Laera

Sorry if this question has been answered, but I couldn't find a discussion on it.

I've heard some people in various threads posit that it's best not to try to de-convert some people for various reasons (usually having to do with their simultaneous loss of sanity).

Is someone's ability to deal with loss of belief an inherant trait of that person, or is it solely a function of their degree of indoctrination? (i.e. Are some people incapable of not believing in a god, and what are the factors involved?)

To use an example close to home, two women (mother and daughter) are liberal Christians and have always believed in God and Jesus. They think alike in almost every respect - including an affinity for math and science reasoning. The mother is a pastor. The daughter is an engineer dating an atheist who has exposed her to atheist arguments for the first time.

1. Is it easier for one to lose belief than the other?
2. Should both have "de-conversion" attemped? (or would it be futile/harmful?)
3. What problems do you see in this situation?

Maybe these are two different topics...
Thoughts?

lpetrich

This reminds me of an old argument that religion is desirable as the opium of the people -- that it is useful to get the common people to follow some superstitious form of religion in order to get them to be well-behaved.

This argument has had several eminent advocates in past centuries, like Plato, Strabo, Polybius, Machiavelli, and so forth. It is implicit in the argument that religion is useful for making people virtuous, even if not explicitly or honestly stated.

And carrying the opium analogy further, the idea of religion as addiction is worth exploring, though there are lots of different religions, and there is unlikely to be a universal explanation for them.

Gar

I believe it was Marx who said that religion is the opium of the masses.

As for using religion as a means of control, it does work. What you need is a living god. Look at the Egyptians. They were a pretty stable society as far as civilizations go. 4000 years is longer than any other civilization has been around (except maybe the Myans).

Anyway I suggest reading the Dune series by Frank Herbert. It deals a lot with religion as a mechanizm of control.

IvanK

I think it might be possible to draw some conclusions about personal characteristics more likely to be found in those more likely to challenge theistic beliefs. But I know of so many exceptions I don't think one could draw up a list of people who would never do so.