RE: Evolutionary Theories of Religion
August 4, 2015 at 12:32 pm
(This post was last modified: August 4, 2015 at 12:33 pm by Whateverist.)
(August 4, 2015 at 1:41 am)rainmac Wrote: The most popular theories for why humans have religion are:
1. To answer the existential mysteries--Why do we die? What is our purpose in life? How did the zebra get its stripes, etc...
2. To increase social cohesion in tribes/groups
My question is, at least for #2, there are 1,000s of animals species that live in social groups and have perfectly adequate social cohesion mechanisms such as territoriality, dominance hierarchy, grooming, etc. Why would humans need religion to improve their social relationships when there are already abundant mechanisms and successful social species? For those of you who might be familiar with some of the theory of religion writers--Scott Atran, Pascal Boyer, Dennett, Matt Rossano, and others--I haven't seen anybody ask this question. Is this a valid question? Is this a valid question for #1?
This way of putting it is a lot like speculating why a species has evolved the way it has. In both cases no intention was involved. Religion can be understood as having served certain functions just as the giraffe's neck serves some. But the human no more chose to believe in gods any more than the giraffe chose to elongate its neck. God belief may have arisen as a result of #1, the need to understand the intentions of others and therefore oneself. God belief exists as a cultural artifact which has been handed down for longer than any written form of language. To understand human behavior you must examen culture as well as what is needed for survival. Just as the giraffe is stuck with some biologically inefficient anatomy, so we seem to be stuck with god belief long after any direct need for it can be demonstrated. C'est la vie.
