Becki asked:

Is it fair to say the religion for some is a 'need'? — like those explained in Maslow's theory of need —
for those that need to believe, they do and for those that do not don't — is this a valid argument? if
not why not? what are the argument's faults?

============

I'm certain religion is a need for some, assuming by that by this you mean that some people find life,
without the solace of religion belief or at least observance, very difficult. This sort of remark doesn't
express a logical necessity so much as an observational commonplace. Either way, I'm sure it's true.

The argument you give is invalid, if it is true that some individual exists who either needs to believe
and doesn't, or doesn't need to believe and does. In fact, there are lots of people without religious
belief, who feel its lack. Similarly, there are lots of people who are just as well off whatever their
beliefs, but who happen to have religious belief for whatever reason.

Richard Craven