Religious and Hominid Evolution

[EyeofOdin]

I've always been fascinated with the evolutionary success of homo sapiens. Although I try to remain biocentric, there are advantages humans have that most other animals don't, at least not all at once. Please keep in mind, I don't pretend to be a scientist.

From what I can observe, the most successful animals which form organized colonies of individuals inside of structures built by them are homo sapiens and social insects.

What acted as a catalyst to their evolution is actually multiple factors.

Dexterousness- The ability to grasp things and manipulate them is important to a species wanting to give itself an evolutionary boost.

Problem Solving- Usually via intelligence, the ability to use one's own biology to find ways back home is a huge advantage to the individual.

Cooperation- Dedication to the greater group or colony not only helps insure the survival of the individual but also the survival of the group or even population.

Although dolphins use their intelligence and deep emotional connection to solve problems and cooperate as a group, they lac dexterousness. Same with elephants, as they're dexterous only to an extant.

Chimpanzees are very dexterous and cooperative, but they lack the problem solving skills to form colonies.

Wolves and other canines are extremely cooperative and are excellent problem solvers. What they lack are dexterous limbs.

So how is it that two very polar species, ants or bees and homo sapiens, have made similar achievements? Do ants have the dexterousness, cooperation and problem solving skills to suffice? Yes, BUT just because they're solving a problem with their evolutionary anatomy doesn't mean that they're intelligent.

Ants naturally and involuntarily excrete a pheromone path along wherever they walk. Example: If one is looking for food, she leaves a scented path that the same animal is attracted to, but only once she finds the food is she attracted. She then follows the path after finding the food which coincidently leads her home. She's now left another pheromone trail which wreaks of her excitement over the food she's just found. Other's follow the trail leaving a "oh! I just found food!" scent. As more ants follow the path, the more chemicals are laid on it, the stronger it gets.

Other scents are laid out stimulating other activities, such as colony building, digging, battle and nursing; an accidental system of pheromones and attraction to them, making them cooperative and problem solving. The dexterousness was already there via mandibles and precise jaws.

How did humans do it? Our dexterousness was already there with our ape-like hands. Our intelligence and cooperation are difficult to place and probably evolved side by side.

Intelligence likely developed out of the necessity for language. Everything we learn, we learn through a language of some sorts. Obviously we learn Art and History through lectures and discussions, but too Math and Science are just numerical languages communicating the nature of the physical world. The necessity for a language came out of the large social groups. The groups grew at first but something had to keep the individuals together.

Cooperation is achieved accidently through an evolutionary psychological trait which compels animistic interpretation. At first it seems counterproductive to become better by adopting a trait which leaves the organism focusing on delusions about its ancestors, fairies or other non physical entities, that is until one considers ritual.

When in ritual, the individual who believes that he or she is actually in the presence of a superhuman entity with magical powers or control of the elements is compelled to be sincere. When the group sees the sincerity, it creates empathy and trust and stronger community bonds.

Also notice also that almost all gods and goddesses have responsibility over at least one of the following:
1) fertility (food and passing of genes)
2) social order
3) self betterment or virtuous intelligence
4) dominance over the unknown or mysterious

These four archetypes seem to be what's most desired for an animal on the edge of survival on the Savannah, being more food, sex, order, intelligence and less death. People often see what's most desired out of them or the world through their gods. Appeasing a deity who's depicted as being very beautiful and sensual would make sense if you needed crops to grow or your wife to bear a son.

Examples:
Zeus: god of social order by being king of Olympos and of fertility from his role as god of storms.
Hel: Dominance over the unknown and seemingly far afterlife
Isis: Goddess of fertility as the queen of heaven and representing order over the mysterious otherworld being goddess of magic and queen of the dead (from her marriage with Osiris). She also is the mother of the pharos, making her goddess of royalty and thus social order.
Freyja: Goddess of fertility being a Van goddess and a goddess of sexuality. She's also goddess of death and magick, making her goddess of the unknown.
Loki: A god who presides over the archetype of the unpredictable nature, he's Lord of the mysteries of the next decision or even the shape he assumes.
Hermes: Being god of writing and knowledge makes him god of virtuous intelligence. He also looks over the mystery of death and interdimensional travel or shamanism. Being a god of healing and wealth he's also a fertility god.
Odin: Allfather role makes him giver of social order. He also brought the Futhark to mankind and vehemently seeks knowledge at great costs to himself, making him a god of self betterment. He also is a psychopomp making him a dominant force over death.

I can go on and on. The deities may not be deities of one of the archetypes listed, but have traits or mythology that makes them virtuous, as people often see their moral system in their gods. Vikings saw a band of warriors willing to self-sacrifice for the community, even if it meant a severed body part, while the Greeks viewed their gods as being symmetrical (symmetry was equated with beauty).

So religion seems to be the accidental phenomenon aiding the cooperation and evolution of humans.

 

[LegionOnomaMoi]

I've always been fascinated with the evolutionary success of homo sapiens. Although I try to remain biocentric, there are advantages humans have that most other animals don't

You'd be biased if you didn't recognize that humans have advantages, so no worries here.

Please keep in mind, I don't pretend to be a scientist.

That's ok. Most scientists do pretend.

From what I can observe, the most successful animals which form organized colonies of individuals inside of structures built by them are homo sapiens and social insects.

Humans don't organize into colonies. We are social animals the way that e.g., other primates, wolves, hyenas, et., are. Also, what exactly do you mean by "inside of structures built by them"? Do you mean e.g., ant hills or bee hives (as in physical structures built to contain and to sustain the colony)?

Dexterousness- The ability to grasp things and manipulate them is important to a species wanting to give itself an evolutionary boost.

Ants, bees, and the other most successful species which form colonies have minimal motor coordination or dexterous abilities.

Problem Solving- Usually via intelligence, the ability to use one's own biology to find ways back home is a huge advantage to the individual.

Colonies are practically defined by the almost complete lack of any intelligence by members. That's why they are fascinating and whence comes the nomenclature "super-organism".

"The solitary army ant is behaviorally one of the least sophisticated insects imaginable. Even in quite large numbers army ants may demonstrate behavior that is essentially aberrant. For example, if 100 army ants are placed on a flat surface, they will walk around in never decreasing circles until they die of exhaustion. In extremely high numbers, however, it is a different story. A colony of 500,000 Eciton army ants can form a nest of their own bodies that will regulate temperature accurately within limits of plus or minus 10 C. In a single day, the colony can raid 200 m through the dim depths of the tropical rain forest, all the while maintaining a steady compass bearing. The ants can form super-efficient teams for the purpose of transporting large items of prey."

Franks, N. R. (1989). Army Ants: A collective intelligence: A neural network Seems an apt analogy as a colony of army ants navigates the tropical rain forest American Scientist 77: pp. 138-145

Although dolphins use their intelligence and deep emotional connection to solve problems and cooperate as a group, they lac dexterousness. Same with elephants, as they're dexterous only to an extant.

Actually Elephant trunks are unbelievably dexterous.

Chimpanzees are very dexterous and cooperative, but they lack the problem solving skills to form colonies.

So do humans.

Wolves and other canines are extremely cooperative and are excellent problem solvers. What they lack are dexterous limbs.

They aren't great problem solvers, but you are right about their motor skills.

So how is it that two very polar species, ants or bees and homo sapiens, have made similar achievements?

Simple. They haven't.

Do ants have the dexterousness, cooperation and problem solving skills to suffice?

Absolutely not. And there is no possible evidence that they do. Unless you disregard individual members, of course, but that makes comparison to humans meaningless.

How did humans do it?

Fundamentally differently.

Intelligence likely developed out of the necessity for language.

It is almost certain that at best the opposite is true.

Everything we learn, we learn through a language of some sorts.

We've known this is wrong for almost the past 100 years. Even when Behaviorism dominated psychological research it was realized that there were different kinds of learning, including kinds that were "implicit" or "non-conscious". There is no need for language to learn.

The necessity for a language came out of the large social groups.

1) There was no "necessity". It happened.
2) The largest groups are incapable of anything remotely resembling language, and those closest to us (e.g., primates) are incapable of language but very successful.

which compels animistic interpretation.

How so?

Also notice also that almost all gods and goddesses have responsibility over at least one of the following

Only if one reads into poorly constructed mythology constructions:

Sounds about right.

“Was there ever such a thing as ‘Greek Religion’? It may be an odd question to start this survey with, but it should be absolutely clear from the start that Greek religion as a monolithic entity never existed. When Greece emerged from the Dark Age around 800 B.C., different communities had developed in very different social, political, and economic ways, and this development was reflected also on the religious level. Every city had its own pantheon in which some gods were more important than others and some gods not even worshipped at all. Every city had its own mythology, its own religious calendar and festivals...
[R]eligion was such an integrated part of Greek life that the Greeks lacked a separate word for 'religion'. When Herodotus wants to describe religions of the neighboring peoples of Greece, he uses the term ‘to worship the gods’, sebesthai tous theous…for Herodotus, the problem of describing foreign religions could be reduced to the question ‘which (other) gods do they worship and how’. In such an environment atheism was simply unthinkable. The term atheos did not originate before the fifth century and even then indicated only a lack of relations with the gods” pp. 1-2

Bremmer, J. N. (1994). Greek religion (Vol. 24). Cambridge University Press.

Examples:

There are all examples of idealisms based on 19th century creations of religions of antiquity based upon texts thanks to said scholars inability to understand "religion" as a practice, not a belief system.

 

[RichardParker]

Chimpanzees are very dexterous and cooperative, but they lack the problem solving skills to form colonies.

You are really, really underestimating what chimps (and other primates) can do!
They have extremly high problem solving skills. And they do live in societies and groups (I'm not sure what you mean with "colonies" though).

How did humans do it? Our dexterousness was already there with our ape-like hands. Our intelligence and cooperation are difficult to place and probably evolved side by side.

They evolved from our more ape-like ancestors.
Which is why these traits are also found in other modern apes.

The difference between human societies and the societies other apes build is actually remarkably close! Much, much closer than we humans are to ants or other social insects.
These insects have no real "individuals". They usually work as big hive-mind like entities. Every part has its job, the individual doesn't really count. They don't really fight among each other, they don't do stuff for pleasure and they don't show any indication that they "enjoy" doing anything as group-activities.

Apes, on the other hand do.
There you have individuals, you have characters. You have individuals fighting among each other, and you have strong, social bonds. Apes have social activities, where the different personalities play out.
Young apes (especially males) are reckless, and competitive. They do silly power-games, sometimes just for fun, sometimes to determine their leaders...
Apes intelligently can cooperate to be successfull in more difficult tasks, and not just tasks that are instinctivly ingrained into them, but rather things they learn together.
Ape cultures have in- and outgroupe mentality, which allows them to live in individual colonies and populations that sometimes addopt their own little cultures (learned behavior which gets passed on over generations, and become unique to these tribes), and they also occasionally go to war against other clans.

These are all things that can be found in many ape-species, NOT just humans.

Believe me, our social behavior and society-structure is much, much closer to other apes...
And in apes, that's just a more defined version of what we can observe in other social primates...
Which is just a more defined version of what we observe in other social mamals...

I mean, don't get me wrong, I also think humans are a very interessting species. We do have certain traits that are fairly unique to us (but then again: This applies to many species). But none of them are just out-of-nowhere characteristics, and you might find equally interessting things in other primates (especially great apes) that are very, very similar.

 

[Sunstone]

By the way, it seems that another trait that humans have used to help them survive and flourish is an ability to live in large groups. Apparently, chimps and most other group dwelling primates have fairly rigid upward bounds on the size of the groups they will tolerate. Humans, on the other hand, while having a tendency towards groups of 200 or fewer members, can somehow manage living in close proximity to millions of other humans.

 

[RichardParker]

By the way, it seems that another trait that humans have used to help them survive and flourish is an ability to live in large groups. Apparently, chimps and most other group dwelling primates have fairly rigid upward bounds on the size of the groups they will tolerate. Humans, on the other hand, while having a tendency towards groups of 200 or fewer members, can somehow manage living in close proximity to millions of other humans.

Yes and no.
We have forced ourselves into living under these conditions, but originally humans were also very tribal animals that lived in rather small groups.
There certainly are benefits to living in such huge groups as we have now, and that's why we eventually adapted to them. But this wasn't really something that came "natural" to us, and even though bigger communities are now very much the norm, this comes with problems and complications we are still struggeling to deal with.

After all, if you compare the "societies" we have now, these huge groups of sometimes millions of people, it's easy to see, that they usually split into sub-groups, that simply seem to live "next" to each other.

 

[EyeofOdin]

Wow, so many posts confirming what I said that the user didn't bother to read, as if something new has been proven or brought up.

 

[LegionOnomaMoi]

By the way, it seems that another trait that humans have used to help them survive and flourish is an ability to live in large groups.

That's a good point. Most of the time (at least in the forums/arenas I'm most used to), we talk about the development of agriculture and the crucial role of language in terms of their necessity for large social groups (or "civilization"). However, the ability to e.g., communicate and support a larger population in no way guarantees the success of any large population. These are necessary conditions for large groups & civilization, but not sufficient. Make the brain's flexibility when it comes to social cognition just a bit different or more fixed, and it is entirely possible that even with the necessary conditions for large populations we wouldn't have any. The constructions (moral constraints motivated by opprobrium or religion or whatever, the creation of new social roles and sociocultural institutions & practices such as Rome's Patron/Client relationship or a justice system working in tandem with a defined government, etc.) that make even the oldest "large" settlements possible required an ability for humans to fundamentally re-conceptualize norms that had probably remained more or less unchanged for the last 100,000+ years.

 

[NicholasJClark]

gd points

 

[Sapiens]

I've always been fascinated with the evolutionary success of homo sapiens. Although I try to remain biocentric, there are advantages humans have that most other animals don't, at least not all at once. Please keep in mind, I don't pretend to be a scientist.

From what I can observe, the most successful animals which form organized colonies of individuals inside of structures built by them are homo sapiens and social insects.

What acted as a catalyst to their evolution is actually multiple factors.

Dexterousness- The ability to grasp things and manipulate them is important to a species wanting to give itself an evolutionary boost.

Problem Solving- Usually via intelligence, the ability to use one's own biology to find ways back home is a huge advantage to the individual.

Cooperation- Dedication to the greater group or colony not only helps insure the survival of the individual but also the survival of the group or even population.

Although dolphins use their intelligence and deep emotional connection to solve problems and cooperate as a group, they lac dexterousness. Same with elephants, as they're dexterous only to an extant.

Chimpanzees are very dexterous and cooperative, but they lack the problem solving skills to form colonies.

Wolves and other canines are extremely cooperative and are excellent problem solvers. What they lack are dexterous limbs.

So how is it that two very polar species, ants or bees and homo sapiens, have made similar achievements? Do ants have the dexterousness, cooperation and problem solving skills to suffice? Yes, BUT just because they're solving a problem with their evolutionary anatomy doesn't mean that they're intelligent.

Ants naturally and involuntarily excrete a pheromone path along wherever they walk. Example: If one is looking for food, she leaves a scented path that the same animal is attracted to, but only once she finds the food is she attracted. She then follows the path after finding the food which coincidently leads her home. She's now left another pheromone trail which wreaks of her excitement over the food she's just found. Other's follow the trail leaving a "oh! I just found food!" scent. As more ants follow the path, the more chemicals are laid on it, the stronger it gets.

Other scents are laid out stimulating other activities, such as colony building, digging, battle and nursing; an accidental system of pheromones and attraction to them, making them cooperative and problem solving. The dexterousness was already there via mandibles and precise jaws.

How did humans do it? Our dexterousness was already there with our ape-like hands. Our intelligence and cooperation are difficult to place and probably evolved side by side.

Intelligence likely developed out of the necessity for language. Everything we learn, we learn through a language of some sorts. Obviously we learn Art and History through lectures and discussions, but too Math and Science are just numerical languages communicating the nature of the physical world. The necessity for a language came out of the large social groups. The groups grew at first but something had to keep the individuals together.

Cooperation is achieved accidently through an evolutionary psychological trait which compels animistic interpretation. At first it seems counterproductive to become better by adopting a trait which leaves the organism focusing on delusions about its ancestors, fairies or other non physical entities, that is until one considers ritual.

When in ritual, the individual who believes that he or she is actually in the presence of a superhuman entity with magical powers or control of the elements is compelled to be sincere. When the group sees the sincerity, it creates empathy and trust and stronger community bonds.

Also notice also that almost all gods and goddesses have responsibility over at least one of the following:
1) fertility (food and passing of genes)
2) social order
3) self betterment or virtuous intelligence
4) dominance over the unknown or mysterious

These four archetypes seem to be what's most desired for an animal on the edge of survival on the Savannah, being more food, sex, order, intelligence and less death. People often see what's most desired out of them or the world through their gods. Appeasing a deity who's depicted as being very beautiful and sensual would make sense if you needed crops to grow or your wife to bear a son.

Examples:
Zeus: god of social order by being king of Olympos and of fertility from his role as god of storms.
Hel: Dominance over the unknown and seemingly far afterlife
Isis: Goddess of fertility as the queen of heaven and representing order over the mysterious otherworld being goddess of magic and queen of the dead (from her marriage with Osiris). She also is the mother of the pharos, making her goddess of royalty and thus social order.
Freyja: Goddess of fertility being a Van goddess and a goddess of sexuality. She's also goddess of death and magick, making her goddess of the unknown.
Loki: A god who presides over the archetype of the unpredictable nature, he's Lord of the mysteries of the next decision or even the shape he assumes.
Hermes: Being god of writing and knowledge makes him god of virtuous intelligence. He also looks over the mystery of death and interdimensional travel or shamanism. Being a god of healing and wealth he's also a fertility god.
Odin: Allfather role makes him giver of social order. He also brought the Futhark to mankind and vehemently seeks knowledge at great costs to himself, making him a god of self betterment. He also is a psychopomp making him a dominant force over death.

I can go on and on. The deities may not be deities of one of the archetypes listed, but have traits or mythology that makes them virtuous, as people often see their moral system in their gods. Vikings saw a band of warriors willing to self-sacrifice for the community, even if it meant a severed body part, while the Greeks viewed their gods as being symmetrical (symmetry was equated with beauty).

So religion seems to be the accidental phenomenon aiding the cooperation and evolution of humans.

 

[Sapiens]

From what I can observe, the most successful animals which form organized colonies of individuals inside of structures built by them are homo sapiens and social insects.

Please define "successful," blattariads were here long before us and will be here long after we're gone.

What acted as a catalyst to their evolution is actually multiple factors.

I would disagree, evolution is not "catalyzed."

Dexterousness- The ability to grasp things and manipulate them is important to a species wanting to give itself an evolutionary boost.

The idea of a species "wanting" anything, especially wanting an "evolutonary boost" is hogwash.

Problem Solving- Usually via intelligence, the ability to use one's own biology to find ways back home is a huge advantage to the individual.

If the ability to find one's way home humans are near the bottom of the list. Look to insects like the Monarch Butterfly, fish like the Salmon, and migratory birds. Most people can't find their butts with both hands, or their way home (from outside their known neighborhood) without a GPS receiver.

Cooperation- Dedication to the greater group or colony not only helps insure the survival of the individual but also the survival of the group or even population.

There are many solitary species that do just fine.

Although dolphins use their intelligence and deep emotional connection to solve problems and cooperate as a group, they lac dexterousness. Same with elephants, as they're dexterous only to an extant.

Low dexterity ... so what?

Chimpanzees are very dexterous and cooperative, but they lack the problem solving skills to form colonies.

Realy? Read Dame Jane Goodall's books and papers.

Wolves and other canines are extremely cooperative and are excellent problem solvers. What they lack are dexterous limbs.

Low dexterity ... so what?

So how is it that two very polar species, ants or bees and homo sapiens, have made similar achievements? Do ants have the dexterousness, cooperation and problem solving skills to suffice? Yes, BUT just because they're solving a problem with their evolutionary anatomy doesn't mean that they're intelligent.

Who said humans were intelligent and even so, is intellegence all that it's cracked up to me. Try not to be so taxocentristic.

Ants naturally and involuntarily excrete a pheromone path along wherever they walk. Example: If one is looking for food, she leaves a scented path that the same animal is attracted to, but only once she finds the food is she attracted. She then follows the path after finding the food which coincidently leads her home. She's now left another pheromone trail which wreaks of her excitement over the food she's just found. Other's follow the trail leaving a "oh! I just found food!" scent. As more ants follow the path, the more chemicals are laid on it, the stronger it gets.

Other scents are laid out stimulating other activities, such as colony building, digging, battle and nursing; an accidental system of pheromones and attraction to them, making them cooperative and problem solving. The dexterousness was already there via mandibles and precise jaws.

How did humans do it? Our dexterousness was already there with our ape-like hands. Our intelligence and cooperation are difficult to place and probably evolved side by side.

And we can't find our way to food and home without a smart phone and "Yelp" the combination of which still does not work as well as a phermone trail.

Intelligence likely developed out of the necessity for language. Everything we learn, we learn through a language of some sorts. Obviously we learn Art and History through lectures and discussions, but too Math and Science are just numerical languages communicating the nature of the physical world. The necessity for a language came out of the large social groups. The groups grew at first but something had to keep the individuals together.

Always, in evolution ... it's hardware before software. Remember that!

Cooperation is achieved accidently through an evolutionary psychological trait which compels animistic interpretation. At first it seems counterproductive to become better by adopting a trait which leaves the organism focusing on delusions about its ancestors, fairies or other non physical entities, that is until one considers ritual.

Experimental evidence indicates that cooperation a hardwired evolved characteristic and as such has nothing to do with religion what humans may have overlayed later, much later.

When in ritual, the individual who believes that he or she is actually in the presence of a superhuman entity with magical powers or control of the elements is compelled to be sincere. When the group sees the sincerity, it creates empathy and trust and stronger community bonds.

Also notice also that almost all gods and goddesses have responsibility over at least one of the following:
1) fertility (food and passing of genes)
2) social order
3) self betterment or virtuous intelligence
4) dominance over the unknown or mysterious

These four archetypes seem to be what's most desired for an animal on the edge of survival on the Savannah, being more food, sex, order, intelligence and less death. People often see what's most desired out of them or the world through their gods. Appeasing a deity who's depicted as being very beautiful and sensual would make sense if you needed crops to grow or your wife to bear a son.

Examples:
Zeus: god of social order by being king of Olympos and of fertility from his role as god of storms.
Hel: Dominance over the unknown and seemingly far afterlife
Isis: Goddess of fertility as the queen of heaven and representing order over the mysterious otherworld being goddess of magic and queen of the dead (from her marriage with Osiris). She also is the mother of the pharos, making her goddess of royalty and thus social order.
Freyja: Goddess of fertility being a Van goddess and a goddess of sexuality. She's also goddess of death and magick, making her goddess of the unknown.
Loki: A god who presides over the archetype of the unpredictable nature, he's Lord of the mysteries of the next decision or even the shape he assumes.
Hermes: Being god of writing and knowledge makes him god of virtuous intelligence. He also looks over the mystery of death and interdimensional travel or shamanism. Being a god of healing and wealth he's also a fertility god.
Odin: Allfather role makes him giver of social order. He also brought the Futhark to mankind and vehemently seeks knowledge at great costs to himself, making him a god of self betterment. He also is a psychopomp making him a dominant force over death.

I can go on and on. The deities may not be deities of one of the archetypes listed, but have traits or mythology that makes them virtuous, as people often see their moral system in their gods. Vikings saw a band of warriors willing to self-sacrifice for the community, even if it meant a severed body part, while the Greeks viewed their gods as being symmetrical (symmetry was equated with beauty).

So religion seems to be the accidental phenomenon aiding the cooperation and evolution of humans

I do believe that you have that quite backwards.

 

[fschmidt]

Very good EyeofOdin, you actually seem to have some understanding which is rare in modern times.

The importance of religion is somewhat discussed in this book:


But I would add that the most important aspect of a religion for providing cooperation is to provide a strong virtual alpha-male. This is why all successful Western cultures were based on such religions. Also, democracy is only possible with such religions because otherwise a human will occupy that role. That is why democracy didn't develop in the East, because they lacked sufficiently strong alpha-male gods.

This is why I am dedicated to the god of the Old Testament who is the ideal god for a sane moral society.

 

[Sapiens]

Very good EyeofOdin, you actually seem to have some understanding which is rare in modern times.

The importance of religion is somewhat discussed in this book:


But I would add that the most important aspect of a religion for providing cooperation is to provide a strong virtual alpha-male. This is why all successful Western cultures were based on such religions. Also, democracy is only possible with such religions because otherwise a human will occupy that role. That is why democracy didn't develop in the East, because they lacked sufficiently strong alpha-male gods.

This is why I am dedicated to the god of the Old Testament who is the ideal god for a sane moral society.

I guess you've not done much reading in any of the eastern mythos?

BTW: How do you account for the oldest living participatory democracy on Earth, the "Hau de no sau nee" which goes back to at least August 31, 1142?