Is Believing in God(s) a Choice?

[It Aint Necessarily So]

It was suggested in another thread that one can choose to be a believer or not.

In the first part of my life, I didn't choose what to believe. If a parent or other adult said something, I believed it.

Later, I began having thoughts that something or other didn't sound correct. This was the birth of skepticism for me. But it was in this stage that I became a Christian, and approached the experience as if it might be what it claimed for itself or not. I was already 18, and had been an apt learner until university life distracted me, and so, had some critical thinking skills. I remember distinctly agreeing with myself to suspend disbelief until I had had a chance to try this religion out and like a pair of shoes, see if it fit or not, or became more comfortable over time. Although I was a believer for many years, I think that it was already too late for me to believe by faith. My belief was based in experience - the euphoria my charismatic first pastor could generate during a church service, which I interpreted as the Holy Spirit.

I say too late for faith, because this all happened in my army years, when I was suffering great angst first at what appeared to be throwing away my dreams of going to medical school (I dropped out of university just ahead of being thrown out) and then at my predicament of being in the army so far from home. I believe that this is what predisposed me to investigate religion - psychological comfort.

But the empiricist in me never died during the period of trying on the religion for fit, despite my efforts at suppressing the cognitive dissonance as part of the suspension of unbelief. I say this, because it was after discharge and a return to my home state that I discovered that the euphoria was not the Holy Spirit, since that feeling didn't follow me to California. That's empiricism.

This was followed by a return to university now older, wiser, and more disciplined, where I learned critical thinking formally, and developed habits of thought that are incompatible with believing by faith. I think that had I remained in that original congregation and in Christianity while attending university, I might have remained a Christian, but I think a social Christian who really didn't believe the theology any longer.

Choosing to believe probably ended at about six or eight years of age for me. Now, I am forced to believe or disbelieve (or remain agnostic) according to experience and the rules for evaluating evidence.

 

[LuisDantas]

You are quite wrong in assuming that most people are just professing a belief in God to assuage cultural expectations and peer pressure. Most people believe in God because they have been taught that God exists, they like believing that God exists, and have found no reason not to accept it as being so. They are not being pushed or pressured. They are quite willing and happy to accept the theology they've been given.

Would you call that belief instead of, perhaps, disinterested conformity? If so, would you qualify that belief somehow?

 

[stvdv]

It was suggested in another thread that one can choose to be a believer or not.

Is it a choice, is it something inherent to one's psyche, or is a product of one's environment and experience?

Some Indian Masters declared:
"The Master "calls" the disciple"

 

[SalixIncendium]

Some Indian Masters declared:
"The Master" calls" the disciple

Where to they get the phone number?

 

[syo]

Is it a choice

Yes. We choose to believe or not.

 

[PureX]

Would you call that belief instead of, perhaps, disinterested conformity? If so, would you qualify that belief somehow?

I don't believe it's disinterested conformity. I think most people accept the idea of God they've been given because they want it to be true. They like the idea of it. So they hold onto it until something happens that causes them not to want it, anymore. They aren't being pushed and they aren't indifferent.

 

[Yerda]

Wait, you're not suggesting Santa isn't real, are you?

You had to find out sometime...

 

[robocop (actually)]

It was suggested in another thread that one can choose to be a believer or not.

Is it a choice, is it something inherent to one's psyche, or is a product of one's environment and experience?

My mom reminded me yesterday that everyone has the light of Christ... that's what I believe.

 

[Daemon Sophic]

We grow into it so early that we do not recognize that it is built into us and our culture, so we do not see it as a choice. This would make many people believe that it is somehow some thing they were born with. But they are not. We are born as explorers and wondering how things work. As many have pointed out here, whatever their parents or their teachers tell them is the truth, is what they consider to be the undeniable truth. It is only as children (most of them are already fully indoctrinated into their local culture’s religion) become teenagers, that they begin to question the edicts of parents and other adults. So it is in that time range that young people might try out other religions and/or philosophies that they have heard of, or read about.

On a related note:
In the present, and throughout all history, one never sees a person raised in Faith A grow to young childhood somehow believing Faith B, assuming Faith B is a second religion, never introduced to them and never written about in the child’s culture; never discussed with the child by some random stranger. Nothing. This has never happened. Six hundred years ago there were no Native Americans espousing Shintoism or Hinduism or Judaism. No Christian missionary in the jungles of South America 100 years ago, ever bumped into a completely isolated yet devout Catholic native tribesman.

Similarly, within complete cultural isolation, one finds either believers in the local faith, or some version of agnosticism, atheism (often simply in objection to the norms of their fellow people), or some hidden cult originated by a creative individual in the current or preceding generation.

 

[LuisDantas]

I don't believe it's disinterested conformity. I think most people accept the idea of God they've been given because they want it to be true. They like the idea of it. So they hold onto it until something happens that causes them not to want it, anymore. They aren't being pushed and they aren't indifferent.

Percentually, how many people would you expect to fit this model of yours?

 

[Brickjectivity]

It was suggested in another thread that one can choose to be a believer or not.

Is it a choice, is it something inherent to one's psyche, or is a product of one's environment and experience?

Supposing there are gods. Wouldn't it benefit them to remain in secret?

Supposing there are gods, mightn't they be cruel and mischievous?

So then they would be busy suppressing knowledge of their own existence, sort of like vampires. It would, therefore, be dangerous to believe in them (at least publicly). It might attract their attention.

 

[Twilight Hue]

It was suggested in another thread that one can choose to be a believer or not.

Is it a choice, is it something inherent to one's psyche, or is a product of one's environment and experience?

I don't see it as a choice more than it's something that's been introduced.

 

[Dawnofhope]

It was suggested in another thread that one can choose to be a believer or not.

Is it a choice, is it something inherent to one's psyche, or is a product of one's environment and experience?

Belief for many of us is both a choice and is also related to other factors as you note. Investigating the nature of reality requires understanding of ourselves and the culture we live in. A degree of self awareness and knowledge appears a critical part of the journey if we are to overcome bias and prejudice. Otherwise we simply imitate the path our ancestors followed or rebel against it.

 

[danieldemol]

I dont know for certain, but I'm inclined to think our thoughts are the product of brain structure/chemistry and interaction with our environment (inputs/outputs), so it leads me to believe that thoughts such as faith like all other alleged "choices" we make are outside our control.

Does that answer the question? Lol

In my opinion.

 

[firedragon]

It was suggested in another thread that one can choose to be a believer or not.

Is it a choice, is it something inherent to one's psyche, or is a product of one's environment and experience?

I think belief in God is inherent in human beings and some studies provide some data towards it, but they can later make a choice based on their grooming or studies or what ever reasons he or she has to disbelieve in God. Like Charles Darwin who finally disbelieved in God because of human suffering.

Unless you are a hard determinist.

 

[DNB]

It was suggested in another thread that one can choose to be a believer or not.

Is it a choice, is it something inherent to one's psyche, or is a product of one's environment and experience?

A choice indeed, ..but not always for the best of reasons. The conviction and ability to defend one's faith with acumen and persuasion depends on the person, but it is always a choice (outside of coercion, indoctrination and cults)..

 

[PureX]

Percentually, how many people would you expect to fit this model of yours?

The vast majority. Most "believers" understand that they don't know that God exists, or that God is anything like what they are being told God is like. But since this is the common perception and they see the value both personally and collectively in the idea, they accept it as true, anyway. Why not? Who doesn't want help from 'on high'? Who doesn't want forgiveness for their own misdeeds and punishment for those who will not repent of theirs? Who doesn't want to think that there must be some purpose for their suffering? Who doesn't want to think there is some sort of life after death? Few of us have to be pushed into accepting these ideas. Even if they know they don't know them to be so. They are attractive ideas.

But when these ideas are tested by life, and they come up short, then they become more suspect. And some people will then reject them. And some won't, of course.

 

[PureX]

In the present, and throughout all history, one never sees a person raised in Faith A grow to young childhood somehow believing Faith B, assuming Faith B is a second religion, never introduced to them and never written about in the child’s culture; never discussed with the child by some random stranger. Nothing.

That's because what you are calling "faith" is really just the religious construct: the conceptual language that the culture uses to express and communicate their spiritual experiences. It's like saying that people who grow up in a culture that speaks only language X never begins speaking language Y on their own. As if this somehow negates the value or truth of language.

The fact that languages (and religions) developed in humans everywhere on Earth even as they were living completely separate lives tells us that language and religion are innate to the human experience. And the fact that they develop differently in different regions and times doesn't negate the fact that they developed in all regions and all times. The experience of spirituality is as universal among humans as the experience of communicating through language. And to share those experiences with each other, human developed religions. Just as they developed language.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

That's because what you are calling "faith" is really just the religious construct: the conceptual language that the culture uses to express and communicate their spiritual experiences. It's like saying that people who grow up in a culture that speaks only language X never begins speaking language Y on their own. As if this somehow negates the value or truth of language.

The fact that languages (and religions) developed in humans everywhere on Earth even as they were living completely separate lives tells us that language and religion are innate to the human experience. And the fact that they develop differently in different regions and times doesn't negate the fact that they developed in all regions and all times. The experience of spirituality is as universal among humans as the experience of communicating through language. And to sgare those experiences with each other, human developed religions. Just as they developed language.

Further for natural religions, i.e. in effect that the world is metaphysically natural, they are not consider religious, because it is to their believers a fact. As for spiritual that is the belief in an all objective rational and with evidence system, which is also a fact to the believers.

 

[LuisDantas]

The vast majority. Most "believers" understand that they don't know that God exists, or that God is anything like what they are being told God is like. But since this is the common perception and they see the value both personally and collectively in the idea, they accept it as true, anyway. Why not? Who doesn't want help from 'on high'? Who doesn't want forgiveness for their own misdeeds and punishment for those who will not repent of theirs? Who doesn't want to think that there must be some purpose for their suffering? Who doesn't want to think there is some sort of life after death? Few of us have to be pushed into accepting these ideas. Even if they know they don't know them to be so. They are attractive ideas.

But when these ideas are tested by life, and they come up short, then they become more suspect. And some people will then reject them. And some won't, of course.

It does not seem to be too far from my own understanding of what happens, then.

I would not call that belief, though. Belief proper is, as I said previously, quite rare.

You might call that group hopefuls, I suppose. But I think that you are not acknowledging how many of those are just conforming to expectations or even just keeping appearances in order to avoid tensions. They may be many more than you expect.