For the sake of discussion, one could argue that religion began with the first lucky rabbit foot or similar charm.  That would put it back about 250,000 years before the dawn of agriculture.  That would put it back to the hunter/gatherer Neanderthals or their next of kin.

I suppose it has only been in the last blink of human history that a few people have found freedom from superstition.  Today, most parents and societies still teach their children to be superstitious.  After 250,000 years of it, there’s a case for saying that humans are by nature superstitious.  Are they?  How many Danish children, raised by non-superstitious parents in a non-superstitious society, become superstitious?

The first campfire story that had heroic biblical overtones was probably told 250,000 years before the Bible was written.  DAVID AND GOLIATH.  It was likely told by the first human who killed a mastodon with a spear.  Maybe it was told by his more articulate hunting partners who witnessed it.

Yeah that sounds plausible. Along with abstract thought came weird things like superstition. Could have even started with Archaeic Homo Sapiens as far back as 500,000 thousand years. Probably started with cause and effect correlations to events.

Paleoanthropologists have said that we are social pattern-seeking primates. We look for patterns and sequences of events. Possible repetition. We may never understand totally the natural phenomena of superstition, but we seem to have a propensity to look for anecdotes instead of evidence. We seem to have to be trained to do the latter.

The superstitious belief of personal revelation for example. What makes some people think warm fuzzy euphoric feelings while reading scripture is an interaction with God, but those same exact feelings and emotions while doing a strenous mountaineering adventure is considered physiological? Brain chemistry or hypoxia? Maybe it depends on what you have been behaviorally trained to look for.

Is superstition a form of fear or paranoia possibly? Insecurity?

eudemonia - 01 March 2010 02:16 PM

The superstitious belief of personal revelation for example. What makes some people think warm fuzzy euphoric feelings while reading scripture is an interaction with God, but those same exact feelings and emotions while doing a strenous mountaineering adventure is considered physiological? Brain chemistry or hypoxia? Maybe it depends on what you have been behaviorally trained to look for.

Maybe it’s because they are completely different experiences. But you wouldn’t know anything about that.

‘But you wouldn’t know anything about that.’

Sure? Always talking like you know what I don’t know.

That’s the problem Bruce, you people always KNOW. Pretty amazing arrogance IMO.

eudemonia - 01 March 2010 02:46 PM

‘But you wouldn’t know anything about that.’
Sure? Always talking like you know what I don’t know.
That’s the problem Bruce, you people always KNOW. Pretty amazing arrogance IMO.

For those who are too intellectually cowardly to face their sacred cows with anything remotely resembling an objective or intellectually honest approach, an utterly bullshit interpretation of a subjective experience is easy to defend even in the face of pretty clearly contrary evidence, merely by presuming; my subjective experience is obviously different (i.e. superior or more pure or more genuine, otherworldly ... whatever) from yours. If you were to have my (superior) experience you’d see things the way I do [more or less].

Remember, True Believer types don’t need a sound or even really very convincing form of plausibility for affirmation. That’s what faith (i.e. presumption coded into the proper franchise schema) is all about. We all know this, but often it’s still a bit alien to we non-believers and we forget how seriously faith compromises an otherwise healthy intellect—even an otherwise formidable intellect.

All true Byron, and I will add that Bruce simply ignored my apples to apples comparison to make his point which was irrelevant to the thread. I plainly stated that two different scenarios with the exact feelings and emotions’ Thus the symptoms they described would not be ‘different’ in my theoretical case, which was my exact point.

To dumb it down a little further for clarity-

If two people described the exact same set of symptoms concerning their revelation-and fMRI scans showed the same exact parts of their respective brains lit up while experiencing such events-

A Christian while reading scripture enduring this experience could and often would attribute it to a revelation from God.

While an Alpinist while climbing might attribute it to hypoxia or brain chemistry changes during exasperating physical activity.

Further, the Alpinist could be a religious person and in fact attribute the experience to a revelation from God, but rarely will a Christian attribute any kind of emotional experience while reading scriptures to natural brain chemistry.

That I think is the just of my point.

This is all confirmation bias on the part of the true believer.

Many people from many walks of life have mental states known as personal revelations. They are only religious/spiritual in origin when the person having the experience wants them to be.

Test Name:  Bruces in partibus infidelium (in the region of the infidels)

If Bruce was taking part in a scientific test, a brain scan - I suspect that when given a Bible and told to read Mathew 8:23-27 - (Jesus successfully commanding the storm to stop), one part of his brain would light up.  When given the Koran and told to read a short passage about a similar miraculous event, a different part of his brain would light up.

If we accept that our ancestors, the first “modern” humans, had the same intellectual potential as we….  They would have been confronted with a world
that was mighty confusing.  Sun, Moon, and stars all moving around for no apparent reason, the Earth shaking now and then, volcanoes erupting…

All that sort of thing.  The idea that all this was being caused by some sort of spirits or entities would have been quite logical.  This idea would
have been reinforced by a variety of psychological phenomena that we are just now beginning to understand.  So far as we know, all primitives
believe in some sort of animism… Animating spirits responsiible for all manner of things.
As cultures matured, these spirits would morph into gods and eventually Gods. 
I agree that belief in the supernatural would have been ancient indeed, but also that our ancestors could not be blamed for coming to these
conclusions.

unsmoked - 02 March 2010 11:52 AM

Test Name:  Bruces in partibus infidelium (in the region of the infidels)

If Bruce was taking part in a scientific test, a brain scan - I suspect that when given a Bible and told to read Mathew 8:23-27 - (Jesus successfully commanding the storm to stop), one part of his brain would light up.  When given the Koran and told to read a short passage about a similar miraculous event, a different part of his brain would light up.

If remember one of SH’s reports, the same part of the brain shows increased inferred (by increased blood flow from an FMRI)neuronal activity. 

Dennis

unsmoked - 01 March 2010 01:57 PM

For the sake of discussion, one could argue that religion began with the first lucky rabbit foot or similar charm.  That would put it back about 250,000 years before the dawn of agriculture.  That would put it back to the hunter/gatherer Neanderthals or their next of kin.

I suppose it has only been in the last blink of human history that a few people have found freedom from superstition.  Today, most parents and societies still teach their children to be superstitious.  After 250,000 years of it, there’s a case for saying that humans are by nature superstitious.  Are they?  How many Danish children, raised by non-superstitious parents in a non-superstitious society, become superstitious?

The first campfire story that had heroic biblical overtones was probably told 250,000 years before the Bible was written.  DAVID AND GOLIATH.  It was likely told by the first human who killed a mastodon with a spear.  Maybe it was told by his more articulate hunting partners who witnessed it.

“Superstitious” behavior that has been coincidentally rewarded behavior. Lots of that around.

Dennis

Bikewer - 06 March 2010 08:45 AM

I agree that belief in the supernatural would have been ancient indeed, but also that our ancestors could not be blamed for coming to these conclusions.

Only our contemporaries, my man, only our contemporaries.