Religion as man's projection
The projection theory of religion
God is not a being distinct from man: he is the human essence idealised by desire, projected outside man and worshipped as another. The secret of theology is anthropology.
The qualities given to God (reason, love, goodness) are human qualities raised to infinity, so their subject is human too.
"Religion as man's projection" is an argument by Ludwig Feuerbach (The Essence of Christianity (1841; 3rd ed. 1849), 1841) on the question "Does God exist?" (answer: atheism). Its claim: God is not a being distinct from man: he is the human essence idealised by desire, projected outside man and worshipped as another. The secret of theology is anthropology. According to AskPhilosophy's logic check (Z3 solver), the argument is valid only if one grants a premise the author leaves unstated (P5). AskPhilosophy presents 4 objections, 1 of them with a documented reply, and the original text behind each premise, checked word for word.
Feuerbach does not begin with the proofs of God's existence. He asks a different question: when people worship God, what do they really worship? His answer: their own qualities. Reason, will, love, goodness and justice are human qualities. Religion frees them from the limits of each individual, raises them to infinity, then places them outside man and worships them as another being. God is man idealised, projected into heaven. Feuerbach is no wrecker: he keeps these qualities, love, justice, wisdom, as divine. He only denies that a being distinct from man possesses them. The aim is to give back to man what he took away from himself: "man is a god to man".
click a premise to reject it
Without the implicit premise: Without P5, the computer finds a case where the idea people have of God is indeed made of idealised human qualities, projected by desire, and yet a real God exists: our images of him would be human, without his being so.
Objections
4Each objection is a conversation: click to see who replies and where the debate stands.
HHans Küng (the genetic fallacy) 1978 · attacks premise 5Feuerbach is right on one point: our ideas of God bear the mark of our wishes and our image. But nothing follows from this about God's existence. That a wish exists proves neither that its object exists nor that it does not. Projection explains the form of the belief, not the falsity of what it aims at. Concluding from the origin of an idea to its falsity is what logicians call the genetic fallacy.
no reply
Feuerbach is right on one point: our ideas of God bear the mark of our wishes and our image. But nothing follows from this about God's existence. That a wish exists proves neither that its object exists nor that it does not. Projection explains the form of the belief, not the falsity of what it aims at. Concluding from the origin of an idea to its falsity is what logicians call the genetic fallacy.
KKarl Barth 1927 · attacks premise 1Barth, a major Protestant theologian, takes Feuerbach very seriously: his critique hits home against any theology that starts from man, from his religious feeling and experience. Such a theology indeed only talks about man writ large. But Christian faith, for Barth, does not start from man: it answers a word of God that comes from elsewhere. He also blames Feuerbach for speaking of "man" in general, forgetting the death and the evil of real human beings.
Feuerbach replies
Barth, a major Protestant theologian, takes Feuerbach very seriously: his critique hits home against any theology that starts from man, from his religious feeling and experience. Such a theology indeed only talks about man writ large. But Christian faith, for Barth, does not start from man: it answers a word of God that comes from elsewhere. He also blames Feuerbach for speaking of "man" in general, forgetting the death and the evil of real human beings.
Karl Marx (Theses on Feuerbach) 1845 · attacks premise 3Marx is not defending God: he thinks Feuerbach stops halfway. Bringing heaven back to earth is not enough. One must explain why people need to double the world: it comes from the rifts and contradictions of their real life. And "the human essence" is not an abstraction lodged in each individual: it is the ensemble of social relations. Understanding religion is not enough; the society that produces it must be transformed.
no reply
Marx is not defending God: he thinks Feuerbach stops halfway. Bringing heaven back to earth is not enough. One must explain why people need to double the world: it comes from the rifts and contradictions of their real life. And "the human essence" is not an abstraction lodged in each individual: it is the ensemble of social relations. Understanding religion is not enough; the society that produces it must be transformed.
MMax Stirner 1844 · attacks the conclusionFeuerbach is not done with religion: he has only changed gods. In place of God he puts "Man", the human essence, before which each real individual must still bow and to which he must sacrifice himself. It is still a supreme being outside me. Feuerbach's own critique, turned against him, shows that "Man" is a projection too.
no reply
Feuerbach is not done with religion: he has only changed gods. In place of God he puts "Man", the human essence, before which each real individual must still bow and to which he must sacrifice himself. It is still a supreme being outside me. Feuerbach's own critique, turned against him, shows that "Man" is a projection too.