Is the idea of god innate?

[andrewoberg]

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

Did I say that?

[IceM]

If you suggest innate as forced upon us by parents who wish to avoid us being called heathens, then yes.

All children are atheists at birth.

[The Atheist]

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.

I have yet to see any evidence that belief is innate.

Anecdotal evidence of a billion non-theists provides evidence to the contrary.

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.

What evidence is this?

Can you supply some, please, because it's news to me.

The evidence I've seen seems to indicate all gods are human construct and none of the beliefs arrived spontaneously.

If you suggest innate as forced upon us by parents who wish to avoid us being called heathens, then yes.

All children are atheists at birth.

Bingo!

[Dodo25]

What evidence is this?
Can you supply some, please, because it's news to me.

The evidence I've seen seems to indicate all gods are human construct and none of the beliefs arrived spontaneously.

I never stated that they weren't human constructs. Let me also emphasize that there was a qualifying concession at the end of the sentence you quoted: "or at least a 'goal' or 'direction' of existance".

Of course I agree with IceM, without the religious memes around, one would hardly come up with a whole theistic worldview by oneself. However, what I meant is that there is only one single tribe / civilization in all of history that does not have a creation myth (the piraha, pretty interesting subject in itself by the way). So there must be an innate predisposition towards 'creation' and 'purpose' and whatever you want to call it.

[Technophile]

I believe in God and think that we are initially taught to believe, and that that belief becomes innate. That's how different cultures believe so strongly in their version of God. This also explains atheism and agnosticism.

[Dodo25]

I believe in God and think that we are initially taught to believe, and that that belief becomes innate. That's how different cultures believe so strongly in their version of God. This also explains atheism and agnosticism.

How does it explain atheism and agnosticism? Furthermore, how would it explaine non-theistic religions like Buddhism? Or how would it explain polytheistic religions like Greek mythology, where the gods are 'sinners' themselves? How does it explain the piraha, who don't have a creation myth?

[The Atheist]

However, what I meant is that there is only one single tribe / civilization in all of history that does not have a creation myth (the piraha, pretty interesting subject in itself by the way). So there must be an innate predisposition towards 'creation' and 'purpose' and whatever you want to call it.

I still can't agree with your position, because only the questions are common.

That humans have a common question about existence doesn't show anything innate beyond imagination. The fact that there is a similarity between the alleged answers is a lot more likely explained by the ignorance of those starting the myths than any predisposition to an answer.

What you're suggesting seems to be a kind of Lamarckism.

It's only in the last few hundred years that humans have understood any part of existence, so the options were limited to creationism of some form or other.

I believe in God and think that we are initially taught to believe, and that that belief becomes innate.

That's a straight contradiction in terms. Learned behaviours are not innate and cannot be, by their very difinitions.

That's how different cultures believe so strongly in their version of God. This also explains atheism and agnosticism.

Can you expand on that, please, as it makes no sense to me.

[andrewoberg]

I think I posted my opinion on this on the first page. Re: Technophile's post, I'd like a more clearly defined argument, as well.

And btw, Atheist, your "Save the world with English" link appears to be broken.

[Paulclem]

Perhaps the only innate part is curiosity in humans and a desire to explain, but we are all culturally bound into acceptance or rejection of the cultural ideas around us, and so there's no way of testing this out.

Is the question another form of the nature/ nurture debate?

[Dodo25]

I still can't agree with your position, because only the questions are common.

That humans have a common question about existence doesn't show anything innate beyond imagination. The fact that there is a similarity between the alleged answers is a lot more likely explained by the ignorance of those starting the myths than any predisposition to an answer.

What you're suggesting seems to be a kind of Lamarckism.

It's only in the last few hundred years that humans have understood any part of existence, so the options were limited to creationism of some form or other.

I'm not suggesting Lamarckism, not even epigenetics plays a role in what I've stated. All I'm saying is that we have an innate tendency to assume that the universe has a purpose. It's the 'same questions' you're talking about, or, more precisely, the fact that people tend to assume that all these questions must have meaningful answers. Methinks it's a rather trivial statement. In my first post in this thread, I tried to explain why this could be the case.

[The Atheist]

And btw, Atheist, your "Save the world with English" link appears to be broken.

?

I just tried and it worked - have another go.

I'm not suggesting Lamarckism, not even epigenetics plays a role in what I've stated. All I'm saying is that we have an innate tendency to assume that the universe has a purpose. It's the 'same questions' you're talking about, or, more precisely, the fact that people tend to assume that all these questions must have meaningful answers. Methinks it's a rather trivial statement. In my first post in this thread, I tried to explain why this could be the case.

Maybe I'm not explaining it very well.

Once an animal/human is able to start asking abstract questions, "where did I come from?" and "why am I here?" are the questions which arise.

You are saying it's an innate trait, while I feel those questions come up because there's nothing else to ask.

We don't ask "What colour is three?", we ask questions that appear make sense.

[Dodo25]

Maybe I'm not explaining it very well.

Once an animal/human is able to start asking abstract questions, "where did I come from?" and "why am I here?" are the questions which arise.

You are saying it's an innate trait, while I feel those questions come up because there's nothing else to ask.

We don't ask "What colour is three?", we ask questions that appear make sense.

I see your point. It's not just the questions though, it's the assumption that these questions have meaningful answers. You've stated earlier that this just reflects the ignorance of a culture without science and thus is to be expected. Maybe so..

I think it has everything to do with the Argument from Design and why it seems so appealing to us. Is it an innate tendency to assume organisms are designed, or is evolution just so good at mimicking design that it deceives any conscious agent? I think it is both (I actually do). There are mechanisms in the brain that attribute purpose to almost everything. Kids often anthropomorphize their toys, how far away is it to assume that there are nymphs in every tree (or are nymphs in rivers? I forgot..)? And of course it adds to the effect that nature has a striking resemblance to true design.

Anyway, I concede that 'innate tendency towards goal and purpose' might be a bit exagerated, 'innate tendency towards god' definitely is wrong.

An interesting question would be whether what I'm talking about is universal among all kinds of rational beings. Meaning, if there are intelligent aliens, do they have creation myths as well? I would think yes, and this I think is the problem you have with it, because it seems 'obvious' rather than an 'innate tendency'. I think it can be both.

I hope this all made sense somehow..

And as a side note, some people, with some form of autism, actually do think about numbers in color.

[The Atheist]

I see your point. It's not just the questions though, it's the assumption that these questions have meaningful answers.

I don't think anyone automatically assumes meaningful answers either. Kids come up with enough weirdness to show that.

You've stated earlier that this just reflects the ignorance of a culture without science and thus is to be expected. Maybe so..

Yes, we have an interesting evolution where our abstract thinking far outgrew our knowledge.

I think it has everything to do with the Argument from Design and why it seems so appealing to us. Is it an innate tendency to assume organisms are designed, or is evolution just so good at mimicking design that it deceives any conscious agent? I think it is both (I actually do). There are mechanisms in the brain that attribute purpose to almost everything. Kids often anthropomorphize their toys, how far away is it to assume that there are nymphs in every tree (or are nymphs in rivers? I forgot..)? And of course it adds to the effect that nature has a striking resemblance to true design.

While I think we just the resemblance because our designs mirror nature. If there were no birds, I bet whatever we flew around in wouldn't have wings. We are designed to recognise patterns, as are all animals, but I just don't see it being more complicated than that - until we introduce human constructs.

Pretty sure nymphs are in water. I have fly fishing nymphs anyway.

An interesting question would be whether what I'm talking about is universal among all kinds of rational beings. Meaning, if there are intelligent aliens, do they have creation myths as well? I would think yes, and this I think is the problem you have with it, because it seems 'obvious' rather than an 'innate tendency'. I think it can be both.

I hope this all made sense somehow..

Well, we've already seen that creation myths aren't universal, so why would aliens have them?

Depends how far they've evolved, I guess.

And as a side note, some people, with some form of autism, actually do think about numbers in color.

So I believe. Letters as well - fascinating what the human mind can do to people.

[andrewoberg]

Yes, we have an interesting evolution where our abstract thinking far outgrew our knowledge.

This is an interesting point. What kind of natural selection pressures led us to arrive at this point? What is the evolutionary advantage of such a high degree of abstract thought? And when our knowledge catches up, how will we be different than we are now?

Btw, Atheist, the link is now working. Could have been a server problem on my end yesterday.

[andrewoberg]

Perhaps the only innate part is curiosity in humans and a desire to explain, but we are all culturally bound into acceptance or rejection of the cultural ideas around us, and so there's no way of testing this out.

Is the question another form of the nature/ nurture debate?

Nice summation. The middle path indeed!