People who believe in a god, often do it because they claim to feel him or trust their inner knowing; which is claiming to have knowledge of god through intuition.
But think is intuitive thinking how you run the rest of your life or just the god question?
If just manly in the god question is that deserving of such a different way of being sure of things or is it just a way you have been told to affirm god is real when you have no evidence for that reality?
If you use intuitive navigation for determining things in life do you find this ridged as in never changing once you realize something with intuition it never changes?
Think if this is true intuitive thinking it is a thinking stemming from to main sources which are empathy and creativity both not fixed ways of thinking that seem would not fit a highly fixed religious mind set about god. So are you not then using a pseudo intuitive navigation system not from yourself but indoctrinated into you by others?
So does the tendency to think rationally which is also a internal way of knowing but not so highly effected by emotion a support for religious thinking and thus belief in god or a cause of religious doubt?
To find out, the researchers conducted a series of experiments with hundreds of people that triggered them to think analytically before answering faith-themed questions about things like their belief in god and the role that faith plays in their decision-making.
In an experiment, participants looked at artwork portraying either a thinker or a man throwing a discus. In another, in which people rearranged letters and words to form sentences, they saw either thinking-related words or neutral words. Yet another experiment asked people to read the religious-beliefs survey in a font that was either easy or hard to decipher.
No matter how the researchers primed the brain to think critically, people’s responses were less strongly religious compared to the responses of people who were not put in a rational frame of mind. The findings, suggest that the rational brain still an internal way of knowing is capable of undermining the intuitive brain in slight ways when it comes to faith.
It’s important to note that across studies, participants ranged widely in their religious affiliation, gender, and race. None of these variables were found to significantly relate to people’s behavior in the studies.
So its not reasonable to say intuitive god belief it is real intuitive navigation as a thinking style certain people are bound to or there would be vernation just like how not all people are highly creative or highly empathizing.
An intuition only style about the god question is thus a chosen denial of rational thought (also a internal way of knowledge), it is a self rejection of attaining all means of self knowledge. Thus is a fraud pseudo intuition forced on you not of self, it is an anti-self truth which can and should be rejected.
Intuitive abilities were quantitatively tested at Yale University. While studying nonverbal communication, researchers noted that some subjects were able to read nonverbal facial cues before reinforcement occurred. It was noted that highly intuitive subjects made decisions quickly but could not identify their rationale. Their level of accuracy, however, did not differ from that of nonintuitive subjects.
Intuition means different things to different people. To some it refers to a sudden flash of insight, or even the spiritual experience of discovering a previously hidden truth. In its more mundane form, intuition refers to a way of knowing and deciding that is distinct from and complements logical analysis.
The psychologist Daniel Kahneman nicely contrasts the two: “Intuitive thinking is perception-like, rapid, effortless. Deliberate thinking is reasoning-like, critical, and analytic; it is also slow, effortful, controlled, and rule-governed.”
Real Intuition is not a bad thing for it can help us make good decisions without expending the time and effort needed to calculate the optimal decision, but shortcuts sometimes lead to dead ends.
Kahneman received the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Science in 2002 for his work with the late Amos Tversky that showed how people often rely on intuitive heuristics (rules of thumb) rather than rational analysis, and how those mental shortcuts often lead us to make decisions that are systematically biased and suboptimal thus not truly a reliable means to claim knowledge.