The Science behind Belief

[boatsnguitars]

We often skirt around this issue to avoid offending people who are neurodivergent and can't understand their beliefs are based on factors other than their unique, occult knowledge of the "supernatural." In fact, science has provided a substantive body of work that shows why people become religious:

Social Factors: Socialization plays a significant role in shaping religious beliefs. Family, community, and cultural influences can introduce and reinforce religious teachings, rituals, and values from an early age. Religious communities provide a sense of belonging, social support, and shared identity, which can contribute to the adoption and maintenance of religious beliefs.

Psychological Factors: Several psychological needs and tendencies can draw individuals towards religious beliefs. These include the need for meaning and purpose in life, the desire for a sense of control and predictability, the need for comfort and reassurance in the face of uncertainty and existential concerns, and the quest for identity and self-transcendence. Religion can offer answers to life's big questions, provide a moral framework, and offer a sense of hope and solace.

Cognitive Factors: Humans possess cognitive biases that make them prone to religious beliefs. For example, the tendency to perceive agency and intentionality in the natural world (called agent detection) can lead to beliefs in supernatural beings or forces. Additionally, our brains have evolved to seek patterns and make sense of the world, which can contribute to finding meaning and purpose in religious narratives.

Emotional Factors: Emotions play a significant role in religious experiences. Religious practices, rituals, and beliefs can evoke a range of emotions, including awe, reverence, joy, and a sense of transcendence. These emotional experiences can deepen one's connection to religious beliefs and foster a sense of spiritual fulfillment.

Neurological Factors: Neurological research suggests that religious experiences can be associated with specific brain activity patterns. Certain brain regions, such as the prefrontal cortex, limbic system, and temporal lobes, have been implicated in religious experiences, feelings of transcendence, and religiously motivated behaviors. However, it is important to note that the neural correlates of religious experiences do not provide a definitive explanation for the origins or truth claims of religious beliefs.

I think these things are definitely worth discussing. After all, it's clear that people in Muslim countries become Muslim, those in Buddhist countries become Buddhist, etc. But there are other factors, especially with those people who are zealots, extremists, or otherwise fanatical. There are also those who have feelings that they are prophets, or have secret knowledge that others don't have - despite having no special insight. Some think they can predict what God will do next, and they all fail miserably.

Debate:
1. Why isn't this more of a topic of conversation?
2. Are religious people able to analyze their beliefs from this perspective, or do they believe they are immune?
3. Why are beliefs that are so "odd" (like the belief in the supernatural, despite there being no evidence) so compelling to people who have so-called "mental disorders"?
4. This is not to shame mental illness (I have it, and it runs in the family), but to try to talk about it and ask why people who exhibit certain traits are drawn to believe they are special to God - and why this isn't a fair discussion to have when discussing religion?
5. If religion is a psycho-social-neurological phenomenon, what would that mean?

[tam]

Peace to you,

We often skirt around this issue to avoid offending people who are neurodivergent and can't understand their beliefs are based on factors other than their unique, occult knowledge of the "supernatural." In fact, science has provided a substantive body of work that shows why people become religious:

This does not appear to be particularly objective either (though you might have just worded it wrong).

Science has provided a substantive body of work that suggests why people may become religious. That would be a more accurate statement, would it not?

(Not also that becoming religious is not necessarily the same thing as having faith or spirituality. I can only respond as a person with faith, spirituality.)

Debate:
1. Why isn't this more of a topic of conversation?

I think it has been discussed on this forum multiple times. I do not think it is quite the golden snitch some make it out to be, though.

2. Are religious people able to analyze their beliefs from this perspective, or do they believe they are immune?

I am able to analyze my faith from these perspectives. People who do not want to believe my analysis of myself, won't.

3. Why are beliefs that are so "odd" (like the belief in the supernatural, despite there being no evidence) so compelling to people who have so-called "mental disorders"?

4. This is not to shame mental illness (I have it, and it runs in the family), but to try to talk about it and ask why people who exhibit certain traits are drawn to believe they are special to God - and why this isn't a fair discussion to have when discussing religion?

These are pretty broad questions, ones that also appear to make assumptions without providing evidence to back those assumptions up. People with and without so-called "mental disorders" (what do you even mean by so-called "mental disorders"), have faith or religion. People with and without so-called "mental disorders" also have no faith or religion.

5. If religion is a psycho-social-neurological phenomenon, what would that mean?

If it were true, I suppose it would mean that religion will be around forever, unless people would find another way to fulfill those needs.


On to your listed factors:

Social Factors: Socialization plays a significant role in shaping religious beliefs. Family, community, and cultural influences can introduce and reinforce religious teachings, rituals, and values from an early age. Religious communities provide a sense of belonging, social support, and shared identity, which can contribute to the adoption and maintenance of religious beliefs.

Socialization (family, culture, etc) can play a role in shaping belief (at least while young). That is not the same thing as being the cause or source of belief. Nor does it mean that a person cannot search for what is true on their own if they so desire.


As for community providing a sense of belonging, etc... this has never been a factor for me. I searched for truth. Not community. I had multiple invitations to join various churches, but I would have had to compromise and sacrifice truth in order to do so. I would have been putting socialization ahead of truth, ahead of Christ, of God. So even in early days when I felt lonely for other people and longed to have a community that shared my faith, I chose truth instead, and remained in Christ.

I am not lonely anymore; I have my dear Lord and I am never alone. But there was a short period of time where I did have that choice to make: social group or Christ/truth. I chose my Lord.

Psychological Factors: Several psychological needs and tendencies can draw individuals towards religious beliefs. These include the need for meaning and purpose in life, the desire for a sense of control and predictability, the need for comfort and reassurance in the face of uncertainty and existential concerns, and the quest for identity and self-transcendence. Religion can offer answers to life's big questions, provide a moral framework, and offer a sense of hope and solace.

Again, it was truth I was seeking. I didn't doubt the existence of God, I just wanted to know what was true about Him, what He wanted me to do. What good is a comforting lie? You might feel better, I suppose, but that is not what I was looking for.

Cognitive Factors: Humans possess cognitive biases that make them prone to religious beliefs. For example, the tendency to perceive agency and intentionality in the natural world (called agent detection) can lead to beliefs in supernatural beings or forces. Additionally, our brains have evolved to seek patterns and make sense of the world, which can contribute to finding meaning and purpose in religious narratives.

I have actually had this discussion with a few people. It is suggested that "agent detection" can lead to belief in supernatural beings or forces, but there is no evidence that people assign agency to anything other than things they already believe in (or have heard about). They don't come up with something they have never heard of before. The most I think this factor can do is cause a person to assign an incorrect agency to something. But I do not see any evidence that this factor could cause someone to assign agency to something they never believed in or heard of to begin with.

Emotional Factors: Emotions play a significant role in religious experiences. Religious practices, rituals, and beliefs can evoke a range of emotions, including awe, reverence, joy, and a sense of transcendence. These emotional experiences can deepen one's connection to religious beliefs and foster a sense of spiritual fulfillment.

Well, love is an emotion, and I love Christ and God (was loved by them first).

But emotion plays a significant role in many experiences (spiritual or non-spiritual). How does that show that these experiences are based in something artificial? (I am aware that it is possible to feel a sense of euphoria in a group - religious or otherwise, that could be mistaken as proof of something being real.)

I have certainly felt joy, peace, overwhelming love, etc... all the fruits of the spirit that my Lord gives... but faith in my Lord came first.

Neurological Factors: Neurological research suggests that religious experiences can be associated with specific brain activity patterns. Certain brain regions, such as the prefrontal cortex, limbic system, and temporal lobes, have been implicated in religious experiences, feelings of transcendence, and religiously motivated behaviors. However, it is important to note that the neural correlates of religious experiences do not provide a definitive explanation for the origins or truth claims of religious beliefs.

I think there are far too many factors for this to be discussed as anything other than hypothetical. If a surgeon can stimulate an area of the brain in awake surgery so that a person experiences a sensation, like a smell of smoke, that doesn't mean that smoke doesn't exist or that they have never actually smelled smoke before.

I looked for just stimulation of the brain (without surgery) and found this article (which is super cool, imo):

https://news.uchicago.edu/story/creatin ... al-stimuli

The point though is that just because a sensation can be experienced by artificially 'activating' a part of the brain, doesn't mean that the sensation cannot be experienced by the genuine experience or that the genuine experience is not real.


Now, I don't think an actual spiritual experience is felt in the brain (but rather in the spirit), but emotions are processed or recognized in some fashion by the brain. So it also makes sense to me that stimulating certain parts of the brain can cause someone to feel an emotion that they have already associated with a particular experience.

I think these things are definitely worth discussing.

Sure, why not?



Peace again to you!

[Eloi]

I consider atheism simply a philosophical position, not a scientific position ... also believing in the existence of God. Both positions can use science in one way or another to try to prove their validity.

If atheist scientists study the religious position from the psycho-social point of view, with much more reason they should study the atheist position from that same perspective, since atheism is much younger than the position that accepts that we have a Creator. Atheism being a denial of an earlier position, I think it is more likely to be an aberration from what has been a natural view if that term were to describe human ways for as long as there is a record of human civilization.

In real life, the fear of God has been an obvious obstacle to the development of human perversions that currently threaten the safety and well-being of humanity and the planet itself.

[Miles]

I consider atheism simply a philosophical position, not a scientific position ... also believing in the existence of God. Both positions can use science in one way or another to try to prove their validity.

If so, then what's holding them back? Why haven't either atheists or theists used science to try to prove the validity of their position? Could it be that you're wrong?


.

[Eloi]

Much more is needed than information to reach correct conclusions. Right now I can mention intellectual honesty, humility, rational (logical) thinking,...

There are many things that disadvantage people when they want to know the truth, such as a bad attitude, prejudices and biases, pre-established agendas,...

In my opinion, the search for the truth must be personal... It is not common to agree with a person who explains things differently when you think that by doing so you betray your team.

[jackparis]

Science Accept the GOD is Real Everything is Created By GOD (Allah) Non believer Should Learn Quran How Allah Created Earth and Each And Everything Quran help to understand why we here in this world

[boatsnguitars]

Science Accept the GOD is Real Everything is Created By GOD (Allah) Non believer Should Learn Quran How Allah Created Earth and Each And Everything Quran help to understand why we here in this world

No. But your post is a very good example of how irrational religion is.