Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
1. mental stability in the face of failure and opposition.
2. lower anxiety in the face of failure
3. A drive and reason to oppress others and out-compete them
4. A sense of understanding for [evolutionary] feelings of Disgust, etc
5. mental stability in the face of lack of complete knowledge
6. A sense of community and connectedness
7. an escape mechanism and hatch against the fear of death
8. An ability to deify something "other" which is wholly your own, and thus escape oppression.
The survival benefits of believing that an individual or group having a belief in their cause or their war or their theory is often seen. Many an athelete gains that much needed self -belief that helps them to get that extra bit of performance. More than one political figure carried on despite setbacks and achieved greatness and notoriety because of their belief that 'Destiny' had their success planned out.
I certainly feel that there is a 'faith' gene as an evolutionary trait which has evolved as a survival mechanism. I could be wrong and we may have a brain -lobe that communicates with God. On the other hand, the lobe of the brain that may be the one that communicates with God, 'God' or god (or 'god') may just be the one that lights up on the board when entertaining the belief that the postman always calls when one is taking a shower (citation needed ).
Yep, my current pet theory is that religious faith is a great survival mechanism and that the more fiercely intensively observed it is, the more it instills a cultural identity, the more it can succeed in enabling a people to survive against all the odds to make them extinct. I'll leave the others to think up examples.
I have of late decided there's evidence of those who are satisfied with, or in need of, completely simplified and perhaps inexplicable externally generated explanations for how things come to be, and then there are those (of us) as a separate cohort who are far happier (and accepting of...) getting to the bottom of how things actually work!
Given the stridently diverse insistence on such matters, I've concluded that there may well be an actual genetic component predisposition to this obvious and glaring dichotomy. This then leads to the possibility of there being (<gasp!>)two different species () of hominids out there.
1) Those who were selected for by active unnatural church Evolutionary activities (lynchings, floggings, public thrashings or burnings, mandatory bible school for otherwise naive kids, etc.) versus...
2) The more open-minded approach, one that rewards critical thinking, inquisitiveness, and an open acceptance of alternate ideas. Plus an intellectual ability to see that very little in this universe is carved in absolute stone.
Some things, OK: yes to gravity, no to God, etc. But otherwise we simply have to be always open to new ideas. Given some supporting evidence of course. The big loss loser of organized religion, always. It's always simply based on hope, fear and "feelings" of faith.
Homosapiensacceptans vs. H. s. criticalium. Unable to cross-breed successfully, thus each species is "speciating" at a measurable rate. (After all, the percentage and absolute numbers of Christians is on the decline, but that is matched, unfortunately, by a steady rise of Islamic fundamentalism, which does indeed breed on illiteracy)
As to which "socialize species" is perhaps better adapted for future survival, given the increasing stresses and strains our society is now enduring, is your opinion. However, as a scientist, I'll always go with the numbers…
I certainly feel that there is a 'faith' gene as an evolutionary trait which has evolved as a survival mechanism. I could be wrong and we may have a brain -lobe that communicates with God. On the other hand, the lobe of the brain that may be the one that communicates with God, 'God' or god (or 'god') may just be the one that lights up on the board when entertaining the belief that the postman always calls when one is taking a shower (citation needed ).
Quote:
Originally Posted by rifleman
Given the stridently diverse insistence on such matters, I've concluded that there may well be an actual genetic component predisposition to this obvious and glaring dichotomy. This then leads to the possibility of there being (<gasp!>)two different species () of hominids out there.
1) Those who were selected for by active unnatural church Evolutionary activities (lynchings, floggings, public thrashings or burnings, mandatory bible school for otherwise naive kids, etc.) versus...
2) The more open-minded approach, one that rewards critical thinking, inquisitiveness, and an open acceptance of alternate ideas. Plus an intellectual ability to see that very little in this universe is carved in absolute stone.
Homosapiensacceptans vs. H. s. criticalium. Unable to cross-breed successfully, thus each species is "speciating" at a measurable rate. (After all, the percentage and absolute numbers of Christians is on the decline, but that is matched, unfortunately, by a steady rise of Islamic fundamentalism, which does indeed breed on illiteracy)
As to which "socialize species" is perhaps better adapted for future survival, given the increasing stresses and strains our society is now enduring, is your opinion. However, as a scientist, I'll always go with the numbers…
Quote:
Originally Posted by AREQUIPA
I like your theory. But how does is account for Hominus superstitiensis speciating to Hominus Rationalis just by reading the Bible?
Ah . . . two of my favorite and most enjoyable heathen posters!I think you might be on to something . . . but I fear you have the species misidentified. I believe we are dealing with homo sapiens sensitiviensis abstractus and homo sapiens obliviensis concretus!
Given the stridently diverse insistence on such matters, I've concluded that there may well be an actual genetic component predisposition to this obvious and glaring dichotomy. This then leads to the possibility of there being (<gasp!>)two different species () of hominids out there.
Actually I recall reading recently a study of conservatives vs liberals that suggest that, whether due to gene expression, biochemistry or something else, there really is a difference in perception between the two groups that goes beyond mere opinion or preference; they truly perceive differently. IIRC, for purposes of this study, they were not talking so much about politics as about social issues / preferences, so it certainly could apply to conservative theists vs liberal theists, agnostics, or others with loosely held beliefs.
I have observed that conservative believers need certainty and concrete "answers", and find the magic words "I don't know" or "it depends" to be well nigh intolerable. There are also lots of slippery slope concerns that if some immediately minor uncertainty is tolerated or some fairly minor rule bent, there is terrible danger of the wheels coming off and their world flying apart. They seem over-concerned with unintended consequences, as if society is stretched thin and tight and could rip apart with the slightest mis-step.
On the other hand, progressive / liberal thought is more inclined to see society as a complex system, and complex systems tend to be resilient and self-healing. It's more willing to experiment and try different things and objectively evaluate the outcomes. Having recently moved to a fairly liberal community, I am impressed with the difference in response to unexpected difficulties in civic endeavors. I was reading the other day about a civic project which proved way more expensive than expected once the bids were in. In other areas I've lived, this would tend to result in cries of "see, I told you it can't be done" and probably "kicking the can down the road" or killing the project outright. Here, it was very different. Various parties came forward with creative ideas. The most costly parts of the project were isolated and given particular attention. New technology was applied, out of the box thinking was in evidence. The project is going forward, better and stronger than ever, with a combination of cost savings, relaxed timelines and location of additional revenue sources.
Conservatism also seems to be associated with more pessimism about humanity in general, which tends to argue for some external agency to help hold things together, and for denial of credit to people for their legitimate accomplishments.
So, maybe conservatism is a desire for un-nuanced simplicity -- which, itself, tends to support hard and fast, black and white cause and effect.
My random thoughts for what they are worth, if anything.
For anyone who's heard about the theory of a "God gene" (or set of genes), do you feel this theory has merit?
If so, what, from an evolutionary standpoint, do you feel the benefit of a "God gene" would have been? How would it have been a positive for humans?
I would be more for a byproduct theory rather than any theory that there is a gene "for" belief in god.
Take the common cold for example. We do not have any genes "for" catching it. Yet we catch it all the time. Why? The reason is that our genes do do a lot of things and the ability to catch the common cold is a side effect of this. Similarly moths do not have a gene "for" flying into a candle flame. They have genes for other things which in the presence of a candle flame "misfire" and cause them to fly into it.
Similarly I do not see any reason to think we have a gene or set of genes "for" belief in god. Rather we have evolved to see patterns, to assume intention behind everything around us, and so forth and these things have left us susceptible to the side effect of thinking there is a god.
Ah . . . two of my favorite and most enjoyable heathen posters!I think you might be on to something . . . but I fear you have the species misidentified. I believe we are dealing with homo sapiens sensitiviensis abstractus and homo sapiens obliviensis concretus!
Sorry, it is biologists and palaeontologists who get to label species, not philosophers. Since your monickers latinize believing -the -abstract -to -be -physical -man and ignoring- the -obvious- man, there is probably a good reason why.
plus....
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vizio
No....by some gullible sheep on the left.
Thank you. Another entry for the Theist -English dictionary.
'Gullible' ..preferring to believe what is indicated by mere evidence instead of taking unsupported Bible-claims on faith.
Last edited by TRANSPONDER; 04-24-2013 at 04:39 AM..
I would be more for a byproduct theory rather than any theory that there is a gene "for" belief in god.
Take the common cold for example. We do not have any genes "for" catching it. Yet we catch it all the time. Why? The reason is that our genes do do a lot of things and the ability to catch the common cold is a side effect of this. Similarly moths do not have a gene "for" flying into a candle flame. They have genes for other things which in the presence of a candle flame "misfire" and cause them to fly into it.
Similarly I do not see any reason to think we have a gene or set of genes "for" belief in god. Rather we have evolved to see patterns, to assume intention behind everything around us, and so forth and these things have left us susceptible to the side effect of thinking there is a god.
I agree. When I regard atheism as a subset of the rationalist worldview specifically related to god -claims (theist -think)I also regard the god -claims as a subset of the worldview that has a (possibly instinctive) preference for believing all manner of crap (cult -think) as absolutely true rather than waiting for an explanation or -even worse - being disappointed with a boringly mundane explanation.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
).
God Genes accepted.
) of hominids out there.
