Feynmann once remarked, "God is needed for understanding those things which you don't believe the laws will explain, such as consciousness, or why you only live for a certain length of time — life and death — stuff like that. God is always associated with those things that you do not understand."
Why did humanity require God and religion in the first place?
For prehistoric man, the world around him was shrouded in mystery. The elemental forces of nature that were necessary for human sustenance could suddenly strike back without warning leaving a trail of death and destruction in their wake. The same fire that helped Man to cook his food and keep himself warm could rage through a forest and leave men burnt. The rain that nourished his crops could pour down in torrents washing away his hard work. The river where he washed the grime off his body or fur/hide could swell angrily past its banks in a flood and wash away all that he held dear. The gentle breeze , a breath of relief after a hard day's night could just as unexpectedly turn into a cyclone or a dust storm that blew him away. (All puns intended)
With his primitive science, the vagaries of Mother Nature were far beyond the comprehenion of poor ol' Y - Chromosomal Adam. Perhaps it gave him comfort to believe in an omnipresent, omniscient being who watched over the Universe.... to quote the old chestnut, "God has to exist, for if he doesn’t, we’re in trouble".
Religion with naturalistic motifs may have been born in the confused aftermath of tragedies - explaining natural disasters or illness as the rage of an angry God who could be appeased by ceremonies or sacrifices. Death and destruction were borne with greater courage and grace if one believed in a heavenly afterlife. Trials and tribulations were mitigated by faith in a divine presence who was certain to make sure that "All's well that ends well".
Rituals, by virtue of their repetitiveness and normalcy would be therapeutic for humans, giving them something to focus on instead of their worry / pain. Also, they seem to give humanity the faith (though some call it wishful thinking) that they can shape the highs and lows of destiny to their liking.
Is religion in our genes?
From Matt Ridley's book, "Nature via Nurture: Genes, Experience and What Makes Us Human":
In a recent study [psychologist Thomas] Bouchard measured how [religiously] fundamentalist individuals are by giving them questionnaires about their beliefs. The correlation between the resulting scores for identical twins reared apart is 62 percent; for fraternal twins reared apart it is just 2 percent. Bourchard repeats the exercise with a different questionnaire designed to elicit a broader measure of religiosity and still gets a strong result: 58 percent [for identical twins reared apart] vs 27 percent [for fraternal twins reared apart].
Religion conferred an evolutionary (and hence genetic) advantage on the primitive Homo Sapien. Being communal in nature, it fostered a cohesive bond amongst a group of hunter gatherers. This engendered a greater sense of togetherness , producing a lean, mean survival machine, a group that worked together towards common goals whether it be defending their territory or hunting down prey. Such a force would bring in more food -----> Full bellies ------> Increased physical and mental strength -----> Greater immunity to diesease -----> Healthier offspring ; a virtuous circle of sorts.
The more capable religion was of producing a group streamlined for survival, the greater was the group members' chance of passing on their genes to subsequent generation. Hence, religions that endured were those that had stood the test of time (and evolution) and passed with flying colours.
Why are God and religion a bone of contention between the atheists and theists?
Through the centuries, we have discovered the reasons for the natural phenomena that so plagued early man. This doesn't contradict religion, but it does takes away one of the original motivations for religion.
This does not mean that a lack of belief in the Divine precludes the belief in humanity/ moral values. But if all scientists had believed that the natural phenomena existed because God made them, science would never have progressed.
A scientist has to question the dogma of the past, that is how new theories come into existence. In any experiment/ new theory, the burden of proof is omnipresent. These beliefs (from what I've read) tend to spill over into other fields, one of which is the existence of God. There is no absolute proof that God exists, hence skepticism creeps in.
To justify this dogma, Kant in his Critique Of Reason, says God is in the noumenal realm where we have no intuition or direct experience of Him. I guess that means we take our belief in God, on faith (literally and figuratively) since we can't perceive him through the normal five senses.
However, the truth of the matter as far as those who swear by absolute proof are concerned :
- Science has failed to find natural evidence of God. For men of science, natural evidence is all there is. No God. Case closed.
- Slightly softer is this line of reasoning: Science erases the "need" for God as an explanation of our experiences, and God either doesn't exist or is at best a hypothesis (to the agnostic).
Despite this, many famous scientists still held on to the belief in the Divine:
I believe in Spinoza's God who reveals himself in the orderly harmony of what exists, not in a God who concerns himself with the fates and actions of human beings ~Albert Einstein
Numero pondere et mensura Deus omnia condidit
God created everything by number, weight and measure. ~Isaac Newton
At bottom God is nothing more than an exalted father. ~ Sigmund Freud
I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use. ~Galileo Galilei
Perhaps religion endures because of its humanity (I mean both humankind as a species and the more emotional meaning of the word). As far as science is concerned, humankind is the most evolved in a series of serendipitious mutations since the first group of appropriately combined hydrocarbons spawned life ; we are but well seasoned derivatives of the primordial soup. It does not deal with messy emotions or life's major questions. It deals with life, not living.
Religion, on the other hand, perhaps because it is of the people, by the people and for the people, essentially revolves around humanity. It helps us cope with tragedies, what to do when we're in a moral dilemma, it helps us in the realities of our day to day life and restrains us from running pell mell towards the greener grass on the other side.
Hence, the title quote, courtesy Herr Einstein. Science only tells us what we can do, religion tells us what we ought to do. However, science enables us to weed out the fantastic stories that pepper all religions' scriptures and focus on the tenets that will guide our ascent to a more evolved plane of thinking, leaving the pettiness behind.
The belief in God, a benevolent all - encompassing, loving entity often brings out the best in men. Perhaps the faith that though certain decisions / happenstances are beyond our capability, they will be taken care of by a Higher Power helps us relax and let go of the burden of stress we take on. In a frame of mind, unclouded by fear, our natural abilities and instincts come to the fore, enabling us to take the optimum decision for the situation.
It is my belief that faith is a purely personal matter, which will persist regardless of arguments for and against it. The personification of God, whether known as Avatar or Messiah, is required because humans in their frailty identify best with the divinity if portrayed in a human form.
However, inspite of the fact that all religions preach the same basic values, a few people insist on condemning others faiths needlessly. On further reflection, I surmise that people who try to pull down another's faith are doing so in an effort to hide from the lacunae they perceive in their own beliefs. In an effort to drown out that niggling inner voice, they overcompensate by shouting their derogatory remarks from the rooftops, hoping for validation from the multitude.
I feel that if your religion (or moral code sans the so - called opium of the masses) provides succour during times of sorrow and pain and keeps you grounded in times of plenty, then it has fulfilled its purpose.
To make it more personal , I've observed that medicos often need to fall back on faith in God and religion. At times a patient beyond the pale of hope makes a miraculous recovery for reasons we cannot explain, 'tis a time that makes you believe that there must be a God, and thank the heavens for that. Sometimes, we do all we can for our patients, but the awareness is still there that their life is not in our hands. It is so much more heartbreaking if he/she is a young child or the sole breadwinner. At such times, a belief in a benevolent higher power helps one to soldier on, to give our best and hope that all will work out or gives one the strength to deal with (those inevitable) failures.
Man does not live by bread alone. We need religion to ground us, to help us navigate our way through the agony and the ecstasy of life. We require it to come to terms with our mortality. We reflect on the Divine idea to rise above the trivialties of everyday existence. However, the belief in God (or humanity, in its abstract form) is most important in that it propels us down the path of knowledge towards perfection ; it inspires us to strive towards an ideal... Nirvana.
Doctor Witch
Doctor Witch
