Is it wrong or mean to call beliefs in god or gods a "superstition"?

  • It is totally wrong to call a belief in God a superstition because that is what people base their life on.

    It is irresponsible and very wrong to even consider calling a belief in God superstitious. Not only that, it is very ignorant and short-sighted. Most people who believe in God consider it their life's duty to live according to him. To question their belief is questioning their whole meaning of life. It is noone's place to ever make such a statement.

    Posted by: M0r3Interior
  • The definition of "superstition" includes aspects of ignorance, false causality, and irrationality that are not necessarily part of a belief in god.

    Individuals' beliefs in god or gods take many forms. Some of these are certainly superstitious, but others are not. A superstition involves irrationality and ignorance, and usually a belief in a false causal relationship. For example, breaking a mirror is falsely believed to cause bad luck. Some beliefs about god fit this template, such as the belief that too many gay people causes god to send hurricanes at the nation. Other beliefs do not, such as the belief in a god who created the universe from "outside", but does not intervene.

    Posted by: tacomoon
  • Yes, it is inconsiderate to call a person's belief in God or gods a superstition, because the word "superstition" has the connotation of a thought without logical backing.

    Common courtesy allows for differences in people. There is not reason that the same courtesy that we offer in other areas shouldn't be extended to cover religious believes as well. It would then be general courtesy to allow others to have a view of religion that is different from your own. When you attach the word "superstition" to their belief, it discredits their thoughts by making them appear less logical or consequential. Even if you do not agree with the person's views, common courtesy should always guide how your treat the person and their ideas.

    Posted by: Random85906
  • To tell others yes, to keep to yourself no.

    It is hypocritical to believe that monotheism or polytheism are superstitions by definition because it is based off "ignorance" because it is ignorant to purely believe that a higher, sacred entity does not exist. Why? The world is full of possibilities and it is impossible to say that this one event will never happen because it could happen. Even many scientific theories or formulas have exceptions to its own rule.
    Long ago in Europe, some people thought it was common sense to eat with hands rather than utensils because they are born with them thus believing that a later useful tool, the fork, will not last long. Well today, we could tell them they were wrong.
    Well where's the proof God or gods exists? Evidence could be seen by many events that many regarded as luck or chance. Some supernatural events are deemed unexplainable at times and even scientists or researchers have difficulty explaining. Throughout time, it is hard to define what is truth because there is so many perspectives and our knowledge is still minuscule.
    The reality is that many people think they acknowledged reality by expelling possibilities and extolling on theories believing they are not ignorant yet practical. Of course, we could question whether religion exists or not. Yet to blatantly call it a superstition is simply hypocritical because how do we know?
    However, the one of the few truths that we definitely know is that there is so much to learn from the universe and even Earth that it is erroneous to call religion superstitious because (I again repeat) how do we know? Our knowledge is hardly a grain of sand in a beach.

  • yes and no

    What about the everyday superstitions like not walking under a ladder or that you should always pass on a found penny? Many of those types of superstitions have their roots in common sense. If the ladder falls because you are walking under it and your shoulder knocks into it, you sure would be sorry. And passing money on to someone else is a charitable practice more folks should learn. There are lessons to learn in the old ways, even if takes a bit of searching for the right way to look at it

  • Mostly False

    According to the dictionary entry on superstition, Superstition is a : a belief or practice resulting from ignorance, fear of the unknown, trust in magic or chance, or a false conception of causation
    Beliefs in some god may be caused by fear or ignorance. However, one can’t fear the God of Love/Gentleness. Is not that illogical? According to Matthew Parris (Chance Witness), Christianity appears to have liberated and relaxed its adherents. Sure, some gods are oppressive, but to bundle all gods together is really bad categorization.

  • We should always be respectful of others' religion.

    No matter what the technical category for a belief might be, the views
    of others should be respected, with few exceptions. People are quite sensitive about their religion, and I see no reason to insult them.

    Posted by: MarsBIue
  • Although I am an atheist, I think it is rather rude to intentionally disrespect someone's belief.

    I do not believe in a one-god world. Although I do not think any one religion is actually, "correct," many do come from a place of good. The belief in gods is kind of silly to me. I do not think Jesus walked on water. If he was an actual man, he probably did inspire people so much that they created myths about him to glorify how wonderful they thought he was. So if people are still inspired by his stories, I do think it's rude to tell people their beliefs are myths. It is the belief in myths that makes them real.

    Posted by: ColdEmmanuel92
  • It is wrong to call a belief in god or gods a superstition, because everyone is entitled to their own beliefs, even though it might not fit what another thinks.

    Every person has a right to believe in whatever religious belief they want to. It should not be called a superstition by others who do not believe it, because that is making an unfair judgement. Most religions do have some kind of background that could make it a reality, and it is the individual's decision on how he approaches it, without having someone else make fun of it.

    Posted by: eyeslikethat
  • A belief in God or gods is very important to many people as a guide for their lives so I believe it should not be called a superstition.

    Calling a belief in God or gods a superstition is an insult to many people who depend on their beliefs to guide their lives. This fellowship with others of the same belief give them a sense of community and structure to their lives. Many draw comfort from their belief in coping with the pain in their lives and celebrating the joys in their life.

    Posted by: R0d0Ferdy
  • No, it's what it is



  • They're just synonyms, get over it.

    A rose by any other name would smell as sweet.

    Religion: A particular system of faith and worship



  • We can all be divided into two groups...Those who are superstitious and those who are not !

    Those who are superstitious will turn to the sky for answers..Just as their pagan ancestors have always done, while those who are not superstitious turn to science for answers....It's as simple as that.
    We have all genetically inherited the inclination to believe in spooky stuff because all holy books command the culling of skeptics, referring to them as blasphemers or heretics, thus the gene for skepticism has been almost entirely eradicated in favor of the gene for superstition which enhanced ones chances of survival in a tribal society.

  • The Logical Approach

    Take all the people in the world and wipe their memories clean. Then destroy all the books on earth. And see which finds its way back. Any religion we know now? Of course not. Those gods believe you sould know them without proof. Science will return just as it is now. Math, physics, biology are all more concrete than any god. They don't change. Side with logic.

  • No because it is by definition superstition


    Beliefs are based on faith meaning that they literally trust a holy text despite the fact that it fails to carry the burden of proof, they they purely believe in it because they wish to believe it.

    If you take a leap of faith into something without evidence whatsoever purely because you wish it to be then it is by definition superstition.

    So should we seriously now stop accepting reality in order not to hurt someone's feelings? It's just a belief, it shouldn't be that personal to the point where you feel insulted by a fact.

  • Sort of.

    I believe it's disrespectful given the term's connotation and the emotional tie people have with religion. "Superstition" implies the person in practice is obviously wrong which (insert religion here) doesn't take to kindly, and it's sort of an anti-theistic thing to claim. HOWEVER, it's not incorrect to say the practice of the theistic religions is superstitious.

  • Not at all.

    We call the Roman and Greek beliefs superstitions. We call other beliefs that are not widely accepted superstitions. None of that is wrong. By calling something superstitious, you are not saying it isn't true. While it can be used as an attack on a religion, for the most part, it is a superstition. And that is not a bad thing. That does not mean it is not true.

  • 2 questions with different, albeit similar, answers.

    Is it wrong to call said beliefs superstitions? Absolutely not, by definitition these beliefs are superstitious. Any [honest] christian, when asked, will proudly define faith in terms that are clearly superstitious. The question of whether or not it is "mean" can be taken to mean many things. I will assume it is intended to be taken as "rude" and say that the answer depends heavily on the circumstances. If discussing a deeply held religious belief with a well meaning person, the use of such a label and it's attached connotations can be reasonably assumed to be an attack on the person them self. If discussing the merits of holding such a belief with a person attempting to better understand the non theist position, the use of the term can be more reasonably taken as a neutral attempt to describe one's particular view on the matter.

  • No it isnt.

    In another 1000 years society will look back at the religious of today and treat them the same way we treat the barbaric paganism and superstitions of 1000 years before us. Its just a matter of time until the world is in consensus.
    So calling it a superstition now is just progressive.

  • Not always

    In cases of faith healing, for example, I think it is very justified. While I am respectful of the beliefs of others, anytime my views are criticized by others, I will follow suit. And of course, if they are completely ridiculous, like faith healing, I will consider it superstition, and you may hear about it...

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.