Atheism is unstoppable.

[EgoDeath]

So, is the answer to my question that fictional writings can sometimes evoke emotional reactions in people?

In my view, "emotional reactions" is too simple. It's not merely like feeling happy when you see a puppy. 

The human world, the lived world, the phenomenological world, the world of our experience rather than the dispassionate world of science, is real to us. It is where we live. It can never be separated from desire or interest. It is in part sensed and in part filled in by knowledge and theory-laden projections. 

Perhaps you are a divine spark of pure reason placed into a body-vehicle due to a fall from the divine world. Frankly, I doubt it. Everybody else I know is a human being, and human beings are made of meat. Our brains and bodies operate on several levels, some more conscious than others. There is no reason at all to think that what our minds and bodies do in conjunction make sense in any logical way, are consistent, are not self-contradictory. We want to live and we want to die, we want to stop wanting, we are capable of loving and hating the same thing at the same moment. It may be that some people dislike this fact and strive to eliminate those qualities. But I find them very interesting. 

To misquote Thomas Nagel: there is something it is like to be a human. Of course science informs us of the mechanisms through which we get there, but it doesn't tell us what it is like. 

There is something it is like to be me. And most likely, this is different from what it is like to be somebody else. Especially if we're talking about someone far removed in time and culture. And people have long wondered what it is like to be a superior person. This is one of the main themes of both Proust's novel and Murasaki Shikibu's, and we learn a lot from what they say about what superiority is to them, what it would be like to be that way, etc. Others have wondered what it would be like to have total perfection in a human being, and this is an important part of the Christian tradition. 

Since self-contradiction is a part of what it is to be human, along with many other non-logical functions, human stories do not strive for the same kind of qualities as a scientific paper. 

Have you read any Nietzsche? He says that lying underneath our mental phenomena is just chaos. For him, the order that we perceive in the world is a kind of overlay, projected onto the world of no-order. In physics of course he is not correct -- there is order in the world independent of our perception (probably). But in the lived world he is correct. Scientific investigation doesn't tell us about the meanings we overlay on the world that physics studies. But when you walk down the street, most of what goes into our consciousness is human-created. The purpose of the sidewalk, the beauty of this year's fashions, the value of the iPhone you just dropped -- these are not available to physics. But these are what we live with. And these are the things that both the arts and religion work on.

Your rambling comes off as incoherent and it seems like you're just avoiding actually answering my question. Saying religion satisfies some deep thing we don't quite understand is the same as saying it does nothing. There are much more effective, natural ways to feel fulfilled as a human. Here are EXACT and PRECISE examples... the things I was asking you for:

The need to feel connected to nature and Earth (can also be read as a need to feel spiritual): taking a walk in a state park or spending time outside meditating in nature, standing in awe before a waterfall or a tall tree, pondering how long it took that tree to grow or how long it took for that waterfall to form... looking up into the night sky and truly sitting with the fact that any direction you look in goes on INFINITELY... nature is absolutely fascinating
The need to feel connected to others: Taking time out of your week to eat a meal with your family or go out with your friends
The need to feel fulfilled professionally: Passionately pursuing excellence in your career, even if you're not crazy about your job
The need to feel loved: Show love to others and have the favor returned, spend time with your children, nieces, nephews, etc.
The need to understand the unknown: Study the sciences... biology, chemistry, physics... if you're truly a curious person, you will find these subjects fascinating and will find that understanding them more, even on a rudimentary level, makes the world MORE wonderful, not less
The need to pursue creative desires: Taking up writing, painting, drawing, tattooing, sculpting, interior design, fashion design, etc.
The need to have sex: Have sex, be intimate with your lover/husband/wife/partner... masturbate... fantasize about preferred sexual situations, write erotic stories, draw or look at erotic pictures or watch erotic videos
The need to taste something delicious: cook a wonderful meal, maybe for you and your partner/wife/husband/lover... or have them cook for you, or if you both suck at cooking, visit your favorite restaurant or maybe get into fine dining (even if you can only afford one lavish meal every other month, savor it and love the experience)

There is simply NO NEED I can see that religion fills that other Earthly, carnal activities cannot fill more efficiently. And as Robvalue pointed out the cost at which religion MIGHT fill some of these desires highly outweighs the benefit.

[Belacqua]

Saying religion satisfies some deep thing we don't quite understand is the same as saying it does nothing.

But I never said that religion satisfies some deep thing we don't quite understand. You are imagining that. 

There are much more effective, natural ways to feel fulfilled as a human.

I said nothing about how we feel fulfilled. It's an interesting topic, but not one I've addressed. 

But since my post seems incoherent I'll drop the subject. Thank you anyway. [/quote]

[EgoDeath]

But I never said that religion satisfies some deep thing we don't quite understand. You are imagining that. 

I was trying to understand what you were getting at and that's the only thing I could assume from what you were trying to say. Your post was hard to decipher.

I said nothing about how we feel fulfilled. It's an interesting topic, but not one I've addressed. 

But since my post seems incoherent I'll drop the subject. Thank you anyway. 

I suppose I'm simply having a hard time understanding what you're trying to say. But alright.

[Deesse23]

Even if we grant Belaqua that religion does actually do something
#1 demonstrably true and
#2 beneficial to humans
there still remains the issue: Is there a way to get the same effect/satisfaction of a human need, without the *unwarranted belief* part? I would prefer this.

He mentioned art in an earlier post: Could we possibly have (in the future) Michelangelos paintings without the (detrimental!) religious baggage?

[Belacqua]

Even if we grant Belaqua that religion does actually do something
#1 demonstrably true and
#2 beneficial to humans
there still remains the issue: Is there a way to get the same effect/satisfaction of a human need, without the *unwarranted belief* part? I would prefer this.

He mentioned art in an earlier post: Could we possibly have (in the future) Michelangelos paintings without the (detrimental!) religious baggage?

It is possible to have wonderful paintings without Michelangelo's Neoplatonic Christian foundations. 

It is not possible to have Michelangelo's works without that. Form and content are not separable.

[Dr H]

Atheism may be growing, but I don't see religion disappearing for a long, long time, if ever.  

Other than being inculcated with religion as a child, why do people take up religion or convert to a particular religion?

Because they're looking for something that is missing in their life.  It might be something abstract like an answer to questions about origins, moral issues, survival, etc.  Or, quite commonly its something more concrete:  Why am I poor?  Why can't I get a good job?  Why can't I find adequate housing?  How can I feed my family?  Why can't I get medical care for my sick child?

Religion offers answers to these questions.  
Not good answers, but answers that come with a certain amount of community approval and support.

No matter now many atheists there are, until we evolve as a society to the point where we are able -- and willing -- to adequately address and provide for the basic needs of all members of society, there will be religion, and people turning to religion.  It is the equivalent of a comforting mental night-light.

[Deesse23]

Even if we grant Belaqua that religion does actually do something
#1 demonstrably true and
#2 beneficial to humans
there still remains the issue: Is there a way to get the same effect/satisfaction of a human need, without the *unwarranted belief* part? I would prefer this.

He mentioned art in an earlier post: Could we possibly have (in the future) Michelangelos paintings without the (detrimental!) religious baggage?

It is possible to have wonderful paintings without Michelangelo's Neoplatonic Christian foundations. 

It is not possible to have Michelangelo's works without that. Form and content are not separable.

You seem to avoid the issue.
Do you imply with those statments that, in order to keep having art as awesome as Michelanglos in order to satisfy a human need for *something* (which you still havent demonstrated) we should embrace irrational and detrimental religious beliefs? Yes or no. Dont deflect or avoid or *misunderstand* me please.

P.S.: and i deem you educated enough to think you purposefully have avoided the issue. Aka: you are "playing stupid", which pretty much disappoints me i have to say.

[Belacqua]

Do you imply with those statments that, in order to keep having art as awesome as Michelanglos in order to satisfy a human need for *something* (which you still havent demonstrated) we should embrace irrational and detrimental religious beliefs? Yes or no. 

No.