GeoTheo

One must begin with an a priori assumption that god does not exist to undertake such a study?
I am thinking that Man's apprehension of the existence of God evolved at some point. So I would start this study with a much different assumption than someone who assumes that belief in god is a delusion. Would my study be totally illegitimate?

Liquidrage

Why would a property of a god be that said god could not allow a process so simply as evolution to occur? I believe you are putting forth a poor definition of god if you claim this.

I believe that man's ability to put forth the existance of a god evolved at some point. Why must the nonbelief in something that has no factual evidence be the newly aquired trait?

It seems to me your axioms are created out of misunderstanding and are therefor not truely axioms.

-edited for typo correction

[ August 31, 2002: Message edited by: Liquidrage ]</p>

Valentine Pontifex

Well the study of why people believe in God cannot in-and-of-itself prove or disprove His existence. So I would say no.

Consider that that the evidence that religious experences have a biological basis. Doctrinaire atheists interpret this as "proof" that God is just an irrational emotion, etc. But then the doctrinaire theists take this exact same information as "proof" that God has installed within every human a desire/need for Him.

Now less dogmatic people from both schools of thought can recognize that neither intretation can absolutley trump the other but instead try to conclude that the simplest explanation is best. Of course which one is the simpliest explanation will be debated. And furthermore, while figuring out which explanation is simpliest is often a good way to the truth (lower case), it is not always right.

Dr.GH

I think that substantive portions of this topic have been posted in:
<a href="http://iidb.org/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=58&t=001278" target="_blank">http://iidb.org/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=58&t=001278</a>

Of course, there is a fair amount of chaft, some of it my own.

Caverdude

Hmmm...Most studies begin with some kind of assumption or hypothesis. The study results should (if done properly) reinforce the assumption or refute it. Everything evolves (changes over time)...living creatures, cultures, and religion. I think it would be an interesting topic to research.

Happy Wonderer

Not really, you just need an a priori assumption that all the other guys gods don't exist. Then you can study how they came to have such silly and illogical beliefs since none of their gods are rational (unlike yours.)

Then all you need to do is include a member of another religion on your research team.

HW

[ September 02, 2002: Message edited by: Happy Wonderer ]</p>

jpbrooks

This is quite an interesting topic.
What I find puzzling is why it would have occurred to the early humans that we assume created the first religious doctrines to assume that natural phenomena can have "personal" beings (such as deities) as their basis or origin, and why these kinds of (religious) doctrines seem so persistent and predominant in the history of human civilizations despite their apparent lack of survival value. Why, for example, would dreaming up "imaginary" "spirit beings" (whose existence, having no indisputable evidential support, just makes the world more complicated and thus more difficult to account for) make a society more powerful than a society that posited no such beings?

[ September 03, 2002: Message edited by: jpbrooks ]</p>

Wyz_sub10

I strongly recommend Boyer's "Religion Explained".

It looks at the evolution of religion and dispells the notions that religion was "created" to explain the unknown or to provide comfort. It does not bash religion (at least so far as I have read), but looks at it in terms of our brain's hard-wiring.

Interesting stuff, whether one agrees or not.

Tom Sawyer

I don't think it really matters what your assumptions are when you begin a study. None of us look at anything with a blank slate and our own beliefs colour everything we do.

You can begin the study as a Christian fundamentalist or a strong atheist but as long as you have a sound methodology in place and are honest with your results, the study would be valid.

Starboy

Check out Joseph Campbell. He is dead now, but he started out a Christian and it is difficult to figure out what he ended up as, but I don't think it was as an a-theist as the world would understand it. He spent his entire life studying mythology. I'm reading one of his books right now "The Power of Myth". Very interesting, puts Christianity in a whole new light. His book definitely supports the claim that Christians don't get their own religion.

Starboy