Why do people believe in god?

arfa brane said:
Here's an argument that I hope doesn't get too simplistic:

One of the strongest influences on your consciousness that you learn as you grow up, is that you learn to believe in your ability to think. You start to believe, unlike a young child, that what you think and say is important, even more important than what you do.
You start to believe that having an opinion, about anything, is so important that you need to be seen as supporting one opinion over another--this process probably starts when you start school and encounter such opinions from other children.

Anyway, you know that opinions and having them isn't really as important as you also have learned to think they are, the latter process being more a coping mechanism, so you "fit in" and can deal with other people. As a child though, you remain in awe to some extent of the ability of grownups to think about things and discuss them, perhaps even to the extent of feeling some jealousy towards this ability they seem to have.

So, the concept you also have of something that transcends all the thinking and discussing, is perhaps a way to reassure yourself that it is all just ideas. You learn that you too, can have ideas--but where do they really come from? You can't help being influenced by those around you, and so neither can you help having ideas that also conform to those social norms you learn about.

This supposed transcendent "other" gives you a way to suspend your belief, to question if you are really thinking the way you should, or if thinking in and of itself is really the whole point. Otherwise, all you learn about is how to conform and eventually, perhaps you stop questioning. You end up doing what you perceive most of the grownups doing--you accept it all and join in, and then you lose this innate ability to question the role of your thinking mind, and it "becomes" what you think you are.

So by then, you are that which you think you are, and not a being who can exist without those necessary thoughts supporting this existential model you have formed, by "fitting in", by coping and by not wanting to be perceived as an outsider. Thus you lose a certain ability, and instead believe it isn't needed, or even desirable to question the "norm".


And I hope you are having the time of your life,
But think twice,
That's my strong advice.

Who do you, who do you, who do you
Who do you think you are?
Ha ha ha, bless your soul,
Do you really think you're in control?

--Gnarls Barkley
Click to expand...

Tell me something, just to be clear:

1. Do you think that humans should, essentially, feel sorry that they are alive and can think?

2. Do you think that the ideal state of life is to not think at all - that pure consciousness is one that does not think?


Other than that, I find your post very interesting, filled with topics that would be useful to discuss.
 
Signal said:
1. Do you think that humans should, essentially, feel sorry that they are alive and can think?
Click to expand...
Not at all. But perhaps we should feel sorry for not being able to think when we need to--have you ever remonstrated with yourself by thinking or saying: "I wish I'd thought of . . . ". Also we shouldn't have to think in order to act sometimes--as in, "he who hesitates" and all that.
2. Do you think that the ideal state of life is to not think at all - that pure consciousness is one that does not think?
Click to expand...
No, not-thinking can be an ideal state though. You are conscious, and so you can be conscious of your ability to think without actually thinking. But we're conditioned to think about how we're perceived by others, when this isn't always a necessary or even a desirable thing to occupy your mind.
 
Signal said:
Tell me something, just to be clear:

1. Do you think that humans should, essentially, feel sorry that they are alive and can think?

2. Do you think that the ideal state of life is to not think at all - that pure consciousness is one that does not think?


Other than that, I find your post very interesting, filled with topics that would be useful to discuss.
Click to expand...

ignorance is bliss
 
arfa brane said:
Not at all. But perhaps we should feel sorry for not being able to think when we need to--have you ever remonstrated with yourself by thinking or saying: "I wish I'd thought of . . . ".
Click to expand...

Oh yes. There's even a name for this phenomenon - L'esprit de l'escalier and I've seen websites devoted to it.


No, not-thinking can be an ideal state though. You are conscious, and so you can be conscious of your ability to think without actually thinking.
Click to expand...

I would call this faultless reasoning.

Even in our usual unenlightened state, there are times when we think, or reason, and are pleased with it, seeing no fault in it. I imagine part of being enlightened is to reason - but faultlessly.


But we're conditioned to think about how we're perceived by others, when this isn't always a necessary or even a desirable thing to occupy your mind.
Click to expand...

Sure.
Your previous post has pointed at many things that I find very interesting.
There are issues of epistemic dependence and social necessity that we cannot just gloss over.

Many people who are into spirituality/religion/philosophy get driven to extremes - usually in the extremes of individualism or in the extremes of total epistemic dependence on others.

So, for example, we often see "independence from others" as an (implied) ideal in notions of impersonalism and in-effect nihilism.

Total epistemic dependence on others tends to manifest as cultism and generally isn't highly valued.

I don't like ideas of "balance" or "moderation," but I do think that considering what some particular person(s) might think of one is not necessarily a threat to one's individuality.
 
i think people dont want 2 blv n thmslvz,and they wish that th cld be a force tht cn hlp thm ovrcm their opstclz thy do not blv tht thy cld ovrcm opstclz and whn thet do so they blv that a god had hlpd thm!!!!
 
capsule said:
i think people dont want 2 blv n thmslvz,and they wish that th cld be a force tht cn hlp thm ovrcm their opstclz thy do not blv tht thy cld ovrcm opstclz and whn thet do so they blv that a god had hlpd thm!!!!
Click to expand...

Deciphered: I think people don't want to believe in themselves, and they wish that they could be a force that can help them overcome their obstacles, they do not believe that they could overcome obstacles and when they do so they believe that a God had helped them.

I still have no idea what your talking about.
 
Knowledge91 said:
Deciphered: I think people don't want to believe in themselves, and they wish that they could be a force that can help them overcome their obstacles, they do not believe that they could overcome obstacles and when they do so they believe that a God had helped them.

I still have no idea what your talking about.
Click to expand...

Google "how to believe in oneself"/"how to believe in yourself."
It's rather popular.
 
I'd like to take this opportunity to apologise to Gnarls and Barkley (not their real names of course) for fudging the lyrics.

It should be: "my only advice", and the next verse should start: "Come on now", and end with: "You think you're in control?". I was OTOH-ing.

Dave, my mind is going. I can feel it.
I can feel it.
 
Last edited:
Sheesh. You really missed the irony there didn't you?

So now I have to go to the trouble of pointing out that: 1) I know what the name of the group is, 2) I know both the artists are not called "Gnarls" nor "Barkley". So Gnarls and Barkley aren't their real names. Did I mention that?

What would Pink or Floyd have to say about such ignorance? I mean, really.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top