Is religion fundamental to human nature?

[Nerissa]

So this is a statement I posted in my introduction thread. A bit out there, perhaps, but it is what I believe.
The reason I chose to study religion studies is because I was so intrigued by how widespread religion is. Although there is some debate on the topic, practically every culture knows some form of religion, no matter how remote or primitive they might be. Or how evolved and modern, for that matter. Isn't it interesting that all over the world, people have beliefs in something? It might be a belief in ancestors or spirits of nature, or deities or gods or magic or some sort of energy that surrounds us all - whatever the case may be, there is hardly a culture to be found that believes there is absolutely nothing else than what meets the eye. The most obvious example is burial rites - so many customs and rituals to ease the "soul's" passing. Why bother if we're all just humps of flesh?

I was just wondering how you all feel about this. I know in modern times it is increasingly popular to state that one believes in nothing - but how true is that, really?

 

[Laika]

So this is a statement I posted in my introduction thread. A bit out there, perhaps, but it is what I believe.
The reason I chose to study religion studies is because I was so intrigued by how widespread religion is. Although there is some debate on the topic, practically every culture knows some form of religion, no matter how remote or primitive they might be. Or how evolved and modern, for that matter. Isn't it interesting that all over the world, people have beliefs in something? It might be a belief in ancestors or spirits of nature, or deities or gods or magic or some sort of energy that surrounds us all - whatever the case may be, there is hardly a culture to be found that believes there is absolutely nothing else than what meets the eye. The most obvious example is burial rites - so many customs and rituals to ease the "soul's" passing. Why bother if we're all just humps of flesh?

I was just wondering how you all feel about this. I know in modern times it is increasingly popular to state that one believes in nothing - but how true is that, really?

Religion serves certain functions of human understanding which are innately required, but I wouldn't say religion itself is innate. We need to make sense of the world, know our place in it, what we are doing, where we are going and ultimately making sense of 'why' we are here at all. Whilst science has got better at understanding the natural world, many of the existential and moral questions remain unanswered or very uncertain from an atheist and humanist point of view.
We have certain emotional and psychological needs and the stereotype of nihilism is that it represents an impoverishment of our sense of being. It is certainly possible to reject religious belief, but it remains partial and most atheists continue to inherit ideas from religious traditions as part of a secular compromise. Militant forms of atheism in both anarchism and communism have proven to be abortive and generally belong to groups of intellectuals rather than anything more widespread. They have focused too heavily on rejecting the past rather than building a future in which people have fulfilling beliefs without the need for religion. They often therefore often fit negative nihilist stereotypes.
I would argue its because they haven't been able to provide fulfilling answers, rather than the impossibility of such answers. Rather than directing our lives towards unseen forces which may or may not exist and we have little control over, we learn to direct our sense of meaning a purpose towards each other and consciously realize our common shared sense of being, we may necessarily be able to make sense of our own individual existence as part of a wider human context.

 

[Breathe]

I believe it is. All tribes have some form of spirituality, even the Pirahã, whom some try to wrongly believe are not. I do not really separate 'spirits' from 'gods', as the line is very... well... fuzzy. Often the spirits are gods, except when they are not. It depends. Can one separate, say, a kami spirit from a kami god? Æsir are often álfar, as well, and it's all confusing.

I believe it is innate in humans. We are 'wired' for it. I think that this probably evolved in one of our earlier ancestors, as we have reason to believe that non h. sapiens have also performed burial rituals, and so on.

Those who claim to believe in 'nothing', are, from my experience, the fervent in something else: politics, sports (football/soccer fans are freaky as hell to me), drink, drugs, sex, feminism, social justice, nationalism, gym, martial arts, or, occasionally even obsessing over religion and trying to shove it away and getting upset at the mere mention of belief near them (usually despite shoving their own non-belief on everyone else). I suspect I'm not the only one who has experiences like this.

The reason why is partially because we are social animals; a loss of religion or spirituality (as we know, the terms are not synonymous) often makes people look for fulfilling connections elsewhere and often try to find meaning in life somewhere else, which is not a bad thing. It's good to have many meanings in life. I find connections and meaning in faith, family, friends, volunteering, and so on.

Ironically, some of the most fervent atheists I've met have often been some of the most superstitious, too. I know an atheist, for example, who won't eat apart from on 'lucky hours', and another who won't drive the same way to and from a destination because it's bad luck, which is really annoying when you're travelling with him and he takes the long route to get back. Of course, what can be defined as superstition often depends, too. Humans are an interesting bunch, and I don't think we can be wholly rational or logical, as much as we would probably like to be.

The bad thing with any group or anything one invests part of one's time or core into being is when it causes people to be bad. Things are generally not, by themselves, necessarily bad (people may or may not have differing views on which of these from my list are bad, I'm keeping out of that), but, like art, or sex, there can be (unquestioningly) bad faith, bad politics, bad nationalism, and so on.

 

[fantome profane]

I think there is a problem with how we are defining religion. The concept of "religion" as a separate and distinct set of beliefs and practices is a relatively new concept. Modern societies seem to strive to keep "religion" separated and isolated from politics, from work, from recreational activities and entertainment. And the more we do this, the more we define religion as a separate distinct thing, the more it becomes unnecessary.

You say that practically every culture has known some kind of religion, but look at how the majority of different cultures throughout history have their religion integrated into everything they do. Their politics is all about their religion, the way they make their living and produce food, clothing and shelter is religious, their sports activities are religious. And if everything is religious, then nothing is religious.

What exactly is the difference between a religious belief, and a belief? What is the difference between a religious activity and just something we do?

I think we have created an artificial concept and called it "religion" and then we superimpose that on other cultures and conclude every culture has some form of religion. We see religion where there is just culture.

I thing to answer the question you really need to break down and examine that term "religion".

 

[DawudTalut]

...... how widespread religion is... practically every culture knows some form of religion, no matter how remote or primitive they might be. Or how evolved and modern, for that matter. Isn't it interesting that all over the world, people have beliefs in something? ....The most obvious example is burial rites - so many customs and rituals to ease the "soul's" passing. Why bother if we're all just humps of flesh? I was just wondering how you all feel about this.

Peace be on you...It is God Who first spoke to capable people and gave His message to distribute. That is why idea of God and religion is present everywhere.....When people forgot message, new message was sent.

There is an inborn urge in all human to think, speak and acts according to certain teaching of morals and spirituality.

All founders of religions were people of slender means. They addressed all sort of people. They rose from humble to heights.

They were well honoured before their claims. They were truthful. It is impossible that they suddenly start to tell lies about God.

They knew little about those things (arts, culture....) which are essential for a great leadership. Yet they taught something which was ahead of their times. Their teachings made their follows to reach heights.

They spoke against the popular thoughts, eventually they succeeded against odds.

It all shows that a great Power sent them to teach to people the ways of life which make connection with God.

That is why you finds various signs of religions everywhere and in all instances.

I know in modern times it is increasingly popular to state that one believes in nothing - but how true is that, really?

Our such friend, many a times, are found discussing God and faith. It shows that people search for peace in God. Then why they seems denying it? Because they were born in some faith which could not solve or address their specific problems. So first they showed some disappointment and then they reacted but they really want to fill this vacant place in their hearts and minds.!

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

I was just wondering how you all feel about this.

Yes, it is. We are predisposed to presume preternatural agency. Beyond this but related to it, as Yi Fu Tuan wrote:

"the religious person is one who seeks coherence and meaning in his world, and a religious culture is one that has a clearly structured world view. The religious impulse is to tie things together. ... All human beings are religious if religion is broadly defined as the impulse for coherence and meaning. The strength of the impulse varies enormously from culture to culture, and from person to person."​

 

[Quintessence]

I'll take the fact that anthropologists consider it one of the five basic institutions that all human societies have... as a yes.

I'm sure I could write out something more detailed if I wanted to, but I think others have covered what else I might say well enough, particularly Jayhawker Soule above.

 

[Revoltingest]

Religion is fundamental to some (even a majority), but not to all humans. A number of us just never had those needs or feelings. Tis like asking if heterosexuality is fundamental to humans.....it is to most, but not all.

 

[George-ananda]

I think there can be multiple reasons for the prevalence of spiritual/religious beliefs in pretty much all cultures. Humans want understanding and control of nature (propitiating the gods was one way). They saw all these fantastic things in the world and had no scientific framework to figure out how/why they came to be so they developed stories. Plus I think ancient people were more right-brained and actually experienced genuine things (I'm a believer) that are beyond the physical and tried to understand it; particularly shaman, holy-men, etc..

 

[Twilight Hue]

No. I don't view religion itself as being innate , yet rather a result.

My take that it's our natural compulsion to explore and to understand how things work and why. Religion oftentimes provides the easiest venue for answers when conventional means fall short or is found insufficient.

 

[morphesium]

So this is a statement I posted in my introduction thread. A bit out there, perhaps, but it is what I believe.
The reason I chose to study religion studies is because I was so intrigued by how widespread religion is. Although there is some debate on the topic, practically every culture knows some form of religion, no matter how remote or primitive they might be. Or how evolved and modern, for that matter. Isn't it interesting that all over the world, people have beliefs in something? It might be a belief in ancestors or spirits of nature, or deities or gods or magic or some sort of energy that surrounds us all - whatever the case may be, there is hardly a culture to be found that believes there is absolutely nothing else than what meets the eye. The most obvious example is burial rites - so many customs and rituals to ease the "soul's" passing. Why bother if we're all just humps of flesh?

I was just wondering how you all feel about this. I know in modern times it is increasingly popular to state that one believes in nothing - but how true is that, really?

NO, religion is not fundamental to human nature.

In the past, as humanity progressed into tribal societies and beyond, power always had to be vested with a few for proper administration. And it was easy for them to realize that they could guarantee their strong hold the most if they could take advantage of the fact that

1. The fear of the unknown is always much greater than fear of the known.
2. There is always the uncertainty of the future.
3. People had to suffer extreme hard ships for their survival and this demanded something strong to pacify them.

and nothing fits better than the God factor and hence the formation of a religion. This is something very easy to sell and makes the least oppression which they can easily suppress with some magical trickery and stories. Additionally, it has a very addictive nature and can propel itself for generations. Rituals and other holy practices were incorporated into it which not only strengthened the religious bondage, but also helped the religious heads to keep an eye on those who are stepping away from such practices. followers are easily made to believe that they get some form of divine protection.

so as different tribes formed, so were different stories and different gods. As societies merged or progressed or destroyed through war etc, so was religion.

In these societies, there were always evil practices and , there are always good and exceptional people who keep much advanced thoughts and they stand against the evils in the society. They take people or society from dark ages and enlighten them. Unfortunately just like ordinary people these great ones also die.(Religion is a always good business - then and now). Some people seeing a business opportunity (and for power), sanctifies this person. So laws are made are kept as such. Not (never) to be changed at all. Then existing scientific proofs are added to give it more credibility. Rituals and practices make it imprinted on those who practice it. This is how a typical non-tribal religion is formed - and 1,2, and 3 are still valid here.

Additionally,

4. Constant thinking (even way of thinking) and practices make things hardwired in the brain and once it is hardwired (kind of habitulazing), it is very difficult to break such thoughts and practices. This is the reason religion keeps lingering even if our rational minds finds faults with it. (Once hardwired, it takes strong will and determination to break free from this).​

It is these (1, 2, 3 & 4 ) that are fundamental to human nature, not religion. It is the reason why people from very religious families/scocities/countries tend to be deeply rooted to religion. Give them free mind and free will, they will eventually break free from their religion - because it is not fundamental to human nature.

 

[Nerissa]

A number of us just never had those needs or feelings

But that's what I was wondering. Is it possible to have no such feelings whatsoever? I understand that not all people feel the need to pray or join a community etc, but don't we all believe there is something beyond us? I mean, even people who don't believe in "anything" have thoughts about death. What about believe in a soul that survives death?

I thing to answer the question you really need to break down and examine that term "religion".

True. Not an easy thing to do though, defining religion. In this case, I meant religion in its broadest sense, a set of beliefs about the world that often include some kind of supernatural entity. Spirituality would be included in this. Although I understand the nuances and differences between the two, I thought we'd save that discussion for another time
But for now, for the sole purpose of this discussion, I suppose by religion I mean any kind of faith, particularly in the supernatural.

 

[Revoltingest]

Is it possible to have no such feelings whatsoever? I understand that not all people feel the need to pray or join a community etc, but don't we all believe there is something beyond us? I mean, even people who don't believe in "anything" have thoughts about death. What about believe in a soul that survives death?

I've never had any desire for such stuff.

 

[fantome profane]

True. Not an easy thing to do though, defining religion. In this case, I meant religion in its broadest sense, a set of beliefs about the world that often include some kind of supernatural entity. Spirituality would be included in this. Although I understand the nuances and differences between the two, I thought we'd save that discussion for another time
But for now, for the sole purpose of this discussion, I suppose by religion I mean any kind of faith, particularly in the supernatural.

Be careful even there. Some cultures don't have that divide that we have between the "natural" and the "supernatural".

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

I think it obviously is, for humanity in general. Socially speaking, it provides organizing and psychological effects. Even in the absence of spiritual beliefs, humans have formed quasi-religions out of political ideologies such as Fascism, NS, Stalinism, Maoism, etc. North Korea is a very religious state, for example.

 

[Skwim]

I know in modern times it is increasingly popular to state that one believes in nothing - but how true is that, really?

"Religiosity is on the decline in the U.S. and atheism is on the rise, according to a new worldwide poll.

The poll, called "The Global Index of Religiosity and Atheism," found that the number of Americans who say they are "religious" dropped from 73 percent in 2005 (the last time the poll was conducted) to 60 percent.

At the same time, the number of Americans who say they are atheists rose, from 1 percent to 5 percent." [that's a 500% increase][ See dumb post below

that says it's 400%. It's right of course, and 500% is wrong, but still dumb.

Nobody hides their tuna fish sandwich in a toilet bowl.]
source

______________________________________________


"The other finding is that atheists are now 13% of the world population, an increase of 9% since 2005:"
source​

 

[Revoltingest]

At the same time, the number of Americans who say they are atheists rose, from 1 percent to 5 percent. [that's a 500% increase]

That's a 400% increase.

(You know I just had to do that.)

 

[Certitude]

So this is a statement I posted in my introduction thread. A bit out there, perhaps, but it is what I believe.
The reason I chose to study religion studies is because I was so intrigued by how widespread religion is. Although there is some debate on the topic, practically every culture knows some form of religion, no matter how remote or primitive they might be. Or how evolved and modern, for that matter. Isn't it interesting that all over the world, people have beliefs in something? It might be a belief in ancestors or spirits of nature, or deities or gods or magic or some sort of energy that surrounds us all - whatever the case may be, there is hardly a culture to be found that believes there is absolutely nothing else than what meets the eye. The most obvious example is burial rites - so many customs and rituals to ease the "soul's" passing. Why bother if we're all just humps of flesh?

I was just wondering how you all feel about this. I know in modern times it is increasingly popular to state that one believes in nothing - but how true is that, really?

The question of whether religion is fundamental to human nature requires us to first define exactly what human nature is and second to define what religion is. These are big questions.

 

[Skwim]

The question of whether religion is fundamental to human nature requires us to first define exactly what human nature is and second to define what religion is. These are big questions.

While I don't see any questions, defining religion is best left to the arrogant who think they actually know and let them blather on. Soooo, I think the definition should be turned back to the OP poster and let her define it as she wishes. We can then take it from there.

 

[Nerissa]

Humans want understanding and control of nature

Socially speaking, it provides organizing and psychological effects.

I've been thinking about that. I understand these are all functions of religion, important ones, too, and I know some scholars have claimed these were the bases for many religions. But was religion really the only way to accomplish such goals? It got me thinking, perhaps there actually is some kind of thing, some feeling or instinct that all people feel or felt and that inspired them to believe. Why else would it be so similar all over the world?
If religion were just some kind of "coping system", wouldn't there have been cultures that came up with different systems or solutions to those difficulties?