RE: God: No magic required
January 28, 2014 at 7:12 pm
(This post was last modified: January 28, 2014 at 7:20 pm by lweisenthal.)
Hi Simon,
Firstly, here, again, are the links I originally posted (for convenience):
http://www.webmd.com/balance/features/sp...ive-longer
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1305900/
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19949046
I think that it's pretty evident that the preponderance of evidence supports the conclusion that religious people are happier, healthier, and live longer than non-religious people.
Now, dissecting out a mechanism is not nearly as simple as you suggest. You want to attribute all the advantages to "social structure." Actually, you said "it's all about social structure."
I don't find that the published studies, either individually or collectively, conclude that "it's all about social structure." Social support is almost certainly part of it, but why do church goers have better social support than non-church goers? Are atheists socially isolated because they are intrinsically unpleasant people who can't make friends...or what? I'm really curious as to what the explanation would be for this. And, if this is so, then is there not still an objective advantage associated with church going, health-wise and longevity-wise? It certainly doesn't mean that God grants improved longevity by divine decree, but it means that the religious people are doing some good things, with respect to impact on their own health. So why is religiosity any less rational than yoga classes or eating healthy foods or having a hobby?
And "social structure" is almost certainly not the whole story. You simply can't deny that religion provides solace, courage, companionship, and the like, all of which are very helpful for avoiding and coping with stress, and it's been shown that people who attend church regularly have lower levels of biochemical and physical stress markers.
As I said before, religion is a high class health problem. It improves health, but we haven't completely defined the mechanism(s) involved. But it's at least consistent that someone who won't entertain the possibility that theism is of positive value to many people -- absent physical world proof of a theistic deity -- would deny the health and longevity benefits of religion, simply because these benefits may be unrelated to the unprovable existence of this unprovable deity.
If I could do something simple and pleasurable to prevent cancer, I'd do it, even if I couldn't satisfy myself of a provable mechanism for the benefit, particularly if said activity provided other important benefits, as well.
Not so irrational.
- Larry Weisenthal/Huntington Beach CA
Firstly, here, again, are the links I originally posted (for convenience):
http://www.webmd.com/balance/features/sp...ive-longer
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1305900/
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19949046
I think that it's pretty evident that the preponderance of evidence supports the conclusion that religious people are happier, healthier, and live longer than non-religious people.
Now, dissecting out a mechanism is not nearly as simple as you suggest. You want to attribute all the advantages to "social structure." Actually, you said "it's all about social structure."
I don't find that the published studies, either individually or collectively, conclude that "it's all about social structure." Social support is almost certainly part of it, but why do church goers have better social support than non-church goers? Are atheists socially isolated because they are intrinsically unpleasant people who can't make friends...or what? I'm really curious as to what the explanation would be for this. And, if this is so, then is there not still an objective advantage associated with church going, health-wise and longevity-wise? It certainly doesn't mean that God grants improved longevity by divine decree, but it means that the religious people are doing some good things, with respect to impact on their own health. So why is religiosity any less rational than yoga classes or eating healthy foods or having a hobby?
And "social structure" is almost certainly not the whole story. You simply can't deny that religion provides solace, courage, companionship, and the like, all of which are very helpful for avoiding and coping with stress, and it's been shown that people who attend church regularly have lower levels of biochemical and physical stress markers.
As I said before, religion is a high class health problem. It improves health, but we haven't completely defined the mechanism(s) involved. But it's at least consistent that someone who won't entertain the possibility that theism is of positive value to many people -- absent physical world proof of a theistic deity -- would deny the health and longevity benefits of religion, simply because these benefits may be unrelated to the unprovable existence of this unprovable deity.
If I could do something simple and pleasurable to prevent cancer, I'd do it, even if I couldn't satisfy myself of a provable mechanism for the benefit, particularly if said activity provided other important benefits, as well.
Not so irrational.
- Larry Weisenthal/Huntington Beach CA
