Do you see any benefits to religious faith?

[robvalue]

How could you possibly demonstrate a causal link between mental health and the religion? To begin with, you're only going by what people say they believe. It's pretty damn hard to find out what they actually believe.

And once you've accounted for placebo, the huge social structure of religion and the oppression or people refusing to conform, is there anything magical left to explain? I think not.

Also, we're talking about religion in general here. If religion itself gives a benefit, does that mean they are all true? Seems a bit of a weird admission for any particular theist to make. I made a thread all about this before here. We see people from all religions claiming the same benefit, but they can't all be true. So just saying religion is beneficial would appear to be an admission that it's all placebo, social and psychological benefits of being part of a massive group of people.

[bennyboy]

Rob, the problem you are talking about is true for ALL mental experiences and states of mind. . . you have to take what people say, then see if you can find neural or physiological correlates. But if you test a lot of people, and those who SAY they have feelings of faith tend toward certain types of brain function which those who say they do not have those feelings, then you can reasonably infer that their feelings are real.

And faith is NOT religion. Faith is a state of suspension of disbelief, combined with a sense that some entity or principle maintains rightness in the universe. Religions require it, but it is not religion.

[robvalue]

Indeed yes, but my point is you can't correlate it with the religion. Like you say, at best you can correlate it with belief/faith in religion. That tells you nothing about why the effects are happening (which are easily explained anyway).

[Cyberman]

"Don't be silly, Superman doesn't exist outside of fiction. So what weakens him is irrelevant to our reality."

Oh to hell with it, Stimbo, let's just remake everything in our own image and pat ourselves on the solipsist back.

That's your response? Either your pet fantasy is imaginary or everything is? No middle ground, no shades of grey, only one or zero?

What's a fun-house without a hall of mirrors?

And here we have it, folks. Smoke and mirrors.

Look, I'm not advocating abandoning fantasies, even cherished ones. I love escapism, I can watch the X-Files or a Bond film and pretend, for a while, that the world is a more magical place than we generally experience. All I'm suggesting is recognising fantasy from fact and not eschewing the latter to live in the former. Certainly don't try to insist that others do the same.

[Neo-Scholastic]

It is true that the studies cited in my previous post sample from church attendees. They do not attempt to correlate mental health with specific beliefs or practices within those groups. If I recall they did not notice significant differences between various faith traditions. One can only speculate but I think it is a stretch to say that only community involvement and social identity explain the benefits of religious affiliation. That would put religions in an overly wide (and therefore meaningless) category that includes things such as political parties, bridge clubs and live action role-playing groups.

In addition to the comfort an encouragement faith provides, there is also the possibility of gratitude. In moments of quiet contemplation a believer can direct his or her feelings of gratitude toward a transcendent Other. Non-believers can feel appreciation, enjoyment, and satisfaction for what they have but not true gratitude. Gratitude, by definition, requires someone to whom we feel grateful. I do not doubt that non-believers can feel gratitude for the generosity of friends and family, perhaps even the affection of animals. While those are important they occur at a different scale and would not be available to the dispossessed. Does the mental health benefit of gratitude differ appreciably from basic appreciation? I don’t know but it is one more thing available to believers that is not available to non-believers.

I have spoken often before about the absence of meaning and purpose entailed by atheism and received a great deal of push-back, some deservedly so, since I often overstate the case. A non-believer can feel proximate meaning and find a local sense of purpose in things such as their work, community, and family. Perhaps that is enough for some. I wish you well. At the same time atheism precludes any possibility of ultimate purpose or significance – “All we are is dust in the wind” etc. etc. A secular sense of purpose is tied to having some external legacy or achievement to show for your life whereas a believer feels assured that their life matters, somehow, even if they left no lasting legacy (and for most folks what legacy truly lasts for very long). For Christians at least, they can feel significant not because of anything they did but because they know that by His Grace alone God loves them. One line from a hymn simply expresses this notion and goes “Nothing in my hand I bring / only to the Cross I cling.”

As for those who say they would feel like they were living a lie, I want to at least commend you on your intellectual honesty.

[Arkilogue]

Oh to hell with it, Stimbo, let's just remake everything in our own image and pat ourselves on the solipsist back.

That's your response? Either your pet fantasy is imaginary or everything is? No middle ground, no shades of grey, only one or zero?

What's a fun-house without a hall of mirrors?

And here we have it, folks. Smoke and mirrors.

Look, I'm not advocating abandoning fantasies, even cherished ones. I love escapism, I can watch the X-Files or a Bond film and pretend, for a while, that the world is a more magical place than we generally experience. All I'm suggesting is recognising fantasy from fact and not eschewing the latter to live in the former. Certainly don't try to insist that others do the same.

My pet fantasy??? How many freaking times must I repost the scores of bible verse that say faith is not man made and a gift from God? The modern "pet fantasy" is that it means self generated confidence when the text clearly says it is not. That was not the mind set they were working with.

YOU guys are overlaying YOUR paradigm of what you think can and can't be, occluding their paradigm. And YOU see YOUR reflection in what you project on them.

[Cyberman]

Why put stock in what the bible says? It's not only not been demonstrated to be relevant, to anything other than vested political interest, it's downright false in many areas. Isn't there something about building your house on sand..?

[Neo-Scholastic]

And faith is NOT religion.  Faith is a state of suspension of disbelief, combined with a sense that some entity or principle maintains rightness in the universe.  Religions require it, but it is not religion.

I can suspend disbelief about many things such as ghosts, ESP, etc. but those notions don't affect my life in any significant way. Religious faith is different in that it is about setting aside your doubts and putting you trust in a higher power. Religious faith is a type of belief, sometimes contrary to every instinct, that dramatically affects how someone lives his or her life.

[Arkilogue]

Rob, the problem you are talking about is true for ALL mental experiences and states of mind. . . you have to take what people say, then see if you can find neural or physiological correlates.  But if you test a lot of people, and those who SAY they have feelings of faith tend toward certain types of brain function which those who say they do not have those feelings, then you can reasonably infer that their feelings are real.

And faith is NOT religion.  Faith is a state of suspension of disbelief, combined with a sense that some entity or principle maintains rightness in the universe.  Religions require it, but it is not religion.

Faith = pistis = Divine persuasion not self persuasion.

If faith is taken to mean belief, then there is no need for the word faith. It's spiritually redundant aka dysfunctional. Much to the delight of The Church.

The meaning has been hijacked and lost like part of a map cut off. People won't very well explore a territory that is not represented nor entertain a possibility they think does not exist.

If you can degrade the meanings of words, you can degrade the function of thought and limit the potential expression/development of an individual....aka "newspeak".

---

Why put stock in what the bible says? It's not only not been demonstrated to be relevant, to anything other than vested political interest, it's downright false in many areas. Isn't there something about building your house on sand..?

I make a foundation of concrete with sand and other aggregate. To me, the bible is like a giant conglomerate rock built over many many years....there is usable ore to refine if you are so inclined. There is also all the coprolite you could want if you are looking for something to throw.

My entire point is not about the veracity of the bible, it's about what the authors meant by what they said and their mindset when they wrote it and the loss of that conceptual function in todays mindset.


The phone book contains errors, but if I sift through it for information and check with other sources does that make me a Yellow Pagean?

[Simon Moon]

I make a foundation of concrete with sand and other aggregate. To me, the bible is like a giant conglomerate rock built over many many years....there is usable ore to refine if you are so inclined.  There is also all the coprolite you could want if you are looking for something to throw.

The "usable ore" has nothing to do with being in the Bible. If something in the Bible comports with reality, it does so on its own merit, not because it is in the Bible.

And the fact that there are some things in the Bible that do comport with reality, does not in any way add any evidence that any other particular thing also does.

My entire point is not about the veracity of the bible, it's about what the authors meant by what they said and their mindset when they wrote it and the loss of that conceptual function in todays mindset.

And you know what the mindset of the Bible authors was?

The phone book contains errors, but if I sift through it for information and check with other sources does that make me a Yellow Pagean?

Yes, but the phone book does not make claims as being inspired by the creator of the universe, with the added claims of accepting the contents or be punished for eternity.