What are the Evolutionary Origns of Religiosity?

[Sunstone]

There seems to be increasing evidence that human religiosity has a genetic or inherent component to it. If so, that would seem to imply that human religiosity somehow and for some reason evolved in us.

But if so, then why?

There appear to be two current theories. First, that it evolved as a spandrel. Second, that it evolved because it furthered survival and reproduction.

So, the question is: Did human religiosity evolve because it in some way furthered survival and reproduction, or did it evolve as a spandrel? And if it in some way furthered survival and reproduction, in what way did it do that?

 

[Revoltingest]

I've long thought that religion arose as a by-product of our propensity for & ability to recognize
patterns. Humans are wired to see pattens. (In fact, we're so good at it that humans of average
ability at playing go can still beat the best computer programs at the game.) This ability let us
understand our environment than our faster & stronger prey. The downside to this propensity
is that we are imperfect at it, & we will leap to patterns which aren't there, finding significance
where there is none, eg, pareidolia. Religion, with its great diversity, is a phenomenon which
fits this theory of the desire to find patterns/order in our environment.

 

[LuisDantas]

Some aspects of religiosity are almost certainly a direct result of our pattern-seeking, as Revoltingest just said. Beliefs in deities and spirits are almost impossible to explain in any other way.

Other aspects, though, are more tied to the human need for social organization and creation of authority figures. Which is - or at least was for a long time - useful for survival and reproduction because it kept hostile impulses that would otherwise cause a lot of infighting in check.

 

[sandandfoam]

Interesting.
I think stuff just happens. Is there a difference between attributing cause to God and attributing cause to evolution?

 

[`mud]

From our Sun came Ra. The revolution of planets and the seasons and of the wheather.
The Romans had their gods from who the rulers were named and worshipped.
And came "gods" of all the worshippers, Jewish, Christian, and Muslum.
The orientals had there class and on and on....
but you people know all this crap.....
Fear of fire, and fear of death were the highest cause of religion to arise, I would guess.
It's too early for this crap, and I haven't even said my prayers yet !
~
'mud

 

[Sunstone]

Some aspects of religiosity are almost certainly a direct result of our pattern-seeking, as Revoltingest just said. Beliefs in deities and spirits are almost impossible to explain in any other way.

So, would you assert that religiosity is to some extent a spandrel of pattern recognition?

Other aspects, though, are more tied to the human need for social organization and creation of authority figures. Which is - or at least was for a long time - useful for survival and reproduction because it kept hostile impulses that would otherwise cause a lot of infighting in check.

Have you had a chance to read, Darwin's Cathedral? It makes a case very similar to what you're saying here.

 

[LuisDantas]

Interesting.
I think stuff just happens. Is there a difference between attributing cause to God and attributing cause to evolution?

Yes. Evolution is testable and evidenciable.

 

[LuisDantas]

So, would you assert that religiosity is to some extent a spandrel of pattern recognition?

Not so much religiosity proper as the belief in the supernatural, but I believe that to be the case, yes.

Pattern recognition was very useful for hunters and gatherers. A subproduct of it was the predisposition to see spirits and phantom causes for most anything.

Personally, though, I see supernaturalism as an adversary to true religiosity even if it may have played a historical role in opening the way to it.

Have you had a chance to read, Darwin's Cathedral? It makes a case very similar to what you're saying here.

Not directly, but I have read articles commenting on it.

 

[sandandfoam]

Yes. Evolution is testable and evidenciable.

Evolution is a good explanation. It makes sense in a way that no reasonable person would doubt in the context of our current knowledge.

Psychology takes a 'reverse' engineering approach to evolution. It puts on a thinking cap and works backwards. I have no trouble with this either. But I don't think we should attribute more weight to the approach than it can bear.

I reckon that if anyone could come up with a robust way of testing the hypothesis that religiosity was the product of evolution there would be a lovely shiny nobel prize waiting for them.

 

[Sunstone]

Pattern recognition was very useful for hunters and gatherers. A subproduct of it was the predisposition to see spirits and phantom causes for most anything.

But don't agent detection and theory of mind better explain the predisposition to see spirits and phantom causes than pattern recognition?

It seems to me that pattern recognition might actually pose a counter to seeing spirits as the causes of things. I mean, one might note, via pattern recognition, that "spirits" don't amount to much.

 

[Sunstone]

I reckon that if anyone could come up with a robust way of testing the hypothesis that religiosity was the product of evolution there would be a lovely shiny nobel prize waiting for them.

I suppose that might -- but only might -- happen if and when we discover some genes that function to create religiosity.

 

[Revoltingest]

I suppose that might -- but only might -- happen if and when we discover some genes that function to create religiosity.

I doubt we'd ever find set of genes responsible for an emergent property of a complex
brain. But we might find some which create a greater propensity for magical thought.
For example, it could be related to a greater need for connection to others (which
would extend to imagined beings)

 

[Monk Of Reason]

There seems to be increasing evidence that human religiosity has a genetic or inherent component to it. If so, that would seem to imply that human religiosity somehow and for some reason evolved in us.

But if so, then why?

There appear to be two current theories. First, that it evolved as a spandrel. Second, that it evolved because it furthered survival and reproduction.

So, the question is: Did human religiosity evolve because it in some way furthered survival and reproduction, or did it evolve as a spandrel? And if it in some way furthered survival and reproduction, in what way did it do that?

False pattern recognition.

If we are back in a more primal evolutionary state then we have two options when we hear something that is unknown.
1) Its nothing we shouldn't worry.
2) Its "something" and we should worry.

If we hear a rustling in the tall grass it may be a big cat or it may be the wind? One is harmless the other is not. However those who developed the "paranoid-esk" trait of assuming it is dangerous when it isn't live longer. Why? Because if you run from both the wind and the tiger you live but if you run from the tiger and not the wind you are bound to be wrong sometime.

Thus this develops a sort of pattern recognition that doesn't tell us the truth but we lean towards an imagined explanation.

 

[metis]

In anthropology, we regard religion as being one of the five basic institutions* all societies have, which implies that for some reason it is intrinsic enough, although not necessarily with each individual person. Some have referred to it as the "God gene".

There are some benefits for religious belief that some here have already mentioned, but there can be some drawbacks as well. The fact that it permeates human societies indicates to us that it's generally more beneficial than harmful.

* the other four are family, political, economic, and educational.

 

[Monk Of Reason]

In anthropology, we regard religion as being one of the five basic institutions* all societies have, which implies that for some reason it is intrinsic enough, although not necessarily with each individual person. Some have referred to it as the "God gene".

There are some benefits for religious belief that some here have already mentioned, but there can be some drawbacks as well. The fact that it permeates human societies indicates to us that it's generally more beneficial than harmful.

* the other four are family, political, economic, and educational.

Not necessarily. Racism for example has never been a beneficial trait in humans. But it has developed from useful genetic presuppositions which is prejudice of the unknown and of different patterns. But the trait of racism itself hasn't been useful.

 

[metis]

Not necessarily. Racism for example has never been a beneficial trait in humans. But it has developed from useful genetic presuppositions which is prejudice of the unknown and of different patterns. But the trait of racism itself hasn't been useful.

Actually it is to a large extent as you mention above, but like so many other characteristics, it also has some negative aspects. Evolution does not mean or imply perfection, but merely that certain traits may prove advantageous over not having them. Just about every trait we can think of that we might think as being positive can have some negative drawbacks.

Very young children tend to get frightened quite easily when in the presence of people that are different than what they're used to. The more different, the more adverse the reaction tends to be. Since this is an untaught trait, we simply cannot blame it on one's upbringing.

We see similar characteristic with many other animals, such as my last dog that terribly "racist" if any blacks or Asians were around, and yet he certainly wasn't taught as such.

Fearing people that are different undoubtedly must have been part of our survival while living in bands whereas people who were different were potential enemies. We have to remember that most of our evolution did not occur in large societies with thousands or millions of others. Unfortunately, one of the negative drawbacks is that this trait can continue as we age, and racism appears to be one of those characteristics.

 

[Yerda]

Not necessarily. Racism for example has never been a beneficial trait in humans. But it has developed from useful genetic presuppositions which is prejudice of the unknown and of different patterns. But the trait of racism itself hasn't been useful.

If you lived in a tribe surrounded territorially by say five other tribes and the members of those tribes were racist, racism might be of concievable benefit.

 

[outhouse]

There seems to be increasing evidence that human religiosity has a genetic or inherent component to it. If so, that would seem to imply that human religiosity somehow and for some reason evolved in us.

But if so, then why?

There appear to be two current theories. First, that it evolved as a spandrel. Second, that it evolved because it furthered survival and reproduction.

So, the question is: Did human religiosity evolve because it in some way furthered survival and reproduction, or did it evolve as a spandrel? And if it in some way furthered survival and reproduction, in what way did it do that?

Parental love Is instinctual

Imaginary father figures are 100% natural

 

[metis]

If you lived in a tribe surrounded territorially by say five other tribes and the members of those tribes were racist, racism might be of concievable benefit.

You're obviously correct. And I experience this myself as a Jew. When I wear my yarmulke where there are a lot of Jews, people don't pay that much attention, but if I wear it in an area not used to having seen many Jews, I attract a lot of attention.

 

[outhouse]

.

I reckon that if anyone could come up with a robust way of testing the hypothesis that religiosity was the product of evolution there would be a lovely shiny nobel prize waiting for them.

I dont want it.


The Human conscious mind is weak, and it evolved into a required imagination skill that evolved into place as a survival instinct since any mammal existed.


One who could imagine a lion waiting for him in the grass, was the one who survived and spread this imaginative trait on to the next generation.


Parental love, tied with imagination is not hard to figure out HOW ancient men answered questions they did not know. They used their imagination and mythology was born.


These answers are simple and not worthy of a prize. Its sad most people cannot see reality due to lack of education.