It's time

[The End of Atheism]

I get your point. All I'm saying is that people are naturally inclined to believe in a caring being. It shouldn't be difficult for an atheist to "nourish" this inclination.

People are naturally inclined to believe many things, e.g. cognitive biases, which don't reflect reality.  What people are naturally inclined to do tells us nothing about its truth content.

I don't disagree with that, even though the entire concept of truth becomes increasingly unclear once you refuse to "respond" to any inclination or bias. Cognitive biases are there for a reason: the brain has limited energy, and so has to rely on simplistic rules of thumb to make decisions. In my view, one has to consider each situation in its own right, it's not enough to discredit an assertion or a belief simply because they're the result of cognitive bias (maybe that would be a genetic fallacy, but not sure).

Cognitive biases are there to help us save some energy, but not always to mislead us.

[The End of Atheism]

I think there can be a natural tendency to believe in superstition for instance, since we're so adept at perceiving coincidences and seeking meaning in them, as well as a natural tendency to see agency in things. Put the two together and it's not surprising to me, that and how, religion/spiritualism develops over time in our history, from primitive times to the present, but where some see that as a feature, others, like me, see it as a bug.

Given our predicament (the human condition), it's not entirely stupid to give in to this tendency. One can make a solid case that a religious belief is beneficial, even when "beneficial" is understood in materalistic terms.

[Angrboda]

People are naturally inclined to believe many things, e.g. cognitive biases, which don't reflect reality.  What people are naturally inclined to do tells us nothing about its truth content.

I don't disagree with that, even though the entire concept of truth becomes increasingly unclear once you refuse to "respond" to any inclination or bias. Cognitive biases are there for a reason: the brain has limited energy, and so has to rely on simplistic rules of thumb to make decisions. In my view, one has to consider each situation in its own right, it's not enough to discredit an assertion or a belief simply because they're the result of cognitive bias (maybe that would be a genetic fallacy, but not sure).

Cognitive biases are there to help us save some energy, but not always to mislead us.

I wouldn't disagree. All I'm saying is that the mere fact of having an inclination doesn't move the ball any. The work is yet to be done.

[The End of Atheism]

I wouldn't disagree.  All I'm saying is that the mere fact of having an inclination doesn't move the ball any.  The work is yet to be done.

It does move the ball a bit. That's what an inclination means.

[emjay]

I think there can be a natural tendency to believe in superstition for instance, since we're so adept at perceiving coincidences and seeking meaning in them, as well as a natural tendency to see agency in things. Put the two together and it's not surprising to me, that and how, religion/spiritualism develops over time in our history, from primitive times to the present, but where some see that as a feature, others, like me, see it as a bug.

Given our predicament (the human condition), it's not entirely stupid to give in to this tendency. One can make a solid case that a religious belief is beneficial, even when "beneficial" is understood in materalistic terms.

That wouldn't make it necessarily true though. That some people find value in religious belief and community doesn't mean all do. So I think you could argue that it's beneficial for some, at most. Each to their own. Coming here I learnt that some people seek religion primarily for community etc, a whole new perspective to me, but again, each to their own.

[The End of Atheism]

That wouldn't make it necessarily true though. 

For sure, for sure. It's even necessary that some religious beliefs are absolutely false, because they're mutually exclusive.

That some people find value in religious belief and community doesn't mean all do. 

How can one not benefit from the belief of being taken care of by a very powerful being ?

[emjay]

[...]

That some people find value in religious belief and community doesn't mean all do. 

How can one not benefit from the belief of being taken care of by a very powerful being ?

I can't speak for everyone of course but in my case, I don't seek that sort of dependence any more. I did while I was a Christian, but now my perspective is very different, based around a kind of Stoic/Buddhist philosophy of not trying to control my environment so much as my own mind. So in other words, no longer constantly praying to a god or any other external thing to change my circumstances... to do that would just seem to create an endless state of 'learned helplessness'... but instead learning to accept whatever comes my way.

[The Architect Of Fate]

[...]

How can one not benefit from the belief of being taken care of by a very powerful being ?

I can't speak for everyone of course but in my case, I don't seek that sort of dependence any more. I did while I was a Christian, but now my perspective is very different, based around a kind of Stoic/Buddhist philosophy of not trying to control my environment so much as my own mind. So in other words, no longer constantly praying to a god or any other external thing to change my circumstances... to do that would just seem to create an endless state of 'learned helplessness'... but instead learning to accept whatever comes my way.

Indeed people don't need to be taken care of they need to learn to take care of themselves or to change their perception of hardship. To lean on a cosmic nanny is unhealthy.

[Angrboda]

I wouldn't disagree.  All I'm saying is that the mere fact of having an inclination doesn't move the ball any.  The work is yet to be done.

It does move the ball a bit. That's what an inclination means.

To be clear, it doesn't move the ball a bit towards concluding that the proposition is true. Don't be dense. We can be inclined falsely or rightly; being inclined doesn't mean being inclined rightly.

[zebo-the-fat]

You seem to think that believing (or not) in a god is something you can choose to do, it isn't. I don't believe that gods exist, that's it, I can't decide that from 9:00 on Monday morning I will believe, it just doesn't work like that. I don't believe in gods for the same reason I don't believe in the tooth fairy or in pixies, if you put a gun to my head I will be very convincing in saying "yes, I believe now!" but it won't really be true, you would need to convince me, people have been trying to do that for the last 68 years, not convinced yet!