Chimpanzee Religion

[Revoltingest]

Fixed that for you.

 

[cladking]

Do you know which animals are fully bipedal, not only occasionally? All the surviving dinosaurs. And on top of that they have some weird, almost religious behavior.

I believe we are looking at this wrong. The pigeons Can't engage in superstitious behavior because superstition requires a belief that some irrelevant behavior will result in a reward. Animals have no beliefs and no other types of abstractions either. Rather you have simply trained them to engage in an unnatural behavior by means of successive approximations. If they actually "believed" that you (or any unknown force) were going to reward them for some irrelevant movement they would be doing a spastic dance inside the cage trying to find it. The hungrier they get the harder they'd try. No, they have merely learned that some irrelvancy will get them rewards. When they are again rewarded by the exact same means they are conscious and attuned to what behavior preceded it. Nature will never train animals in such a way but obviously it will reward behavior which might seem irrelevant to us or even the individual in question. If a bird finds a location where worms surface on wet mornings it will visit it repeatedly and may or may not stop coming when it's dry. Of course food sources are well known and well understood to some "species". We call this inbred knowledge "instinct". Birds don't need to be taught how to land on a telephone wire or find protection before a hail storm. But each individual is still conscious and still learning from its experiences which are the results of knowledge, observation, and consciousness.

An animal will not persist in what is being called "superstitious behavior" unless it is being rewarded for ever new behavior. Perhaps you could even train them to do that spastic dance but nature doesn't play such games. It's about as likely as a bird inadvertently flying into a vacuum.

 

[Bear Wild]

Brief perusal of the abstract.
It appeared to conflate secular social behavior with religion.

Or it is looking at the heart of religion. Maybe you can enlighten me as to is required to call something a religion to explain what is wrong with what was presented.

 

[Bear Wild]

I believe we are looking at this wrong. The pigeons Can't engage in superstitious behavior because superstition requires a belief that some irrelevant behavior will result in a reward. Animals have no beliefs and no other types of abstractions either. Rather you have simply trained them to engage in an unnatural behavior by means of successive approximations. If they actually "believed" that you (or any unknown force) were going to reward them for some irrelevant movement they would be doing a spastic dance inside the cage trying to find it. The hungrier they get the harder they'd try. No, they have merely learned that some irrelvancy will get them rewards. When they are again rewarded by the exact same means they are conscious and attuned to what behavior preceded it. Nature will never train animals in such a way but obviously it will reward behavior which might seem irrelevant to us or even the individual in question. If a bird finds a location where worms surface on wet mornings it will visit it repeatedly and may or may not stop coming when it's dry. Of course food sources are well known and well understood to some "species". We call this inbred knowledge "instinct". Birds don't need to be taught how to land on a telephone wire or find protection before a hail storm. But each individual is still conscious and still learning from its experiences which are the results of knowledge, observation, and consciousness.

An animal will not persist in what is being called "superstitious behavior" unless it is being rewarded for ever new behavior. Perhaps you could even train them to do that spastic dance but nature doesn't play such games. It's about as likely as a bird inadvertently flying into a vacuum.

You seem very limited in your understanding of behavior in birds. We now that birds play for the sole reward of the action and no survival benefit. We know that birds recognize death with behavior patterns showing that recognition. We know that birds have complex learned social behaviors.
Religion is a behavior that has evolved like all behaviors. Examples of behaviors should be able to be found in other animals that can be precursors to the behaviors that humans developed that represent religious behaviors. The article approaches the problem appropriately.

 

[Bear Wild]

How can they be dinosaurs if there is no evolution? Birds are birds. Dinosaurs are dinosaurs. Does that fit into the chimpanzee religion?

Birds did not evolve from dinosaurs

The person mentioned in your article is a creationist and made it to the Encyclopedia of American Loons #270. The article has no support behind it and shows a complete lack of understanding of evolutions. Please find better sources than this one.

 

[cladking]

We now that birds play for the sole reward of the action and no survival benefit.

Yes! Exactly! Animals don't do abstractions. Either behavior is beneficial to the individual or it is unlikely to be repeated. What gets them food, mates, or comfort is desired by the individual as pain, disease, and death are avoided. Obviously they lack the depth of knowledge that a person has but I'd guess the average human wouldn't survive an entire day as a bird. It's not the lack of instinct so much as the lack of common sense. Birds are flying beaks and most people wouldn't survive long enough to catch on.

We know that birds have complex learned social behaviors.

Birds of a feather...

Religion is a behavior that has evolved like all behaviors. Examples of behaviors should be able to be found in other animals that can be precursors to the behaviors that humans developed that represent religious behaviors.

These are assumptions., They are based on other assumptions. The assumptions are wrong.

The article approaches the problem appropriately.

I couldn't disagree more.

 

[Revoltingest]

Or it is looking at the heart of religion.

Looking at the heart of being human.

Maybe you can enlighten me as to is required to call something a religion to explain what is wrong with what was presented.

Religion is belief in things supernatural...typically
about creation of our reality & morality. Look for
such behavior in chimps.

 

[cladking]

The article is Look and see Science. It is attempting to define the average consciousness of a species without even defining "consciousness" or the meaning of what a religion can mean to an entire species. We don't even understand much of the language and they want to tell us the meaning of behavior. I'm sure they've not noticed that there are no abstractions in the language.

 

[Bear Wild]

Looking at the heart of being human.

Religion is belief in things supernatural...typically
about creation of our reality & morality. Look for
such behavior in chimps.

So religion is limited to the belief in the supernatural? There cannot be a religion without the supernatural? Does a religion have to have a creation belief? Chimpanzees do have morality in their social organization and the react to phenomena in ways that cannot be explained with typical behavior. What aspect of the chimpanzee brain would limit it from having the curiosity of unexplained aspects of their world?

How do you know that religion is limited to humans? Any evidence for that?

 

[Bear Wild]

The article is Look and see Science. It is attempting to define the average consciousness of a species without even defining "consciousness" or the meaning of what a religion can mean to an entire species. We don't even understand much of the language and they want to tell us the meaning of behavior. I'm sure they've not noticed that there are no abstractions in the language.

The article is not attempting to prove chimpanzees have religion but to open up thought about the possibility and to find ways to observe behaviors that could demonstrate it. Chimpanzees are conscious organisms. We once believed that only humans made and modified tools. That preconception was proven wrong. We once believed that no other animal had theory of mind. Evidence has shown this was also correct. Can we say chimpanzees do not have religious behaviors? This article is opening up the question and suggesting ways we can study the problem. It is clearly not the first time we underestimated animal behavior.

 

[Revoltingest]

So religion is limited to the belief in the supernatural? There cannot be a religion without the supernatural?

I'm open to considering counter-examples.

Does a religion have to have a creation belief?

I said that's only typical.

Chimpanzees do have morality in their social organization and the react to phenomena in ways that cannot be explained with typical behavior.

Non-religious people also have morality.
So the existence of morality wouldn't mean religion.

What aspect of the chimpanzee brain would limit it from having the curiosity of unexplained aspects of their world?

I don't know if they consider that or not.

How do you know that religion is limited to humans? Any evidence for that?

Who says religion is limited to humans?
But I don't see evidence of it being found elsewhere.
It's a problem that we can't communicate with other
big brained species, eg, dolphins, whales.

 

[Bear Wild]

I'm open to considering counter-examples.

I said that's only typical.

Non-religious people also have morality.
So the existence of morality wouldn't mean religion.

I don't know if they consider that or not.

Who says religion is limited to humans?
But I don't see evidence of it being found elsewhere.
It's a problem that we can't communicate with other
big brained species, eg, dolphins, whales.

What is absolutely needed to say there is a religion or not?
Religion is behavioral patterns so they can be observed. Religion evolved as a behavioral pattern influencing social behavior. What behaviors would be specific to religion that could be identified?

 

[cladking]

We once believed that no other animal had theory of mind.

How can any animal at all have a "theory of mind" if they don't think, have no beliefs, no taxonomies, and don't have reductionistic words like "theory". Your belief is riddled with assumptions and abstractions and ancient man and all animals have no abstraction. We simply overlooked it because we see what we believe and what we expect. We see evolution in animals manifested as gradual change and extrapolate this to ideas like religion in monkeys.

Tell me do you believe a bee's waggle dance is an homage to the gods or that a beaver is honoring the swamp gods by inventing dams? No! There are no abstractions in animal languages because they can't understand abstraction because their language can format no abstraction. They have no beliefs and don't even experience "thought".

Religion can neither originate nor flourish in such a medium.

 

[Heyo]

How can any animal at all have a "theory of mind" if they don't think, have no beliefs, no taxonomies, and don't have reductionistic words like "theory".

Theory of mind - Wikipedia

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Now open your mind a little and read the article and give it a thought. Even if you believe in god why would that god include other organisms. More important in the theory of evolution there is the behavioral patterns that create advantages. Humans developed religion as we think of it today but it began at some point. And look beyond just the words associated with religion and consider the behaviors. After all even rabbits should be able to have religion. So can you make a case for chimpanzee religion, think beyond the need for written word.

While I recognize that chimps display proto-religious behaviors from which a religion could emerge, I am dubious about whether they have developed something that is a fully fledged religion. I am not saying I don't think they can. We have no idea when the practice developed in humans and there is nothing to say it did not develop in our ancestors. Evidence for ritualistic behavior in humans goes back as far as 50,000 years as I recall and there is half million year old evidence of abstract thinking in Homo erectus revealing a capability of artistic representation. Given that chimps are our closest relatives and have a high degree of intelligence, they certainly posses a basis for the development of religion.

I have even wondered if I am hoping they don't, since has caused us so much trouble. Maybe they could surpass us by finding a way around it.

I mentioned whales in a humorous way, but also because they are in a large group of species of high intelligence. Being so radically different than hominids, I wonder if similarly behavior and potential exists with them.

 

[Revoltingest]

What is absolutely needed to say there is a religion or not?

I find the word, "religion", to be so broad that I'd prefer to avoid anything
absolute. But evidence should be something different from traits which
apply to all humans, including the most definitely non-religious ones.

Religion is behavioral patterns so they can be observed. Religion evolved as a behavioral pattern influencing social behavior. What behaviors would be specific to religion that could be identified?

Professed belief in or communication to supernatural entities would be
strong indicators. This would require our understanding their languages
far better than we do.
The problem with using social behaviors is that non-religious people also
have those, so they'd be a useless indicator of religion. So for example,
let's say that we saw some bonobos at a church social....how could we
know they weren't there just to pick up some babes or have some pie?

 

[cladking]

Theory of mind - Wikipedia

Thank you. I didn't understand the term. I believe that on some level there is a "theory of mind" in "every" species. One simple species fluoresces whenever the population achieves a critical mass/ number of individuals.

But I don't believe they think like humans or experience the "mind" like we do. To animals "the mind" is just a sum total of what the brain is doing. They lack the internal dialog. Since they don't think they don't think others are thinking. Consciousness is necessary to survival but "thought" is not. Thought and the ability to formulate and understand abstractions is a product of modern language. Like applied math and logic, however, abstractions aren't necessarily apt, appropriate, or relevant. Abstractions are not a manifestation of reality but of definitions and perspectives. Sometimes reality is much more easily seen without lots of knowledge and thinking. Sometimes language and abstractions obscure our view of the obvious.

 

[Heyo]

But I don't believe they think like humans or experience the "mind" like we do.

Neither do I.

To animals "the mind" is just a sum total of what the brain is doing. They lack the internal dialog. Since they don't think they don't think others are thinking.

While they don't have our "inner dialog", they have some sort of thinking, probably based on pictures in their mind. Chimpanzees that have learned sign language may even think in signs.
Birds fake hiding food when they are watched but not if they feel they are not.

Consciousness is necessary to survival but "thought" is not. Thought and the ability to formulate and understand abstractions is a product of modern language. Like applied math and logic, however, abstractions aren't necessarily apt, appropriate, or relevant. Abstractions are not a manifestation of reality but of definitions and perspectives. Sometimes reality is much more easily seen without lots of knowledge and thinking. Sometimes language and abstractions obscure our view of the obvious.

 

[cladking]

While they don't have our "inner dialog", they have some sort of thinking, probably based on pictures in their mind. Chimpanzees that have learned sign language may even think in signs.
Birds fake hiding food when they are watched but not if they feel they are not.

I've put a lot of thought into trying to understand how animals "think"/ experience consciousness in the last five years. I've written about it extensively but most isn't relevant here. The Egyptians referred to awareness arising like a lily from under the waters of the Nile. Since animals think in four dimensions rather than our one dimension an individual would not be able to follow his own thoughts.

I agree that "thought" is necessarily language based and that if an animal learns a different language then its thoughts will be in that new language.

There was some pundit a couple centuries back who suggested that ancient people experienced thought as though listening to an unseen individual. Where he got this idea I do not know but it's an interesting concept and may well have a grain of truth to it. He believed this unseen individual because the basis of the concept of "God".

 

[Heyo]

There was some pundit a couple centuries back who suggested that ancient people experienced thought as though listening to an unseen individual. Where he got this idea I do not know but it's an interesting concept and may well have a grain of truth to it. He believed this unseen individual because the basis of the concept of "God".

I read something like that recently but can't find it again. It's somewhere in the intersection of anthropology, psychology (subclinical dissociative disorder), linguistics, evolution, philosophy of mind and religion.