The Human need for a (the) Creator or other higher being?

To the Creationist, it's simple. Mankind was created and, at least, at the beginning, had complete communion with his Creator. This one on one relationship was broken with the whole apple incident, in which woman broke the only rule that existed, encouraged the man to do the same, then, when found out, the man blamed the Creator for giving him the woman in the first place.

Over the next several hundred years, mankind was never far removed from that generation. For much of it, we could point to the one who walked and talked with God. When they (Adam and Eve and even Cain and Seth) died, there was someone who was only a couple of generations removed from these. Yet, polytheism and pantheism (which, yes, technically predate Judaism and Christianity as organized faiths) seeped in and, eventually reigned. Until Noah. Then we had this one guy out of thousands who did what the Creator told him to, and, by his family, was humankind saved. Still, over generations, mankind moved back into poly/pantheism, which was prevalent in the time of Abram. And so it goes through biblical history, at least.

Naturally, the Creationist points to an evil infuence (Satan, Lucifer, Mephisopheles, whatever), which seeks to pull the human race away from God. Yet, even in doing so, it is not primarily into atheism. It may be a guess, but I would think that wiccans (for instance) outnumber atheists on any given day.

From a Creation POV, one can only conclude that world religions have been created because man, as created, has a need for a higher power. These religions provide a structure/substitute for that need for God, obfuscating faith in Him.

*** This is not meant to slam other faiths! *** I am trying to objectively explore a facet of humanity from an obviously Judeo-Christian worldview, which I hold, to that which is most diametrically opposed to it, the secular humanist worldview ***

So mankind (and womankind!) is created to need God. If a human doesn't find God, s/he finds something else to fill that void. Great music, poetry and art have been devoted to God. People have gone to great lengths, from within and without, to destroy faith (or the structure, called religion). It divides us today as it did from the earliest we know.

Why?

The answer is easy from a Creationist's POV.

So, for what reason, in strictly evolutionary terms, would humans, and humans only, develop a need for a Higher Power? And why does it persist in being central to society?

Animals fight, but they fight for food, territory and mates. Animals communicate on a rudimentary level, to warn others, warn away or say, "Hey, there's food here!" or "Hey, I'm horny!" Humans do all of this on a much more sophisticated level (Is it, sometimes?), then we fight about the Supreme Being.

Why? What evolutionary mechanism explains how and why? How does it implement self survival and/or group survival? How does it attract a mate? How does it feed the individual? What is it good for, and, if nothing, why hasn't it found its way out of the gene pool?

And, since I don't subscribe to evolution, I don't want a "God evolved us that way." answer. Evolution is, inherently, a godless worldview. That well meaning Christians have mixed the two viewpoints to reconcile what schools are teaching with what they want their kids to believe in have diluted both "theories" with each other is a cop out to both worldviews.

Control. Religion allows others to control your behavior.
The church has more influence than governments.

Now, ask yourself how religion attracts a mate, finds you food and shelter, etc. If it doesn't do these things, why does it still exist?

You mention music and poetry. How does evolution or religion explain them? They are uniquiely human as well.

[This message has been edited by Formula88 (edited 06-15-2005).]

quote Originally posted by Patrick's Dad: The Human need for a (the) Creator or other higher being? To the Creationist, it's simple. Mankind was created and, at least, at the beginning, had complete communion with his Creator. This one on one relationship was broken with the whole apple incident, in which woman broke the only rule that existed, encouraged the man to do the same, then, when found out, the man blamed the Creator for giving him the woman in the first place. Over the next several hundred years, mankind was never far removed from that generation. For much of it, we could point to the one who walked and talked with God. When they (Adam and Eve and even Cain and Seth) died, there was someone who was only a couple of generations removed from these. Yet, polytheism and pantheism (which, yes, technically predate Judaism and Christianity as organized faiths) seeped in and, eventually reigned. Until Noah. Then we had this one guy out of thousands who did what the Creator told him to, and, by his family, was humankind saved. Still, over generations, mankind moved back into poly/pantheism, which was prevalent in the time of Abram. And so it goes through biblical history, at least. Naturally, the Creationist points to an evil infuence (Satan, Lucifer, Mephisopheles, whatever), which seeks to pull the human race away from God. Yet, even in doing so, it is not primarily into atheism. It may be a guess, but I would think that wiccans (for instance) outnumber atheists on any given day. From a Creation POV, one can only conclude that world religions have been created because man, as created, has a need for a higher power. These religions provide a structure/substitute for that need for God, obfuscating faith in Him. *** This is not meant to slam other faiths! *** I am trying to objectively explore a facet of humanity from an obviously Judeo-Christian worldview, which I hold, to that which is most diametrically opposed to it, the secular humanist worldview *** So mankind (and womankind!) is created to need God. If a human doesn't find God, s/he finds something else to fill that void. Great music, poetry and art have been devoted to God. People have gone to great lengths, from within and without, to destroy faith (or the structure, called religion). It divides us today as it did from the earliest we know. Why? The answer is easy from a Creationist's POV. So, for what reason, in strictly evolutionary terms, would humans, and humans only, develop a need for a Higher Power? And why does it persist in being central to society? Animals fight, but they fight for food, territory and mates. Animals communicate on a rudimentary level, to warn others, warn away or say, "Hey, there's food here!" or "Hey, I'm horny!" Humans do all of this on a much more sophisticated level (Is it, sometimes?), then we fight about the Supreme Being. Why? What evolutionary mechanism explains how and why? How does it implement self survival and/or group survival? How does it attract a mate? How does it feed the individual? What is it good for, and, if nothing, why hasn't it found its way out of the gene pool? And, since I don't subscribe to evolution, I don't want a "God evolved us that way." answer. Evolution is, inherently, a godless worldview. That well meaning Christians have mixed the two viewpoints to reconcile what schools are teaching with what they want their kids to believe in have diluted both "theories" with each other is a cop out to both worldviews.

I don't have a "need for a creator". The whole premise is based on a biased opinion.

quote Originally posted by Formula88: Control. Religion allows others to control your behavior. The church has more influence than governments. Now, ask yourself how religion attracts a mate, finds you food and shelter, etc. If it doesn't do these things, why does it still exist? You mention music and poetry. How does evolution or religion explain them? They are uniquiely human as well.

The first presumes that humans have an intrinsic need to be controlled by something. There are people who need to control, of that, there is no dispute. But what makes followers?

Music, poetry and art can be explained as created to attract a mate. Look at Mick Jagger. How could he have gotten anyone without being a musician? There are explanations for these in both worldviews. But the need for a creator?

IMO, we are "Wired for Spirituality".

http://www.godpart.com/

For every physical characteristic that is universal to a species, there must exist some gene or set of genes responsible for the emergence of that particular trait. For example, the fact that all cats possess whiskers means that somewhere within a cat's chromosomes there must exist "whisker" genes. Of our own species, that all humans possess a nose in the middle of our face means that somewhere within our chromosomes there must exist "nose" genes that instruct our emerging bodies to develop one in that very place. It's not, for instance, as if a nose can develop anywhere on one's body, only by mere coincidence, it always ends up on our face. Apparently, humans are genetically "hard-wired" to develop in a very specific and particular way.

The same principle not only applies to universal physical traits, but to universal behaviors as well. Take, for instance, the fact that all honeybees construct their hives in the same hexagonal pattern. That all honeybee colonies, regardless of whether they've been exposed to any other, construct their hives in such an identical fashion means that they must be "hard-wired" to do so. It's not as if honeybees can build their hives any way they "desire," only by sheer coincidence all construct them in the same exact way. Apparently, honeybees are innately, that is, genetically "hard-wired" to construct their hives in this particular fashion. This would suggest that somewhere in the honeybees' brains there must exist a specific cluster of neurons that contain genetically inherited instructions which compel the bees to construct hexagonally shaped hives. The same principle holds true for anything from a peacock's instinct to display its feathers when exposed to an aroused peahen to a cat's instinct to groom itself. In essence, any behavior that is universal to any species is, more than likely, the consequence of a genetically inherited impulse or instinct. The above principle not only applies to honeybees, peacocks, or cats but to every life form, including our own. The fact, for instance, that every human culture - no matter how isolated - has communicated through language suggests that our species' linguistic capacities constitute a genetically inherited trait. Since our capacity for language represents a cognitive function, there must exist some very specific cluster of neurons within the brain from which our linguistic capacities are generated.

As we know such "linguistic" sites do exist in the human brain and include the Wernicke's area, Broca's area, and angular gyrus. Damage incurred to any one of these "language" specific sites will impair some very specific part of one's language capacities. What this clearly demonstrates is that our linguistic capacities are directly related to our neurophysiological makeup. Furthermore, this supports the notion that for every cross-cultural behavior our species exhibits there must exist a specific part of the brain from which that behavior is generated.

If it's true that this principle applies to all of our cross-cultural behaviors, should we not also apply it to spirituality? Every known culture from the dawn of our species has maintained a belief in some form of a "spiritual" reality. Wouldn't this suggest that human spirituality must represent an inherent characteristic of our species, that is, a genetically inherited trait? Furthermore, being that spirituality, just like language, represents a cognitive function, wouldn't this suggest that our "spiritual" instincts, just like our linguistic ones, must be generated from some very specific physical part within the brain? I informally refer to this site as the "God" part of the brain, a cluster of neurons from which spiritual cognitions, sensations, and behaviors are generated.

How else are we to explain the fact that all human cultures - no matter how isolated - have maintained a belief in some form of a spiritual/transcendental reality, in a god or gods, a soul, as well as an afterlife? How else are we to explain the fact that every human culture has built houses of worship through which to pray to such unseen forces? Or that every known culture has buried (or at least disposed of) its dead with a rite that anticipates sending the deceased person's "spiritual" component, or what we call a soul, onward to some next plane, or what we call an afterlife? Wouldn't the universality with which such perceptions and behaviors are exhibited among our species suggest that we might be "hard-wired" this way? How about the fact that every known culture has related undergoing what we refer to as spiritual experiences? Perhaps we are "hard-wired" to experience such sentiments as well. Just as all honeybees are compelled to construct hexagonally shaped hives, perhaps humans are compelled to perceive a spiritual reality...as a reflex, an instinct.

Essentially, what I'm suggesting is that humans are innately "hard-wired" to perceive a spiritual reality. We are "hard-wired" to believe in forces that transcend the limitations of this, our physical reality. Most controversial of all, if what I'm suggesting is true, it would imply that God is not necessarily something that exists "out there," beyond and independent of us, but rather as the product of an inherited perception, the manifestation of an evolutionary adaptation that exists within the human brain. And why would our species have evolved such a seemingly abstract trait? -In order to enable us to deal with our species' unique and otherwise debilitating awareness of death.

With the dawn of human intelligence, for the first time in the history of terrestrial life, an organism could point its powers of perception back upon its own being; it could recognize its own self as an object. For the first time, when an animal kneeled down to drink from the watering hole, it recognized its own reflection. Only humans possess the advanced capacity for self-awareness. Though, in many ways, this capacity has helped to make our species the most versatile and powerful creature on earth, it also represents the source of our greatest affliction. This is because once we became aware of the fact that we exist, we became equally aware of not just the possibility that one day we might not, but the certainty that one day we will not. With the advent of our species, with the emergence of self-conscious awareness, a life form became cognizant of the fact that it is going to die. All we had to do was to look around us to see that death was inevitable and inescapable. More terrifying yet, death could befall us at anytime. Any moment can be our last.

All life is "hard-wired" to avoid those things that represent a threat to its existence. When an animal gets too close to fire, for example, it reflexively pulls away. It is this negative stimulus, this experience we call pain, that prompts all forms of life to avoid such potential life threats. Pain, therefore, acts as nature's electric prod that incites us to avoid those things which may jeopardize our existence.

In the "higher" animals, most particularly among the mammals, threatening circumstances elicit a particular type of pain we refer to as anxiety. Anxiety constitutes a type of pain meant to prompt these "higher" order animals to avoid potentially hazardous circumstances. For example, a rabbit is cornered by a mountain lion. In such a situation, the rabbit is pumped with adrenaline, charged with the painful symptoms of anxiety, all meant to incite the rabbit to most effectively escape from the source of its discomfort, in this case the mountain lion. In its healthiest form, anxiety is meant to prompt an animal to avoid or escape a potentially hazardous experience. In humans, however, once we became aware of the fact that death was not only inescapable but that it could come at any moment, we were left in a state of constant mortal peril, a state of unceasing anxiety - much like rabbits perpetually cornered by a mountain lion from which there is no escape. With the emergence of self-awareness, humans became the dysfunctional animal, rendered helpless by an inherent and unceasing anxiety disorder. Unless nature could somehow relieve us of this debilitating awareness of death, it's possible our species might have soon become extinct. It was suddenly critical that our animal be modified in some way that would allow us to maintain self-conscious awareness, while enabling us to deal with our unique awareness of our own mortalities, of death.

Here lies the origin of humankind's spiritual function, an evolutionary adaptation that compels our species to believe that though our physical bodies will one day perish, our "spirits" or "souls" will persist for all eternity. Only once our species was instilled with this inherent (mis)perception that there is something more "out there," that we are immortal beings, were we able to survive our debilitating awareness of death.

By an extreemly large percentage most humans believe in God in one form or another

so the fact that you as an individual reject the idea of God or a creator, the human race as a whole has a very strong tendancy to think or believe there are gods, or at the very least, supernatural beings.

if there is no God, if there is no creator, then is this some kind of defect in human nature?

quote Originally posted by connecticutFIERO: I don't have a "need for a creator". The whole premise is based on a biased opinion.

Maybe, but, worldwide, religion (of all types, mono, pan and polytheism) vastly outnumber the "religionless." I am asking for opinions for a human phenomenon. This is not a "You must be born again!" thread.

quote Originally posted by Ken Wittlief: if there is no God, if there is no creator, then is this some kind of defect in human nature?

No, it's just a shame that a biological "thirst" for a higher power (which possibly arose to aid in our survival) has caused us to create several different flavors of Diety(ies) and most of them tell us to kill the other ants in the other colonies.

facing death does not create the need for a God, or creator - we could rationalize that we pass from one body to another, reincarnation

and no gods or creator would be needed

quote Originally posted by Patrick's Dad: Maybe, but, worldwide, religion (of all types, mono, pan and polytheism) vastly outnumber the "religionless." I am asking for opinions for a human phenomenon. This is not a "You must be born again!" thread.

Most people say "ow" when ya stick 'em with a pin. A few get aroused and say "oh yeah, baby!". I betcha those who "lack faith" have an inactive "God " part of the brain.

That's my opinion. You wanted to know an evolutionalist view of it. "God is an evolutionary adaptation which arose when we realized we get old and die, and life sucks."

quote Originally posted by FieroRumor: IMO, we are "Wired for Spirituality". ...Here lies the origin of humankind's spiritual function, an evolutionary adaptation that compels our species to believe that though our physical bodies will one day perish, our "spirits" or "souls" will persist for all eternity. Only once our species was instilled with this inherent (mis)perception that there is something more "out there," that we are immortal beings, were we able to survive our debilitating awareness of death.

Well written. Exactly the discourse I'm looking for.

So, in summation, maybe simplistic, we are fooling ourselves to death? We think that we are going to God or our next life, and we are just worm food?

The church knows more than science.

Baptist Pastors know more than any doctorate scientist.

Who are you going to believe.

[This message has been edited by Wichita (edited 06-15-2005).]

quote Originally posted by Patrick's Dad: Well written. Exactly the discourse I'm looking for. So, in summation, maybe simplistic, we are fooling ourselves to death? We think that we are going to God or our next life, and we are just worm food?

I enjoyed reading that book very much, it really didn't say anything "new", but it was well put together.

For some, it's better to believe a happy lie, then to mope around about it...

I just can't bear to do it. It actually sickens me. I usually avoid these threads. I wasn't logged in, and thus, my "religion" filter was not on.

[This message has been edited by FieroRumor (edited 06-15-2005).]

quote Originally posted by FieroRumor: Most people say "ow" when ya stick 'em with a pin. A few get aroused and say "oh yeah, baby!". I betcha those who "lack faith" have an inactive "God " part of the brain. That's my opinion. You wanted to know an evolutionalist view of it. "God is an evolutionary adaptation which arose when we realized we get old and die, and life sucks."

FR, that was a direct reply to CTFiero, who took offense to my postualtes.

I am no more looking to offend you as him. Just explaining the thread. I appreciate your commentary.

quote Originally posted by Patrick's Dad: FR, that was a direct reply to CTFiero, who took offense to my postualtes. I am no more looking to offend you as him. Just explaining the thread. I appreciate your commentary.

Not offended.

Not trying to offend, either. Everyone believes what they want. I gotto get some shut-eye.

May you find something in your net tomorrow morning...

quote Originally posted by Patrick's Dad: You presuppose that a "Baptist Pastor" has a lack of learning under his belt. That same Pastor could easily have a Doctorate of Theology. A "doctorate scientist" is just as focused in his or her study (microbiology, quantum physics or whatever), perhaps even more so, than the biblical scholar. The scientist completes his/her studies from a presupposed viewpoint. Many biblical scholars turn to the Word as converts. C. S. Lewis sought, once and for all, to disprove Christianity, yet he became one of the modern world's greatest apologists. EDIT: Repeated myself. Repeated myself.

OK! I just say the subject thread and say "evoluntionist", I failed to read your post. I now understand what you are asking.

The whole purpose for humans to seek a higher power is a way to provide "meaning" to ones life. If you look at the daily grunge of it all, espcially more true in acient times (were most of mythology and religion bubbles up from), when people routine and hard life is subplanted for a thought of a better future.

I believe all natural elements and being possess a will of a better future, that is the whole reasoning of having offspring. As we continue through out life, we always look forward to things and our situation getting better. When you have kids, you want them to have a better life than you.

We dedicate a large part of our youth on edcuation, because society believes it will lead you to a better life. Everything that we do and produce is about improving our lives by making it better. If you look at any consumerable good produce, it is about making our lives better or satisfying (even if it isn't really good for you or healthy for you). It is the pleasure of feeling better and our futures looking better.

The last thing we cope with is death. The most frightening part of our exisitance. What are we to think or do about helping us to believe it will be a good thing, but to come up with a belief , that in death, we go to a "better" place, where everything is all good and we live forever.

Improving our lives and striving for a better live is the reasoning why evolution works. Evolution changes causes a natural being to improve their survivability and make their lives better.

Evolutionarily speaking, don't we procreate simply as a genetic imperative to propogate the species? IOW, we are two sexes primarily to mix the gene pool towards continual improvement, and we are wired to want to have sex because the species must survive. There would be no genetic need to improve life itself, just to continue it. Of course, as some of us aren't as attractive as others to the opposite sex, so the acquisition of goods can supplant that in a potential mate's mind.

The "God brain" does not assist in the propogation of the species. Nor, technically, does education, but I'll concede that learning does (As in, stay clear of those animals, or that plant is poisonous).

So, the need for spiritualism is to quell our fear of death in the intellectual sense, as we have an innate fear of death that keeps us from jumping off cliffs anyways. Except for the people who win Darwin awards.

quote Originally posted by Patrick's Dad: The first presumes that humans have an intrinsic need to be controlled by something. There are people who need to control, of that, there is no dispute. But what makes followers? Music, poetry and art can be explained as created to attract a mate. Look at Mick Jagger. How could he have gotten anyone without being a musician? There are explanations for these in both worldviews. But the need for a creator?

Most artists pursue their art for it's own sake, not for money or love. Those are just nice benefits.
And there has always been an inborn human need to control his surroundings. It's genetic - a survival instinct. As we grew beyond the hunter/gatherer stage, those instincts manifested themselves in other ways. And as long as there are those who seek to control others, there will be those who can be dominated by them. Either through weaker will or physical ability, military might, etc. There will always be some stronger than others, just as there will always be leaders and followers.

We still have many impulses and instincts today that were primarily to protect us in the wild. They serve no real useful purpose, but they still drive us.

You are presuming that there is a need for a creator. Athiests would disagree.

every tribe invented a religion or stold anothers belife system
but no two are the same unless stolen
no two invented belife systems ever anywhere are or were the same
then every major religion has many sub-cults
jews have reform conserivite and orthodox factions even these are split in to sub cults

christians are so sub culted I dought any one has a full count
and in the time it took to do one who knows how many new sub-sub cults will be born
BTW many christian ideas were stolen from other religions [other then the jews that is]
he11 , virgin birth, rebirth, going to heaven, a man as a son of god and a lot of others

same as it ever was
as each gets to invent their own version

all this shows the hand of man at work
but not the hand of god
even tho your book promisted a holy spirit to guide the church
but unless that spirit is a schiz-o schismatic he sure ain't very good at it

a better explaination was quoted by gracie slick
"MAN IS THE ONLY ANIMAL WHO KNOWS HE WILL DIE
SO HE INVENTS A RELIGION TO KEEP FROM GOING INSANE"
but like a religion I am sure she stold it from somebody else

if there was A GOD there would be A RELIGION
not tooo many to count

there allways willbe unanswered questions
so the masses need a religion to provide those answers [EVEN IF WRONG}
as the sheep value a wrong answer over a mystery
esp if told with conviction
and the man willing to do that gets out of the heavy lifting

I just wish we had a kinder gentler religion less hungup on sex, sin and he11
and even that I was not so smart to see the man behind the curtains for what he is
it would be nice to belive in a wizzard, magic, or a fairytale
but some of us have grownup and seen the error and danger in childish ways

------------------
Question wonder and be wierd
are you kind?

[This message has been edited by ray b (edited 06-16-2005).]

The significantly larger population of the world that has some sort of religion would disprove the Atheist's assertion. Whether or not there is a God, there is a desire in the human animal to seek Him.

If being the head of a religion, a cult, or whatever is the need to dominate by force of will, what is the need in those so dominated, and why do they have it in their genetic makeup?

quote Originally posted by Patrick's Dad: Evolutionarily speaking, don't we procreate simply as a genetic imperative to propogate the species? IOW, we are two sexes primarily to mix the gene pool towards continual improvement, and we are wired to want to have sex because the species must survive. There would be no genetic need to improve life itself, just to continue it. Of course, as some of us aren't as attractive as others to the opposite sex, so the acquisition of goods can supplant that in a potential mate's mind.

Good point. And this has been proven scientifically. Why do men find certain women attractive? What traits do women typically find attractive in a male? The female physical characteristics most men find attractive just happen to be the ones that suggest she would be good breeding stock (I don't say mother, because I mean just the biological act of creating a child). Wide hips suggest a good change for trouble free childbirth, while large breasts suggest she will be able to feed the young.

A woman tends to find a man with broader shoulders attractive, with a leaner body. This shows that he is physically strong and agile - able to provide food, shelter, and protection for her and her young.

Even modern mating rituals demonstrate this. Why do you think women dress provocatively? It shows their body so you can tel they are a good mating candidate. Why do men drive flashy cars and show off? To show they can provide for the female. Hunting skills are less important today than money making skills, but the bottom line is the same - provide food, shelter and protection for the family unit.

Evolutionary speaking, our primary goal in life is to perpetuate the species.

quote Originally posted by Patrick's Dad: The significantly larger population of the world that has some sort of religion would disprove the Atheist's assertion. Whether or not there is a God, there is a desire in the human animal to seek Him. If being the head of a religion, a cult, or whatever is the need to dominate by force of will, what is the need in those so dominated, and why do they have it in their genetic makeup?

no I think it only proves it
as all gods and religions are man made
every tribe has storys to explain the unknowable
but none are true
that never stoped the storys from being told

------------------
Question wonder and be wierd
are you kind?

ray, I knew that I could count on you!

Your suppose that if there was a God, there would only be one religion worlwide. While not the topic of this thread, I'd answer that, that would be the case if God did not allow for free choice. By allowing us to choose and allowing competing views, we are something other than automatons, otherwise a savior would not have been necessary.

Yes, there are many denominations of Christianity, yet the orthodox denominations all hold to the same essentials. Pentacostals speak in tongues, while Baptists don't. These are secondary issues.

So, if we all believed in the Great Green Arkelsezure (I know that you've read the Hitchhiker's Guide), then that would be proof that it existed?

In any case, the question is, why did the innate need evolve, if God doesn't exist? If you and I can accept that we die intellectually and not freak out about it, why does the need not breed itself out of the species?

EDIT: BTW, it's midnight EST, so I'll check back later today.

[This message has been edited by Patrick's Dad (edited 06-16-2005).]

quote Originally posted by Patrick's Dad: ray, I knew that I could count on you! Your suppose that if there was a God, there would only be one religion worlwide. While not the topic of this thread, I'd answer that, that would be the case if God did not allow for free choice. By allowing us to choose and allowing competing views, we are something other than automatons, otherwise a savior would not have been necessary. Yes, there are many denominations of Christianity, yet the orthodox denominations all hold to the same essentials. Pentacostals speak in tongues, while Baptists don't. These are secondary issues. So, if we all believed in the Great Green Arkelsezure (I know that you've read the Hitchhiker's Guide), then that would be proof that it existed? In any case, the question is, why did the innate need evolve, if God doesn't exist? If you and I can accept that we die intellectually and not freak out about it, why does the need not breed itself out of the species?

I look at humans more on the animal side then anything. I wonder if other animals in the natural kingdom is thinking the same way. I wonder if old Brusier out in the back yard is really praying when he barks at night. How does every natural being handle their lives? Why would they be exempt from what you say is an innate desire for a god.

quote Originally posted by Wichita: The whole purpose for humans to seek a higher power is a way to provide "meaning" to ones life. If you look at the daily grunge of it all, espcially more true in acient times (were most of mythology and religion bubbles up from), when people routine and hard life is subplanted for a thought of a better future. I believe all natural elements and being possess a will of a better future, that is the whole reasoning of having offspring. As we continue through out life, we always look forward to things and our situation getting better. When you have kids, you want them to have a better life than you.

Wichita is on to something. I don't dwell on the subject but I have, like many people, given it some thought.

Until only very recently in our past, the concept of being "happy" did not exist. Most people lived short, miserable lives. Loved ones died all the time, most people lived with desease, constant pain from infected wounds and body parts that were broken and went untreated, no dental care at all, there was no explination for why anyone died and most were made to suffer. Religion offered answeres. Reasons to go on. As we grew and evolved we began to "understand" that we were suffering. We were no longer animals surviving for the sake of surviving. We became complex creatures that needed answers when we asked why the complex relationships that we formed were ripped away from us (death of loved ones). We needed answers as to why we should press on, even when all seemed lost. Religion offered the answers. It was the "will" of a power greater than us that we could not understand. Thus enters the need for faith.

A bit OT but I can't understand how for the last 100 years or so people in the civilized world have lived like kings. The past 50 years even more so. And yet many people are still not happy. Look around on any given day and there are people complaining, people bitching. Is it so hard to think back to even the recent past when we had so little, and people had to make REAL sacrifices to survive? I'm not saying that life is not a struggle today but with modern medicine, fresh food, equal rights (at least here in the US), and the ability to choose what we want to do to support ourselves we are living lives that people of the past didn't even dream was possible. And yet people still find (or create) reasons to be unhappy. I look around and see people getting upset of the most foolish things these days it's rediculous.

Often times I stop and look around and realise how incredibly lucky I am to be living in this time and place. I couldn't imagine what life was like a few hundred years ago...

.

[This message has been edited by F-I-E-R-O (edited 06-20-2005).]

quote Originally posted by VTfiero: A bit OT but I can't understand how for the last 100 years or so people in the civilized world have lived like kings. The past 50 years even more so. And yet many people are still not happy. ...

doesnt this contradict your whole theory then, that nobody was happy in the distant past, because everything was so difficult?

apparently happiness and depression/dispair are not logical emotions?

you dont seem to want to accept this

[This message has been edited by Ken Wittlief (edited 06-16-2005).]

humans have a drive to make the world orderly, predictable and controllable. it makes survival easier. if we have no explanation for a phenomenon like lightning or disease or death, to make up a convenient story to explain it lessens our dissonance and lack of control. a superstition about black cats or walking under ladders or lucky numbers or eternal life is comforting in the face of chaos.

woohoo, 5,000 posts.

[This message has been edited by lurker (edited 06-16-2005).]

Recursive and retrograde argumentation.

Well based on current science I am trying to work out how many differenet coloured people evolved from Adam and Eve. Also with a gene pool so shallow we woulda died off in the early days. My view on the need to have a god is the churches were the early forms of politics to control people. It just spread like anything shoved down the throat of people spreads. Tell enough generations God has 3 heads and is green it will become accepted fact.

------------------

How many gods do you Christians believe in?

I just believe in one less.

GL

BTW, many evolutionary scientists are Christians, so much for your "godless worldview". They understand the Bible is a book about how to live our lives, NOT a science book. It's mainly fundamentalists with their literal (in places) reading of the Bible that have problems.

[This message has been edited by Tugboat (edited 06-16-2005).]

quote What is the evolutionist view on the Human need for a (the) Creator or other higher being?

To bring order to the unexplainable, to know "why", the need to have purpose for being and above all to fill the unbelieveable and easlily denyable void of loneleyness..

Remove all the explainations that god "gives you" from your life and what is left?
I'll tell you what I know about it.. I am a carbon based squishy object hurling through an incredibly vast space in an incredibly infantesimaly short span of time. So small am I in this vastness that if I dwell on why I exist I loose my desire to do so because there is no reason to. For that matter there is no reason for you to exist either...

The reality of it all is that there is no reason to exist yet here I am

Belief in god brings order and explaination for why we exist as long as we don't question it. We only truely survive through rules and regulations that if followed ensure our survival even after death.

Without god we just exist in a natural state of chaotic competiton for resources to surviuve. We only truely survive in genetic form passed on through natural selection that eventually becomes our children after we become worm food.

quote If you and I can accept that we die intellectually and not freak out about it, why does the need not breed itself out of the species?

I intend on teaching religious stories to my children. If they have an active "God" part of the brain, so be it. If not, ok. I enjoy many religious stories, from the parables, to the vedas, to the stories about Buddha, etc. I just don't believe most of it actually occurred. I enjoy pondering the metaphors though. Stories don't need to be "true" in order to make a valid point, or have you learn something from them.

I don't think I have a "problem" with religion, I have a problem with people who claim to be religious, and then beat the hell out of their wife.

quote Originally posted by VTfiero: Wichita is on to something. I don't dwell on the subject but I have, like many people, given it some thought. Until only very recently in our past, the concept of being "happy" did not exist. Most people lived short, miserable lives. Loved ones died all the time, most people lived with desease, constant pain from infected wounds and body parts that were broken and went untreated, no dental care at all, there was no explination for why anyone died and most were made to suffer. Religion offered answeres. Reasons to go on. As we grew and evolved we began to "understand" that we were suffering. We were no longer animals surviving for the sake of surviving. We became complex creatures that needed answers when we asked why the complex relationships that we formed were ripped away from us (death of loved ones). We needed answers as to why we should press on, even when all seemed lost. Religion offered the answers. It was the "will" of a power greater than us that we could not understand. Thus enters the need for faith. A bit OT but I can't understand how for the last 100 years or so people in the civilized world have lived like kings. The past 50 years even more so. And yet many people are still not happy. Look around on any given day and there are people complaining, people bitching. Is it so hard to think back to even the recent past when we had so little, and people had to make REAL sacrifices to survive? I'm not saying that life is not a struggle today but with modern medicine, fresh food, equal rights (at least here in the US), and the ability to choose what we want to do to support ourselves we are living lives that people of the past didn't even dream was possible. And yet people still find (or create) reasons to be unhappy. I look around and see people getting upset of the most foolish things these days it's rediculous. Often times I stop and look around and realise how incredibly lucky I am to be living in this time and place. I couldn't imagine what life was like a few hundred years ago...

Well said.

I'm taking these as they come, so if I repeat something that someone else has said, then I'm sorry. Or maybe I'm not. Great minds, and all.

There have been societies in the past that have done well for their citizens. Ancient Rome offred basic civil rights (if only for men) and quite a few ameneties for its day and age. The Greeks, Chinese and Egyptians have had ordered societies that offered relatively much compared to the times. But you are right. Practically anyone in this world can achieve virtually anything they wish. BTW, the Chinese had tea, so they certainly knew happiness.

Your post assumes that happiness, though, comes from stuff and/or from leisure. Craftsmanship has been shown from the Azteks, the early Japanese, the Vikings, and the Middle East. I find that pride in craftsmanship equals happiness (I'm not a great craftsman. I have taken some decent photographs, and we'll see if my Formula ever gets finished). Far a farmer, bringing in a good crop would equal happiness, either from the ability to feed his family for the winter or to sell the excess, or both. Whether this is the human spirit, instilled by God or by natural process, I think that you underestimate the existence of mankind prior to the twentieth century.

But you are right. We have little to no right to complain about anything. Especially here in the US.

Somebody doesn't understand evolution if they expect a social construct to "breed itself out".

GL

quote Originally posted by F-I-E-R-O: God survives as long as we do, when we die- so does God.

Biblically, God is the first and the last. He was here before there was anything and, should everything end, He will still be.

Again, this is not a religion thread, per se, but your post assumes that God is the created, rather than the creator. I say that I shudder to think what God would be like if we created Him in our own image.