The question came up and I thought it worth exploring. I put this thread in the psychology form because I’d like to discuss it from that angle rather than from religion.

Why do otherwise intelligent people fall for religion? Why doesn’t the logic and reason immediately preclude gullibility? One might ask why otherwise intelligent people scratch mosquito bites. Answer that question and you’ll be closer to answering the other.

I would assume usually because they were indoctrinated as kids, and probably don't want to declare themselves atheist in a religiously dominated culture. Quite sad for  country that was founded on secular ideals.

Many reasons, I would assume.

Childhood indoctrination. The need for community.

I read an article a while ago - I'll try to find a link - that seems to imply that it's the more intelligent people who are likely to be drawn into cults.

I think it hinges primarily on the emotions surrounding hope. Why are you sad when you go to a funeral? What questions go through your mind? Logic and reason certainly play a part, but don't discount the part emotions play in our decision making. You want to know your loved one is in a better place and not suffering, it brings comfort to you. That's emotional, not rational. I'm speaking purely about "religion" and not "belief in God" as I think the distinction is important. Einstein believed in an impersonal deity, but not religion of any kind. Religion is solely to do with doctrine associated to a deity. Religion offers answers to perhaps otherwise unanswerable questions, or answers that bring more comfort than alternatives.

Where does my baby go when she died? Religion says she is in Heaven, this indescribable place of pure joy that you are free to allow your imagination to fill. Non-religious answer says, she will slowly rot and decay in the ground or be ashes spread on the dirt or sea, nothing more. It's empty and hollow and doesn't fulfill your emotional damage with your loss.

Religion fills emotional voids. Intelligence, though it does play a factor, is not the primary reason for accepting religion.

For the ultra religious that I know it almost seems that religion is like a drug for them. It's mentally rewarding on some level and the more they incorporate into their (and others) lives the more they get off on it.

For most that I'm around it's like the Ward Clever effect. There when they need it, gentile, guiding, comforting, soothing, rarely lets them down, something that they can count on.

For a few, it's mental torture. The whole I'm not now nor will every be worthy. Yet they continue to believe. This one I don't understand.

Looking at this topic, however, I see the word 'succumb'.

Well, is that really true ??


'Succumb' to me would imply surrendering to it and is that what we see ?? 99% of the Christians we encounter are of the slacker, scripture cherry picking variety. I wouldn't use the word 'succumb' to describe how they experience their 'faith'. I see I used the word 'slacker' above, and it seems more appropriate in describing the typical christer we encounter. I think the majority of the intelligent folks entwined in faith are doing it to appease family members, to foster business relationships, and for appearances sake.

As for these people feeling a burning desire to succumb or surrender to Jesus, I dunno, I don't think we see that very often. That they might tolerate a bit of intellectual dishonesty (or suspension) to be seen as a team player is one thing, following Jesus and his wacky, bizarre and totally impractical ideas about the poor and marriage, is quite another.

Quote:Why are you sad when you go to a funeral? What questions go through your mind?

How long am I going to be stuck here" usually tops my list.

(October 20, 2015 at 3:42 pm)lkingpinl Wrote: I think it hinges primarily on the emotions surrounding hope.  Why are you sad when you go to a funeral?  What questions go through your mind?  Logic and reason certainly play a part, but don't discount the part emotions play in our decision making.  You want to know your loved one is in a better place and not suffering, it brings comfort to you.  That's emotional, not rational.  I'm speaking purely about "religion" and not "belief in God" as I think the distinction is important.  Einstein believed in an impersonal deity, but not religion of any kind.  Religion is solely to do with doctrine associated to a deity.  Religion offers answers to perhaps otherwise unanswerable questions, or answers that bring more comfort than alternatives.

Where does my baby go when she died?  Religion says she is in Heaven, this indescribable place of pure joy that you are free to allow your imagination to fill.  Non-religious answer says, she will slowly rot and decay in the ground or be ashes spread on the dirt or sea, nothing more.  It's empty and hollow and doesn't fulfill your emotional damage with your loss.  

Religion fills emotional voids.  Intelligence, though it does play a factor, is not the primary reason for accepting religion.

you can believe that there is God and some kind of afterlife without believing in organized religion . but i do agree that religion meets an emotional need but more it is the need and the sense of security from thinking they have the mysteries of the universe all figured out . humans are naturally problem solvers and we dont like mysteries . putting everything in a neat little package is satisfying and comforting.

For an otherwise intelligent person who is religious it's not really a question of logic when it comes to it. It's just a matter of unquestioned ideas that were there all along. This is why it's important to identify oneself as an atheist and openly talk about it whenever asked about religious affiliations or invited to an open discussion about them. This is the kind of social exposure to rational thought that confronts dogma in people's minds and makes them doubt their own cherished albeit unjustified beliefs.

The human desire to circumvent death is the driving force behind religious belief...it always has been and always will be. The notion that we simply rot into non-existence is a hell of a pill to swallow; too disturbing and depressing for many people to even consider, let alone accept. 

So if you don't like the end of the story, why not rewrite the ending to one that suits you and makes you feel better?
People do it all the time.

Of course, that ain't the way the story really goes, but hey...

"If it makes you happy
It can't be that baaa..aa..aa..ad."
-Sheryl Crow