Is belief in the supernatural an intelligent person’s game? — Gnostic Christian Bishop

No.

You ask

Is belief or faith in the supernatural a worthy idea for us or is it a tool used by lying preachers intent on fleecing sheeple?

Neither. Except perhaps in the case of the fleecing of the flock by those American consumerist mega churches. But not because science has all possible ontology completely sussed. How could it?

But for two related reasons:

• The historical origins of religious narratives in the context of the geological timeline makes us aware they are a cultural artifact

• Beliefs that help human societies thrive emerge to justify the type of social organization necessary given a certain level of technological development. In a global economy where women’s work in the home has largely been outsourced or made redundant by manufacturing and medical technology (food, clothing, the pill), we need a new story. One that doesn’t preserve closer-to-God hierarchy or a cosmic patriarchy.

Is belief in the supernatural an intelligent person’s game?
— Gnostic Christian Bishop
No. — tim wood

Why do you say so?

When one takes into account the amount of intelligence that has been invested in attempts to prove the existence of God, it is hard to answer entirely in the negative.

But of course, that is a completely different thing from believing that their arguments are valid, or their conclusions true. Extremely intelligent people can be quite delusional. Or simply wrong.

Belief may be a sucker's game. But intelligence on its own does not grant immunity to it.

Is belief in the supernatural an intelligent person’s game?

If you assume that religious belief is the game of the stupid, you are mistaken. Some of the brightest minds of humanity are and have been religious, not only in the way Albert Einstein embrazed Spinozism, whichis not really a religion. All those men who invented "science" during the early modern period where believers too, some more, some less, but none of them was an atheist or naturalist

Is belief or faith in the supernatural a worthy idea for us or is it a tool used by lying preachers intent on fleecing sheeple? — Gnostic Christian Bishop

Anything that helps us to deal with the real world is a worthy idea, I think. I find my beliefs form a sort of scaffold on which to assemble my own personal mental model of the world, to hold and connect my ideas and beliefs. And of course, any worthy idea could potentially be used to fleece the unwary. I don't think that supports or takes away from the idea itself, do you?

Is belief in the supernatural an intelligent person’s game? — Gnostic Christian Bishop

People believe in all kinds of things which wouldn't exist apart from the belief. Justified, true, belief=knowledge. How much of what makes the anthropocentric world turn has no seat in anything but belief? Humans are untrue beings as they revolve around constructions impossible to have knowledge of. When enough people believe the same thing to be so, it is so (becomes same as gravity)...even if it isn't so in the extrahuman world. Social constructions are similar to the supernatural in this way. Money is ghosts. The content hardly matters when the content is belief in something that doesn't exist.

It's wise to be a cynic toward shared beliefs rooted in impossible knowledge. Where this is the case - shared belief in something that has no existence - it is wise to go ahead and have your own individual esoteric beliefs no one else may agree with. Where the esoteric is made exoteric, and enough people believe in the same fantasy, mass hysteria and disorder is usually following close in the wake.

Why do people assume the supernatural, or gods, or whatever, should conform to our all-too-human ideas about morality? If religion is a cultural artifact, morality certainly is. Is there not room anymore in the enlightened human mind to see something as amoral as badgers eating baby bunnies as the signature of a god?

Humans are untrue beings as they revolve around constructions impossible to have knowledge of. When enough people believe the same thing to be so, it is so (becomes same as gravity)...even if it isn't so in the extrahuman world. Social constructions are similar to the supernatural in this way. Money is ghosts. — Anthony

Well put!
That reminds me of one of the central ideas in the work of Yuval Harari:

"We are repeatedly told these days that we are living in a new and frightening era of “post-truth”, and that lies and fictions are all around us. Examples are not hard to come by.

In fact, humans have always lived in the age of post-truth. Homo sapiens is a post-truth species, whose power depends on creating and believing fictions. Ever since the stone age, self-reinforcing myths have served to unite human collectives. Indeed, Homo sapiens conquered this planet thanks above all to the unique human ability to create and spread fictions.
We are the only mammals that can cooperate with numerous strangers because only we can invent fictional stories, spread them around, and convince millions of others to believe in them. As long as everybody believes in the same fictions, we all obey the same laws, and can thereby cooperate effectively.

So if you blame Facebook, Trump or Putin for ushering in a new and frightening era of post-truth, remind yourself that centuries ago millions of Christians locked themselves inside a self-reinforcing mythological bubble, never daring to question the factual veracity of the Bible, while millions of Muslims put their unquestioning faith in the Qur’an. For millennia, much of what passed for “news” and “facts” in human social networks were stories about miracles, angels, demons and witches. We have zero scientific evidence that Eve was tempted by the serpent, that the souls of all infidels burn in hell after they die, or that the creator of the universe doesn’t like it when a Brahmin marries an Untouchable – yet billions of people have believed in these stories for thousands of years. Some fake news lasts for ever.

When a thousand people believe some made-up story for one month, that’s fake news. When a billion people believe it for a thousand years, that’s a religion. But I am not denying the effectiveness or potential benevolence of religion. Just the opposite. For better or worse, fiction is among the most effective tools in humanity’s toolkit. By bringing people together, religious creeds make large-scale human cooperation possible. They inspire people to build hospitals, schools and bridges in addition to armies and prisons. Adam and Eve never existed, but Chartres Cathedral is still beautiful. Much of the Bible may be fictional, but it can still bring joy to billions and encourage humans to be compassionate, courageous and creative."

(in: Yuval Noah Harari: "Lessons for the 21th century"

Why do you say so? — Brett

Would you like to give me a $100 for any supernatural being I claim to believe in? Would you like to give me $100 for any supernatural being I believe in for cause, which cause I can present as conclusive evidence?

My guess in the first case no, the second yes.

Never mind supernatural beings. Maybe @Brett will give me $100 for some new plastic flooring in the bathroom.

So your answer is a fool and his money are easily parted.

No. — tim wood

^ this.

Regards
DL

we need a new story. One that doesn’t preserve closer-to-God hierarchy or a cosmic patriarchy. — Izat So

I agree.

They should go Gnostic and seek god their god within.

https://imgur.com/9eoBEyo

Regards
DL

But intelligence on its own does not grant immunity to it. — Theologian

I agree, given that the main reason for joining a religion is insecurity, our tribal natures and need of fellowship.

I do not mind people appeasing their natures but to lie to oneself in doing so is not intelligent or moral, in the case of our vile mainstream gods.

Regards
DL

but none of them was an atheist or naturalist — Matias

I disagree. In much of the time you see, to admit to atheism meant death.

The inquisitors and jihadists have been around a long time.

Regards
DL

If you assume that religious belief is the game of the stupid, you are mistaken. — Matias

I would be if I said that, I agree.

It is the supernatural aspect of belief that I find stupid.
It is all speculative nonsense as no information on the supernatural can be known or shown.

Do you disagreeing with that?

Regards
DL

I find my beliefs form a sort of scaffold on which to assemble my own personal mental model of the world, — Pattern-chaser

I think we all do that and that is why it is important to have ones thinking in reality instead of fiction or the supernatural. If you use junk members in your scaffold, it is not safe.

Regards
DL

It's wise to be a cynic toward shared beliefs rooted in impossible knowledge. — Anthony

I agree and that is why I see the opposite as evil.

I also agree that our beliefs are what we base reality on and that is why I dislike the notion of peole living in delusional states based on some preachers lies.

Regards
DL

Why do people assume the supernatural, or gods, or whatever, should conform to our all-too-human ideas about morality? — yupamiralda

Because if they do not, they are inferior and not worthy of us.

Secular law has already shown it superiority to theistic law and morality and if our gods cannot conform to that better morality they should be condemned.

To not do so has us ending todays with homophobic and misogynous inquisition and jihad using inferior religions.

Regards
DL

So your answer is a fool and his money are easily parted. — Brett

It would be nice if it was only the fools money, but non-believing tax payers have to make up the billion dollar short fall that religious tax exemptions create.

Believer or not, you are paying for lying clergy to continue lying.

Regards
DL

I think we all do that and that is why it is important to have ones thinking in reality instead of fiction or the supernatural. If you use junk members in your scaffold, it is not safe. — Gnostic Christian Bishop

Life, the universe and everything aren't "safe". We base our thinking on speculation and the like because there's nothing more concrete available. If you think you know stuff - really know stuff - then you are very lucky ... or more likely, deluded. Much of "reality" is unknown and unknowable to us. Sometimes it's fiction or nothing.

Much of "reality" is unknown and unknowable to us. — Pattern-chaser

Science would disagree.

To not at least stick to what can be known, and think what cannot be known is real, would be people giving up logic and reason for fantasy.

I do not see that as a good idea.

Regards
DL

To not at least stick to what can be known, and think what cannot be known is real, would be people giving up logic and reason for fantasy. — Gnostic Christian Bishop

Where logic and reason have no useful effect, what choice have we but to look elsewhere, maybe to fantasy? You talk blithely about sticking to what we know, but that is itself a difficult area. Adopting the perspective of Objectivism - a school of thought I find to be a pointless waste of time, personally - we know only that Objective Reality exists, and (maybe) that we are all or part of it. We know nothing else at all, to Objective standards. It depends how rigorous you want your thinking to be.

These questions cannot be answered by science. If you want to assume that the world your senses show you pictures of is Objective Reality, I can't stop you. But you have already embarked on a fantasy voyage, and your claims to knowledge are less than they seem. And yet science does what it can, and what it must. The 'reality' our senses show us is the only one we have access to. So we pretend it's real and certain ... and we could be right. But we cannot demonstrate this. We assume it, maybe as one or more axioms, but we don't know it. Your talk of knowing stuff is, at least in part, fantasy. A necessary, common-sense, fantasy, given our position, but fantasy nonetheless.

:up:

It would be nice if it was only the fools money, but non-believing tax payers have to make up the billion dollar short fall that religious tax exemptions create.

Believer or not, you are paying for lying clergy to continue lying. — Gnostic Christian Bishop

I don’t see what this has to do with individuals believing in something other than the material world.

Much of "reality" is unknown and unknowable to us.
— Pattern-chaser

Science would disagree. — Gnostic Christian Bishop

Science cannot agree or disagree. People can. Scientists recently discovered that most of the matter and energy in the universe they had been completely unaware of. Noticing this, it would be a logical conclusion that perhaps we will keep discovering more things, but perhaps some things will not be found out. Perhaps most will not be. Perhaps most will be. Pattern chaser's claim above is problematic because how would he know. But your response is eqully problematic since you cannot know whether we will find out most things. Perhaps scientists will find a way to prove there is a multiverse but not be able to learn more about the other universes, which would be most of what is, for example.

A necessary, common-sense, fantasy, given our position, but fantasy nonetheless. — Pattern-chaser

True that reality is a collective hunch.

Still better to not add to the objective reality by adding a fantasy that one must believe in to be saved.

Do you need saving and what did you do to be condemned?

Regards
DL

I don’t see what this has to do with individuals believing in something other than the material world. — Brett

Their belief is costing you your hard earned dollars.
Do you like to pay for someone else's fantasy?

Regards
DL

But your response is equally problematic since you cannot know whether we will find out most things. — Coben

We have no idea how close we are, knowledge wise, to all that can be known and what can be done.

Speculative nonsense is all we can have of what we do not know, especially of the supernatural.

Regards
DL

Do you need saving and what did you do to be condemned? — Gnostic Christian Bishop

No. Like Josef K., I don't know.

True that reality is a collective hunch. Still better to not add to the objective reality by adding a fantasy that one must believe in to be saved. — Gnostic Christian Bishop

Better still to recognise the truth of your first sentence. If you apply it to the second, you may see that you can't recognise a fantasy, nor tell fantasy from 'reality'. That is my point.