Anyone seen this weeks New Scientist. It's sub-titled “The God Issue”. The relevant section contains 5 articles on various aspects of religious faith. The first is by Justin L. Barrett who makes the case that children are born believers with a “God-shaped” space waiting to be filled. He is a psychologist who works at the Fuller Theological Seminary in Pasadena, so is certainly a committed Christian – in fact I have seen him described as such elsewhere – but this does not necessarily render his views completely without merit. His case seems to be that children find it very easy to accept supernatural explanations for things, and are constantly looking for causes or agents when looking at the world around them, and that “we all share an intuition that apparent order and design such as we see in the world around us requires an agent to bring it about”. He discounts the Santa Clause or Tooth Fairy analogy because people do not come to believe in these entities in adulthood. His article is very careful not to draw the conclusion “therefore God exists” , merely that children are susceptible to that suggestion – which we all knew anyway.
The other articles are.
“The idea that launched a thousand civilisations” by Ara Norenzayan
Religious thinking played a role in uniting groups of humans when they evolved from small hunter/gatherer tribes to bigger groups, and helped to encourage cooperation and trust between strangers within these groups.
“Natural religion, unnatural science” by Robert N. McCauley
There is a difference between “popular religion” and theology, and “when asked in experiments to talk or think about gods' thoughts and actions in stories, religious people immediately and completely abandon theologically correct doctrine in favour of popular religion”. I interpret this to mean for instance that Christians will continue to talk enthusiastically about someone they know miraculously recovering from an illness because they prayed, but ignore the fact that according to strict theological doctrine it must have been Gods' plan all along, regardless of whether they prayed or not. Also the the article makes the point that science is hard and often counter-intuitive, whilst religion is easy – children can understand it, thus concluding that atheists underestimate its staying power.
“The God Hypothesis” by Victor J. Stenger
If god or gods play a central role in the operation of the universe and the lives of humans, evidence for him/them should be readily detectable by scientific means. The article outlines some of the experiments done to attempt to detect god, e.g. the secret message on top of a high shelf in operating theatres for Near Death Experiences, and concludes that the universe and everything that happens in it (as far as we can see) are exactly what one would expect if there were no God.
“Religion without God” by Alain de Botton
This is in an interview form rather than a written article. “Atheists need to reclaim the useful bits of religion that have been annexed by the godly”. Some of these useful bits are stated as being “community binding” , “community rituals” , stuff to do with “the challenges of living in a community” and “the challenges of bad stuff happening to us”.
I recommend that people try and get a copy. Its dated 17th March and is edition number 2856.
Regards
Grimesy
The other articles are.
“The idea that launched a thousand civilisations” by Ara Norenzayan
Religious thinking played a role in uniting groups of humans when they evolved from small hunter/gatherer tribes to bigger groups, and helped to encourage cooperation and trust between strangers within these groups.
“Natural religion, unnatural science” by Robert N. McCauley
There is a difference between “popular religion” and theology, and “when asked in experiments to talk or think about gods' thoughts and actions in stories, religious people immediately and completely abandon theologically correct doctrine in favour of popular religion”. I interpret this to mean for instance that Christians will continue to talk enthusiastically about someone they know miraculously recovering from an illness because they prayed, but ignore the fact that according to strict theological doctrine it must have been Gods' plan all along, regardless of whether they prayed or not. Also the the article makes the point that science is hard and often counter-intuitive, whilst religion is easy – children can understand it, thus concluding that atheists underestimate its staying power.
“The God Hypothesis” by Victor J. Stenger
If god or gods play a central role in the operation of the universe and the lives of humans, evidence for him/them should be readily detectable by scientific means. The article outlines some of the experiments done to attempt to detect god, e.g. the secret message on top of a high shelf in operating theatres for Near Death Experiences, and concludes that the universe and everything that happens in it (as far as we can see) are exactly what one would expect if there were no God.
“Religion without God” by Alain de Botton
This is in an interview form rather than a written article. “Atheists need to reclaim the useful bits of religion that have been annexed by the godly”. Some of these useful bits are stated as being “community binding” , “community rituals” , stuff to do with “the challenges of living in a community” and “the challenges of bad stuff happening to us”.
I recommend that people try and get a copy. Its dated 17th March and is edition number 2856.
Regards
Grimesy
