Reasons Part 8 - Psychological explanations

Posted by Jason on: 02.23.2009 /

Over the last few month I’ve provided some of the common reasons why many people fail to believe in gods or God.  I’ve talked about different kinds of atheism, about how evidence and how it does not lead to God, about how God isn’t necessary to living, about how some of the common argument for God are not convincing for me, the Problem of Evil, science as a better way of explaining things and about the lack of meaning in the term “God”.  There are a few more reasons to go and this is one that I personally put a good deal of stock in. 

Religion exists throughout almost all cultures on Earth.  To my mind that leads to three possible conclusions.

1. All cultures share a common origin and the central tales that form religion have become corrupted or altered since the original took place.
2. God or gods visited disparate cultures and taught them about the divine in a way that the people would best understand and appreciate.
3. The structure of the human brain lends itself to belief in deities.

The idea of a shared culture I think is safe to rule out.  I doubt that any faith would accept that their interpretation is a corruption of a central idea and I doubt that there is evidence of humanity diverging geographically at a cultural stage where gods were a commonality.  The differences in god ideas throughout history and cultures is proof that their is no central idea beyond a belief in a cosmic “something” and that is too vague to be satisfactory.

I am similarly dissatisfied with the idea of gods or a single god would visit several cultures and provide them with divine cultural myths that were at odds with one another.  It would make more sense if the myths formed part of a larger whole that cultures could link together or use to complement their own myths but this is not the case.

This leaves the idea that the “God concept” is something that is inherent to human psychology.  Psychologists have asked if “religion” is another way of expressing various psychological drives.  This opposes the idea that “religion” is a response to the existence of God or gods but is unsurprisingly opposed by those of a religious view.

Freud expressed the idea of religion as being a

system of doctrines and promises which on the one hand explains to him the riddles of this world with enviable completeness, and, on the other, assures him that a careful Providence will watch over his life and will compensate him in a future existence for any frustrations he suffers here.

Emotionally the belief in God is safe.  It provides a protective father figure to care for them in a world that is often frightening.  God provides meaning in a  world that is often confusing and seemingly without purpose.  Death holds no fear of an end to existence for those who believe in an afterlife.  A divine plan puts importance on the life of a believer as a vital (though small) component in the universe.  A divine plan also comforts a believer with the knowledge that they are cared for and respected.  Strongly held faith enables people to cope with basic human concerns and fears.

Now a theist might argue that all this is true but that doesn’t disprove God.  They might argue that we are “made” to be psychologically inclined to believe and that this is evidence of God’s mercy.  Are we not saved through faith after all?  An interesting idea.  Either way it leaves us with the the view that religion is a phenomena of psychology.  As such should we not abandon faith in order to grow as human beings to respond to the world appropriately rather than through God belief?

Returning to Sigmund Freud it is well known that he had many ideas regarding religion.  He theorized that the belief in a loving parent figure in God stemmed from early infant experience.  As babies we were utterly dependent on our parents.  Infants see parents as all powerful figures who satisfy all their needs and who heap love upon them without condition.  Many people portray their relationship with God in the same way.

Another idea that Freud wrote about was the suggestion that experiences from childhood leave people with complex emotions about their parents and themselves.  Religion and the rituals that are involved with religious worship provide a socially acceptable outlet for working these feelings through and coming to terms with them.  Of course Freud also famously described religion as a mass-delusion, mentally shaping reality to ensure personal happiness and security.

Closely linked to the idea that God is a psychological phenomena is the genetic predisposition of certain areas of our brains.  Parts of the brain are specialised to interpret and express ideas in language.  Noam Chomsky has put forward the theory our understanding of language and grammar is innate.  Could such a thing also be true for religion?  Could the human brain be genetically structured to see the divine in natural objects and events?  We certainly have very complex pattern recognition abilities that could certainly be applied in seeing the hand of God in the mundane.

Copyright 2010 Off The Map | Terms of Service | Contact Webmaster | Powered by Wordpress | Admin