in Web Site: http://users.uniserve.com/~tfrisen/welcome.html
==============================================================
>I don't have any thing to say about your pages, I personally think they are
>very well done! I do have a question that I've wondered for a while.
>Why do people really need religion?
When one is forced, it is difficult to come up with possible answers to your question.
Maybe that is why it is such an interesting one. I must admit I don't know the answer.
The following are some guesses. The first part is my reply.
The second part is one I got (after I finished mine) from a friend (Christian Stuhr) that
I began to communicate with, a few months ago. He was a philosophy professor at
the University of Regina, and I asked him your question.
Part I: My suggestions:
Some possible reasons:
(1) To explain the unknown.
People like to have rationalizations for everything, including the unknown.
e.g. the history and future of the universe, life before and after death,
purpose of life. The danger here is that the religious explanation can become
the "TRUTH", and prevent scientific research in these fields. Historically
religion has been a big negative in this respect. New Age beliefs are also
a big negative here too.
(2) To provide law and order in a society
-- commandments, etc.
As in part (1), historically these have become the "TRUTH" and prevent
wise ethical decisions by individuals and society.
Here again, religion has been a big negative.
(3) It is evident that people of all
cultures seem to have some form of religion
-- there seems to be a need for religion.
This does not mean, of course, that people really need religion to live a
happy, constructive, ethical and fulfilled life.
(a) It may have started initially with ways of explaining happenings and
developed into a larger belief system which people inherited.
Because this system was inherited from the past it may have gained awesome
attributes, and just grew.(b) It could even be that after years of leaders selectively choosing followers
that were religious (for better control of people), that through evolution people
have genetically gained a predisposition towards religious beliefs.
However, religion is a fact of life now.
On my website I think I have described a simple religious belief that can be
appropriate to individuals -- that allows individuals to be freethinkers, to be
tolerant of other beliefs or nonbeliefs, to be independent of "experts" and
the consequences of being dependent on them. -- A belief system that can
satisfy the religious need in the people that have this need.
(4) Of course, organized religions will justify their own religion.
I looked up some passages in two so called "Holy Books". I'm getting desperate.
(a) The Bible has the following to say about religion:
Jas 1:27
Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, [and] to keep himself unspotted from the world.
(b) From the Koran:
2:139.
Say, `We have adopted the religion of ALLAH; and who is better than ALLAH in teaching religion, and him alone do we worship.'
3: 20.
Surely the true religion with ALLAH is Islam. And those who were given the Book did not disagree but, after knowledge had come to them, out of mutual envy. And whoso denies the Signs of ALLAH, then surely ALLAH is quick at reckoning.
3: 86.
And whoso seeks a religion other than Islam, it shall not be accepted of him, and in the Hereafter he shall be among the losers.
Part of my e-mail to Chris:
I don't know if W. is a Christian, non-religious, or what. Could you send me
your views on this question. After I articulate my own view I would like to
read yours, and come up with some kind of answer -- I'll probably quote you.
Part II: Christian Stuhr's suggestions:
I think we have to find out first in what sense of the word 'why' John asks
his question. Is he looking for a biological explanation? a psychological one?
a philosophical one? a theological one? or what?
My comments to you were philosophical in nature. I said that Humanism offers
a framework (I meant a philosophical framework) within which people explain
the world and take moral guidance - that framework being the rejection of the
supernatural and working tentative answers out for ourselves.
I leave it to psychologists to describe and systematize scientifically the
phenomenon that humans seem to need to do this. But I am not a
psychologist, and don't presume to comment on this aspect of the matter.
The biologists may explain whether and how religious behaviour provides
an evolutionary advantage. I think it does -- but again, I am not a biologist.
As for a theological explanation -- well, I must confess to you
(here I go again, Father!) that every one I have encountered seemed to pass
all understanding (forgive me my biblical allusion here). This in spite of the
fact that some of those explanatory lectures seemed to endure forever
(oops -- I did it again). But it really was like the peace and mercy of God
that passeth all understanding and endureth forever.
Pax vobiscum,
Chris
Here is another thought: what people say about being religious and what
they actually believe may be two different things. It seems to me that there
are at least four possible types of people:
TYPE ONE: People who say they are religious, and really are.
TYPE TWO: People who say they are religious, but are not.
TYPE THREE: People who say they are not religious, but really are.
TYPE FOUR: People who say they are not religious, and really are not.
Here are real-life examples of each type:
Type One is the true believer whom all churches want as a member.
Type Two is the hypocrite who joins a
church for inauthentic reasons
(social status, business connections, etc.).
Type Three is the Apostle who will deny his Savior in the crunch.
Type Four is represented by the likes of us.
A problem arises because we cannot tell accurately how many people report
their views on religion honestly, and how many do not. And that fact
muddles any supposedly reliable account of why the believers believe.
We can't even say how many believers there are! (In this respect,
questions about religions are not unlike questions about sexual orientation,
annual income, and political preference. Asked directly, some people will lie.)
Sorry to be so pedantic, but ask a philosopher a seemingly simple question,
and this is the long-winded answer you are likely to get.
Chris
Back to Philosophy of Religious Belief