are likely the exact opposite of what you propose, they are interested in uncovering the world around them so they better understand it. They most certainly aren't hiding from anything.

May I amplify here? Isn't atheism based on the notion that observing the world as it is leads the the inescapable conclusion there is no mystical force acting. Saying that there is a particle of belief is like saying that one should reject theory of earth formation and life evolution because there is the possibility there there are possible errors in converting observation to theory. Well sure, but, that's throwing out the baby with the bath water in favor of hunch and faerie tale.

 

[fromderinside]

I've never seen a satisfactory rebuttal of the idea that - if religion is invented by people who wish God was real -then atheism is invented by people who wish He is not real.

The rebuttal is that the people who don't believe in God aren't convinced by the arguments for one. Whether you refuse to accept that or not is up to you.

Really? Are you equating possibility that theory based on observation and experiment may be in error is the same as closing one's eyes and wishing for faeries.

 

[GenesisNemesis]

The rebuttal is that the people who don't believe in God aren't convinced by the arguments for one. Whether you refuse to accept that or not is up to you.

Really? Are you equating possibility that theory based on observation and experiment may be in error is the same as closing one's eyes and wishing for faeries.

No idea what you're talking about.

 

[fromderinside]

Really? Are you equating possibility that theory based on observation and experiment may be in error is the same as closing one's eyes and wishing for faeries.

No idea what you're talking about.

I'm talking about a false equivalence in the interests of keeping atheism a philosophical topic. If observation and physical theory form the basis of one's beliefs (atheism) then why is that compared with one's belief's based on faeries and metaphysical hand jobs. There is no equivalence. Belief in God cannot be supported by other than dream walking.