The origins of religious belief

[PureX]

There is noting else to defend as the truth.

BINGO!

This is the lesson to be learned. We humans don't get to know "The Truth". All we can learn is what works and what doesn't within the limited experience and understanding we have of "reality". It isn't Truth we seek, and it isn't Truth we gain. It's knowledge of what works: functional intelligence.

Which is why the smarter we get, the dumber we stay.

 

[Willamena]

BINGO!

This is the lesson to be learned. We humans don't get to know "The Truth". All we can learn is what works and what doesn't within the limited experience and understanding we have of "reality". It isn't Truth we seek, and it isn't Truth we gain. It's knowledge of what works: functional intelligence.

Which is why the smarter we get, the dumber we stay.

But, if this is true, then we do know the truth. And if what works works, then it's true that it works.

Disclaiming truth is a paradox.

 

[Guy Threepwood]

So, where might the origins have been for there ever being even the thought that some external 'actor' (other than any humans or proto-humans) being involved, firstly, in influencing or controlling the lives of any, and secondly, as to having any kind of influence or power over the material world and their environment?

Explanations?

Bonus question - when would this have occurred?

I'd say it coincided with a capacity to problem solve, to ask the question- why are we here, rather than merely accept 'it just is'. So those deducing an intelligent agent were skeptics first and foremost, of the belief that everything in the world appeared for no particular reason- which some still believe today!

 

[Mock Turtle]

I'd say it coincided with a capacity to problem solve, to ask the question- why are we here, rather than merely accept 'it just is'. So those deducing an intelligent agent were skeptics first and foremost, of the belief that everything in the world appeared for no particular reason- which some still believe today!

You think 'why are we here' was one of the first questions? Or was it perhaps a later question when they had few answers for many other questions - like, why is that lightning destroying my home; why is the earth trembling; why are we plagued with locusts, etc., hence perhaps seeing some malevolent influence at work before suspecting any benign and 'designer' cause. And later placating the latter with offerings etc.

 

[Guy Threepwood]

You think 'why are we here' was one of the first questions? Or was it perhaps a later question when they had few answers for many other questions - like, why is that lightning destroying my home; why is the earth trembling; why are we plagued with locusts, etc., hence perhaps seeing some malevolent influence at work before suspecting any benign and 'designer' cause. And later placating the latter with offerings etc.

It's a good point. The belief that bad weather and other natural events are the result of people's actions- may be the oldest superstition known to mankind, but this has always been propagated by people looking to receive the appeasing sacrifices 'on Gaia's behalf' - (other than switching scary masks for scary computer sims, not much has changed there!)

I'd make a distinction though between these sort of belief systems propagated through duress, and free thinking humanity logically deducing a designer and creator of everything we see around us

 

[PureX]

But, if this is true, then we do know the truth. And if what works works, then it's true that it works.

Disclaiming truth is a paradox.

Presumptions that we make based on our limited knowledge and experience of existence are not "truth". They're just presumptions that we pretend are the truth ... until we find out they aren't. Then we make new presumptions and pretend they are the truth. There is no 'paradox", here. There is just no truth. There is only our presumed truth, which isn't truth at all, but presumption, and pretense.

 

[Willamena]

Presumptions that we make based on our limited knowledge and experience of existence are not "truth". They're just presumptions that we pretend are the truth ... until we find out they aren't. Then we make new presumptions and pretend they are the truth. There is no 'paradox", here. There is just no truth. There is only our presumed truth, which isn't truth at all, but presumption, and pretense.

Edit: Sorry for detracting from your thread. We should have this discussion in full someday, but we've swayed from the topic.

 

[Mock Turtle]

Edit: Sorry for detracting from your thread. We should have this discussion in full someday, but we've swayed from the topic.

You carry on - since I invariably do so in other threads.

 

[1137]

So, where might the origins have been for there ever being even the thought that some external 'actor' (other than any humans or proto-humans) being involved, firstly, in influencing or controlling the lives of any, and secondly, as to having any kind of influence or power over the material world and their environment?

Explanations?

Bonus question - when would this have occurred?

Question One:
Half of the answer is that religion "came from the Stars." Not necessarily that it was extraterrestrial in nature, but that the mythologies were explanations of the movements of the stars. For example, Set was associated with immortality and Ursa Major, because a circumpolar constellation to the Egyptians, Ursa Major never set below the horizon (and so was "immortal"). The other answer, I believe is that... Gods exist, and they interact with us. I think this is part of it, and then philosophies concluding it throughout history as far back as Egypt.

Question Two:
Likely it occurred during the Upper Paleolithic Revolution, in which human consciousness greatly accelerated to the levels we now know - able the question, manipulate, and go against the laws of nature. IMO, the only reasonable conclusion is that some sort of deity must be responsible.

 

[1137]

fear of death. remove the promise of immortality from any religious belief and it will lose the most of its charisma, especiallly the abrahamic ones.

This cannot be correct as these individuals do not seem to have actually believed in death. They knew the physical body died, but it seems rather recent (relatively) to think death is the be-all-end-all of life.

 

[Mock Turtle]

Question One:
Half of the answer is that religion "came from the Stars." Not necessarily that it was extraterrestrial in nature, but that the mythologies were explanations of the movements of the stars. For example, Set was associated with immortality and Ursa Major, because a circumpolar constellation to the Egyptians, Ursa Major never set below the horizon (and so was "immortal"). The other answer, I believe is that... Gods exist, and they interact with us. I think this is part of it, and then philosophies concluding it throughout history as far back as Egypt.

Question Two:
Likely it occurred during the Upper Paleolithic Revolution, in which human consciousness greatly accelerated to the levels we now know - able the question, manipulate, and go against the laws of nature. IMO, the only reasonable conclusion is that some sort of deity must be responsible.

Do you not think that all the various natural events in their lives - the sun rising and setting every day, earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, floods, etc., might have initiated some explanations before any looking towards the stars? And then these beliefs evolved.