Why do people believe in God?

[mem]

Is it because they are weak and cannot take reality?

Is it a chemical imbalance in their brains (or in ours)?

Is it genetic? Are Atheists the next step in evolution?

[The_Flying_Skeptic]

"Is it because they are weak and cannot take reality?"

nobody likes the idea of death and in a way religion solves that problem for them with heaven. I guess in the sense that they don't accept death as an end of consciousness as we do may be reason to consider them weak.

"Is it a chemical imbalance in their brains (or in ours)?"

I like that you added 'or in ours' because we are the minority unless you live in the UK.

"Is it genetic?"

I thought genetics and chemical imbalances were intertwined since genetics produces the chemical imbalance. I hope atheism isn't particularly genetic because that would mean that the only way for our idea to spread would be for us to reproduce more. Have you seen the movie Idiocracy? I think more and more people are converting to atheism now more than ever because of the availability of human knowledge on the internet that has only been around for 20 years disproving the hypothesis that atheism is particularly genetic.

"Are Atheists the next step in evolution?"

Your question here is based on a misunderstanding of evolutionary biology which is treating evolution like a linear process. I know the first thing anyone sees when studying evolution is the picture of a monkey gradually turning into a human but that's a linear view of evolution which doesn't represent evolutionary biology at all. Anyhow, with all the gene flow and no selective pressures in the human population, I don't see evolution being apparent any time soon.

[Violet]

Is it because they are weak and cannot take reality?

I should think rarely.

Is it a chemical imbalance in their brains (or in ours)?

Why would it be an imbalance? Perhaps a belief 'God' implies a balance of chemicals in the brain

Is it genetic? Are Atheists the next step in evolution?

No, and no.

---

I like that you added 'or in ours' because we are the minority unless you live in the UK.

They have more rocks in the UK? Hot dog! I want in!

[mem]

"Is it because they are weak and cannot take reality?"

nobody likes the idea of death and in a way religion solves that problem for them with heaven. I guess in the sense that they don't accept death as an end of consciousness as we do may be reason to consider them weak.

"Is it a chemical imbalance in their brains (or in ours)?"

I like that you added 'or in ours' because we are the minority unless you live in the UK.

"Is it genetic?"

I thought genetics and chemical imbalances were intertwined since genetics produces the chemical imbalance. I hope atheism isn't particularly genetic because that would mean that the only way for our idea to spread would be for us to reproduce more. Have you seen the movie Idiocracy? I think more and more people are converting to atheism now more than ever because of the availability of human knowledge on the internet that has only been around for 20 years disproving the hypothesis that atheism is particularly genetic.

"Are Atheists the next step in evolution?"

Your question here is based on a misunderstanding of evolutionary biology which is treating evolution like a linear process. I know the first thing anyone sees when studying evolution is the picture of a monkey gradually turning into a human but that's a linear view of evolution which doesn't represent evolutionary biology at all. Anyhow, with all the gene flow and no selective pressures in the human population, I don't see evolution being apparent any time soon.

A chemical imbalance in the brain can be treated-as in the case of depression.
I ask about evolution because humans evolved with a need for religion I think, so why do so many of us not need to believe? In my case I guess I would love to believe in God but I just cant. I was brought up a catholic and turned away from it all in my late teens.

[downbeatplumb]

People believe in god for many reasons.

1: because its 'easy' in christian/muslim/hindu or whatever land its just easier to follow the herd
2: because it offers easy answers to difficult questions.
3: because people find the idea of an afterlife less scary than the truth.
4: because people can be dumb

[tackattack]

Is it because they are weak and cannot take reality?

I enjoy reality and live in the now, I don't see what weakness or strength has to do with beliefs at all. If yoou percieve the opposite side as weaker perhaps you're projecting.

Is it a chemical imbalance in their brains (or in ours)?

Good idea treating differences in ideologies as a disease. I think fundamental literalists are still doing that to homosexuals today, go picket with them. Are you intentionlly trying to obfuscate the point?

Is it genetic? Are Atheists the next step in evolution?

I would hope independant thought and true personal freedom would be the next step in social evolution. If we determine thoughts and beliefs can be controlled at a genetic level, let's just sign up for the baby maker vending machine, then we can all get what we want. Could you email me your genetic mapping, I think I'd want to leave out certain codons relating to perception, discrimination and open-mindedness.



@dbp-
5. Because they draw the logical conclusion from subjective evidence, deductive reasoning, and testing/verification that it's more likely that a creator exists than not.

[Violet]

I've got the best reason of all:

6:

[mem]

Hey! Take it easy tack-check out neuropsychology to understand my meaning

[tackattack]

For informational purposes or study is one think, classifying something as a neuropsychological problem/disease or using it to manipulate how people believe is a slippery slope. I doubt if any positive correlations are found that scientists could limit themselves to just monitoring and not tampering, historically this has shown to be true. I apologize if my tone came accross as confrontational, I'm without much needed sleep and surviving off of vicodin and monsters.

[mem]

For informational purposes or study is one think, classifying something as a neuropsychological problem/disease or using it to manipulate how people believe is a slippery slope. I doubt if any positive correlations are found that scientists could limit themselves to just monitoring and not tampering, historically this has shown to be true. I apologize if my tone came accross as confrontational, I'm without much needed sleep and surviving off of vicodin and monsters.

Was only musing on things. No offence intended. I guess it did sound pretty insulting. Sorry