The evolution of religion

[Helix]

What do you think about this theory? I wondered why so many people are religious and I came up with this explanation.
(I’m sure I’m not the first to come up with this theory, so don’t start yelling ‘You stole that from <link>’. If you do have a link to similar theories, please feel free to post that link.)

I asked myself 'why did we evolve into a religious beings''? To some of you, this must seem like a contradicto in terminis, but I think I do have a way to explain religion scientifically.

We've established in other threads that we are social animals. One of the things many social animals evolve, is a sense of hierarchy. There's always an 'alpha-male' (in lions, sealions, wolfs etc.) or a matriarch (elephants, hyenas) to lead the herd/pack/pride, whatever you want to call it.

The instinct to obey those that are higher in rank can be clearly seen in dogs. Wolfs have a hierarchy as well, and dogs (being bred from wolves) seem to have an instinctive urge to obey the alpha male (which should be the owner of the dog).

Now are you starting to see a pattern here? We are a social species too, and we too obey those who are higher in rank. Our parents, our boss at work, the police, our drill instructor in the army, our teacher in school, the president, the king, the pope etc.

I think that religion is a way of serving a hypothetical alpha-male, because you instinctively want to. Evolution has conditioned you to obey and do what you've been told from higher up in the hierarchy. Like wolves or elephants, we too like to be guided by a powerful individual. Sometimes this leads to dramatic results; we’ve all heard of suicide sects with charismatic leaders.

Religious people point to the bible and say 'This is what our Lord wants us to do.’ I imagine that this must be the modern day equivalent of following the dominant elephant matriarch to greener fields, or following the dominant wolf who’s chasing a deer. God or gods are a perfect ways of serving the perfect leader and of fulfilling an instinct. Especially if what he has said is ‘inerrant.’ Religion takes away the burden of responsibility by making decisions for you and by telling you how to live your life. It cannot possibly be your mistake, if god told you to do it. (Remember the killer from that movie, Se7en?)

Anyway, here’s a nice quote, and I’m curious what you think of my little rant

Here's a nice quote to top this off



Give us gods. Oh give them us!
Give us gods.
We are so tired of men
and motor-power.
- D.H. Lawrence

[God'schild]

The problem with your rant, Is that evolustion is narsasitic in scope. survival of the fitest is everyone for themselves, because this is all you get, and kill everything that gets in the way.


My faith in a supreme being actually makes me more acountable to my fellow humans, because He has instructed me to love my niehbor as I would love myself.

Faith [and the ability to believe] are a gift from the Creator. When you use that faith for what it is created for, humanity is always better off. It is people of faith who have had the courage to withstand the proponants of tierany, often times at risk of thier own death, which is totally contrary to evolution.

[Helix]

'Survival of the fittest' has been explained before.

It doesn't mean pushing others aside! A lot of animals work together, SO THEIR SPECIES CAN SURVIVE. Soldier or worker ants will die for their colony. Should each and every ant that lost his life be remembered as a martyr? I actually read a book once (by a French writer) about ants, that actually DID start their own religion at some point. But that's a bit besides the point.

Self-sacrifice may sound noble, but it happens all the time. For some species, reproducing actually MEANS dying! A certain type of californian squid dies after is has deposited its eggs-capsules and male spiders risk their life even before they have mated! (The females are in most species larger and have been known to eat the male, before, after or during copulation).

[God'schild]

'Survival of the fittest' has been explained before.

It doesn't mean pushing others aside! A lot of animals work together, SO THEIR SPECIES CAN SURVIVE. Soldier or worker ants will die for their colony. Should each and every ant that lost his life be remembered as a martyr? I actually read a book once (by a French writer) about ants, that actually DID start their own religion at some point. But that's a bit besides the point.

Self-sacrifice may sound noble, but it happens all the time. For some species, reproducing actually MEANS dying! A certain type of californian squid dies after is has deposited its eggs-capsules and male spiders risk their life even before they have mated! (The females are in most species larger and have been known to eat the male, before, after or during copulation).

My point exactly. even nature disproves survival of the fittest. Your post just proved it!!!!

Those creatures reseaved their parenting instinc from the ultimate Father, God.

[Aineo]

I think that religion is a way of serving a hypothetical alpha-male, because you instinctively want to. Evolution has conditioned you to obey and do what you've been told from higher up in the hierarchy. Like wolves or elephants, we too like to be guided by a powerful individual. Sometimes this leads to dramatic results; we’ve all heard of suicide sects with charismatic leaders.

Human history is filled with "slaves" revolting against their "alpha" males, which is also true in the animal kingdom. An old lion, stallion, buck, and etc. will loose his position in the hierarchy when he can no longer control younger males.

Wars fought in the name of “religion” are usually fought for reasons other than religion. Weak but wealthy men can purchase the use of mercenaries to fight for them. So what motivates human beings to fight is usually land, money, food, and etc. not faith in a god or gods. Religious beliefs led Tibet to become a pacifist nation that is now controlled by an atheist government. Religious beliefs lead Christian Europe to invade Islam controlled Asia Minor but European nobles seeking land and positions for their younger sons is what motivated them to go to war. Greed was the reason Catholic armies sacked Byzantine Istanbul during the 4th Crusade, so you had Christian nations invading a Muslim nation where a Christian church was almost eliminated. Politics and greed not religious reasons were behind the Crusades.

Under closer analysis of what motivates mankind destroys your thesis.

[Helix]

My point exactly. even nature disproves survival of the fittest. Your post just proved it!!!!

Those creatures reseaved their parenting instinc from the ultimate Father, God.

Ehh, no I don't think so. Parenting instinct fits in very nicely with the theory! The genes of the parents ARE their ofspring. By making sure the offspring lives, they ensire that their genes are passed on. That's what it's all about. Passing on the genes!

Look at this. It's not a hardcore piece of scientific research, but it makes clear what I'm trying to say:


From this site: http://www.litemind.com/weblog/