• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Ordinary religiousness

Dragonlance

New Member
Hello forum , this is my first post here. I wonder if anyone read the study done on children and religiousness? Anyway the conclusion the study came to was that human beings have a tendency to think in a religious way, that it is more common to think religiously than to think in a secularized way. Thinking in a secularized way can be compared to putting on gloves while trying to sense something that is very tender and fragile. Thinking in a religious way is far more "authentic" for a human being, but it has the disadvantage of not being as insensitive as the secular way of thinking can be. But religious thinking is also more fond of finding meaning in things and explains the world in a way that is very ethical in an superabundant way that may strike some of us as naive (and therefore worthless).

A child was for example asked why God created trees, and the child said "because they are pretty". Now how come I as an adult have gotten so blind to not have realized the simple truth in this childs point of view before? Not that I think we should elect kids for being presidents, but there is something about the innocent outlook on life that children has that seems to me to be very religious. The innate religiousness of man perhaps? If every child has this way to look at things, then every grown person also somewhere has this way of seeing things... stuffed away somewhere behind all that stuff we collect from growing up. We stop looking with our own eyes somehow.

I used to consider that values in life were to be found in that wich was exclusive, distinguished and superior. Things that sparkled and had a sweet aroma you know. And the pattern was there in my search for trying to understand the world as well, wich was evident in my choice of literature. But it only made me blind to what I had right here. The ordinariness of living. I used to despise that. People who lived ordinary lives was to me some kind of losers that simply lacke the guts to do somthing brave and spectacular. I saw their lives as being trivial.

And perhaps this is the problem in why I didnt understand religion either. We dismiss this so many things in life as common and trivial... You know the ordinary life, the life that is never seen in the media because its "just too ordinary". And instead go chasing those stars and rainbows. I mean I dont know how many religious concepts I have learned, or how many religious phrases Ive read. But nothing comes close to hearing the innosence of an unpretentious mind like that of a child.

When did ordinariness become something trivial and uninteresting? How come so many of us has gotten fooled to think that it is those who are sucessful, bright and prosperous that are the only interesting ones. How much do we miss out on just because we dismiss it as trivial and ordinary? In either case, I just want to say that right now I think I have found a new philosophy of life. A philosophy that upholds the ordinary and the ordinary ones as a valuable gem that is far more interesting simply because it doesnt have an immediate sparkle to it. You need to get closer to it first, you have to get used to it, and see it with your own eyes.

I think I have said enough, you know what I mean.

/Dragonlance
 

bobhikes

Nondetermined
Premium Member
I would enjoy to live life as a kid again. Everything is new and no responsiblities. However I can't. I have knowledge of things I don't want to know. I have to provide for my kids and myself. Life doesn't just let me alone. That pretty tree now drops leaves and if I don't clean them up I get fined. I have to put them in paper bags that I have to buy and put them are the end of my yard every Wednesday in Fall.

When I was a kid I would rake them up and Jump in them. I wish that was all I'ld have to do again.
 

McBell

Unbound
Hello forum , this is my first post here. I wonder if anyone read the study done on children and religiousness? Anyway the conclusion the study came to was that human beings have a tendency to think in a religious way, that it is more common to think religiously than to think in a secularized way.
Where can this study be found?
 

challupa

Well-Known Member
Hello forum , this is my first post here. I wonder if anyone read the study done on children and religiousness? Anyway the conclusion the study came to was that human beings have a tendency to think in a religious way, that it is more common to think religiously than to think in a secularized way. Thinking in a secularized way can be compared to putting on gloves while trying to sense something that is very tender and fragile. Thinking in a religious way is far more "authentic" for a human being, but it has the disadvantage of not being as insensitive as the secular way of thinking can be. But religious thinking is also more fond of finding meaning in things and explains the world in a way that is very ethical in an superabundant way that may strike some of us as naive (and therefore worthless).

A child was for example asked why God created trees, and the child said "because they are pretty". Now how come I as an adult have gotten so blind to not have realized the simple truth in this childs point of view before? Not that I think we should elect kids for being presidents, but there is something about the innocent outlook on life that children has that seems to me to be very religious. The innate religiousness of man perhaps? If every child has this way to look at things, then every grown person also somewhere has this way of seeing things... stuffed away somewhere behind all that stuff we collect from growing up. We stop looking with our own eyes somehow.

I used to consider that values in life were to be found in that wich was exclusive, distinguished and superior. Things that sparkled and had a sweet aroma you know. And the pattern was there in my search for trying to understand the world as well, wich was evident in my choice of literature. But it only made me blind to what I had right here. The ordinariness of living. I used to despise that. People who lived ordinary lives was to me some kind of losers that simply lacke the guts to do somthing brave and spectacular. I saw their lives as being trivial.

And perhaps this is the problem in why I didnt understand religion either. We dismiss this so many things in life as common and trivial... You know the ordinary life, the life that is never seen in the media because its "just too ordinary". And instead go chasing those stars and rainbows. I mean I dont know how many religious concepts I have learned, or how many religious phrases Ive read. But nothing comes close to hearing the innosence of an unpretentious mind like that of a child.

When did ordinariness become something trivial and uninteresting? How come so many of us has gotten fooled to think that it is those who are sucessful, bright and prosperous that are the only interesting ones. How much do we miss out on just because we dismiss it as trivial and ordinary? In either case, I just want to say that right now I think I have found a new philosophy of life. A philosophy that upholds the ordinary and the ordinary ones as a valuable gem that is far more interesting simply because it doesnt have an immediate sparkle to it. You need to get closer to it first, you have to get used to it, and see it with your own eyes.

I think I have said enough, you know what I mean.

/Dragonlance
Welcome to RF. I think there is a lot of truth in your post. To be able to mature and still have the ability to see life through the eyes of a child would be amazing, but I would guess pretty hard. Adults don't have the luxury of unlearning all the things they have witnessed and learned about the world that are less then inspiring. Are you saying you have regained that innocence as an adult?
 

Kilgore Trout

Misanthropic Humanist
"Specifically, the study shows that children who feel that their lives have meaning and value and who develop deep, quality relationships — both measures of spirituality, the researchers claim — are happier. "

I don't understand how or why these would specifically be measures of spirituality. I am completely non-spiritual and both of those descriptions apply to me.
 

Sunstone

De Diablo Del Fora
Premium Member
"Specifically, the study shows that children who feel that their lives have meaning and value and who develop deep, quality relationships — both measures of spirituality, the researchers claim — are happier. "

I don't understand how or why these would specifically be measures of spirituality. I am completely non-spiritual and both of those descriptions apply to me.

I agree those cannot be considered exclusive measures of spirituality.
 

Dragonlance

New Member
Mestemia

Dr Justin Barrett has done several studies on childrens views on God and spirituality. Its a short article about it in The Telegraph called "Children are born believers".

challupa

Thanks! Oh no, I dont pretend to have achieved anything. And I am certainly not arguing for being a child again. Im merely thinking about the sensation of discovering something beyond what Ive formerly been thinking of as "nothing". Like why there are trees or birds in the world, and how children see the world in a way that is really the way we perhaps ought to develop further into a more mature view of seeing the meaningfulness of life.
The philosophy of evolution on the other hand has only managed to made the world more complex without actually adding anything of value to it. And contrary to popular opinion its not even certain that it helps scientists to understand the world better.
 

Magic Man

Reaper of Conversation
First, I think you should define what you mean by "religious" and what you mean by "secular". I see it more as a "childlike/mature" dichotomy as you describe it. I think it's good to remain childlike in some ways. I was just remarking to myself the other night that I tend to see who people remind me of more now than when I was younger, and that it seems that when I was younger I would just see people for who they were rather than who they seem like. However, maturing and having a deeper more complex understanding of the world is necessary for leading a full, long, healthy life.

The philosophy of evolution on the other hand has only managed to made the world more complex without actually adding anything of value to it. And contrary to popular opinion its not even certain that it helps scientists to understand the world better.

It's the theory of evolution. It's a scientific theory (which means that it's as much fact as the law of gravity) based on enough evidence to fill probably dozens of volumes of an encyclopedia. Evolution has not made the world more complex. It has explained a natural phenomenon. It has also added immense amounts of value to our world. We have made a lot of medical advances thanks to evolution, for example. It sounds like you might need to do a little reading on the subject. If you'd like, I or many others here could suggest some places to check out.
 

McBell

Unbound
What he shows is that 3-year-olds think that their parents have god like omniscience - they know everything that the child knows. And when you ask them about god, they think the same. It's not till kids reach 5 years that they understand that their parents do not know what's going on inside their own head, and that there are things that only they know.

But, when you ask 5 year olds about god, well, they still think that god knows everything (as do adult believers, of course). Barrett takes this as evidence that kids come with a 'correct' knowledge of god built in. Young kids get god right, and mum wrong, and he says of 5 year olds: "They are not dumbing down god, they are smarting up mom" (30 minutes).

Now these facts are indisputable. It's the interpretation that's open to question. As Barrett says in the Q&A session: "What we do with the interpretation, depending on our worldview, is a completely different issue. But at least we can agree on what the science is starting to show."

So whose interpretation is right? Is Barrett right that belief in an omniscient god is built in, and we have to be persuaded otherwise? Or is Grayling right that very young kids just aren't smart enough to figure out how minds work. And that when they learn that others can't actually read their mind, then they would extrapolate that to god too if it weren't for cultural indoctrination?

Source
I wonder if his studies on this particular subject are published in a peer reviewed science journal...
 

gnomon

Well-Known Member
both measures of spirituality

link between spirituality and happiness is pretty well-established for teens and adults

spirituality (meaning and value in one's own life) and communal aspects (quality and depth of inter-personal relationships)

Scientific study?

A snapshot based on a questionnaire. Will they follow the same children and repeat the questionnaire? For how many years?

Probably just the language of the news report that makes me skeptical.

I'm not going to fork over the $34.00 for the online version.
 

Caladan

Agnostic Pantheist
Hello forum , this is my first post here. I wonder if anyone read the study done on children and religiousness? Anyway the conclusion the study came to was that human beings have a tendency to think in a religious way, that it is more common to think religiously than to think in a secularized way. Thinking in a secularized way can be compared to putting on gloves while trying to sense something that is very tender and fragile. Thinking in a religious way is far more "authentic" for a human being, but it has the disadvantage of not being as insensitive as the secular way of thinking can be. But religious thinking is also more fond of finding meaning in things and explains the world in a way that is very ethical in an superabundant way that may strike some of us as naive (and therefore worthless).
Welcome to the forum Dragonlance (fan of Krynn?)

Thinking in a 'religious way' is 'authentic' in the sense that the 21 century has emerged out of centuries of religious background.
also the 'secular way' is characterized by immense sensitivity: the secular includes many fields of the every day reality, and all have the fingerprints of human beings who chose to explore and experience beyond settling for blind faith. these people were passionate about finding a meaning behind things and find objective explanations, there are people that believe the ethical is not naive and it should be accompanied by understanding and information. so that for example instead of condemning what we do not understand or what is different we will be more understanding and accepting.

A child was for example asked why God created trees, and the child said "because they are pretty". Now how come I as an adult have gotten so blind to not have realized the simple truth in this childs point of view before? Not that I think we should elect kids for being presidents, but there is something about the innocent outlook on life that children has that seems to me to be very religious. The innate religiousness of man perhaps? If every child has this way to look at things, then every grown person also somewhere has this way of seeing things... stuffed away somewhere behind all that stuff we collect from growing up. We stop looking with our own eyes somehow.
While appreciating the physique of life forms and objects can be a positive sensation, there are many benefits in connecting to these objects and life forms in a deeper level. nature has many uses of attractive phenomena, understanding whats behind these phenomena does not take the magic out of existence, we shouldnt develop a phobia from using our intellect.

I used to consider that values in life were to be found in that wich was exclusive, distinguished and superior. Things that sparkled and had a sweet aroma you know. And the pattern was there in my search for trying to understand the world as well, wich was evident in my choice of literature. But it only made me blind to what I had right here. The ordinariness of living. I used to despise that. People who lived ordinary lives was to me some kind of losers that simply lacke the guts to do somthing brave and spectacular. I saw their lives as being trivial.
While I dont know what your standards are for an ordinary life VS. an extraordinary life, I think that having the maturity to enjoy the ordinary and normality is important for one's own quality of life and inner integrity.

And perhaps this is the problem in why I didnt understand religion either. We dismiss this so many things in life as common and trivial... You know the ordinary life, the life that is never seen in the media because its "just too ordinary". And instead go chasing those stars and rainbows. I mean I dont know how many religious concepts I have learned, or how many religious phrases Ive read. But nothing comes close to hearing the innosence of an unpretentious mind like that of a child.
While childhood is magical, there is nothing more celebrated in nature than a child who grows into maturity in a healthy way. where innocence is matured into integrity and when information is flowing through the mind, when the mind learns to appreciate its surroundings, and is not startled by using its intellectual capabilities to appreciate the qualities of the phenomena around.
 
Last edited:
Top