Brains 'are hardwired to believe in God
-
Religion is part of human nature and our brains are hard wired to believe in God, scientists believe.
The evidence includes studies of babies and children which have shown the brain is programmed to think of the mind as being separate from the body.
This distinction allows us to believe in the supernatural, to conjure up imaginary friends - and to conceive of gods, this week's New Scientist reports.
Other studies suggest our minds come with an overdeveloped sense of cause and effect, which primes us to see purpose and design everywhere, even when there is none.
Children as young as seven or eight believe that rocks, rivers and birds have been created for a specific purpose.
Taken together, the two traits mean were are perfectly programmed to believe in god.
Professor Paul Bloom, a psychologist at Yale University in the US, said 'There's now a lot of evidence that some of the foundations for our religious beliefs are hard-wired.
'All humans possess the brain circuitry and it never goes away.'
Scientists also believe that when the going gets tough, we find it harder to resist the lure of the supernatural, perhaps explaining why so many turn to religion at times of crisis.
Richard Dawkins. Britain's most famous atheist, argues in his book the God Delusion that religion is propagated through indoctrination, especially of children.
Evolution predisposes children to swallow whatever their parents and elders tell them, he argues, as trust and obedience are important for survival.
Asked about the idea of pre-programming, the Oxford University professor said 'I am thoroughly happy with believing that children are predisposed to believe in invisible gods - I always was.
'But I also find that indoctrination hypothesis plausible. The two influences could, and I suspect do, reinforce one another.'
Others argue that religion spread because it aided the survival of our ancestors.
Shared religious beliefs helped our forefathers form tightly knit groups that co-operated in hunting, foraging and childcare, enabling them to out-compete others, so the theory goes.
However, none of this necessarily means that the gods we believe in do not exist.
New Scientist says 'All of the researchers involved stress that none of this says anything about the existence or otherwise of gods whether or not a belief is true is independent of why people believe it.'
Read more
http//www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1136482/Brains-hardwired-believe-God-imaginary-friends.html -
Peace,
Yes this supports the following Quranic statement
Recall that your Lord summoned all the descendants of Adam, and had them bear witness for themselves "Am I not your Lord?" They all said, "Yes. We bear witness." Thus, you cannot say on the Day of Resurrection, "We were not aware of this."
But unfortunately so many people have gotten a false explanation or understanding of GOD. But it is still amazing that even the now multi god worshipping hinduism cotains clear statements of GOD being only One in their Vedas. GOD Bless! -
Salaam,
Bediuzzaman Said Nursi wrote about this too.
Ma'salaama,
T.p.s. Yes, you can like Nursi without seeing him as a prophet.
-
Children as young as seven or eight believe that rocks, rivers and birds have been created for a specific purpose.
Taken together, the two traits mean were are perfectly programmed to believe in god.
Salaam
1529 So when I perfect him, and blow of My spirit in him, you shall yield to him.-
1530 Thus, all of the angels yielded.Man was perfected with goodness yielded to him through the angels so it is in the nature of man to believe in what is right and to submit to the Creator. It?s from the outside that the whispers from Satan enter man, inciting him with ideas that go against his nature but there?s no in built evil.
peace -
Psychologists noticed this when they were studying habits in birds. If birds were given food while they were looking over their shoulders, then they would think that the act of looking over their shoulders had caused the food to be served. After this they would keep looking over their shoulders, even if they didnt get food, but if in the rare chance they were looking over their shoulders and food was given again - they would be even more convinced of their actions.
-
Psychologists noticed this when they were studying habits in birds. If birds were given food while they were looking over their shoulders, then they would think that the act of looking over their shoulders had caused the food to be served. After this they would keep looking over their shoulders, even if they didnt get food, but if in the rare chance they were looking over their shoulders and food was given again - they would be even more convinced of their actions.
I think the experience quoted above has more to do with conditioning of the mind.. And has no relation with the initial post... Since the initial posts says that the tendency to look for God is natural.
A similar experience regarding the conditioning was done with dogs... Each time a bunch of dog were fed, a Bell was rang to call them... After some weeks, just ringing the Bell alone was inducing salivation of the dogs, even if no food was given to them. This is a generic conditioning example.
-
I think the experience quoted above has more to do with conditioning of the mind.. And has no relation with the initial post... Since the initial posts says that the tendency to look for God is natural.
A similar experience regarding the conditioning was done with dogs... Each time a bunch of dog were fed, a Bell was rang to call them... After some weeks, just ringing the Bell alone was inducing salivation of the dogs, even if no food was given to them. This is a generic conditioning example.
No, the experiment was to show that animals (and by extension humans) will look for meaning and higher cause in anything that occurs. Also, Pavlov's experiment on dogs is similar, but not the same. Pavlov showed how he could trigger any response using external stimuli, even if the stimuli had nothing to do with whatever the dog was being offered. Conditioning is a response to external an external stimulus. The birds were attempting to influence the dispensing of the food not the other way around - not like the dogs.
-
No, the experiment was to show that animals (and by extension humans) will look for meaning and higher cause in anything that occurs. Also, Pavlov's experiment on dogs is similar, but not the same. Pavlov showed how he could trigger any response using external stimuli, even if the stimuli had nothing to do with whatever the dog was being offered. Conditioning is a response to external an external stimulus. The birds were attempting to influence the dispensing of the food not the other way around - not like the dogs.
Okay... my misunderstanding then... thnx for clarifying... peace
-
Sounds about right, the gene for believing in religion is most likely a very effective propagator.