Are some people truly better off believing?

[Razzle]

I hear some anti-theists say they think the world would be better with no theistic beliefs at all, including liberal theism, and that people who think they need it, just haven't learned alternative coping mechanisms which could fully replace it. I don't think I agree. There are some people I would prefer to keep their beliefs.

I went to a state-run Church of England school where hell was never mentioned. I only knew of the general notion through popular culture, namely cartoons that didn't take it seriously. But I did understand that it was a place many people believed was real. I assumed that the idea was that hell is where bad people go. At school they taught that Jesus died for our sins so that we could be forgiven and go to heaven (again, not mentioning the alternative), and I assumed that meant everyone who was a good person. I can't remember them ever specifying, so it sounded like they meant humanity in general, not just Christians. It wasn't until I read the New Testament as a teenager that I first found out that it could be interpreted as meaning all non-Christians go to hell, and I was shocked to go online and find out that this was historically the dominant Christian doctrine. It was a completely new concept to me.

Back to the time before that happened. I didn't have any other pro-Christian influence (my mum is an anti-theist and none of my other relatives gave any indication whether they believed in God or not), so as a child I never decided whether I believed it all, but nothing was presented that scared me, and it seemed like it would be quite nice if true. I loved many of the hymns, the ancient church they took us to was nice, colouring in the nativity scene was nice, etc. I enjoyed the culture.

I would go as far as to say that right now I wish I could believe it. Not because I want to go to heaven - I have no fear of non-existence - but for the hope that the suffering in the world that I can do nothing about will be compensated, and for the feelings I used to get when I imagined God being real and watching and making everything fair and alright in the end. Even though I never had any sense of certainty, I still got the feelings. For this reason I can't imagine I would share what I know about the history and content of the Bible or Quran with certain types of people. For an extreme example to illustrate the point, if I meet a homeless person fresh from a psychiatric hospital who is covering scars on their arms with Jesus wristbands, I won't entertain the idea of taking that away from them. 

I do think there is a legitimate concern that liberal theists can raise children who disagree with their parents' Pick-&-Mix Christianity/Judaism/Islam/whatever, and become moderates or fundamentalists with views that can harm themselves or others (especially any gay children of their own that they have, because even moderates can do great harm to gay children). I think the way around that, is to ensure that liberal theists are taught the history of their scriptures - short of enough for them to dismiss the whole thing - so that they can adopt the the view popular among textual scholars who are believers, that scripture was written by people who were just trying to make sense of their own or second-hand revelations from God, and often got it wrong and injected cultural beliefs. That allows them complete freedom to reject whichever parts they want to reject as just an opinion, or as true stories about tribal leaders PRETENDING God ordered them to do bad things. They will then pass that knowledge on to their own children, who will become either become liberal theists or non-believers. Which is harmless, in my opinion.

Agree/disagree? Under what circumstances, if any, might you prefer that someone maintain their theistic beliefs?

[Napoléon]

Under what circumstances, if any, might you prefer that someone maintain their theistic beliefs?

None.

Knowledge should always be preferable to ignorance.

[FatAndFaithless]

You don't need fairy tales to help discuss the world or people or morality or society. There's nothing that religion adds to one's understanding of the world that isn't either A) entirely attainable through actual scientific verifiable soruces or B) false or unsubstantiated.

I really really dislike the argument that 'some people' just need religion, as if one could possible test that hypothesis. No, I don't think that there are 'some people' that just couldn't function in this world without their faith except in the sense that their faith is the thing that makes them think that in the first place.

There's so much to appreciate in the world that requires absolutely no appeal to supernatural ideas or entities, and the things that are upsetting about the world (suffering, inustice, etc) isn't something that I would want to have explained away by some master plan ("Oh, those 14,000 children starving to death in Africa every day is just 'part of the plan', don't worry"), it only emphasizes our duty and ability to make the world better ourselves for its own sake.

In short, no, I don't wish any of it were true, and I certainly don't think that people are "better off" with fairytales except in the most basic, simple, ignorant, narcotic, short-termed sense.

[Dystopia]

In any circumstance that believing is better for the person in the long run (such as preventing suicide or depression, etc.). I'm thinking about an oncologist who sees children dying horribly of cancer and wants to believe there's something more than mere materialism - If believing in a higher power makes the difference between this doctor going to work and becoming depressed with life I see no reason to say no.

I have a friend who went trough depression and believing in spiritual shit helped her get better - The only problem is that when people question her claims she goes nuts because she assumes people are saying she would be better off in pain, so no one can question her beliefs without her becoming depressed again - It's complicated...

[Minimalist]

I think some people are far too stupid to be without their invisible friend.  There is a reason why the image of a shepherd and a flock of sheep is so common.

[Dystopia]

You don't need fairy tales to help discuss the world or people or morality or society. There's nothing that religion adds to one's understanding of the world that isn't either A) entirely attainable through actual scientific verifiable soruces or B) false or unsubstantiated.

Here's something to think about - Atheists focus heavily, as demonstrated by your points A + B, on science and the truth... Here's the thing though - It is very easy for me, a middle class western man, to say science and what is verifiable is better and more desirable, but I can't possibly criticize people who are ignorant due to poverty, marginalization, and because they don't understand science they think god created the world, etc. The problem with your reasoning is that it assumes that (1) Science can solve everything but it's mostly impossible for science to replace the effect religion brings - And no, science can't solve everything (2) You assume that the truth matters the most when sometimes I wonder if values like happiness aren't more important. In theory, if I consider happiness superior to the truth and believing in god makes me happier then I could argue belief in god can be rational. I'm not being a theist apologist, it's just something to think about. If I was born in another country I might not be an atheist posting here but a very devout believer. Nature and nurturing change everything. I happen to value the truth - But I don' see anything as absolute truth, just the most likely possibility.

[cocunningham]

I get where your coming from and yeah I've seen religion give people who need it strength and seen it motivate people to do wondrous things. However it's motivated people to do monstrous things or at least given them means to justify it as well. I don't think you can ever get the good without the bad.

I don't try and convince anyone what to believe, but I do wonder what the world would be like without religion. Unfortunately I think the hatred and violence is part of human nature and as a whole we'd find new justifications for prejudice and harming others.

[Alex K]

It's very well possible. The atheist ideal is not to force everyone to disbelieve. The ideal is to have a society where people can grow up without the need to believe.

[SteelCurtain]

I'd like to differentiate between thinking about the hypothetical world where religion doesn't exist and actively trying to make that happen. I think it's an important distinction.

[Razzle]

 (2) You assume that the truth matters the most when sometimes I wonder if values like happiness aren't more important. In theory, if I consider happiness superior to the truth and believing in god makes me happier then I could argue belief in god can be rational. I'm not being a theist apologist, it's just something to think about. If I was born in another country I might not be an atheist posting here but a very devout believer. Nature and nurturing change everything. I happen to value the truth - But I don' see anything as absolute truth, just the most likely possibility.

I think the value of anything, including truth, is determined by its effect on well-being. That's what 'value' is - a measurement of how something makes us feel. Usually, knowing the truth about things helps us effectively manipulate the world to promote positive emotional states and reduce negative ones, but occasionally, a particular person believing something false will do that instead.