The fact that we’re preoccupied with the dilemma in the first place is a function of our imperfect brains. Detection of causality is an important ability for a brain used in complex social architectures, and ours are over-primed to detect it. So, when there is no apparent ’causer’ we make one up.

I think we should be willing to accept the fact that, although our brains have difficulty maintaining a model in which there is no ultimate cause, and in which we are but a trivial sidenote to the history of the universe, there is no mystical magical hoo haa beyond that which we can detect with our senses, and extended senses, by which I mean mathematics and science.

Anything else is an illusion. Sorry to be such an existentialist.

One final point, I’d like to make about your post: if we’re being honest with ourselves at all, I don’t think there are any circumstances under which humans could call themselves the “highest form of life.” Particularly because that implies some kind of ladder of sophistication, which most people, myself included, reject.

As I’m sure you are aware, many if not most people have some brain dysfunction (colorblindness comes to mind, the tendency to addiction is another) and the brain is certainly an imperfect instrument for processing reality. Those imperfections are passed along from generation to generation and still the race survives due to sheer numbers and the willingness of humans to support those whose flaws would otherwise cause their demise. (We will rescue a nonswimmer who foolishly jumps into the deep end of the pool and would otherwise drown.) Once a species reaches a critical mass, it is inevitable that some will survive until a cataclysmic event happens to wipe it out. (Frogs are currently dying off because of a virus they can’t resist.) This too will happen to humans at some point unless they survive long enough to escape their small environment by developing the technology to seed themselves beyond Earth. (We’ll probably blow ourselves up long before that happens.)

As far as the existence of “God” is concerned, I agree that for the most part, it is a trick of the brain. Man has created God in his own image, with his flawed brain. The brain tricks you into thinking you are the center of the universe and can imagine “God” or “no-God.” If there is “no-God,” then you are the highest form of life imaginable. (Oh, joy!) Hubble has shown us that the universe is so much larger than anyone could imagine when Gods were being imagined that our brains are not sufficient to process what might be.

This is not to say that the existence of god is a trivial question, or one that has no humanly ascertainable answer. Rather, the belief in god is no more a direct affront to objective reality than is the inability to perceive both directions of spin in this dancer. They are both illusions common to human perception; faults in the building materials of our brain/house. But they are usually trivial in terms of our ability to construct a coherent world model.

However, the existence of god has some non-trivial philosophical and social ramifications, so regardless of the pervasiveness or immanence of the illusion, it’s still far more significant than a simple optical trick, and it’s still one we should go to great lengths to dispel. Especially considering this illusion has a curious habit of polluting otherwise functional models.