Can the study of human evolution provide answers to why people believe in God?

[Unknown Soldier]

In nature, in particular among our primate cousins, we may have some clues as to how and why theism evolved. In many species there is a pecking order in which the stronger and more dominant males have first access if not exclusive access to the females. In addition to animals like chickens and lions, gorillas exhibit this kind of behavior. The top male-silverback gorilla rules the roost keeping all other males away from the females unless, of course, another male gorilla defeats him wresting dominance and sexual access to those females away from him. As long as a male silverback is dominant, he maintains a God-like status in which all of the other gorillas in his group must bow to him. The transmission of that male's genes to the next generation is assured this way.

Religions like Judaism as well as Islam and Christianity have a lot of dos and don'ts regarding sexual activity. Married women, for instance, are expected to remain faithful to their husbands under pain of possibly severe penalty, and such a rule is encoded into the religion's scriptures presumably as revealed by that religion's version of God. Any violations of these rules are said to make violators subject to punishment by the all-powerful God who cannot be resisted. Any man who has sex with another man's wife will be punished by God along with her. God's prohibition of adultery helps to ensure that a man's wife or wives never get pregnant to other men safeguarding the married men's transmission of their genes to the next generation.

So it appears that if God does exist, then his laws regarding sex among humans are quite similar to what we see in nature. In humans as well as in other species like gorillas, gene transfer to offspring is more likely accomplished by stronger, more dominant males helping to ensure stronger offspring. Is this similarity just a coincidence, or is God that great silverback in the sky keeping a watchful eye on both male and female sexual activity to favor the stronger and dominant males passing their genes down to offspring? It seems to me that knowing how we evolved helps to explain why so many of believe in a dominant male God who lays down and supposedly enforces rules regarding how and with whom we have sex.

 

[Politesse]

It appears that you have fallen prey to some Creationist propaganda concerning how evolution works, ironically enough! While we do share some common ancestry with gorillas, we are not direct descendants of gorillas. It's not known exactly when our evolutionary lineages diverged, but it was sometime between 8-14 million years ago; as such, comparisons between human and gorilla societies are of limited utilty. Entire species have risen and fallen during the time since our divergence, let alone social paradigms. Indeed, if there is one thing extremely typical of all the Hominidae, gorillas and humans included, it is that our social paradigms are highly fluid and change by the generation, to say nothing of centuries, millennia, and geological epochs. If someone told you that they had a theory explaining how Hawaiian nene geese organize their nesting colonies, based not on observations of the nenes themselves, but rather on a popular stereotype of how Russian domestic ducks prefer to nest (ducks and geese having similarly diverged during the Miocene), would you find that argument convincing on its own? Why or why not?

I notice too that you seem to be assuming that we have been monotheists for the whole of our evolutionary trajectory, which seems quite implausible given how rare monotheistic religons are thought to have been before the rise of the Abrahamic faiths. If evolution were "making" us monotheists, why did it take it so long to kick in, and so incompletely? Even with the meteoric rise of certain Mesopotamian politicoreligious regimes, only about 55% of the present human population subscribes even nominally to a monotheistic faith tradition. What happened with the other 45% of human beings? Did evolution stop working on them? On a similar note, your description of gender relations is a wild generalization if your goal is to describe our entire species. Perspectives on masculinity, femininity, and the relationships therebetween vary considerably between cultures, and a great many different social paradigms have been attempted to regulate them. It makes no rational sense to valorize European social norms and values as "the product of human evolution", while failing to explain the perspectives and practices of other world cultures in light of the same methodology, even if indeed the central methodological assumption of evo psych is valid in the first place (a statement this anthropologist, for one, finds more than a little bit dubious).

 

[Unknown Soldier]

It appears that you have fallen prey to some Creationist propaganda concerning how evolution works, ironically enough!

I was not aware that creationists think we are related to gorillas.

While we do share some common ancestry with gorillas, we are not direct descendants of gorillas.

Yes. I know that.

It's not known exactly when our evolutionary lineages diverged, but it was sometime between 8-14 million years ago; as such, comparisons between human and gorilla societies are of limited utilty. Entire species have risen and fallen during the time since our divergence, let alone social paradigms. Indeed, if there is one thing extremely typical of all the Hominidae, gorillas and humans included, it is that our social paradigms are highly fluid and change by the generation, to say nothing of centuries, millennia, and geological epochs.

Considering that life on earth goes back at least 800 million years, 8 to 14 million years isn't very long. Heck, some paleontologists study modern reptiles and even birds to get an idea of what dinosaurs were like.

If someone told you that they had a theory explaining how Hawaiian nene geese organize their nesting colonies, based not on observations of the nenes themselves, but rather on a popular stereotype of how Russian domestic ducks prefer to nest (ducks and geese having similarly diverged during the Miocene), would you find that argument convincing on its own? Why or why not?

I'm not sure if I would be "convinced," but it appears that such a study might give us some valuable clues regarding nene geese if we could not observe them directly. Ducks and geese, after all, are very similar birds, and it's entirely possible that they have similar nesting habits.

I notice too that you seem to be assuming that we have been monotheists for the whole of our evolutionary trajectory, which seems quite implausible given how rare monotheistic religons are thought to have been before the rise of the Abrahamic faiths.

I'm sorry if I gave you that impression, but I'm not necessarily assuming monotheism but only a powerful "God" that has dominance over other, weaker beings.

...your description of gender relations is a wild generalization if your goal is to describe our entire species. Perspectives on masculinity, femininity, and the relationships therebetween vary considerably between cultures, and a great many different social paradigms have been attempted to regulate them. It makes no rational sense to valorize European social norms and values as "the product of human evolution", while failing to explain the perspectives and practices of other world cultures in light of the same methodology, even if indeed the central methodological assumption of evo psych is valid in the first place (a statement this anthropologist, for one, finds more than a little bit dubious).

Are there any cultures that do not regulate sexuality in particular with the use of marital relationships?

 

[none]

In nature, in particular among our primate cousins, we may have some clues as to how and why theism evolved. In many species there is a pecking order in which the stronger and more dominant males have first access if not exclusive access to the females. In addition to animals like chickens and lions, gorillas exhibit this kind of behavior. The top male-silverback gorilla rules the roost keeping all other males away from the females unless, of course, another male gorilla defeats him wresting dominance and sexual access to those females away from him. As long as a male silverback is dominant, he maintains a God-like status in which all of the other gorillas in his group must bow to him. The transmission of that male's genes to the next generation is assured this way.

Religions like Judaism as well as Islam and Christianity have a lot of dos and don'ts regarding sexual activity. Married women, for instance, are expected to remain faithful to their husbands under pain of possibly severe penalty, and such a rule is encoded into the religion's scriptures presumably as revealed by that religion's version of God. Any violations of these rules are said to make violators subject to punishment by the all-powerful God who cannot be resisted. Any man who has sex with another man's wife will be punished by God along with her. God's prohibition of adultery helps to ensure that a man's wife or wives never get pregnant to other men safeguarding the married men's transmission of their genes to the next generation.

So it appears that if God does exist, then his laws regarding sex among humans are quite similar to what we see in nature. In humans as well as in other species like gorillas, gene transfer to offspring is more likely accomplished by stronger, more dominant males helping to ensure stronger offspring. Is this similarity just a coincidence, or is God that great silverback in the sky keeping a watchful eye on both male and female sexual activity to favor the stronger and dominant males passing their genes down to offspring? It seems to me that knowing how we evolved helps to explain why so many of believe in a dominant male God who lays down and supposedly enforces rules regarding how and with whom we have sex.

Dude. At some point our higher capacity managed to produce compassion or respect for the fallen.
The dead first then those who were maimed or crippled, society clung to them.
It's a long standing tradition. Millenia.
So what do they do? They tell stories and strategies. Alas the birth of explanations from authority was established prior but yeah.

I mean are you going to kill grandpa because he fed you? And grandpa sees the value in his progeny even if they are crippled.
So a coalition is formed and some good roots that kinda make people vomit, well that ain't good for the hunters but geesh what inspiration to tell stories.
That's what I'm going with. Anthropology.
But hey I could be wrong.

 

[Keith&Co.]

As long as a male silverback is dominant, he maintains a God-like status in which all of the other gorillas in his group must bow to him.

I would question 'god-like.'

The silverback is the strongest or fastest or biggest, but he doesn't have any traits that don't exist in the other gorillas. Another male could aspire to take his place. Even the females understand what he does, even if they cannot reach his level of performance. When the leopard stalks, he defense the group, but if he wasn't there, someone else would put a hurting on the cat.

Gods, on the other hand, are mysteries. They control the lightning, provide the fire and the rain, take the sun away. We don't know how they do it, and we're not completely sure how to ask them to do it. Sometimes sacrifices work, sometimes they fail, sometimes they're not necessary.

I think a far better theory is that we observed weird shit and attached agency. We like to attach agency. Seems wired in there pretty deep.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

As long as a male silverback is dominant, he maintains a God-like status in which all of the other gorillas in his group must bow to him.

I would question 'god-like.'

The silverback is the strongest or fastest or biggest, but he doesn't have any traits that don't exist in the other gorillas. Another male could aspire to take his place. Even the females understand what he does, even if they cannot reach his level of performance. When the leopard stalks, he defense the group, but if he wasn't there, someone else would put a hurting on the cat.

Gods, on the other hand, are mysteries. They control the lightning, provide the fire and the rain, take the sun away. We don't know how they do it, and we're not completely sure how to ask them to do it. Sometimes sacrifices work, sometimes they fail, sometimes they're not necessary.

I think a far better theory is that we observed weird shit and attached agency. We like to attach agency. Seems wired in there pretty deep.

Agreed it is a very forced analogy. The male gorilla isn't god-like at all. He would actually be involved in actual protection, actual procreation, actual overseeing the fantasy football draft. God(s) get credit for doing nothing at all.

Evolution tells us nothing about how religion formed, because before religion, there was community which was a social evolution. Community leads to thriving. And then eventually for us upright apes, our brains got so big that we could start having this stupid idea we can influence events. And deism was born as some sort of mental coping mechanism. Sadly, we weren't able to eject that as quickly as we did eugenics.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

I would question 'god-like.'

The Gods of religion, like silver-back gorillas, maintain dominance by force or the threat of force, and their dominance involves control over resources like food and sexual access to females. The comparison seems apt to me if it is understood correctly.

The silverback is the strongest or fastest or biggest, but he doesn't have any traits that don't exist in the other gorillas. Another male could aspire to take his place. Even the females understand what he does, even if they cannot reach his level of performance. When the leopard stalks, he defense the group, but if he wasn't there, someone else would put a hurting on the cat.

Again, I'm not necessarily assuming that a dominate male gorilla is analogous to the all-powerful God of monotheism but to a powerful God who rules over other gods if they exist. So to be like a God the male gorilla does not need to be entirely unique, and neither does he need to be completely invulnerable to rivals. And yes, an alpha-male gorilla will defend his underlings from stalking leopards like a God-of-war is believed to protect his people from evil spirits and other enemies real or imagined.

Gods, on the other hand, are mysteries. They control the lightning, provide the fire and the rain, take the sun away. We don't know how they do it, and we're not completely sure how to ask them to do it. Sometimes sacrifices work, sometimes they fail, sometimes they're not necessary.

The Gods of religion are not completely mysterious by any means. On the contrary, those who believe in them write lengthy works regarding the God's doctrines, laws, and narratives.

I think a far better theory is that we observed weird shit and attached agency. We like to attach agency. Seems wired in there pretty deep.

That agency is very often personified as a human-like being who in some circumstances can be observed and even touched. So again, the analogy between a God and his people resembles in many ways an alpha-male gorilla and his troop. The human tendency to worship Gods may well be rooted in our evolution as seen in the behavior of other primates.

 

[Keith&Co.]

The comparison seems apt to me if it is understood correctly.

Apparently the correct understanding is to concentrate on overlap, and ignore significant differences.

 

[sdelsolray]

...
So again, the analogy between a God and his people resembles in many ways an alpha-male gorilla and his troop. The human tendency to worship Gods may well be rooted in our evolution as seen in the behavior of other primates.

Analogy is not causation.

You present some similarities, perhaps even enough to form a hypothesis. What would that hypothesis be? What would the null hypothesis be? How would you design an experiment, or forensic research, to support your hypothesis?

 

[steve_bank]

I agree.

The Abrahamic god is the ultimate alpha male, a reflection of male patriarchy.

We are not made in god's image, all gods are a reelection of human attributes.

To conservatives in Congress Trump was the alpha male, they pissed their pants and rolled over exposing their bellies like dogs do to indicate submission.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

...
So again, the analogy between a God and his people resembles in many ways an alpha-male gorilla and his troop. The human tendency to worship Gods may well be rooted in our evolution as seen in the behavior of other primates.

Analogy is not causation.

You present some similarities, perhaps even enough to form a hypothesis. What would that hypothesis be? What would the null hypothesis be? How would you design an experiment, or forensic research, to support your hypothesis?

See Hector A. Garcia's Alpha God: The Psychology of Religious Violence and Oppression for more information. I got the idea from that book.

 

[WAB]

...
So again, the analogy between a God and his people resembles in many ways an alpha-male gorilla and his troop. The human tendency to worship Gods may well be rooted in our evolution as seen in the behavior of other primates.

Analogy is not causation.

You present some similarities, perhaps even enough to form a hypothesis. What would that hypothesis be? What would the null hypothesis be? How would you design an experiment, or forensic research, to support your hypothesis?

See Hector A. Garcia's Alpha God: The Psychology of Religious Violence and Oppression for more information. I got the idea from that book.

Unknown Soldier, et al,

"Alpha-male (gorilla) and his troop" could just as easily be pinned on Donald Trump fanboys, or any bottom-sniffing, bootlicking 'cuck' who gets their 'opinions' from some authority figure.

The list of those types would require a large tome with ten volumes, separate forwards, indexes, appendixes, footnotes, and an exhaustive bibliography, plus reissues with corrections of all material!

 

[steve_bank]

We are after all just advanced screeching feces flinging chimps with phallic nuclear missiles.

 

[Keith&Co.]

We are after all just advanced screeching feces flinging chimps with phallic nuclear missiles.

Well, form follows function. What would you have, intercontinental boobs? Submarine launched ovaries? I do recognize, these things are kinda like the space shuttle, flying at a speed where a brick becomes aerodynamic, but there are limits.

 

[steve_bank]

We are after all just advanced screeching feces flinging chimps with phallic nuclear missiles.

Well, form follows function. What would you have, intercontinental boobs? Submarine launched ovaries? I do recognize, these things are kinda like the space shuttle, flying at a speed where a brick becomes aerodynamic, but there are limits.

Missiles and rockets are orgasmic. Crowds gather at Cape Canaveral to feel hte climax. Riding on top is like feeling a throbig motorcycle between your legs.

I\f Freud were around today he would say a rocket is not always just a rocket....

What is our congress but screeching chimps flinging feces in each ohter's face? Chimps really do fling feces when pissed off.

The Abrahamic god is an image of male power. it doesn't take a PHD in psychology to see it. The more eager Christians pledge absolute allegiance to god and feel a power given back from god.
\The alpha male female couple is common in many species.

From a show on archeology htere is evidence that points to the original Abrahamic myth to have both a male and female aspect.

Us arrogant humans think ourselves to be apart from nature with free will, but we have genetic evolutionary influenced behavior like all other creatures.

 

[Keith&Co.]

We are after all just advanced screeching feces flinging chimps with phallic nuclear missiles.

Well, form follows function. What would you have, intercontinental boobs? Submarine launched ovaries? I do recognize, these things are kinda like the space shuttle, flying at a speed where a brick becomes aerodynamic, but there are limits.

Missiles and rockets are orgasmic.

Not nuclear ones. They launch here and go off several time-zones distant. Quite a while later. We used to do training countdowns, calculate time of flight, and set our watches. Alarms would go off during chow, or watching a movie. "What's that?"
"Impact."
"Of what?"
Jesus, you already forgot the countdown?
For a sex metaphor, this is pretty delayed gratification. And even for actual launches, it's weeks to get the pictures from the range safety observer of the REBs coming in.... and that's without a detonation.
Just kinda have to get a quiet moment alone and imagine what it would have been like if it were real and... Oh! So it is like sex.

Never mind.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

We are after all just advanced screeching feces flinging chimps with phallic nuclear missiles.

Primates tend to make war on their opposition in order to gain access to females. Did you notice that when men make war, they very often rape the conquered women? Yahweh was no different telling his army invading Midian: "...all the young girls who have not known a man by sleeping with him, keep alive for yourselves." (Numbers 31:18) So Yahweh, like many men, appears to prefer virgins. I think it's no coincidence that evolution has selected for men who prefer virgins because if a man has sex with virgins, then he's more likely to successfully transfer his genes to offspring. Nonhuman primate males act the same way, and Yahweh never needed to command them to.

 

[sdelsolray]

...
So again, the analogy between a God and his people resembles in many ways an alpha-male gorilla and his troop. The human tendency to worship Gods may well be rooted in our evolution as seen in the behavior of other primates.

Analogy is not causation.

You present some similarities, perhaps even enough to form a hypothesis. What would that hypothesis be? What would the null hypothesis be? How would you design an experiment, or forensic research, to support your hypothesis?

See Hector A. Garcia's Alpha God: The Psychology of Religious Violence and Oppression for more information. I got the idea from that book.

Thank you for the source of your idea. However, you did not address my questions. Care to answer them?

 

[steve_bank]

Missiles and rockets are orgasmic.

Not nuclear ones. They launch here and go off several time-zones distant. Quite a while later. We used to do training countdowns, calculate time of flight, and set our watches. Alarms would go off during chow, or watching a movie. "What's that?"
"Impact."
"Of what?"
Jesus, you already forgot the countdown?
For a sex metaphor, this is pretty delayed gratification. And even for actual launches, it's weeks to get the pictures from the range safety observer of the REBs coming in.... and that's without a detonation.
Just kinda have to get a quiet moment alone and imagine what it would have been like if it were real and... Oh! So it is like sex.

Never mind.

Now that you mention it, the countdown is certainly masterbatory.

 

[steve_bank]

We are after all just advanced screeching feces flinging chimps with phallic nuclear missiles.

Primates tend to make war on their opposition in order to gain access to females. Did you notice that when men make war, they very often rape the conquered women? Yahweh was no different telling his army invading Midian: "...all the young girls who have not known a man by sleeping with him, keep alive for yourselves." (Numbers 31:18) So Yahweh, like many men, appears to prefer virgins. I think it's no coincidence that evolution has selected for men who prefer virgins because if a man has sex with virgins, then he's more likely to successfully transfer his genes to offspring. Nonhuman primate males act the same way, and Yahweh never needed to command them to.

Obvious to the trained eye of the most casual of observers.