Why are humans religious?

[chasw]

Philosophy of religion addresses broad questions concerning the nature of religious experience, leaving to the various religions, the job of describing their particular theologies. Although I'm a neophyte in this branch of philosophy, I'm immediately drawn to a particular general question: When did humans first become aware of, or imagine, a spiritual dimension to reality? A necessary corollary is: What triggered that change from the perceived reality their earlier ancestors experienced?

My own philosophical position is, religious experience seems to have begun only within the last 50k years, based on archeological evidence. Religious practices developed in earnest when human culture advanced to the point where some individuals learned how to communicate with spirit beings. I am convinced there is a spiritual dimension to the universe. The only plausible way to explain all of existence, including living things and spirit beings, is to tie it causally to an all-powerful Creator of the universe.

What do you think? What caused humans, or earlier hominids, to begin having religious experiences? thx - CW

[bobevenson]

When the earliest people were just scratching out a living, there were no religions, but with the first vestiges of civiliation, false prophets automatically appeared and established institutional control (see the KJV book of Revelation and the short paper, "The Ouzo Prophecy.")

[chasw]

When the earliest people were just scratching out a living, there were no religions, but with the first vestiges of civiliation, false prophets automatically appeared and established institutional control (see the KJV book of Revelation and the short paper, "The Ouzo Prophecy.")

Thanks, Bob. How then do you square your proposition with the fact that anthropologists have documented religious practices and beliefs held by those hunter-gatherer societies which survived "uncivilized" into the 19th and 20th Century. Some are still roaming the Amazon basin, wild as Tarzan but interacting with the spirit world through their shamans.

BTW, at your suggestion, I read the Ouzo Prophecy, however it seems to be based on a form of numerology, closer to an alternate form of religious belief, rather than a philosophical position on religion itself. - CW

[Dunce]

My own philosophical position is, religious experience seems to have begun only within the last 50k years, based on archeological evidence.

Why would we necessarily expect there to be archeological evidence for religious experience?

[duszek]

Perhaps religion simply keeps you from fear and from pain.

When you repeat a prayer you do not dwell on your problems: how to protect from evil enemies, how to get enough food for the winter, how to make an alliance with a tribe on the other side of the river, etc.

First religions and magic were probably combined. You wished someone dead (or alive) and pronouncing the wish had some effect on your psyche.

In those days there were no TV sets, no shopping malls, no entertainments. Most people probably stayed in their caves and worried.

[Skip]

The earliest archeological evidence is not of spiritual experience but of some new attitudes to death. People started burying their loved ones with favourite possessions and/or in a ritual position and/or in a place that had some special significance.

I believe this is actually a fairly recent expression of 'spirituality' : some notion of afterlife or denial of death. That's a very sophisticated idea: it flies in the face of reality as we perceive it, and so must be a product of the multi-chambered mind. Humans are capable of sincerely believing two or more incompatible propositions. (I'm not sure other intelligent mammals aren't.)

I'm almost certain, however, that people had been spiritual long before that. It's difficult for today's urban, technological human, surrounded by inert, artificial things, to imagine that all the world is alive and conscious .... unless he goes camping. For people who lived in Nature - all the time, without walls, intermediaries or buffers - it was perfectly obvious that other animals were like themselves, and therefore must have thoughts and desires like their own. From observing the motion and changes and effects of clouds, rivers, trees, moon, wind, fire and so on, it would also seem obvious that they, too, have volition and purpose.
Humans are imaginative. People like to wonder, speculate, gossip, mimic, tell stories. Once they had language, they told stories about themselves and about everything they encountered in their - very much alive! - world.

Put the tradition of those stories together with denial of death, you have the seeds of superstition. Then wait for one more component: magic. A conviction (and wishful thinking can look very much like conviction) that we have the power to influence those conscious larger forces of nature. In order for a human to beg, bribe, flatter or threaten the forces of nature, those forces must have an aspect that's aware of and willing to listen to us. Putting a human face on nature is the breakthrough to religion as we know it. (Unfortunately, whatever can be imagined to listen can also be accused of talking - and pretty soon, you have the Inquisition.)

[chasw]

snip...Humans are imaginative. People like to wonder, speculate, gossip, mimic, tell stories. Once they had language, they told stories about themselves and about everything they encountered in their - very much alive! - world. ...snip... In order for a human to beg, bribe, flatter or threaten the forces of nature, those forces must have an aspect that's aware of and willing to listen to us. ...snip..

Very good, Skip. Our active imaginations foster belief in anthropomorphic forces of nature, sympathetic magic, etc. I prefer to take it a step further and propose that spirit beings have existed since the beginning of the universe. Humans became aware of them, and began communicating, as soon as human mental capabilities developed sufficiently. Its true, genuine religious belief is virtually indistinguishable from superstition, from an unbeliever's perspective. Nevertheless, spiritual phenomena happen frequently enough to call for personal explanations that are religious in nature. - CW

[Perspective]

My own philosophical position is, religious experience seems to have begun only within the last 50k years, based on archeological evidence.

Why would we necessarily expect there to be archeological evidence for religious experience?

Good question.

The topic of this thread is like asking, "Why do humans think in subjectively limited (illusional) ways?"
We are not all-knowing, but this scares us, so we try to fill in the missing pieces with our imagination.
God is created in our image - we define God based on a reflection of our hopes & fears.

We begin life as babies, 100% dependent on care-givers - such care-givers (usually our parents) are like infallible gods to us.
As we grow up physically, but not so much emotionally, we still seek authority figures, and often religion provides such.
Eventually, if one engages in personal development (often considered "positive disintegration") - we break down the myths, and illusions - one after another for the rest of our lives, realizing that nobody's perfect (whatever "perfect" means) & it's actually a good way to learn and grow.

[chasw]

Thanks for the good feedback. This short discussion helped solidify my working model for why humans are religious - not only why it began long ago, but why religious belief and practice continue in modern times, given the almost universal faith in science. Accordingly, I've posted a more complete account of my position on religion in my "onhumanaffairs" blog at BlogSpot.com. - CW

[marmelada]

Perhaps religion simply keeps you from fear and from pain.

Agree, I would also add that religion provides some kind of redemption and hope.

[Lark]

Philosophy of religion addresses broad questions concerning the nature of religious experience, leaving to the various religions, the job of describing their particular theologies. Although I'm a neophyte in this branch of philosophy, I'm immediately drawn to a particular general question: When did humans first become aware of, or imagine, a spiritual dimension to reality? A necessary corollary is: What triggered that change from the perceived reality their earlier ancestors experienced?

My own philosophical position is, religious experience seems to have begun only within the last 50k years, based on archeological evidence. Religious practices developed in earnest when human culture advanced to the point where some individuals learned how to communicate with spirit beings. I am convinced there is a spiritual dimension to the universe. The only plausible way to explain all of existence, including living things and spirit beings, is to tie it causally to an all-powerful Creator of the universe.

What do you think? What caused humans, or earlier hominids, to begin having religious experiences? thx - CW

I believe that religosity is linked to consciousness, it is not a consequence of an intervention from without or external to humankind and the self, perhaps it is linked to comprehension or apprehension of life and death.

The greatest conceptualisation of religion I have considered to date has been that it provides two things which human beings need, a frame of reference, including ethics and instructions, and an object of devotion. That pretty much describes all the world religions, also a lot of philosophy too. It also pin points two pretty compelling, possibly universal in one shape or another, human needs to which religion corresponds.

In my view religion is an invention of man, it is not God given, I dont believe that God needs religion.

[chasw]

Thanks, Lark. I concur, religion is an invention of mankind. However, the invention seems to be based on a real connection to a spiritual realm. How else to explain the supernatural phenomena elicited by shaman, witch doctors, mystics and saints alike throughout history? Its too easy to dismiss them as figments of people's imaginations. They are too common to be mere coincidence. I will grant you that moderns who have not personally encountered religious phenomena are understandably skeptical. - CW

[Skip]

Thanks, Lark. I concur, religion is an invention of mankind. However, the invention seems to be based on a real connection to a spiritual realm.

Real connections between realms that humans identify, yes. But are there actual spirits - that is, non-material entities - in any of those realms?

How else to explain the supernatural phenomena elicited by shaman, witch doctors, mystics and saints alike throughout history?

Your lack of an explanation doesn't automatically revert to the default position: spooks. As to witch doctors and shamans, they are often also herbalists and psychologists; often purveyors of hallucinogens and possibly hypnotists. How well documented are the 'supernatural' phenomena? How consistent in their effects? How culture-dependent? (I mean, does the charm or hex also work on people who don't speak the shaman's language?)

Its too easy to dismiss them as figments of people's imaginations.

Dismissing as figment is quite different from attributing to powerful psychological drives and group dynamics.

They are too common to be mere coincidence.

Something as purposefully directed as organized religion is far, far from coincidental! That an idea is shared by, or imposed upon, many people (of whom the vast majority is uncritical followers) doesn't mean it's fact-based.

I will grant you that moderns who have not personally encountered religious phenomena are understandably skeptical

If the ethereal realm has objective reality and frequent interaction with the material one, i would expect clearer, more complete records of the incidents. I would expect the manifestations to be less equivocal, less elusive than they appear at present.

If, on the other hand, these are exclusive, subjective experiences, i would expect only anecdotal evidence to exist. That wouldn't necessarily disqualify the phenomena from being real, but it would mean that their reality can't be tested or proved by those who - for whatever reason - do not experience them. It would also mean that, to those who cannot experience them, they effectively do not exist. Perhaps among those who have not experienced the supernatural are some who are nevertheless capable of doing so, if they undertake a course of preparations or spiritual cleansing, or whatever.

So, that just divides the human race into experiencers and non-experiencers - with a subset of aspiring experiencers in the middle.
Which is what we have now in the division of believers and unbelievers.

[chasw]

Skip said: "If the ethereal realm has objective reality and frequent interaction with the material one, i would expect clearer, more complete records of the incidents. I would expect the manifestations to be less equivocal, less elusive than they appear at present.

If, on the other hand, these are exclusive, subjective experiences, i would expect only anecdotal evidence to exist. That wouldn't necessarily disqualify the phenomena from being real, but it would mean that their reality can't be tested or proved by those who - for whatever reason - do not experience them. It would also mean that, to those who cannot experience them, they effectively do not exist. Perhaps among those who have not experienced the supernatural are some who are nevertheless capable of doing so, if they undertake a course of preparations or spiritual cleansing, or whatever.

So, that just divides the human race into experiencers and non-experiencers - with a subset of aspiring experiencers in the middle.
Which is what we have now in the division of believers and unbelievers."
___________________________________________

Right on, Skip. I concur with your description. I would add the spiritual dimension definitely does have inhabitants - sentient beings and lost souls. They sometimes interact with the material world, as in poltergeists and miracles. Some of these are well documented, e.g., the history of Joan of Arc (Jeanne La Pucelle). However, as you point out, most interactions are subjective experiences which cannot be repeated. The Holy Spirit and demons seem to work through people's minds. Think of a devout nun praying in her cell, or some teenagers playing with an ouija board. Anecdotes, eyewitness accounts, are about all that is available as evidence in support of the religious account.

There are believers and non-believers in the world, plus others in transition and many more who don't think much about it but unconsciously follow the materialist path. The best I can offer a curious non-believer is to do some reading of credible accounts of demonic possessions, as related by clergy, as well as accounts of Holy miracles witnessed by more than one person. The ultimate proof is when miracles happen to the inquirer. thanks - CW

[jackles]

All consciouse animals have a conection with god. as in consciousness is god.its just that different brains allow for different gasping of consciousness or nonlocality.the brain is the interface between event locality and nonlocal consciousness which is void.so the brain is a bridge as it where between the happening and the nonhappening.this is the exact same for all evolving or evolved animals.man has evolved a brain which can distingish good and evil in an event because of its special conection with consciousness or void.