Scientists say they have located the parts of the brain that control religious faith. And the research proves, they contend, that belief in a higher power is an evolutionary asset that helps human survival.
This proves it, there is no god!!..
That’s a relief…
And all this time people thought the soul was located in the person’s heart rather than in his brain, pfffft.
I’ve been saying I’m religious-orientated. Take that, you religionphobes!
See, atheism is unnatural.
…an interesting comment, and not far from the truth if we consider the findings of this study.
“Some evolutionary theorists have suggested that Darwinian natural selection may have put a premium on individuals if they were able to use religious belief to survive hardships that may have overwhelmed those with no religious convictions.”
…a tribe bonded together by a shared religion stands to survive better than a tribe without such a bond. Ironic don’t you think: God is the result of evolution, lol.
[quote]ephrem wrote:
Ironic don’t you think: God is the result of evolution, lol.
[/quote]
Some of us maintain the belief that evolution is the result of God. Not to turn this into a discussion of theology and doctrine. Just want to be clear that not all of us reject evolution. Hey, I’m taking a college biology course this semester, and it’s the first subject I’ve actually looked foward to.
[quote]ephrem wrote:
pat wrote: See, atheism is unnatural.
…an interesting comment, and not far from the truth if we consider the findings of this study.
“Some evolutionary theorists have suggested that Darwinian natural selection may have put a premium on individuals if they were able to use religious belief to survive hardships that may have overwhelmed those with no religious convictions.”
…a tribe bonded together by a shared religion stands to survive better than a tribe without such a bond. Ironic don’t you think: God is the result of evolution, lol.
[/quote]
As I was sarcastically noting in my first post, it in no way infers anything about a godâ??s existence (or lack of). I kind of assumed that was the direction you were going with this thread and I was right. Nothing in the article relates in any way that god is the product of evolution. Period.
[quote]ephrem wrote:
pat wrote: See, atheism is unnatural.
…an interesting comment, and not far from the truth if we consider the findings of this study.
“Some evolutionary theorists have suggested that Darwinian natural selection may have put a premium on individuals if they were able to use religious belief to survive hardships that may have overwhelmed those with no religious convictions.”
…a tribe bonded together by a shared religion stands to survive better than a tribe without such a bond. Ironic don’t you think: God is the result of evolution, lol.
[/quote]
I don’t find it unusual that one would need a biological component for religious faith. Radios need an antenna to pick up signals, so do we, so to speak.
I would also like to point out that human belief in the axioms of science is unique among all animals. Further, certain areas of the human brain allow for this beliefs. This development can be tracked as a survival instinct since higher order brain function developed to help humans survive.
Now according to Ephermâ??s logic somehow that makes science false.
All abstract thought can be placed in this category of uniquely developed by evolution in humans.
Why is there so much discussion into god when we have yet to understand the human condition?
…signals that can be simulated using electric currents giving the subject religous experiences aren’t exactly supporting the God-idea, but i do see where you’re coming from. Anyway, not trying to stirr to pot or anything…
…as it would seem the two are intertwined…
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
I would also like to point out that human belief in the axioms of science is unique among all animals. Further, certain areas of the human brain allow for this beliefs. This development can be tracked as a survival instinct since higher order brain function developed to help humans survive.
Now according to Ephermâ??s logic somehow that makes science false.
All abstract thought can be placed in this category of uniquely developed by evolution in humans.[/quote]
…do you think that religion/religious beliefs had/have a bigger impact on the survival of the human species than science?
[quote]ephrem wrote:
DoubleDuce wrote:
I would also like to point out that human belief in the axioms of science is unique among all animals. Further, certain areas of the human brain allow for this beliefs. This development can be tracked as a survival instinct since higher order brain function developed to help humans survive.
Now according to Epherm�¢??s logic somehow that makes science false.
All abstract thought can be placed in this category of uniquely developed by evolution in humans.
…do you think that religion/religious beliefs had/have a bigger impact on the survival of the human species than science?
[/quote]
The ability to think/believe the abstract is required for both.
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
ephrem wrote: …do you think that religion/religious beliefs had/have a bigger impact on the survival of the human species than science?
The ability to think/believe the abstract is required for both.[/quote]
…that does not answer the question DD…
[quote]ephrem wrote:
DoubleDuce wrote:
I would also like to point out that human belief in the axioms of science is unique among all animals. Further, certain areas of the human brain allow for this beliefs. This development can be tracked as a survival instinct since higher order brain function developed to help humans survive.
Now according to Epherm�¢??s logic somehow that makes science false.
All abstract thought can be placed in this category of uniquely developed by evolution in humans.
…do you think that religion/religious beliefs had/have a bigger impact on the survival of the human species than science?
[/quote]
Well, if religious beliefs allowed for coming together into cultures/communities/nations or what have you, yes. It’s only then, man having more leisure, that he could specialize and pursue intellectual knowledge.
[quote]ephrem wrote:
DoubleDuce wrote:
ephrem wrote: …do you think that religion/religious beliefs had/have a bigger impact on the survival of the human species than science?
The ability to think/believe the abstract is required for both.
…that does not answer the question DD…[/quote]
I think it depends on how you define science. In the modern scientific method sense of the word, it arrived, I think, too late in our history to affect survival rates that immensely and is more applicable to comfort than survival.
In a more general definition of science, I wouldnâ??t pretend to know what had a larger impact on survival rates thousands of years ago.
What does it matter?
[quote]pat wrote:
I don’t find it unusual that one would need a biological component for religious faith. Radios need an antenna to pick up signals, so do we, so to speak.[/quote]
Clearly, one’s salvation depends on his biology rather than on any choices he actually makes. God saves…but only if you are one of the lucky few with the genetic makeup to accept God’s help. If your brain doesn’t have a big enough soul chamber, you’re SOL 
[quote]forlife wrote:
pat wrote:
I don’t find it unusual that one would need a biological component for religious faith. Radios need an antenna to pick up signals, so do we, so to speak.
Clearly, one’s salvation depends on his biology rather than on any choices he actually makes. God saves…but only if you are one of the lucky few with the genetic makeup to accept God’s help. If your brain doesn’t have a big enough soul chamber, you’re SOL :)[/quote]
This only makes sense to someone used to righting off personal choices as biologically predestined.
If they discover that homophobia is genetically linked, are you going to be willing to accept homophobes as they are and stop trying to change them? =0)