(continued...)
Social scientists have long believed that the emotional depth and complexity of the human mind means that mindful, self-aware people necessarily suffer from deep existential dread. Spiritual beliefs evolved over thousands of years as nature’s way to help us balance this out and go on functioning.
This is not a research finding, but a belief that "social scientists" have, apparently. It is speculation.
If a loved one dies, even many anti-religious people usually feel a need for a farewell ritual, complete with readings from old books and intoned declarations that are not unlike prayers.
Again, not research, but a generalisation. Probably a fair one, apart from the tacked-on bit about prayer at the end. (Did you see what the author tried to do there?)
In war situations, commanders frequently comment that atheist soldiers pray far more than they think they do.
Unverified anecdote. At this point, the author's bias is really starting to shine through.
Statistics show that the majority of people who stop being part of organized religious groups don’t become committed atheists, but retain a mental model in which “The Universe” somehow has a purpose for humanity.
Result 10: most people who dump organised religion tend to retain a mental model in which the universe is "purposeful".
Caveat: The source of the "statistics" is not cited.
In the US, only 20 per cent of people have no religious affiliation, but of these, only one in ten say they are atheists. The majority are “nothing in particular” according to figures published in New Scientist.
Result 11: Of the "no religion" census group (20% of the population), one-tenth say they are atheists (2% of the population).
There are other, more socially-oriented evolutionary purposes, too. Religious communities grow faster, since people behave better (referring to the general majority over the millennia, as opposed to minority extremists highlighted by the media on any given day).
No particular research is cited for the claim that religious communities grow faster. (Faster than what? Communities populated entirely by atheists? Where are those communities?)
Why is this so? Religious folk attend weekly lectures on morality, read portions of respected books about the subject on a daily basis and regularly discuss the subject in groups, so it would be inevitable that some of this guidance sinks in.
Assumption by the author, again showing his bias.
There is also the notion that the presence of an invisible moralistic presence makes misdemeanors harder to commit. “People who think they are being watched tend to behave themselves and cooperate more,” says the New Scientist’s Lawton. “Societies that chanced on the idea of supernatural surveillance were likely to have been more successful than those that didn't, further spreading religious ideas.”
Result 12: People who think they are being watched tend to behave themselves more.
Speculation: Societies populated by people who believe in supernatural surveillance are most successful than ones that lack such people. (This has not been tested, as far as I can tell.)
These theories find confirmation from a very different academic discipline—the literature department. The present writer, based at the Creativity Lab at Hong Kong Polytechnic University’s School of Design, has been looking at the manifestation of cosmic justice in fictional narratives—books, movies and games. It is clear that in almost all fictional worlds, God exists, whether the stories are written by people of a religious, atheist or indeterminate beliefs.
This is not formal research, but the author's opinion, again. Anecdotal evidence.
It’s not that a deity appears directly in tales. It is that the fundamental basis of stories appears to be the link between the moral decisions made by the protagonists and the same characters’ ultimate destiny. The payback is always appropriate to the choices made. An unnamed, unidentified mechanism ensures that this is so, and is a fundamental element of stories—perhaps the fundamental element of narratives.
Author backtracks on previous claim that God exists in all fictional worlds. Now he says it's not really God, but some kind of karmic idea. Maybe. Further speculation follows:
Indeed, it appears that stories exist to establish that there exists a mechanism or a person—cosmic destiny, karma, God, fate, Mother Nature—to make sure the right thing happens to the right person. Without this overarching moral mechanism, narratives become records of unrelated arbitrary events, and lose much of their entertainment value. In contrast, the stories which become universally popular appear to be carefully composed records of cosmic justice at work.
And the author goes on to talk about screenwriting and other narratives.
But if a belief in cosmic justice is natural and deeply rooted, the question arises: where does atheism fit in? Albert Einstein, who had a life-long fascination with metaphysics, believed atheism came from a mistaken belief that harmful superstition and a general belief in religious or mystical experience were the same thing, missing the fact that evolution would discard unhelpful beliefs and foster the growth of helpful ones. He declared himself “not a ‘Freethinker’ in the usual sense of the word because I find that this is in the main an attitude nourished exclusively by an opposition against naive superstition” (“Einstein on Peace”, page 510).
Author attempts argument from authority.
Similarly, Charles Darwin, in a meeting with a campaigner for atheism in September 1881, distanced himself from the views of his guest, finding them too “aggressive”. In the latter years of his life, he offered his premises for the use of the local church minister and changed his family schedule to enable his children to attend services.
Author implies that Darwin must have been religious because he let the local church use his house and sent his kids to church.
Author is drifting off topic at this point.
Of course these findings do not prove that it is impossible to stop believing in God.
See what the author is doing here?
The assumption is that everybody has
already started to believe in God, and that you have to
stop believing to become an atheist. Author is correct that the research results do not prove this.
What they do indicate, quite powerfully, is that we may be fooling ourselves if we think that we are making the key decisions about what we believe, and if we think we know how deeply our views pervade our consciousnesses. It further suggests that the difference between the atheist and the non-atheist viewpoint is much smaller than probably either side perceives. Both groups have consciousnesses which create for themselves realities which include very similar tangible and intangible elements. It may simply be that their awareness levels and interpretations of certain surface details differ.
This is rather a poor summary of the quoted research results, and it "suggests" lots of stuff that the author would like to be true but which the research doesn't really address.
On a more personal level, we all have loved ones who will die, and we all have a tendency to puzzle about what consciousness is, whether it is separate from the brain, and whether it can survive. We will always have existential dread with us—at a personal or societal level. So the need for periods of contemplative calm in churches or temples or other places devoted to the ineffable and inexplicable will remain. They appear to be part of who we are as humans.
I like how the author tries to import his desire for churches or temples into what is otherwise a reasonable statement. Don't you?
Furthermore, every time we read a book or watch a movie, we are reinforcing our default belief in the eventual triumph of karma. While there is certainly growth in the number of bleak narratives being produced, it is difficult to imagine them becoming the majority form of cultural entertainment. Most of us will skip Cormac McCarthy’s crushingly depressing “The Road” in favor of the newest Pixar movie.
What to take from this? I'd say people tend to have a sense of justice, and they like narratives where justice appears to be done.
When looking at trends, there’s also population growth to consider.
Result 13: birth rates in Western nations are falling, whereas in Africa and South Asia this may not be true. Since the people of Africa and South Asia tend to be more religious than Western nations, this means that over time religious populations might tend to increase and secular ones decrease, all other things being equal.
Caveat: There's no guarantee that all other things will remain equal.
This may appear as bad news for pro-atheism campaigners. But for the evolutionary life-force which may actually make the decisions, this may augur well for the continued existence of humanity.
Author thinks that high birth rates are a good thing, it seems.
We might all be a little more spiritual than we think.
Well, maybe. Maybe not. Depends what you mean by "spiritual".
And we're done.
Hope this helps unpack it for you, Jan.
