Why do people believe in God? - results

Discussion in 'Religion Archives' started by James R, Jul 4, 2003.

  1. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    39,397
    Here are the results of a recent survey of posters to the Religion forum. The survey asked posters why they do or do not believe in God. There were 17 responses from theists, 41 replies from atheists/agnostics, and 37 responses to the question asking why people other than the respondent believe in God.

    Theists' stated reasons for believing in God
    The poll options can be divided into three broad categories, namely <b>rational</b> reasons for belief, <b>emotional</b> reasons for belief, and <b>authority-based</b> belief.

    Options in the <b>rational</b> category were:
    The universe is so perfect/complex, it must have been designed by God.
    Without God, there would be no morality.
    God's plan is visible in the world.
    God answers my prayers.
    I experience God everywhere in my daily life.

    Options in the <b>emotional</b> category were:
    God is needed to explain good and fight evil in the world.
    Everybody needs to believe in something.
    My life would be meaningless without God.
    I am afraid of death/the unknown. God gives me comfort.

    Options in the <b>authority-based</b> category were:
    I was raised to believe in God.
    The bible/Qu'ran/other text tells me God exists.

    54% of responses fell into the rational category.
    12% were in the emotional category.
    6% were in the autority-based category.

    Of the 29% "other" responses, I think it is fair to say that four out of five fall roughly into the rational category, and 1 out of 5 is an emotional response, making the overall statistics:

    78% rational
    18% emotional
    6% authority-based.

    (Note: the figures here and elsewhere do not add up exactly to 100% due to rounding.)

    Atheists' and agnostics' stated reasons for not believing in God
    We can divide these responses into two groups, too: <b>rational</b> and <b>emotional</b> reasons for disbelief.

    Rational:
    God is just a substitute for saying "I don't know".
    God is just a means of social control.
    There is no proof that God exists.
    There is too much evil in the world for a God to exist.

    Emotional:
    Religion causes wars and is bad for society.
    God is just a figment of our imagination.
    It is absurd to believe in God.
    There is no need to believe in God.

    46% of responses fell into the rational category.
    41% of responses fell into the emotional category.
    5% of responses were the true agnostic position: God is unknowable.

    10% of responses fell into the "other" category. I estimate a 50-50 split between rational and emotional responses in this category, giving total statistics of:

    51% of responses in the rational category.
    46% of responses in the emotional category.
    5% of responses in the true agnostic category.

    Why other people believe in God

    Both theists and atheists were asked why they thought other people believe in God.
    Using the same classification as for theists responses (above), there results here were:

    Rational: 6%
    Emotional: 43%
    Authority-based: 43%
    Other: 8%

    What can we take away from this survey? Well, here are some of my thoughts. I invite you all to comment, too.

    First, I think it is interesting that most theists give rational reasons for their belief in God. Their beliefs, on the whole, are based in personal experience of their God, or in logical inference from the perceived order of the universe and/or life. The most common response to the poll (by a small margin) was that theists believe because of the apparent design of the universe. They look out at the beauty of the world and conclude that a God must be responsible. The second most common response is that they feel the direct influence of God in their lives.

    In is interesting to contrast these responses with the common portrayal of theists by non-believers. Very often, atheists (in particular) label theists as weak-willed people who believe in fairy tales for purely emotional reasons. Alternatively, theists are often labelled as blind followers of authority, who never ask their own questions about the meaning of life.

    I think the results show that this is not true. In general, theists <b>do</b> think about the big questions and come to logical conclusions based on their own thinking, rather than on authority handed down to them. I would encourage atheists on this forum to take note.

    Turning to the atheists themselves, we find another somewhat surprising result - that atheists are perhaps not as supremely rational as they would have us believe. It seems that many of the atheists responses on this forum, at least, are emotional rather than rational. They are not based purely on available evidence, but rather on a reaction against the idea of God. There may be many reasons for this. People can react against a religious upbringing, or point to the perceived ills that religion causes in the world.

    More worrying from the atheists is the number of people who dismiss the possibility of God on emotional grounds, without really considering why they are doing so. They label the religious as less intelligent, or authority driven, or simply mad, with no good justification. This seems to be largely a knee-jerk response against people who take an opposing view. Perhaps these people should consider the real reasons why they so despise the religious.

    Finally, we come to the perception that we all have of other people. Here we see a very interesting psychological tendency. People tend to attribute their own motives and actions to rational choices, carefully thought out and backed by good arguments. But when it comes to evaluating the reasons that <b>other</b> people make certain choices, it is a common human failing to assume that other people are driven almost exclusively by emotion or authority.

    Notice that in the theists poll, theists themselves overwhelmingly gave rational reasons for their own beliefs. Yet when they were asked why other people believed, presumably they did not put down the same reasons as for their own beliefs. Instead, they thought that other people believe just because they were brought up that way. In fact, putting all results together, 86% of all respondents think that other people believe in God for either emotional reasons or because somebody else told them to, with the split being 50-50 for each option.

    What does all this tell us? I think it is a warning to us that we should be careful of our tendency to assume that other people are not just as rational as we are. We should all consider the possibility that other people have good reasons for their believes, which may just make some sense, even if we do not share those beliefs ourselves.

    So, I end by calling for just a little more tolerance on this forum. To the theists I say: look at the other point of view. By all means, say where you find it wanting, but also recognise where the atheists have a point. To the atheists and agnostics: do not lightly dismiss the religious beliefs of the theists. They are not unconsidered or irrational. You may argue the conclusion, but try to have good reasons for your arguments, rather than merely labelling believers in the hope that you won't have to actually challenge their views.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    39,397
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Pete It's not rocket surgery Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,167
    I seem to have interpreted "There is no need to believe in God" differently to what you meant by it. I think that "there is no need to believe in God" means that "It appears that there is no functional difference between the existence and non-existence of God, therefore there is no need to believe in God.

    I suggest that a poll asking about other people's reasons for sharing your own values is likely to produce more accurate results than one asking about your own reasons. (I can find references for this if necessary). For example, if someone says that others believe because of their upbringing, then it is likely that their own reason is because of their upbringing, regardless of their rational response when asked directly.

    A poll asking non-believers why other non-believers don't believe might also be interesting.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. everneo Re-searcher Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,621
    Actually that is the problem. Why others think what they think.? The underestimating others who believe, especially in this sciforum where the % of intellectual disability is certainly much less than a fair sample in geneal public, is the problem with both theists and athiests. I almost agree with James' fair analysis.
     
  8. Raithere plagued by infinities Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,348
    Very interesting poll James, I applaud the effort and I think you have some very good notions in your conclusion.
    However, can you explain the reasoning for treating the “other” category differently for Theist and Atheist responses?

    Thanks

    ~Raithere
     
  9. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    39,397
    Raithere,

    I assume the "other" responses are explained in the relies to the thread. I read all the posts and tried to categorise them. This was easier for the theists' responses, and I'm fairly sure I got that right. For the atheists, I judged it to be about 50-50, as I said above. We're only talking about a small number of responses in each case, anyway - approximately 4 or 5.
     
  10. Canute Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,923
    James - Very interesting analysis, particularly our judgement of other people's motives.

    However I would question your definition of 'rational'. For instance three of the reasons given by theists for believing in God you have classified as rational. I'm not so sure that they aren't actually emotional/intuitive (albeit subsequently rationalised).

    I suppose I'm wondering if 'based on reasoning' is necessarily the same thing as 'rational'.
     
  11. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    37,884
    Good show, James R

    An excellent set of topics, James R. And some very interesting results. To note one of your points:
    This may well be symptomatic of either the nature of the theistic assertion itself or else of the believers themselves. Despite how any one person feels about their own convictions, it is hard to argue against the notion that when it comes to religion, few people explaining their take on God make any tremendous amount of sense. The theistic assertion is on a certain level both intuitive and ineffable, and even I listen to most people who claim to believe in God and wonder what the hell they're talking about.

    So I think the tendency to see other people as less rational than the self speaks volumes about communication. It is, I believe, what we perceive of each other, and this may be the fault of the paradigm itself or of the expression of the paradigm.

    :m:,
    Tiassa

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  12. Jeremy Imagine Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    116

    Just because people think they have made a rational, well thought out decision, does not mean that they actually have. Self perception is tainted by the viewers perspective.

    "Psychology mixed with statistics, what an interesting combination!"

    Often a person will make an emotionally based decision, then look for evidence to back it up - rejecting facts that may dispel it. This found evidence reinforces the concept of it's false rationalism.
     
  13. Marigny Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    186
    these are good ones, james
    ------
    ...Options in the rational category were:
    The universe is so perfect/complex, it must have been designed by God.
    Without God, there would be no morality.
    God's plan is visible in the world.
    God answers my prayers.
    I experience God everywhere in my daily life.

    Options in the emotional category were:
    God is needed to explain good and fight evil in the world.
    Everybody needs to believe in something.
    My life would be meaningless without God.
    I am afraid of death/the unknown. God gives me comfort. "..."
    ----------------------

    morality, and that simple knowledge of good and evil.
    has to explain something about that demon under my bed or the transistion from life to death.

    they label the religious as less intelligent? so are you saying faith makes one dummer than their atheist counterpart? hmmm, i'd elaborate but i've been online on and off too long today.

    with all statistics aside, what do you believe?
    i believe.
     
  14. isalhala Registered Member

    Messages:
    4
    Interesting, but I disagree

    I think that your poll results are interesting but I disagree with your analysis. While a majority of theists claimed that they believed in God for reasons other than being raised to do so, I think that this is only natural. I don't believe that many people would support their beliefs purely on the idea that they were raised on this. I think that an analogy to this would be if you asked a Nazi why they disliked Jews. It seems that more of them would say something to the extent as "Jews are a menace to society and harm the overwell well-being of the country," rather than "My parents taught me to dislike Jews and the society around me reinforces that belief." If one looks upon history though, they can see that the latter answer is the actual reason. In addition, while the first answer would fit under the "rational" category, it is not a rational response at all.
    It would also be appropriate to point out that many atheists do not believe in God for more than one reason. I believe the lack of proof of a higher being is at least part of the reasoning for every atheist. I would assume that if actual proof came about of a god, atheists would at least admit to the existence of such a being, while maybe not supporting the worship of it.
    In conclusion, a child saying that there is a monster under his bed because he hears noises from under there at night is not displaying more intellect and being for reasonable than the person that tells him that this is not true, that the sounds are only in his head, and that there is actually no proof of this monster. The person may not want to believe in the monster because then his family would be in danger, but that would only accompany the first reason for why he did not believe in the monster.

    I don't know about you, but I've never heard of a monster living under somebody's bed.
     
  15. TheNatMan Chlamydia-free since 1934 Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    32
    Interesting, but skewed

    James, i read your findings, and was interested by them, until i saw what was at the top:
    "There were 17 responses from theists, 41 replies from atheists/agnostics, and 37 responses to the question asking why people other than the respondent believe in God. "
    This means several things: one, since the sample sizes were not the same in the least, any theist response that you classified under the "rational" category would count for more. It also means that for one reason or another, you went on interpreting this data, perhaps to prove your own point. But this is not a scientific study. The samples were not equal, there were people who fell under multiple categories, there were people who fell under no categories, you made up the reasons, you made up the classification system, and you interpreted the results yourself, no doubt a biased observer. These "results" were impressive, but the "study" needs a bit of work. Nice idea though
     
  16. UltiTruth In pursuit... Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    533
    Fully agree wth your analysis, James. Kudos.
     
  17. HOPE Registered Member

    Messages:
    6
    be sure about your thoughts...
    be sure to study long and hard....
    for if your wrong
    you may be LEFT BEHIND
    I want to be with the LORD.
     
  18. Jahiro Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    90
    Studying I agree with

    LEFT BEHIND? you sound like some xtian waiting for the second coming

    So if we study something, and come to the wrong conclusion even though the intention of the one who was studying was to find truth, we get "left behind?"

    Where is this behind?

    How do you know where this "forward" is, is any better?

    Who determines who is right and wrong?

    Who is the LORD?

    Bah

    -Jahiro
     
  19. HOPE Registered Member

    Messages:
    6
    I do not want to be left behind when GOD calls for his people....I want to be in heaven......with GOD......
     
  20. Jahiro Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    90
    How can ONE create another that is not of himself?

    Remember Isaiah 45:
    7 I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.

    Thus, all people are HIS people. That is the patience and understanding of the Lord

    Your brainwashed thinking of a heavenly afterlife may just cost you everything

    The true afterlife is here

    Seek it out, for time is limited

    -Jahiro
     
  21. Avatar smoking revolver Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    19,083
    agree with TheNatMan and Canute

    too much of your own interpretation on what is rational, too messed up math (proportions)

    I am very amazed by our universe, but I don't think that it needs a sentinent creator, am I not rational?
     
  22. invisibleone Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    121
    the universe is far from perfect. take a look around! if it was perfect, everyone would be financially stable, well fed, pain free, happy, beautiful and brilliant.
     
  23. Avatar smoking revolver Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    19,083
    I am talking about the universe not the social structure and its' pros and cons of some ape like humanoid beings living on a rather small but beuatiful planet at the far reaches of the milky way galaxy

    ...and besides, I don't remember using a word "perfect" , it is too relative and subjective
     

Share This Page