Is religion a product of evolution?
 

Fascinating research and questions: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/15/we...f=weekinreview

The ancestral human population of 50,000 years ago, to judge from living hunter-gatherers, would have lived in small, egalitarian groups without chiefs or headmen. Religion served them as an invisible government. It bound people together, committing them to put their community?s needs ahead of their own self-interest. For fear of divine punishment, people followed rules of self-restraint toward members of the community. Religion also emboldened them to give their lives in battle against outsiders. Groups fortified by religious belief would have prevailed over those that lacked it, and genes that prompted the mind toward ritual would eventually have become universal.

In natural selection, it is genes that enable their owners to leave more surviving progeny that become more common. The idea that natural selection can favor groups, instead of acting directly on individuals, is highly controversial. Though Darwin proposed the idea, the traditional view among biologists is that selection on individuals would stamp out altruistic behavior (the altruists who spent time helping others would leave fewer children of their own) far faster than group-level selection could favor it.

It may have served a purpose at one time, but I view it now as a vestigial organ in people. It's like an appendix waiting to burst.

yeah and when it does it'll be a nightmare :2 cents:

The answers to all of life's big questions can be found here...

http://www.slidism.org

It's just a product.

The problem is that ideas do not have clear genetic correlates. There is no 'religion/god gene', for instance. There is a lot of stuff being written about evolution of the mind by people like Pinker and Dennett, but until there is a clear biological correlate, it's all speculative.

Moreover, I don't see how 'religion' could favor survival. It retards science and development and causes division and wars. It is good for absolutely NOTHING. Don't believe me, go to a church in the bible belt.

Here's the money shot:

But group selection has recently gained two powerful champions, the biologists David Sloan Wilson and Edward O. Wilson, who argued that two special circumstances in recent human evolution would have given group selection much more of an edge than usual. One is the highly egalitarian nature of hunter-gatherer societies, which makes everyone behave alike and gives individual altruists a better chance of passing on their genes. The other is intense warfare between groups, which enhances group-level selection in favor of community-benefiting behaviors such as altruism and religion.

A propensity to learn the religion of one’s community became so firmly implanted in the human neural circuitry, according to this new view, that religion was retained when hunter-gatherers, starting from 15,000 years ago, began to settle in fixed communities. In the larger, hierarchical societies made possible by settled living, rulers co-opted religion as their source of authority. Roman emperors made themselves chief priest or even a living god, though most had the taste to wait till after death for deification. “Drat, I think I’m becoming a god!” Vespasian joked on his deathbed.

Not unexpectedly, EO Wilson's group behavior > evolution theories are, to put it mildly, quite controversial.

Very interesting, thanks for link

God is the english word for something we cannot compehend
It cannot be described in words
It is the spirit, the essence that unites separate creatures into one
Atoms make up cells
Cells make up organs
The body is made up of many organs that make up a whole human
Separate humans make up society

Religion was a vital social tool when Man could not answer life's biggest questions. So its logical that religion was used as a source of power & a means to regulate behavior.
Today, science has answered the biggest questions, & God has been replaced by a variety of secular constructs that impose limits on peoples behavior.
Religion is more like a fossil then a product of evolution, as evidenced by the direct correlation between the ascention of knowledge & the decline of religion.

But what about this?...

Join a dangerous cult and enter to win a stupid t-shirt...

http://www.slidism.org/shop.html

Some religions are in slight decline and some religions are growing. Religion will probably be existent as long as the human animal is.

If you're into this topic, check out Breaking the Spell by Daniel Dennett. Great author who breaks down whether religion born of evolution.

I think your right. But the fact remains, nations with the most education have the most secular societies, then there is the middle east...
But the times was positing religion as a component of evolution. That may be true before the ascent of science. Once knowledge began tearing down tenets of religion, it became an obstacle to evolution instead of a complement.

religion served its purpose of keeping some sort of order and discipline within uneducated masses. it would have been much worse without it. although it was used for lots of barbarian things by certain groups in the name of god. as we see fruits rot even in church's gardens.

before asking if religion is product of evolution we must determine if mind and consciousness are products of evolution? how does knowledge impact evolution? and how does faith impact evolution? some things are evolving while basic principles of physiology and chemistry stay the same.