Is it worth believing in God?
Is it worth believing in God?
Life hack: Think of religion as a market
With this mailing, I test a new format here at The Strolling Economist: A life hack mailing.
And that's how it works: I’ll ask a question that I try to solve with mainly economic thinking. So, in the end, I am looking for a trick, shortcut, skill, or novelty thinking that improves your life with economic means – or, in short: a life hack.
The mailing has a three-part structure: first, the issue/question, then the economic thinking, and finally, the life hack.
My goal is to enrich your life through economic thinking. And the first attempt with this new format is not an easy topic right away…
issue/question
Should you believe in God, pray, attend church, pay church taxes, and obey religious laws in the hope of God's protection and life after death?
economic thinking
Although the founder of economics, Adam Smith, had already delved into religion in the 1776 classic The Wealth of Nations, few economists have looked at faith and God in economic terms.
The basic economic approach to this topic is founded on the assumption that people are just as rational in their choices about religion as they are about buying things like a car.
If you take this rationality as a basis, religious behaviour can be seen as an investment in one's future. Believers hope God will help them in difficult situations and hope for life after death. Furthermore, "producers" of religion, like churches, synagogues, and mosques, compete for "customers" by seeking converts, drawing members from other congregations, or combating the pull of secular society.
But these economic thoughts are not that insightful, at least at first glance. So let’s add some philosophy.
The seventeenth-century French philosopher Blaise Pascal offered a pragmatic reason for believing in God. In his (now known as) Pascal’s Wager he explained his wager by considering which party, the believer or nonbeliever, risks more. If the believer is wrong and the atheist is right, Pascal argued, then after death, the believer is in no worse position than the atheist. But if the atheist is wrong, eternal damnation awaits. Thus, he argued, it is better to believe just to be safe.
So, as a rational person, is it better to believe in God?
There are some arguments against Blaise Pascal's “just to be safe” position.
One point is that whether one believes or not is not a question that can be decided so easily. One cannot force oneself to believe. Faith is often a question of socialisation (more here).
A second counter-argument: If one chooses to become religious, which religion is right? "What if, of all the conflicting religious doctrines out there, the one verse that is right is Revelation 7:4, which says that only 144,000 people will enter heaven?" asks David Niose, former president of the American Humanist Association. Then the odds weren't good for any of us.
And by the way, isn't it just as possible that God will reward the atheists? So even if you assume that there is a God who judges us after death, how can we know God's criteria for judging us?
life hack
As with any product or service, everyone must decide whether they want to participate in the market. This is the same with this “believer market”. Economics and philosophy cannot offer general advice here (sorry, not an easy life hack this time). What helps me: To recognise that the suppliers of religion – as with any market – have their interests. The more people believe in a religion, the more powerful and often wealthy dignitaries and others involved become. This view creates, at least for me, a healthy distance from religious offers. Especially from those who want to sell their religion as the only true one. Not only economists know: Monopoly sucks everywhere.
Onwards,
The Strolling Economist
Follow the Strolling Economist on Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn and Instagram. 🚶🏼