£2 million question.

[gcol]

 

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/leading_article/article3393161.ece

 

What a coincidence. Just as this forum is kicking off a debate involving the dreaded Re****** , appears an article in my morning paper (Times uk) headed "Why do we believe in G*D?

 

This appears to be a stub of the main article. Sorry about that, but would not want to short-circuit the inventiveness of debaters.

 

Oxford University academics have been given £1.9m and 3 years to find out. Seems a snip at the price. I am surprised it can be answered so cheaply. "They will use the cognitive science disciplines to develop a "scientific approach to why we believe in G** and other issues around the nature and origin of religious belief""

 

Perhaps this thread will allow space for the flurry of hit and run posts and general intrusions that get in the way of bona fide debaters.

 

A couple of quotes from the main article:

 

"believers.....are like three-year-olds who assume that other people know almost everything there is to be known".

 

And, apparently and importantly, "The researchers will not be troubling themselves with the matter of whether or not G** exists, merely whether belief in G** maybe gave man a Darwinian evolutionary advantage; or whether it is a result of man's sociable nature."

 

Nietzsche's riddle (of which I was not previously aware), "Is Man one of God's blunders? or is God one of Man's?" Is mentioned in an editorial piece accompanying the main article.

 

So if Academics = Scientists ( subject for debate in its own right, perhaps), will we soon have the answer to Life, Religion and everything?

[JohnF]

Those that believe in god do so because we can believe. Being able to believe gives us an evolutionary advantage. If we were not able, or so willing, to believe then it would be more difficult to pass knowledge on.

[Realitycheck]

LOL Been there, done that. I see no advantage other than what is concocted in your mind. I have no desire to make a nuisance of myself in the midst of a formal debate. The only evolutionary advantage gained is dependent on the quality of the content conveyed, of which I have nothing to disagree about. I am just not a big fan of pulling the wool over kids' eyes, for how long? 13 years, 21 years, preaching hardnose creationism till the bitter end? Give me a break.

[JohnF]

I think you miss the point agentchange.

 

It's not believing in god that gives an evolutionary advantage, it's the ability to believe; god is just a side effect.