NEW THEORY SUGGESTS PEOPLE ARE ATTRACTED TO RELIGION FOR 16 REASONS

COLUMBUS, Ohio – People are not drawn to religion just because of a fear of death or any other single reason, according to a new comprehensive, psychological theory of religion.

There are actually 16 basic human psychological needs that motivate people to seek meaning through religion, said Steven Reiss, author of the new theory and professor of psychology and psychiatry at Ohio State University.
“Because this theory can be tested scientifically, we can learn its strengths and weaknesses, and gradually improve it,” Reiss said. “Eventually, we may understand better the psychological basis of religion.”

These basic human needs – which include honor, idealism, curiosity and acceptance – can explain why certain people are attracted to religion, why God images express psychologically opposite qualities, and the relationship between personality and religious experiences.

Previous psychologists tried to explain religion in terms of just one or two overarching psychological needs. The most common reason they cite is that people embrace religion because of a fear of death, as expressed in the saying ‘there are no atheists in foxholes,” Reiss said.

“But religion is multi-faceted – it can’t be reduced to just one or two desires.”

Reiss described his new theory – which he said may be the most comprehensive psychological theory of religion since Freud’s work more than a century ago -- in the June issue of Zygon, a journal devoted to issues of science and religion.

“I don’t think there has been a comprehensive theory of religion that was scientifically testable,” he said.

The theory is based on his overall theory of human motivation, which he calls sensitivity theory. Sensitivity theory is explained in his 2000 book Who Am I? The 16 Basic Desires that Motivate Our Action and Define Our Personalities (Tarcher Putnam).

Reiss said that each of the 16 basic desires outlined in the book influence the psychological appeal of religious behavior. The desires are power, independence, curiosity, acceptance, order, saving, honor, idealism, social contact, family, status, vengeance, romance, eating, physical exercise, and tranquility.

In fact, Reiss has already done some initial research that suggests the desire for independence is a key psychological desire that separates religious and non-religious people. In a study published in 2000, Reiss found that religious people (the study included mostly Christians) expressed a strong desire for interdependence with others. Those who were not religious, however, showed a stronger need to be self-reliant and independent.

The study also showed that religious people valued honor more than non-religious people, which Reiss said suggests many people embrace religion to show loyalty to parents and ancestors.

In the Zygon paper, Reiss explains that every religious person balances their 16 basic human needs to fit their own personality.

“They embrace those aspects of religious imagery that express their strongest psychological needs and deepest personal values.”

One example is the desire for curiosity, Reiss said. Religious intellectuals, who are high in curiosity, value a God who is knowable through reason, while doers, who have weak curiosity, may value a God that is knowable only through revelation.

“People who have a strong need for order should enjoy ritualized religious experiences, whereas those with a weak need for order may prefer more spontaneous expression of faith,” he said.

“The prophecy that the weak will inherit the earth should appeal especially to people with a weak need for status, whereas the teaching that everybody is equal before God should appeal especially to people with a strong need for idealism.”

If religion and personality are linked, religion must provide a range of images and symbols sufficiently diverse to appeal to all the different kinds of personalities in the human population, Reiss says. Religious imagery potentially accommodates everybody because in many instances the images and symbols are psychological opposites.

“How we value and balance the 16 psychological needs is what makes us an individual, and for every individual there are appealing religious images,” he said.

“The values that guide a personality with a strong need for vindication are expressed by a God of wrath, or a war God, while the values that guide a personality with a weak need for vindication are expressed by a God of forgiveness.”

“The values that guide a personality with a strong need to socialize are expressed by religious fellowship and festivals, while the values that guide a personality with a weak need to socialize are expressed by religious asceticism.”

The need for acceptance makes meaningful images of God as a savior, while its opposite inspires the concept of original sin, according to Reiss. The need to eat motives some people to value abstinence and others to value sustenance.

“Because this theory can be tested scientifically, we can learn its strengths and weaknesses, and gradually improve it,” Reiss said. “Eventually, we may understand better the psychological basis of religion.”

Reiss emphasized that the theory addresses the psychology of religious experiences and has no implications for the validity or invalidity of religious beliefs.


Contact: Steven Reiss, (614) 292-2390; Reiss.7@osu.edu
Written by Jeff Grabmeier, (614) 292-8457; Grabmeier.1@osu.edu

Whoa...hold on to your horses. Just a clarification. The pope didn't molest any children. There were unrelated cases in England and US where some priests were found to molest vulnerable children.

Oh pardon me Controversies can always make up people's perceptions you know. Like when people mention MJ and they think of children molestation lol Sorry if I was wrong.

But here's something interesting I googled up. Catholic sex abuse cases. Catholics are really big on sex abuse after all lol. No offense ya.

For your question, I think we human can work well withuot religion... what is your definition of religion? abrahamatic religion? or non reveal religion like buddhism, confusciousm etc??
I bet this thing not only happens in christianity.. but ALL religion where people of power use the name of religion to gain power and money...

very nice and debatable topic. i was thinking should i open a thread like this after going through some topics here in PHD.

i don't practice any religion nor do i believe in the existence of God.
i can say that i am no worse in terms in moral than any one i know with religion.
in our current society, we have laws and cultural norms that control our daily actions so that we don't step over the line between right and wrong.
religion does that function in the past and the present(to a lesser extent).
all religion can be sum up to be a set of rules and regulation.

i personally think that some of the laws or rules in religion is outdated. example like not eating beef for Buddhist and not eating pork of Muslims.
we have to think why these rules are there in the 1st place. most of the rules in religion is due to the conditions we live in in ancient times or some events that occurred that time and these rule might have lost their reason or practicality in our time.

one function i see in religion is serving as the base of our moral.

i apologize if my post is offensive to some people as my knowledge of religion is limited.

I don't have a specific religion I refer to, as this is supposed to be a general philosophic topic. What I can say is that religion is all about believing in God and divinity.

Religion has been abused, yes you're right. No offense for Catholics here, I only highlighted that specific Wikipedia topic as it really amused me at some point, Catholic is so controversial on the sex abuse issue lol.

If human can work well without religion, why religion still exist then?

This is what the muslims say - Why Can't I Eat Pork - IslamOnline

And these are the verifications I found on the net on their scientific reasons not to eat pork -
Pork Contains Worms And Causes Diseases?
Pork's Dirty Secret (er, it's on pigs' environmental issues. i found it related somehow)

No offense for pork eaters yeah, this is just something I wanted to share. Comments welcome, correct me if I'm wrong

for your question from neutral and universal perspective point of view, I draw two conclusion

1) people tend to hope for miracle and wish that there are something larger than life that will save them, grant them wishes or even give them eternal happiness (heaven)..things out  there that hold the question... who are we? why we are here? etc...  they don`t care if this GOD exist or not, if you question them, they will bit their tongue and say I don`t care, I believe my god is true  till the end... or some might say you mock t heir god and hit you... which this GOD don`t even say anythingto them.. everyrthing is said by priest.. or political leader... For GOD.. etc

2) or another type pf religion that deals with innerself rather than supreme being... like buddhism, atheistism, or even sciencism... which is not a religion.. but it governs what people think and see this world....
refer to my No1 example...

from your POV I do agree that from then till now, religion controls people more effectively than politic....

when leader say a thing, public might react and hold a demo or riot...

but when a priest say.. GOD had spoken to me.... and everyone listen and obey....

reflection time..... 

---

Added on November 15, 2009, 5:30 pm
pork is chinese No1 delicacy.. and the chinese population is No1 in the world 

ahaha... again.. the word perfect is actually delusional... we always talk about being perfect but know nothing as perfect.. perfect is a word created for human to aim for.. again.. what is your definition of religion?
yes...
www.guanyinma.com


again.. that is the same as my No1 example.. just that different place; different culture and different god...
you are chinese muslims??

you are right on that part... modern chinese eat pork less now...

What is religion if not moral politics?

In my opinion, the question of whether Man needs Religion is very similar to the question of whether Man needs Electricity. Man can definitely live without it, but it's just so much easier to have religion around. I disagree that Man is only good because of religion, though it does emphasize good morals. Like electricity, it can be used for good or for bad. Crusades & religious killings, anyone? You may say they're misinterpreting their religion, but what makes anyone else any better?

The purpose of religion may be just to convince people that there will be a final judgement at the end of our life whose punishment lasts close to an eternity. Scary. no? Kind of makes you want to be good. More importantly though, religion gives meaning to our lives. & of course, Man is a sucker for finding meaning in our mundane lives. Whether or not it has any truth.

I'm a chinese & i see myself as an agnostic buddhist. Pork's the bomb! Though honestly, it is the dirtiest meat you could eat & i try to reduce my consumption of it.

PHD forum is for wanktard who knows nuts but pretend they know anything and censor those who make them look stupid.
Come ban this account lah you cheebai mod frags.

Hey guys,

Do human need religion? Why do people need religion? I had a heated argument with one of my close contacts about this. He said something like 'you know Anne, I think even if I don't have any religion, I will be a good man.' Uhuh, yeah right.

This profusely denying the normal theory that human need religion for self control. People who is without religion tends to do a lot of bad stuff, thanks to the concept of sin and Satanism. Or religion is merely an attraction to humans? Check this out. Credits to Dr Reiss, Ohio State U :
Religion control one's morale, that's a debatable fact. Most people who are religious are good, but then the Pope molested children. Malay muslims who believed in Islam, the most complete religion in this world, are so behind, so are most muslim countries in terms of morale and quality of society, let alone economy.

So answer this question. Its worth a discussion anyhow

Anna

my definition of religion isn't so different from yours. I think of religion as a moral control factor, and also a way of life - that's the point that is different from your POV.

Lol I'm a malay, just that I understand other races as much as they want to be understood haha, whatever that is 
I like that statement. "Religion makes you want to be good" 

But then, another common thing every religion have instead of morality is actually spirituality. Do you think spirituality is something men need?

Now I wish I'm a moderator, little daredevil 

TS have you ever hoped that you are blessed when going for exam?
Have you ever hoped that you are blessed when you are sick?

Dei kawan, there's a thread on this in RWI, albiet it being peppered with rather fail extremists.

On the topic at hand though, some people find that they need a cornerstone in their lives on which to hold their beliefs. In a sense, not everyone needs it so it isn't really a must.

TS have you ever hoped that you are blessed when going for exam?
Have you ever hoped that you are blessed when you are sick?

whoa... I never expect a malay muslim to have such thinking... most of my malay muslim friend used to think as usual.. You know.. allah is the bese knowing and we should pasrah and never to question god or anything else...

yeap.. to me race is nothing.... you are who you are.. 
My manager used to use this phrase "spirit".. he is a buddhist but never believe in spirit as in islam or christianity... but he meant spirit as in the character of human... the "aliveness"
thanks for quoting this.. I missed it.. a smackdown... LOL

---

Added on November 15, 2009, 7:45 pm
everyone hope and wanted that... IF GOD is proven existed... till then, it is still hope... hope that during christmas santa will come down via the chimney with present....

still.... prayer remain as prayer.... unanswered one....

First, you have to define spirituality haha. You don't have to be religious to be spiritual, you don't even have to be theistic.

The question of whether or not we've ever hoped to be blessed is irrelevant, isn't it? It doesn't show that we need religion, only that people take it as a safe bet. People usually do it as smaller scale of Pascal's wager if they don't really believe in it.

I don't think we need religion. Most of us just need something to believe in that makes us feel secure, that doesn't leave us feeling empty. We want to feel interconnected, like we are a part of something big, like we matter. We want a God like the Christian one because He will become our personal best friend and will lead us to salvation. It is honestly extremely appealing especially when you're down in life, though my logical side refuses to let me embrace it. Too many holes and fallacies. For now, i think that Man is not ready to give up religion. Most of us are not yet intelligent enough and in touch with ourselves to accept life as it is, and that the odds are that we matter as much as a used tissue does in the larger scheme of the universe.

While the terms spirituality and religion are sometimes used interchangeably, an important distinction exists between them. Traditionally, religions have regarded spirituality as an integral aspect of their religious experience and have long arrogated spirituality for themselves; claiming true spirituality cannot be experienced by the secular (non-religious). Declining membership of organised religions in the western world, however, has given rise to a broader view of spirituality. Those who speak of spirituality, outside of religion, often define themselves as "spiritual but not religious" and generally believe in the existence of many different "spiritual paths" - the emphasis being on the importance of finding one's own individual path to spirituality. According to one poll, some 24±4% of the United States population identifies itself as spiritual but not religious.[1]

Secular spirituality also carries connotations of an individual having a spiritual outlook which is more personalized, less structured, more open to new ideas/influences, and more pluralistic than that of the doctrinal faiths of organized religions. At one end of the spectram, even some atheists claim to be spiritual; Whilst atheism tends to lean towards skepticism regarding supernatural claims and the existence of an actual 'spirit', for some atheists being "Spiritual" can be defined as nurturing thoughts, emotions, words and actions that are in harmony with the idea that the entire universe is, in some way, connected; even if only by the mysterious flow of cause and effect at every scale.[2]

In contrast, those of a more 'New-Age' disposition, whilst not regarding spirituality as religion per se, see it as the active connection to some force/power/energy, spirit, facilitating a sense of the deep self. As cultural historian and yogi William Irwin Thompson (1938 - ) put it, "Religion is not identical with spirituality; rather religion is the form spirituality takes in civilization." (1981, 103)

For some, spirituality includes introspection, and the development of an individual's inner life through practices such as meditation, prayer and contemplation. Some modern religions also see spirituality in everything: see pantheism and neo-Pantheism. In a similar vein, Religious Naturalism has a spiritual attitude towards the awe, majesty and mystery seen in the natural world.

For a Christian, to refer to him or herself as "more spiritual than religious"[citation needed] may (but not always) imply relative deprecation of rules, rituals, and tradition while preferring an intimate relationship with God. The basis for this belief is that Jesus Christ came to free humankind from those rules, rituals, and traditions, giving humankind the ability to "walk in the spirit" thus maintaining a "Christian" lifestyle through that one-to-one relationship with God.