Is the idea of god innate?

[Kyriakos]

Descartes thought it was, although his reasoning was circular.
Personally i think it is, although at the same time i do not regard this as proof that god exists, at any rate not as something in the external world.

But it is interesting that everyone can have some notion of a god, and then so seldom do people wonder if their particular notion has much to do with that of the next person. It would seem to me that it is highly likely that each one has something very different, and thus religious discussions re based on a wrong standing point, that accroding to which the members of the discussion actually refer to the same, or at least an analogous, thing.

[andrewoberg]

Interesting topic. The fact that religion has thrived since the dawn of culture in things like funeral services, has been refined, defined, and codified in countless places and in countless ways, and then has even been fought over in very bloody wars that have lasted decades or even centuries, certainly seems to give credence to the idea that we are somehow evolutionary inclined towards a belief system. The real challenge though, in my opinion, is for all of us to be okay with that and stop trying to shove our personal beliefs down other people's throats.

[Paulclem]

Descartes thought it was, although his reasoning was circular.
Personally i think it is, although at the same time i do not regard this as proof that god exists, at any rate not as something in the external world.

But it is interesting that everyone can have some notion of a god, and then so seldom do people wonder if their particular notion has much to do with that of the next person. It would seem to me that it is highly likely that each one has something very different, and thus religious discussions re based on a wrong standing point, that accroding to which the members of the discussion actually refer to the same, or at least an analogous, thing.

There are 1.2-1.6 Billion Buddhists, (Googled), who do not hold the idea of a creator God in a supreme ultimate sense. This challenges the idea that it is innate.

Incidentally I like Thessaloniki - I remember the streets lined with flowering trees and cafes, and a statue of Alexander.

[blazeofglory]

Interesting topic. The fact that religion has thrived since the dawn of culture in things like funeral services, has been refined, defined, and codified in countless places and in countless ways, and then has even been fought over in very bloody wars that have lasted decades or even centuries, certainly seems to give credence to the idea that we are somehow evolutionary inclined towards a belief system. The real challenge though, in my opinion, is for all of us to be okay with that and stop trying to shove our personal beliefs down other people's throats.

I subscribe to your ideas about God, religios and yes we must let others have their own understanding of God not ours, and we more often than not trying to shove our personal beliefs down others' throats.

[Dodo25]

Paulclem is right, not all cultures have personified Gods. However, even in Buddhism, there is something 'intentional' about nature and existance in general. Especially the idea of karma seeks to give meaning to random happenings..

Evidence strongly suggests that there is a universal tendency in humans to believe in a 'creator', or at least a 'goal' or 'direction' of existance.

Looking at it from an evolutionary perspective, I think it has a lot to do with the way our brains conceptualize nature. As self conscious animals with memories of the past and plans for the future, we have a strong self-interest. We look at nature through a 'how is x useful / harmful FOR ME'.

If you ask children questions like 'why is there rain', or 'why are there lions', the answers are often something along 'FOR the plants, so that they (and later WE can eat them)'or 'FOR goING to the zoo'.

I think this kind of thinking in terms of goals and purpose evolved, quasi as a by-product to higher forms of consciousness, because it is an easy way of conceptualization, and it emphasizes the importance of the organisms 'self' by creating a boundary between outside world and ME.

[NikolaiI]

There are 1.2-1.6 Billion Buddhists, (Googled), who do not hold the idea of a creator God in a supreme ultimate sense. This challenges the idea that it is innate.

Incidentally I like Thessaloniki - I remember the streets lined with flowering trees and cafes, and a statue of Alexander.

Try googling again. That number is way, way off. There are something like 376 million Buddhists in the world.

[andrewoberg]

Try googling again. That number is way, way off. There are something like 376 million Buddhists in the world.

I think Paul is referring to the populations of "Buddhist" countries. For example, I live in Japan, and nearly everyone here would say that they're Buddhist, but the percentage of people actually practicing the religion is incredibly small. Nonetheless, Buddhist ideas have absolutely soaked the cultural thinking of Japan, and can be seen in many places.

@Paul, that may be true of Buddhist teachings, but consider the number of people who effectively treat Buddha as a god. If pushed to claim him as a creator god, I suppose you're right that the number would be very few, but still he is widely worshiped and prayed to all over Asia.

[Kyriakos]

For what its worth Descartes' "proof" of god's existence was that if god didnt exist then no one could be certain that his thoughts are ever correct, nomatter how sure he felt that they were correct. But the god, being benevolent, would not allow for such a deception.

I hope i remember the passage correctly, i studied it in university, but it does seem incredibly false and circular. Also it seems that the entirely opossite is true, that is: one can be entirely sure his thoughts are correct, but often they are incorrect.
Descrtes seems to have been arguing that being incorrect was the result of not trying hard to find the truth, but i do not agree with this either

[Dodo25]

I think Descartes 'proof' is quite interesting. Here's a paper about where and why Descartes went wrong.

http://records.viu.ca/www/ipp/pdf/12.pdf

[OrphanPip]

The initial question is more difficult to answer than it would at first seem. First of all, we have to determine what we consider a god. Would tribal societies with animist spiritual worship believe in gods? What about cargo cults, or are early anthropomorphic religions like the ancient Greeks and Egyptians the first conception of gods.

The fact of the matter is that religions don't pop up spontaneously, they develop over millennia. Likely, there is a tendency in humanity to anthropomorphize, to attach human reasoning and expectations onto the natural world. The number of believers past and present further suggests there is a tendency towards credulity and accepting supernatural explanations. Belief in gods is certainly not innate, if a child is never exposed to the complex cultural ideas that circulate around religious beliefs, in all likelihood they won't develop a complex idea like an omniscient supernatural God (that takes years to come up with), but they may develop their own ways of rationalizing the unexplainable (to them at least).

[Kyriakos]

I remember having an idea of a god in elementary school, but do not recall when it formed. It was something that controlled everything, and i guess it served as something protecting me, since i was in alliance with it.

[Paulclem]

@Paul, that may be true of Buddhist teachings, but consider the number of people who effectively treat Buddha as a god. If pushed to claim him as a creator god, I suppose you're right that the number would be very few, but still he is widely worshiped and prayed to all over Asia.

I'm not sure that's true - though I don't speak any of the languages. The Buddhist teachings are quite clear that there is no creator God, and what may be viewed as worship and prayer by Westerners is actually reverence and respect as a the ultimate teacher.

A case in point is HH The Dalai Lama, referred in the West as a God-King. Whatever the translation issues,around this incorrect but not disrespectful term, would it be incorrect to assume that Tibetans weren't aware of the Buddhas teachings - and other Buddhists too? I don't think we can assume that.

[Paulclem]

Try googling again. That number is way, way off. There are something like 376 million Buddhists in the world.

I found that figure. Andrew probably explained it. I wasn't trying to mislead anyone, but apologies.

Still a lot of non-theists though.

[andrewoberg]

I'm not sure that's true - though I don't speak any of the languages. The Buddhist teachings are quite clear that there is no creator God, and what may be viewed as worship and prayer by Westerners is actually reverence and respect as a the ultimate teacher.

A case in point is HH The Dalai Lama, referred in the West as a God-King. Whatever the translation issues,around this incorrect but not disrespectful term, would it be incorrect to assume that Tibetans weren't aware of the Buddhas teachings - and other Buddhists too? I don't think we can assume that.

Indeed, and I know what Buddhism teaches on the subject, but my point was that it tends to get messed up a bit in day to day life. Especially here in East Asia where extant ancestor worship got thrown into the mix. From an historical perspective, I would guess that many of the "Buddhist" practices among laity were later additions to try and fulfill spiritual/ritualistic needs that Buddhism's lofty philosophy didn't.

Please understand that this is not meant to say anything against Buddhism or its teachings.

[Paulclem]

Yes - point taken. I didn't think you were saying anything negative. I noted your comment in another thread about negative postings.