what is the minimum level of inteligence for a species to theoretically have the concept of God and form a religion? [on hold]Are religion, emotion, and individuality binding factors for evolution of a technology-based society?What if AI decided to rule the world through religion?What implications might there be of mycelium being self aware?Does civilization necessarily imply structure-building?How does distributed intelligence impact conscious qualia?What morals and possibly religious beliefs would an intelligent species evolved from pack-living carnivores have?
A fast aquatic predator with multiple eyes and pupils. Would these eyes be possible?
How can demon technology be prevented from surpassing humans?
SuperTuxKart 0.9.3-2 has no online multiplayer?
Why does 1.1.1.1 not resolve archive.is?
What is the fastest algorithm for finding the natural logarithm of a big number?
What is this game with a red cricket pushing a ball?
What do you call a document which has no content?
Marxist and post modernism contradiction
How to say dandruff in Esperanto?
'provocative' vs 'sexy'
Unable to sync Windows 10 time with time servers
"inuendo" in a piano score
Do businesses save their customers' credit card information until the payment is finalized?
How many integers are there that are not divisible by any prime larger than 20 and not divisible by the square of any prime?
QGIS 3.4 calculate date, add month
Is it reasonable to ask candidates to create a profile on Google Scholar?
"Table" method for expanding brackets vs "each term in the first bracket gets multiplied by each term in the second bracket"
Trying to add electrical outlets off of a junction box but the junction box has a lot more wires than Ive been shown so which ones to run it off?
How does Firefox know my ISP login page?
What does the British parliament hope to achieve by requesting a third Brexit extension?
Pass a bash variable to python script
How do I find files with no group permissions?
Is Schrodinger's Cat itself an observer?
Why exactly is the answer 50 Ohms?
what is the minimum level of inteligence for a species to theoretically have the concept of God and form a religion? [on hold]
Are religion, emotion, and individuality binding factors for evolution of a technology-based society?What if AI decided to rule the world through religion?What implications might there be of mycelium being self aware?Does civilization necessarily imply structure-building?How does distributed intelligence impact conscious qualia?What morals and possibly religious beliefs would an intelligent species evolved from pack-living carnivores have?
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty
margin-bottom:0;
.everyonelovesstackoverflowposition:absolute;height:1px;width:1px;opacity:0;top:0;left:0;pointer-events:none;
$begingroup$
This might be hard to answer if we think about all other life on our planet, even with animals such as dolphins, octopi, chimpanzees and others that show relatively high levels of intelligence but as we cant communicate fully with them we cant truly understand their thought processes as yet.
There has been footage of chimpanzees slowly walking up to the same tree and throwing a rock and a large hole in the tree trunk slowly forming from repeated throws, this making experts wonder if this could be a religious event but it could likely just be game.
Looking at the lifestyles and needs of early humans and how we think our extinct homo genus cousins lived and what lead to humans embracing theism is a way but I don't want to basically create a species that is almost a clone of human behaviour but with alien bodies.
So my question is what at minimum would a species need to be capable of, for them to need or want to believe in a God and then form a religion?
This question isn't about their environment, weather they are predator or prey, how they came to be more intelligent or how the religion started, it's more about the kinds of behaviours they have that show different forms of intelligence.
My first thought is they need a large enough community with a sophisticated enough level of communication as well as a good enough memory to allow for story's to be told and passed down.
This large community would also show their are capable of relatively complex emotions, leading to being able to love or adorn whatever they worship.
Maybe they would also need to somehow show behaviours of having an imagination, so it wasn't just a case of taking orders from others to worship, this could be shown in creative forms like art and music.
Any other suggestions of the minimum intelligent behaviour needed for a religious lifeform would really help designing this species.
.
religion psychology intelligence
$endgroup$
put on hold as primarily opinion-based by Halfthawed, A Lambent Eye, Gryphon, 011358 smell, EDL 1 hour ago
Many good questions generate some degree of opinion based on expert experience, but answers to this question will tend to be almost entirely based on opinions, rather than facts, references, or specific expertise. If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
This might be hard to answer if we think about all other life on our planet, even with animals such as dolphins, octopi, chimpanzees and others that show relatively high levels of intelligence but as we cant communicate fully with them we cant truly understand their thought processes as yet.
There has been footage of chimpanzees slowly walking up to the same tree and throwing a rock and a large hole in the tree trunk slowly forming from repeated throws, this making experts wonder if this could be a religious event but it could likely just be game.
Looking at the lifestyles and needs of early humans and how we think our extinct homo genus cousins lived and what lead to humans embracing theism is a way but I don't want to basically create a species that is almost a clone of human behaviour but with alien bodies.
So my question is what at minimum would a species need to be capable of, for them to need or want to believe in a God and then form a religion?
This question isn't about their environment, weather they are predator or prey, how they came to be more intelligent or how the religion started, it's more about the kinds of behaviours they have that show different forms of intelligence.
My first thought is they need a large enough community with a sophisticated enough level of communication as well as a good enough memory to allow for story's to be told and passed down.
This large community would also show their are capable of relatively complex emotions, leading to being able to love or adorn whatever they worship.
Maybe they would also need to somehow show behaviours of having an imagination, so it wasn't just a case of taking orders from others to worship, this could be shown in creative forms like art and music.
Any other suggestions of the minimum intelligent behaviour needed for a religious lifeform would really help designing this species.
.
religion psychology intelligence
$endgroup$
put on hold as primarily opinion-based by Halfthawed, A Lambent Eye, Gryphon, 011358 smell, EDL 1 hour ago
Many good questions generate some degree of opinion based on expert experience, but answers to this question will tend to be almost entirely based on opinions, rather than facts, references, or specific expertise. If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.
1
$begingroup$
The ontological argument would like to have a word with you. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ontological_argument
$endgroup$
– Halfthawed
9 hours ago
2
$begingroup$
"If cattle and horses and lions had hands or could paint with their hands and create works such as men do, horses like horses and cattle like cattle also would depict the gods' shapes and make their bodies of such a sort as the form they themselves have." (Xenophanes of Colophon, 5th century BCE)
$endgroup$
– AlexP
7 hours ago
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
This might be hard to answer if we think about all other life on our planet, even with animals such as dolphins, octopi, chimpanzees and others that show relatively high levels of intelligence but as we cant communicate fully with them we cant truly understand their thought processes as yet.
There has been footage of chimpanzees slowly walking up to the same tree and throwing a rock and a large hole in the tree trunk slowly forming from repeated throws, this making experts wonder if this could be a religious event but it could likely just be game.
Looking at the lifestyles and needs of early humans and how we think our extinct homo genus cousins lived and what lead to humans embracing theism is a way but I don't want to basically create a species that is almost a clone of human behaviour but with alien bodies.
So my question is what at minimum would a species need to be capable of, for them to need or want to believe in a God and then form a religion?
This question isn't about their environment, weather they are predator or prey, how they came to be more intelligent or how the religion started, it's more about the kinds of behaviours they have that show different forms of intelligence.
My first thought is they need a large enough community with a sophisticated enough level of communication as well as a good enough memory to allow for story's to be told and passed down.
This large community would also show their are capable of relatively complex emotions, leading to being able to love or adorn whatever they worship.
Maybe they would also need to somehow show behaviours of having an imagination, so it wasn't just a case of taking orders from others to worship, this could be shown in creative forms like art and music.
Any other suggestions of the minimum intelligent behaviour needed for a religious lifeform would really help designing this species.
.
religion psychology intelligence
$endgroup$
This might be hard to answer if we think about all other life on our planet, even with animals such as dolphins, octopi, chimpanzees and others that show relatively high levels of intelligence but as we cant communicate fully with them we cant truly understand their thought processes as yet.
There has been footage of chimpanzees slowly walking up to the same tree and throwing a rock and a large hole in the tree trunk slowly forming from repeated throws, this making experts wonder if this could be a religious event but it could likely just be game.
Looking at the lifestyles and needs of early humans and how we think our extinct homo genus cousins lived and what lead to humans embracing theism is a way but I don't want to basically create a species that is almost a clone of human behaviour but with alien bodies.
So my question is what at minimum would a species need to be capable of, for them to need or want to believe in a God and then form a religion?
This question isn't about their environment, weather they are predator or prey, how they came to be more intelligent or how the religion started, it's more about the kinds of behaviours they have that show different forms of intelligence.
My first thought is they need a large enough community with a sophisticated enough level of communication as well as a good enough memory to allow for story's to be told and passed down.
This large community would also show their are capable of relatively complex emotions, leading to being able to love or adorn whatever they worship.
Maybe they would also need to somehow show behaviours of having an imagination, so it wasn't just a case of taking orders from others to worship, this could be shown in creative forms like art and music.
Any other suggestions of the minimum intelligent behaviour needed for a religious lifeform would really help designing this species.
.
religion psychology intelligence
religion psychology intelligence
edited 10 hours ago
Aizen-sama
asked 10 hours ago
Aizen-samaAizen-sama
3919 bronze badges
3919 bronze badges
put on hold as primarily opinion-based by Halfthawed, A Lambent Eye, Gryphon, 011358 smell, EDL 1 hour ago
Many good questions generate some degree of opinion based on expert experience, but answers to this question will tend to be almost entirely based on opinions, rather than facts, references, or specific expertise. If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.
put on hold as primarily opinion-based by Halfthawed, A Lambent Eye, Gryphon, 011358 smell, EDL 1 hour ago
Many good questions generate some degree of opinion based on expert experience, but answers to this question will tend to be almost entirely based on opinions, rather than facts, references, or specific expertise. If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.
put on hold as primarily opinion-based by Halfthawed, A Lambent Eye, Gryphon, 011358 smell, EDL 1 hour ago
Many good questions generate some degree of opinion based on expert experience, but answers to this question will tend to be almost entirely based on opinions, rather than facts, references, or specific expertise. If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.
1
$begingroup$
The ontological argument would like to have a word with you. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ontological_argument
$endgroup$
– Halfthawed
9 hours ago
2
$begingroup$
"If cattle and horses and lions had hands or could paint with their hands and create works such as men do, horses like horses and cattle like cattle also would depict the gods' shapes and make their bodies of such a sort as the form they themselves have." (Xenophanes of Colophon, 5th century BCE)
$endgroup$
– AlexP
7 hours ago
add a comment
|
1
$begingroup$
The ontological argument would like to have a word with you. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ontological_argument
$endgroup$
– Halfthawed
9 hours ago
2
$begingroup$
"If cattle and horses and lions had hands or could paint with their hands and create works such as men do, horses like horses and cattle like cattle also would depict the gods' shapes and make their bodies of such a sort as the form they themselves have." (Xenophanes of Colophon, 5th century BCE)
$endgroup$
– AlexP
7 hours ago
1
1
$begingroup$
The ontological argument would like to have a word with you. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ontological_argument
$endgroup$
– Halfthawed
9 hours ago
$begingroup$
The ontological argument would like to have a word with you. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ontological_argument
$endgroup$
– Halfthawed
9 hours ago
2
2
$begingroup$
"If cattle and horses and lions had hands or could paint with their hands and create works such as men do, horses like horses and cattle like cattle also would depict the gods' shapes and make their bodies of such a sort as the form they themselves have." (Xenophanes of Colophon, 5th century BCE)
$endgroup$
– AlexP
7 hours ago
$begingroup$
"If cattle and horses and lions had hands or could paint with their hands and create works such as men do, horses like horses and cattle like cattle also would depict the gods' shapes and make their bodies of such a sort as the form they themselves have." (Xenophanes of Colophon, 5th century BCE)
$endgroup$
– AlexP
7 hours ago
add a comment
|
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
In order to form a religion around a deity character, a species needs:
- The curiosity to question the world around them and how it works.
- The creativity and abstraction capabilities to make up theories about it.
- The social structure which leads them to the theory that those things they do not understand are the result of the actions of an intelligent deity with certain characteristics.
- The communication ability to discuss the nature of that deity with other members of their species and come to a consensus about what characteristics that deity has and how that deity is to be worshiped.
Good memory might not actually be required. If the species isn't particularly good at preserving information, then it might simply result in religions which change very rapidly.
Cultural activity like art can be used as part of religious worship, but they don't necessarily need to. Sure, most religions we know of in Earth's history are mostly remembered by the cultural artifacts they produced, but that impression might be heavily impacted by survivorship bias. Who knows how many religious myths existed for centuries as purely oral tradition and were then forgotten without trace because their worshipers didn't produce any artifacts which tell us of that religion today? For example, we know Stonehenge was very likely a place of religious worship over 5000 years ago. But we have no idea about the details of the mythology of whatever religious cult was practiced there, because the faithful did not create any cultural artifacts like drawings, sculptures or writings which tell us what, how or why they worshipped.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
good answer, thanks, the point about a good memory and a quickly changing religion is true and interesting. with art I meant it was just a way of showing their ability to imagine a god, not to make impressions or symbols of their god.
$endgroup$
– Aizen-sama
9 hours ago
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
Required intellectual level - early hominid
(warning: good evidence is scanty, thus usually far reaching conclusions are being drawn from a few bones)
Lower bound:
The hominids, called Homo naledi, had brains about a third the size of ours but had modern-looking hands and backbones. The first fossils were only found in 2013 and their discovery has caused heated debate ever since. [...]
The second cave is about 100 yards away from the first cave, the discovery of which led to debate about when Homo naledi lived and whether the pre-humans had deliberately buried their dead.
"This likely adds weight to the hypothesis that Homo naledi was using dark, remote places to cache its dead," University of Wisconsin-Madison anthropologist John Hawks, who worked on the study, said in a statement.
"What are the odds of a second, almost identical occurrence happening by chance?”
source
Higher bound:
The second period, the Middle Paleolithic, occurred when Homo erectus was replaced by Homo sapiens neanderthalensis about 130,000 years ago. Unlike their ancestors, these new hominids buried their dead. Several Neanderthal graves have been found with grave goods, indicating that these hominids had some sort of belief system with notions of an after-life.
source
BTW: If you expect a universalistic, monotheistic religion with proper theology - then it was even challenging for our specie.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
good answer thanks, I forgot to take into account how some animals deal with the death of their kind and this could lead to asking why or what happens next for them. agreed about a universal religion, I will likely have similar to humans, disbelievers and different variations of the religion.
$endgroup$
– Aizen-sama
8 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@Aizen-sama Even in early civilisation times you have less "disbelievers" and more "gods of my tribe are better than gods of your tribe". You get some kind of intermingling between basic medical and herbalists practices, magic/superstitions, tribe creation myths and legends (with at least grain of truth) and things that we would clearly consider as religion.
$endgroup$
– Shadow1024
8 hours ago
add a comment
|
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
In order to form a religion around a deity character, a species needs:
- The curiosity to question the world around them and how it works.
- The creativity and abstraction capabilities to make up theories about it.
- The social structure which leads them to the theory that those things they do not understand are the result of the actions of an intelligent deity with certain characteristics.
- The communication ability to discuss the nature of that deity with other members of their species and come to a consensus about what characteristics that deity has and how that deity is to be worshiped.
Good memory might not actually be required. If the species isn't particularly good at preserving information, then it might simply result in religions which change very rapidly.
Cultural activity like art can be used as part of religious worship, but they don't necessarily need to. Sure, most religions we know of in Earth's history are mostly remembered by the cultural artifacts they produced, but that impression might be heavily impacted by survivorship bias. Who knows how many religious myths existed for centuries as purely oral tradition and were then forgotten without trace because their worshipers didn't produce any artifacts which tell us of that religion today? For example, we know Stonehenge was very likely a place of religious worship over 5000 years ago. But we have no idea about the details of the mythology of whatever religious cult was practiced there, because the faithful did not create any cultural artifacts like drawings, sculptures or writings which tell us what, how or why they worshipped.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
good answer, thanks, the point about a good memory and a quickly changing religion is true and interesting. with art I meant it was just a way of showing their ability to imagine a god, not to make impressions or symbols of their god.
$endgroup$
– Aizen-sama
9 hours ago
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
In order to form a religion around a deity character, a species needs:
- The curiosity to question the world around them and how it works.
- The creativity and abstraction capabilities to make up theories about it.
- The social structure which leads them to the theory that those things they do not understand are the result of the actions of an intelligent deity with certain characteristics.
- The communication ability to discuss the nature of that deity with other members of their species and come to a consensus about what characteristics that deity has and how that deity is to be worshiped.
Good memory might not actually be required. If the species isn't particularly good at preserving information, then it might simply result in religions which change very rapidly.
Cultural activity like art can be used as part of religious worship, but they don't necessarily need to. Sure, most religions we know of in Earth's history are mostly remembered by the cultural artifacts they produced, but that impression might be heavily impacted by survivorship bias. Who knows how many religious myths existed for centuries as purely oral tradition and were then forgotten without trace because their worshipers didn't produce any artifacts which tell us of that religion today? For example, we know Stonehenge was very likely a place of religious worship over 5000 years ago. But we have no idea about the details of the mythology of whatever religious cult was practiced there, because the faithful did not create any cultural artifacts like drawings, sculptures or writings which tell us what, how or why they worshipped.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
good answer, thanks, the point about a good memory and a quickly changing religion is true and interesting. with art I meant it was just a way of showing their ability to imagine a god, not to make impressions or symbols of their god.
$endgroup$
– Aizen-sama
9 hours ago
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
In order to form a religion around a deity character, a species needs:
- The curiosity to question the world around them and how it works.
- The creativity and abstraction capabilities to make up theories about it.
- The social structure which leads them to the theory that those things they do not understand are the result of the actions of an intelligent deity with certain characteristics.
- The communication ability to discuss the nature of that deity with other members of their species and come to a consensus about what characteristics that deity has and how that deity is to be worshiped.
Good memory might not actually be required. If the species isn't particularly good at preserving information, then it might simply result in religions which change very rapidly.
Cultural activity like art can be used as part of religious worship, but they don't necessarily need to. Sure, most religions we know of in Earth's history are mostly remembered by the cultural artifacts they produced, but that impression might be heavily impacted by survivorship bias. Who knows how many religious myths existed for centuries as purely oral tradition and were then forgotten without trace because their worshipers didn't produce any artifacts which tell us of that religion today? For example, we know Stonehenge was very likely a place of religious worship over 5000 years ago. But we have no idea about the details of the mythology of whatever religious cult was practiced there, because the faithful did not create any cultural artifacts like drawings, sculptures or writings which tell us what, how or why they worshipped.
$endgroup$
In order to form a religion around a deity character, a species needs:
- The curiosity to question the world around them and how it works.
- The creativity and abstraction capabilities to make up theories about it.
- The social structure which leads them to the theory that those things they do not understand are the result of the actions of an intelligent deity with certain characteristics.
- The communication ability to discuss the nature of that deity with other members of their species and come to a consensus about what characteristics that deity has and how that deity is to be worshiped.
Good memory might not actually be required. If the species isn't particularly good at preserving information, then it might simply result in religions which change very rapidly.
Cultural activity like art can be used as part of religious worship, but they don't necessarily need to. Sure, most religions we know of in Earth's history are mostly remembered by the cultural artifacts they produced, but that impression might be heavily impacted by survivorship bias. Who knows how many religious myths existed for centuries as purely oral tradition and were then forgotten without trace because their worshipers didn't produce any artifacts which tell us of that religion today? For example, we know Stonehenge was very likely a place of religious worship over 5000 years ago. But we have no idea about the details of the mythology of whatever religious cult was practiced there, because the faithful did not create any cultural artifacts like drawings, sculptures or writings which tell us what, how or why they worshipped.
edited 8 hours ago
answered 9 hours ago
PhilippPhilipp
33.6k12 gold badges70 silver badges130 bronze badges
33.6k12 gold badges70 silver badges130 bronze badges
$begingroup$
good answer, thanks, the point about a good memory and a quickly changing religion is true and interesting. with art I meant it was just a way of showing their ability to imagine a god, not to make impressions or symbols of their god.
$endgroup$
– Aizen-sama
9 hours ago
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
good answer, thanks, the point about a good memory and a quickly changing religion is true and interesting. with art I meant it was just a way of showing their ability to imagine a god, not to make impressions or symbols of their god.
$endgroup$
– Aizen-sama
9 hours ago
$begingroup$
good answer, thanks, the point about a good memory and a quickly changing religion is true and interesting. with art I meant it was just a way of showing their ability to imagine a god, not to make impressions or symbols of their god.
$endgroup$
– Aizen-sama
9 hours ago
$begingroup$
good answer, thanks, the point about a good memory and a quickly changing religion is true and interesting. with art I meant it was just a way of showing their ability to imagine a god, not to make impressions or symbols of their god.
$endgroup$
– Aizen-sama
9 hours ago
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
Required intellectual level - early hominid
(warning: good evidence is scanty, thus usually far reaching conclusions are being drawn from a few bones)
Lower bound:
The hominids, called Homo naledi, had brains about a third the size of ours but had modern-looking hands and backbones. The first fossils were only found in 2013 and their discovery has caused heated debate ever since. [...]
The second cave is about 100 yards away from the first cave, the discovery of which led to debate about when Homo naledi lived and whether the pre-humans had deliberately buried their dead.
"This likely adds weight to the hypothesis that Homo naledi was using dark, remote places to cache its dead," University of Wisconsin-Madison anthropologist John Hawks, who worked on the study, said in a statement.
"What are the odds of a second, almost identical occurrence happening by chance?”
source
Higher bound:
The second period, the Middle Paleolithic, occurred when Homo erectus was replaced by Homo sapiens neanderthalensis about 130,000 years ago. Unlike their ancestors, these new hominids buried their dead. Several Neanderthal graves have been found with grave goods, indicating that these hominids had some sort of belief system with notions of an after-life.
source
BTW: If you expect a universalistic, monotheistic religion with proper theology - then it was even challenging for our specie.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
good answer thanks, I forgot to take into account how some animals deal with the death of their kind and this could lead to asking why or what happens next for them. agreed about a universal religion, I will likely have similar to humans, disbelievers and different variations of the religion.
$endgroup$
– Aizen-sama
8 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@Aizen-sama Even in early civilisation times you have less "disbelievers" and more "gods of my tribe are better than gods of your tribe". You get some kind of intermingling between basic medical and herbalists practices, magic/superstitions, tribe creation myths and legends (with at least grain of truth) and things that we would clearly consider as religion.
$endgroup$
– Shadow1024
8 hours ago
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
Required intellectual level - early hominid
(warning: good evidence is scanty, thus usually far reaching conclusions are being drawn from a few bones)
Lower bound:
The hominids, called Homo naledi, had brains about a third the size of ours but had modern-looking hands and backbones. The first fossils were only found in 2013 and their discovery has caused heated debate ever since. [...]
The second cave is about 100 yards away from the first cave, the discovery of which led to debate about when Homo naledi lived and whether the pre-humans had deliberately buried their dead.
"This likely adds weight to the hypothesis that Homo naledi was using dark, remote places to cache its dead," University of Wisconsin-Madison anthropologist John Hawks, who worked on the study, said in a statement.
"What are the odds of a second, almost identical occurrence happening by chance?”
source
Higher bound:
The second period, the Middle Paleolithic, occurred when Homo erectus was replaced by Homo sapiens neanderthalensis about 130,000 years ago. Unlike their ancestors, these new hominids buried their dead. Several Neanderthal graves have been found with grave goods, indicating that these hominids had some sort of belief system with notions of an after-life.
source
BTW: If you expect a universalistic, monotheistic religion with proper theology - then it was even challenging for our specie.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
good answer thanks, I forgot to take into account how some animals deal with the death of their kind and this could lead to asking why or what happens next for them. agreed about a universal religion, I will likely have similar to humans, disbelievers and different variations of the religion.
$endgroup$
– Aizen-sama
8 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@Aizen-sama Even in early civilisation times you have less "disbelievers" and more "gods of my tribe are better than gods of your tribe". You get some kind of intermingling between basic medical and herbalists practices, magic/superstitions, tribe creation myths and legends (with at least grain of truth) and things that we would clearly consider as religion.
$endgroup$
– Shadow1024
8 hours ago
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
Required intellectual level - early hominid
(warning: good evidence is scanty, thus usually far reaching conclusions are being drawn from a few bones)
Lower bound:
The hominids, called Homo naledi, had brains about a third the size of ours but had modern-looking hands and backbones. The first fossils were only found in 2013 and their discovery has caused heated debate ever since. [...]
The second cave is about 100 yards away from the first cave, the discovery of which led to debate about when Homo naledi lived and whether the pre-humans had deliberately buried their dead.
"This likely adds weight to the hypothesis that Homo naledi was using dark, remote places to cache its dead," University of Wisconsin-Madison anthropologist John Hawks, who worked on the study, said in a statement.
"What are the odds of a second, almost identical occurrence happening by chance?”
source
Higher bound:
The second period, the Middle Paleolithic, occurred when Homo erectus was replaced by Homo sapiens neanderthalensis about 130,000 years ago. Unlike their ancestors, these new hominids buried their dead. Several Neanderthal graves have been found with grave goods, indicating that these hominids had some sort of belief system with notions of an after-life.
source
BTW: If you expect a universalistic, monotheistic religion with proper theology - then it was even challenging for our specie.
$endgroup$
Required intellectual level - early hominid
(warning: good evidence is scanty, thus usually far reaching conclusions are being drawn from a few bones)
Lower bound:
The hominids, called Homo naledi, had brains about a third the size of ours but had modern-looking hands and backbones. The first fossils were only found in 2013 and their discovery has caused heated debate ever since. [...]
The second cave is about 100 yards away from the first cave, the discovery of which led to debate about when Homo naledi lived and whether the pre-humans had deliberately buried their dead.
"This likely adds weight to the hypothesis that Homo naledi was using dark, remote places to cache its dead," University of Wisconsin-Madison anthropologist John Hawks, who worked on the study, said in a statement.
"What are the odds of a second, almost identical occurrence happening by chance?”
source
Higher bound:
The second period, the Middle Paleolithic, occurred when Homo erectus was replaced by Homo sapiens neanderthalensis about 130,000 years ago. Unlike their ancestors, these new hominids buried their dead. Several Neanderthal graves have been found with grave goods, indicating that these hominids had some sort of belief system with notions of an after-life.
source
BTW: If you expect a universalistic, monotheistic religion with proper theology - then it was even challenging for our specie.
answered 8 hours ago
Shadow1024Shadow1024
6,68513 silver badges39 bronze badges
6,68513 silver badges39 bronze badges
$begingroup$
good answer thanks, I forgot to take into account how some animals deal with the death of their kind and this could lead to asking why or what happens next for them. agreed about a universal religion, I will likely have similar to humans, disbelievers and different variations of the religion.
$endgroup$
– Aizen-sama
8 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@Aizen-sama Even in early civilisation times you have less "disbelievers" and more "gods of my tribe are better than gods of your tribe". You get some kind of intermingling between basic medical and herbalists practices, magic/superstitions, tribe creation myths and legends (with at least grain of truth) and things that we would clearly consider as religion.
$endgroup$
– Shadow1024
8 hours ago
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
good answer thanks, I forgot to take into account how some animals deal with the death of their kind and this could lead to asking why or what happens next for them. agreed about a universal religion, I will likely have similar to humans, disbelievers and different variations of the religion.
$endgroup$
– Aizen-sama
8 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@Aizen-sama Even in early civilisation times you have less "disbelievers" and more "gods of my tribe are better than gods of your tribe". You get some kind of intermingling between basic medical and herbalists practices, magic/superstitions, tribe creation myths and legends (with at least grain of truth) and things that we would clearly consider as religion.
$endgroup$
– Shadow1024
8 hours ago
$begingroup$
good answer thanks, I forgot to take into account how some animals deal with the death of their kind and this could lead to asking why or what happens next for them. agreed about a universal religion, I will likely have similar to humans, disbelievers and different variations of the religion.
$endgroup$
– Aizen-sama
8 hours ago
$begingroup$
good answer thanks, I forgot to take into account how some animals deal with the death of their kind and this could lead to asking why or what happens next for them. agreed about a universal religion, I will likely have similar to humans, disbelievers and different variations of the religion.
$endgroup$
– Aizen-sama
8 hours ago
1
1
$begingroup$
@Aizen-sama Even in early civilisation times you have less "disbelievers" and more "gods of my tribe are better than gods of your tribe". You get some kind of intermingling between basic medical and herbalists practices, magic/superstitions, tribe creation myths and legends (with at least grain of truth) and things that we would clearly consider as religion.
$endgroup$
– Shadow1024
8 hours ago
$begingroup$
@Aizen-sama Even in early civilisation times you have less "disbelievers" and more "gods of my tribe are better than gods of your tribe". You get some kind of intermingling between basic medical and herbalists practices, magic/superstitions, tribe creation myths and legends (with at least grain of truth) and things that we would clearly consider as religion.
$endgroup$
– Shadow1024
8 hours ago
add a comment
|
1
$begingroup$
The ontological argument would like to have a word with you. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ontological_argument
$endgroup$
– Halfthawed
9 hours ago
2
$begingroup$
"If cattle and horses and lions had hands or could paint with their hands and create works such as men do, horses like horses and cattle like cattle also would depict the gods' shapes and make their bodies of such a sort as the form they themselves have." (Xenophanes of Colophon, 5th century BCE)
$endgroup$
– AlexP
7 hours ago