Quoth ITR Champion:
Have we ever successfully identified a gene or complex of genes for any psychological trait? I mean, clearly, humans are genetically more intelligent than, say, sheep. What genes do humans have that sheep lack that give us this greater intelligence? Would you claim that a failure to identify such genes calls into doubt the assertion that humans are smarter than sheep?
Pssst, Nazi Germany wasn’t atheistic. Gott mit uns.
Besides, rape and murder is what conquerors do. I don’t think you can ascribe it to any specific belief system.
Honestly, it appeared they were trying to answer a question with an important difference. It seemed they were trying to say, “Since this is universal, it must convey an advantage. So, what is that advantage?”
Those are all examples of religious folk persecuting others, though the victims aren’t identified by religion in some of the cases. For Stalin, communism was, for all practical purposes, a religion.
Look at pack animals, like wolves. If one of the follower wolves challenges the lead wolf, that’s seen as an act of antagonism. The pack can’t survive the hardships of the world if it’s split between leaders, so the challenger either has to become the leader, die, or leave the group. Within a human pack, rather than duking it out with fisticuffs, it’s more likely that the chief will send the challenger out on a particularly dangerous hunt, devise some sort of crime to charge the guy with and have him killed, or simply kill him straight out. I’m not saying that this happens every time. Some chiefs might be more accepting or diplomatic about rebellious attitudes, but over the course of thousands of generations there will be some amount of evolutionary pressure towards a default setting of taking what the big boss says as inviolate – particularly where there doesn’t seem to be any useful purpose in arguing with him.
There’s evidence to make it (or something similar) seem likely, yes:
We know that cognitive biases are true, as shown by testing on human subjects. If we then take Occam’s Razor to the two options:
Not to mention that Japan committed much more rape than Nazi Germany, who probably committed about as much as the Western Allied powers, especially when you take into account the greater opportunities for it.
Germany was quite Christian, acting the way Christians typically do when they can. Mass murdering Jews is as Christian as it gets. As for Communism, Communism is just another religion, and acts like one. That’s why when you want to vilify atheism you need to turn to communism, and pretend they are the same thing. Or pretend that Nazi Germany was atheistic.
Such a question would be leaping to a conclusion; it is equally possible that there are other evolutionarily advantageous traits for which religion is a side effect. Possibly even a detrimental side effect - so long as the detriment isn’t worse than the benefits gained from the orignal traits that (incidentally) cause the predelication towards religion.
In fact, I would say this is obviously what happened; imagination, pattern detection, the tendency to presume that things have a cause, and the tendency to seek ways to influence the world around onesself are all obviously advantagous traits, which just as obviously would, taken with a largely unmapped and misunderstand environment, lead a person or society to search for intelligence in their surroundings as a way to both infer explanations of seemingly random events; and to possibly find some way to predict or appeal to the natures of these spirits in order to more safely navigate “their” domains.
This phenomenon would only cease to occur when science advanced to the point where people felt that their environment was sufficiently mapped without requiring gods to fill in the gaps in their understanding.
How this relates to the “I feel the universe watching me” phonomena, I suspect, is that once a person believes that there are observers, there is a natural tendency to imagine that one is “aware” of their gaze - this might be an evolutionary advantagous trait as well, in that wariness in the presence of known or potential threats would be obviously advantageous. But once one has convinced themselves that God is everywhere, watching, always watching, then this “I am being watched” sense could in theory occur anytime, triggered from within by the belief that an observer is present.
This would explain the apparent difference in frequency of this sensation between the theists and atheists in this thread.
Yep, that’s what I find likely too. I think I called it potentially a “byproduct” upthread, but same dealio.
I think religion could make some groups more cohesive, and by doing so could give them an advantage. But we’re always grouping things, and hardly need religious groupings, too.
Perhaps it’s more a feeling of guilt. It may seem like someone is watching you because you think you wouldn’t feel guilty if no one was watching you.
It’s probably not, it’s just a by-product of other evolutionary advantages.
Kinda like masturbation… We’ve got the manual dexterity for it, (and the handy opposable thumbs for us guys), the cognitive ability to create scenarios in our heads to make it more pleasurable… and react to them as they really existed. It’s not that masturbation as such has an evolutionary advantage, it’s just that we have several otherwise advantageous traits that we employ for that purpose.
I believe religion offers advantages, but on the societal level - in essence, it offers mechanisms for integrating human societies on a scale much larger than the tribal, or even the early state. Historically, this offers groups which adopted religion obvious advantages over groups which did not.
Other mechanisms offer such transcending effects, but they tended to either rely on personal leadership/military power/charisma and so have a short life-span (examples: empire of Alexander, Mongols) or developed more recently (such as the modern nation-state, poltical-imperial state such as the Soviet Union, or more or less voluntary association such as the EU).
To an extent, religion competes with these other forms of cohesion, but over human history it has proved remarkably successful and durable in offering solid advantages to adherants as a group - a set of rules for social organization that do not depend on personal charisma alone for enforcement, for example.
There was a show a while ago on one of the learning type channels (Discovery maybe) where a scientist was studying this sensation. He was testing a device that could induce this sensation a high percentage of the time…supposedly even in atheists. 
Now, that’s not the same thing as believing it was god, but I’d say that even you could be induced to FEEL some sort of presence or sensation of ‘being watched’, since it seems to be part of the general make up of the human mind. Unless your mind doesn’t work the same as the rest of us humans, of course.
-XT
I have to object to both this and the thread title. There isn’t “religion”, there are and have been many religions. There isn’t “God”, there are a variety of various magical creatures.
The earliest religions, from what I’m aware, didn’t set any rules for living. They didn’t teach morality nor social structure. Outside of a few ceremonies to be performed from time to time – probably quite often as some sort of village party – there wasn’t any more “there” there than that.
We know nothing about the form that the earliest religions had. Nothing. We know our stone age ancestors buried (at least some of) their dead. We don’t know why. But we don’t even know when the concept of spirit or supernatural first entered our ancestors thoughts. It might have been before we evolved as a species. In fact, it is likely to be so since Neanderthals also buried their dead. The implication of that shared behavior is that it might have been inherited from our common ancestor.
Eh, true in a sense. But looking at the similarities of religions among hunter-gatherer tribes which have survived to the days of writing that there’s enough confluence to say that it’s likely that the beliefs of any hunter-gatherer society, during any age, likely bears those same shared traits.
Nothing? What about the earth mother cults and figurines? I thought that at least some conclusions could be drawn from the archeology. Also, I thought there was a lot of evidence of ancestor worship and spirit totem worship.
-XT
Nope. It’s unlikely that the earliest religious beliefs sprung forth fully formed in their modern sense. And I use the term “modern” for the practices of any extant human group. Like I said, those earliest beliefs could very well predate our existence as a species.
We can only guess at what those things were. And we have no idea what predated them, as something surely did.
Sure. But I’d say it’s a good bet that SOMETHING predated them. Our brains haven’t changed that much in the last few hundred thousand years, after all…merely our knowledge base (hardware vs software, so to speak). Myself, I don’t think there is an evolutionary advantage to spiritualism…I simply think that it’s a side effect of our rather unique brain. More a bug than I feature I suppose.
-XT