- Aug 27, 2011
- 1,775
- 35
- Country
- United Kingdom
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
I will agree that the articles you provide say we are predisposed to do something, but "believe in gods"? No. What the research shows is typical human reaction - we hate not having an explanation for things. What we see is humans not being able to explain or understand something so they invent a cause. That may or may not be some sort of god. It does not, though, prove a need for a god. It proves a need for understanding our world. Once we have an explanation for the previously unexplained the god explanation goes away. And since we've all agreed that you cannot remove a need then this predisposition cannot be one.
You got any other lines of argument left?
I dont need another line of argument you point above doesnt require me to have one, and anyway the research suggests otherwise to what you say..
The first thing as an aside, is to say is that it makes me chuckle the way you try and cast aside such a huge body of work in a couple of sentences. Heres something thats involved 57 researchers from around the world, on a project that has taken 3 years ..and then Bungle Bear says no youve got it wrong it doesnt actually show what they say it shows.
But to address your above points most of what you say above is true but irrelevant.
I agree that we have a disposition to understand the world we live in. This is why we have the cognitive skills to question and think abstractly in the first place
I agree that humans invent a cause when they see something they are not able to explain or understand. This is there are many gods and many religions in the world today
I partially agree that once we have an explanation for the previously unexplained the god explanation goes away. We have free will and personal choice to explain matters to either include or exclude a god. So yes, for some people the god explanation will go away, but for others god IS the explanation.
These things are all irrelevant however..
Its irrelevant because the research already has this as its core assumption in the first place. Yes, there a need for meaning exists, but the real question is where or what is this need actually directed at? What can be tested or researched to provide proof or evidence (or both) that a need for meaning can actually be expressed or revealed as a need for a god?
I agree that there is a universal human need for meaning, but what is actually behind a need for meaning in the first place? This research shows that this universal need can best be explained through a predisposition for a need for god.
But I think is still quite tenuous because a need for a god of some description doesnt necessitate a belief in god, and certainly not in a theistic god.
Upvote
0