An Accidental Belief.
The question of why we believe what we do has come up on a lot of Blogs lately so I’ve been giving it some extra thought. It seems to me that beliefs are basically cultural constructs, after all beliefs change from place to place and throughout time. Religious or political beliefs emerge, flower and then die. Some survive centuries or even millennia whilst others are a mere ‘flash in the pan’ – extinguished in a single life time or less.
That being the case how is it that we believe some things and not others? Why are Christians Christian and not Muslim for example? It seems obvious to me that we generally take on the beliefs of the culture we happen to be born into. If a devout Christian had been born in the Middle East instead of the USA (for example) it’s highly likely that they would have been a devout Muslim instead. If I had been born into a devout Catholic family (instead of a disinterested one) it’s highly likely that I would also be a devout Catholic today. Being the atheist that I am I do hope that if I had still been ‘me’ that the structure of my brain determined by my DNA (amongst other things) might still have made me an atheist later in life but it’s something that I could never know for sure.
The point that I’m making here is that a person’s beliefs appear to be largely dependent on an accident of birth. A practicing believing Christian, Muslim or Hindu born in a different place or at a different time would hold a radically different position. This being the case what does it say about our deeply held personal beliefs? Does it actually say anything useful? One thing I think it does say is that we should all examine our sincerely held beliefs and ask ourselves why we believe them. We should all ask ourselves just how much of our belief system is dependent on an accident of where and when we are born. My guess is that the answer is a lot.
About Me
- CyberKitten
- I have a burning need to know stuff and I love asking awkward questions.
13 comments:
Great post. You said, "a person’s beliefs appear to be largely dependent on an accident of birth" -- Exactly. That's one of the main things that get me. This whole concept of a provincial God is baffling. Does someone that is a Baptist honestly think they would still be a Baptist if they were born in Ethiopia or South America? Is someone not going to heaven merely because they were born in the wrong location ... or the wrong time?
Although the choice of religion is probably an accident of birth, there have been a number of claims made that "religiosity" is a heritable trait. It's by no means a consensus view, and the only real data collected that showed a correlation between religiosity and genetics was the "Minnesota Twins" study, where they searched out identical twins who had been raised separately (usually without knowledge that the other existed) and those raised together, with a control group of fraternal twins. I do not know another way that such a hypothesis can be tested, and I'd agree that the sample size was very small and the data contained too many subjective elements. Still, it sounds good.
You said, "that we generally take on the beliefs of the culture we happen to be born into[.]" I'm not sure about that. As a general statment, it's probably true, but I'm sure there are many instances where that is not true. My own life in point, I was raised by a devout Athiest. I always believed in reincarnation and karma, not sure where it came from. I was "corrected" about my faulty beliefs when I began walking my self to church across the street as a small child. The Catholics tried to re-educate me and correct the falicies I believed in. It didn't take, I still believe the same way. I no longer attend the church, and my mother along with her whole family are still athiests. I have taken my children to church at times throughout their youth. I speak to them about my beliefs and why I believe the way I do. My son is an Athiest and my daughter isn't sure, but believes organized religion is a crock of poo. Both of my children grew up and lived their formative years in the conservative, ultra-religious South and went to church quite regularly with their friends. They definitely didn't take on the beliefs of the culture they were born into.
What does your findings say about people that are persecuted for their faith throught history? Take the Protestant-Catholic wars in England/Ireland.
Take the Muslim-Christian in Africa.
I call it "war" but there aren't really two sides fighting--there is usually oppresion followed by killing.
I'm sure the people being oppressed for their beliefs would have gladly been born someplace else--too bad for them though. Why don't they take the easy way out and just follow the mainstream faith of where they were born?
Ummm...because it doesn't work that way. It just doesn't cyberkitten.
Sadie: What you're getting at are encroachments of cultures upon one another, and it's a great question. There are many places in the world that are not dominated by one religion but several. Those places tend to be sources of social/political unrest. I think that further supports the theory rather than weakens it. Since everyone in those areas are, primarily, taking the culture/religion they were born into, normalizing it, and casting the other group(s) as illegitimate on no basis other than they're different. If there were more critical thought, I think they'd be finding more compromises/commonalities.
We all view our own cultures as 'normative' whether we admit it/realize it or not. What we are used to is normal, and therefore the religions that are based upon those cultural norms are a better fit. They perpetuate each other in an unending feedback loop. I mean, if Voodoo seems "weird" to soemone, most likely that person will dismiss those beliefs as such, rather than exploring it further.
I think it takes a unique, special kind of person to take all the cultural/social/religious baggage they are born into, criticize it, question it, and choose something else. That's why conversions are, for the most part, fairly rare and politica strife based on religion is all too common.
Laura--I'm not ashamed to admit that you lost me. *smile*
You said...
I think it takes a unique, special kind of person to take all the cultural/social/religious baggage they are born into, criticize it, question it, and choose something else.
On a small scale, this happens very regularly. My husband was born into a Catholic household--now he's not.
My dad was born into a Catholic household--now he's not.
I was born in a household much like Cyberkitten--indifferent--now I'm a Christian.
My husband and I tell our youth group kids at church that now is the time for questions. Now is the time to make Christianity their own instead of just adopting the faith of their parents--which is a weak way to have faith.
That kind of faith will fail you.
What I was talking about and I'm not sure if you addressed it Laura, is when a ministry goes into--say Uganda--and preaches the gospel and the people KNOW Christians are persecuted to the point of death--why would they still believe?
"when a ministry goes into--say Uganda--and preaches the gospel and the people KNOW Christians are persecuted to the point of death--why would they still believe?"
The cynical side of me says: The same way extremist madressas succeed in luring in desperate youth in the middle east, asia, and africa. Telling them what they want to hear and giving them the food & medicine they need to survive.
I was talking more about conversions that take someone outside of their "home" culture. I consider Catholicism and Evangelicalism still close cousins. Much different than a Christian becoming a Buddhist or a Muslim becoming a Hindu.
Much different than a Christian becoming a Buddhist or a Muslim becoming a Hindu.
Or Christians becoming atheists or Atheists becoming Christians because I mentioned that too; myself as an example.
Telling them what they want to hear and giving them the food & medicine they need to survive.
So what about Christianity is so different than the Muslim faith? I know the answer and I know why it's what they *want* to hear. Also, I think it's admirable that Christians care enough to give them food and medicine and since those people are poor--nobody can accuse the missionaries of having the wrong motivations--in fact, why do you think missionaries go to third world nations and preach the gospel and serve food and heal the sick?
Dammit, my comment got eaten... I'll have to try and remember what I said. I admit I was baiting you a little bit, I must be PMSing...
*laughing*
So am I actually.
Well... I've dragged myself away from Sadies Blog to actually answer (or try to) some of the comments raised here...
Thanks dbackdad, that's the point I was trying to bring out. A Christian/Muslim etc might passionately believe that their faith is the 'one' and that by practicing it they will got to Heaven/be saved etc.. and yet if they had been born a few hundred/thousand miles east or west they could quite possibly hold an exactly opposite view equally passionately. Therefore their passionate sincere belief is largely based on a accident of geography & culture.
ken said: there have been a number of claims made that "religiosity" is a heritable trait.
I'd heard that but I don't believe it. I think its quite possible that our brains are 'designed' in such a way (by our DNA not God) that we have a tendency to believe things quite strongly. This has the evolutionary advantage of not having to spend time and energy constantly evaluating things. However, what we actually end up believing is cultural not genetic. That's why you get different beliefs in different places and different times.
V V said: As a general statment, it's probably true, but I'm sure there are many instances where that is not true.
Indeed. My idea is certainly not an answer to the riddle of religion. If it was I probably should have padded it out into a book and made some money - or at least earned a PhD. But I do think that generally if you grow up in a particular religious community it is probable that you will take on the beliefs of that community. I would think it highly unlikely (for example) that Sadie's children would decide to become Hindu's without a *very* good reason. If I was a betting man I'd certainly put a few dollors on them all being life-long Christians.
Sadie said: I'm sure the people being oppressed for their beliefs would have gladly been born someplace else--too bad for them though. Why don't they take the easy way out and just follow the mainstream faith of where they were born? Ummm...because it doesn't work that way. It just doesn't cyberkitten.
Beliefs can be held very strongly. People throughout History have died for their beliefs (and not just religious ones) which is admirable in many ways. People have also killed for their beliefs which is rather less admirable. Many people thoughout History have also made practical decisions about their faith when threatened with death or boddily harm. The classic case is where Jews converted to Christianity in Europe during the Inquistion. They had a choice of retaining their faith or retaining their life. Many chose life.
Laura said: Since everyone in those areas are, primarily, taking the culture/religion they were born into, normalizing it, and casting the other group(s) as illegitimate on no basis other than they're different.
In mixed faith areas you're also going to get a lot of pressure to defend your group against other hostile faiths. A good way to do this is make sure that everyone (including children) are particularly strong in their faith. Those that break away from a faith group in these circumstances are usually particularly harshly treated.
Laura said: I think it takes a unique, special kind of person to take all the cultural/social/religious baggage they are born into, criticize it, question it, and choose something else. That's why conversions are, for the most part, fairly rare and politica strife based on religion is all too common.
I agree. Conversion is rare and I would suggest that the greater the difference bewteen the religions the rarer the conversion is. I would guess that the movment within Christian sects is a lot more common than outside it and that conversions within the Abrahamic religions are a lot more common that outside of that... I wonder if there's a PhD in *that* particular idea?
Sadie said: Or Christians becoming atheists or Atheists becoming Christians because I mentioned that too; myself as an example.
Christians becoming atheists is fairly easy to explain. They've simply lost their faith. Things happening the other way around is slightly more difficult to explain but I can see it happening for many reasons. However, I'd bet that an atheist in the predominantly Christian society is *much* more likely to become a Christian that he is to become a Sikh. Likewise in a Muslim society he is *much* more likely to become a follow of Islam than the Buddha. Though I'm not saying that these things don't happen - because they do.
Thanks for your comments ladies. Hope you're both feeling better... [grin].
Well, there are people that convert to different religions. But this isn't really all that common if the religion is alien to your culture. People that are born atheist generally don't convert to Christianity outside of Christian cultures. An atheist in, say, Japan is much more likely to become Buddhist.
Hi Trevor...
You said: People that are born atheist generally don't convert to Christianity outside of Christian cultures.
Actually we are *all* born atheists... [grin]. But yes I agree.
You also said: An atheist in, say, Japan is much more likely to become Buddhist.
Yup. My point exactly. I'm talking about probabilities here not certainties....
Post a Comment