Is Belief Instinctual?

I have several friends and acquaintances who are religious. Some Born-Again, others into New Age spirituality and even one who calls himself a Secular Christian. Needless to say, discussions are always interesting and sometimes revealing.  What do I mean by revealing? Well, let me get to that.

As a non-believer I’m not alone in feeling the occasional bout of frustration when talking with believers. Despite all the scientific discoveries, achievements and plain-as-day facts one can point out, believers often seem to have an uncanny ability to completely disregard logic and reason where it concerns their religious beliefs, instead clinging to the barbaric ideologies of the biblical God.

What’s so frustrating is that generally these people don’t exhibit this kind behavior in any other areas of their lives. Quite the contrary, they’re often brilliant, astute, and logical individuals. They fully accept the science of medicine, such as the use of vaccines, which are based on the ‘mutation’ or ‘adaptation’ (in other words, the evolution) of viruses. All the while, denying evolution as a conflict of religion.

So why is it then that someone who applies the principles of logic and reason in other areas of their lives can then switch to an ideology which for all purposes is a flagrant abandonment reason?  This is where things get interesting.

Often during discussions, I can’t tell you how many times I’ve heard someone say, “I just can’t imagine that after we die there is nothing, that it’s just the end.”

After hearing this statement or something similar several times it finally started to sink in. Could it be that this is the basis for the dissonance between faith and reason? Could it be that the desire to live on after death in some form—be it ascension to heaven, resurrection on earth or some form of reincarnation—is really the driving force which moves people to believe in a god or creator which enables an afterlife and summarily disregard evidence to the contrary? (i.e. evolution and medical science).

We humans, as advanced creatures, have an inherent instinct for self-preservation. This is an evolutionary trait which in some way or another drives all animal species on the planet to live long enough to reproduce. But as animals who have evolved to the point where we have developed advanced consciousness—and unlike other animals, are aware of our own eventual death—have we simply taken this self-preservation instinct to the next level by incorporating it into the desire to live on even after that death?

In terms of evolutionary reproductive instinct, the concept of life after death is interesting when analyzed through a religious ideological lens. When we look at the concepts of resurrection and reincarnation specifically, we can see a scenario in which reproduction would be possible if not highly likely. The belief itself is consistent with our evolutionary instincts.

The concept of heavenly ascension is also interesting in terms of it’s compatibility with our evolutionary self-preservation and reproductive drive. Some religious doctrine, such as the Mormon faith suggests that the righteous will actually be given their own planets, of which they will be gods, and will people those planets with their offspring. Muslims believe that martyrs will go to heaven and be gifted with some 70 virgins. Again, in both cases these ideologies are directly consistent with our instincts to reproduce. Across a wide spectrum of religions who subscribe to the idea of a heavenly afterlife, beliefs as to what that life will be like vary from: a paradisaical utopia in which one lives out their idealistic life in peace, reunited with dead loved ones; life in the realm of God and Christ, becoming an angel yourself; and many other interpretations in between.

It is interesting that the religious concepts of life after death themselves are generally consistent with our evolutionary instincts. It seems almost natural for us, with our highly-evolved consciousness, to be predisposed to believing in such things. In fact, it seems that rejecting these religious ideologies is paramount to contradicting our natural instincts.

But along with our highly-evolved consciousness, which still promotes the animalistic drive of self-preservation for reproduction, also comes the advanced abilities to reason and use logic. Our decision making is not based purely on instinct. Rather, because of our highly developed brains we have the ability to ignore instinct for intellectual decision-making. Interestingly it could be said that in the context of this discussion, that these two things  are somewhat at odds with each other. One one hand you are, shall we say, predisposed to believing in an almost infinitely improbable god because ‘he’ ideologically’ creates the possibility of life after death. And on the other hand you have the unique intellectual ability (and asset of the scientific method) to rationally conclude that this belief, desire or instinct, while natural, is irrational and improbable if not down-right impossible.

So going back to the beginning of this article, I mentioned that people often say that they find it difficult to comprehend that their lives simply end at death. Then I posed the hypothesis that our instinctual drives may actually contribute to our belief in god as the enabler of an after-life.

What I find interesting is that essentially we define ourselves as human beings because of our intellectual ability over other animals. In many aspects of life we are able to override our instinctual heritage, instead applying our faculties of reason and logic. But when it comes to religion, people often abandon those abilities. Could it be that where religion is concerned, it’s not necessarily about worship to god, it’s not about morality, it’s not about custom or tradition, or any other tenants of religious belief, but really the crux of the matter is that religion singularly addresses our instinctual desire to live (and reproduce). Religion provides for an ideology that allows us to (however illogically) ignore the psychological stress that comes with the knowledge of our impending death and instead believe that our lives will continue on forever.

The issue as I see it, is between instinct and intelligence. And I wonder if we as human beings are not at a mid-point of our own intellectual evolution, a cross-roads if you will. Will humans cling to instinct, favoring religious belief,  or will we further develop our intelligence or ability to use reason and embrace the facts of our evolution and the non-existence of any kind of designer/creator? This all begs the question, in terms of natural selection, which is more beneficial to our species survival?

So the next time someone says that they just can’t imagine that death is the end of it all, consider that it is quite natural for them to feel that way, and that their reaction in itself is further evidence of our evolution.