Terry: We are stuck in a real world in a real universe with a mind that can "create" non-real worlds and non-real characters.
Remarkable. We agree.
Do any other species demonstrate this ability, or are humans unique in this?
What survival need was fulfilled by this trait such that we have done so well?
Is it really likely that a survival trait needed to get us here should be expected to be safely shed within a very short period of time, let's say, within 10 generations? Is that really a reasonable expectation? Should we attempt to forcibly expel this trait of worshipping the unseen from ourselves as an undesirable trait despite our ignorance of how it has apparently aided us to succeed, specially speaking?
Would you really call it stuck? If so, what utile purpose does such capacity of mind serve us in the arena of survival? If, as you and others suggest, there is actually a detrimental effect on the species produced by religion then it is a disease. However, how can you show that such a detriment to the species exists without knowing the potential outcomes both with and without religious beliefs so that an accurate cost to benefit analysis can be made?
Once again, you assert purely subjective conjectures as fact. What if we aren't "stuck" in such a world at all? What if we are liberated into such a world; distinctly differentiated from all other animals in this peculiar aspect of ability? In that case, would it be a disease or a boon to the species?
Again, we would have to have a means of prescience to fairly judge the merits of religious beliefs.
I believe I have personally experienced such a prescient source of foreknowledge. Many millions of others believe they have experienced such a source, as well. That is not evidence which can be tendered to a scientific rigor for verification. I admit I have no evidence beyond my person, but why should I need such? In order to convince you? I am not compelled to do so. I only feel compelled to inform others, not to convince them.
I do not believe science claims to be a prescient source of knowledge and I think history has proved them to be incredibly inept at their best attempts along those lines. Therefore, I do not credit science as such a source and cannot think why I should heavily weight my judgments about cost and benefit to the species according to what science merely believes to be true or likely about the future for our species.