How Did Apes Across the Globe Develop Similar Beliefs in a Creator?

  • Thread starter eggomaniac
  • Start date
In summary, the conversation revolves around the concept of religion and its origins in different cultures. The participants discuss the similarities in beliefs among different ape civilizations and the scientific explanation for this phenomenon. While some believe that religion was a result of early humans trying to explain unexplained phenomena, others see it as a product of natural selection and evolution. The conversation also delves into the debate between creationism and evolution, with some suggesting that a better understanding of evolution could help explain the origins of religion.
  • #1
eggomaniac
15
0
The first I heard of Richard Dawkin, I had been directed to a talk by Larry Krauss.
Then I linked to a talk they had together.
At one point, Dawkins was pointing to a table and saying. "This is a table!"
Well, it's not called a table in Norway, Ancient Greece or India.
How did so many ape civilizations from all over the Globe, separated by time and distance, come up with a belief in God? Yes, Richie, they had different Names, because there are different languages in the World. Vishnu, Thor, Apollo, Taiwo, Michael; it's absolutely scientifically astounding that nearly every ape species came up with basically, language, for one thing and a basic similar Notion about a Creator, for another. Some of the amazing similarities are totally beyond comprehension to a layman like myself and would require a great Biologist to explain.
It all seems very much the opposite to Darwin's conclusions, where every mountain has a different kind of turtle, finch and reptile. How did hundreds, or thousands, of disconnected animal species all, independently, develop language and similar beliefs, or was it observations, in a Pantheon?
Write a book on that, eh?
Can't blame it on the stars talking to them as the constellations were different.
What is the scientific explanation for that?
apes were such good survivalists they got to sit around the campfire and discovered 'talking' was a good pass time. They were still scared of beasties so they ALL made up a big man who was stronger, quite a COINCIDENCE
 
Biology news on Phys.org
  • #2
I can't decide whether to write a book about it, or just give you scientific explanation. Now I'm stuck in purgatory-
 
  • #3
Science can never answer the question of why something happens, all that may be done is observe that a phenomenon is indeed happening and, hopefully, elucidate how that phenomenon happens. Why questions are in the realm of philosophy, which, incidentally, is probably where this thread is going (that or wherever threads go when they are locked).

Despite the fact that thread is oozing with a creation vs. evolution debate I will contribute something.

After you have watched that, you can check out Michael Shermer's first TED talk (something about 'strange beliefs'). Do have a look see at both of them.

http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/eng/michael_shermer_the_pattern_behind_self_deception.html
 
  • #4
eggomaniac said:
apes were such good survivalists they got to sit around the campfire and discovered 'talking' was a good pass time. They were still scared of beasties so they ALL made up a big man who was stronger, quite a COINCIDENCE

Actually that is a very good explination for it. That kinda stuff works well in the human mind. Lemme tell you a story... I met a hot girl named erin at a gas station. She thought I was cute and when she gave me the change for my cup of coffee there was a silver quarter in the register and so she gave it to me saying "guess its your lucky day". And indeed it was I got a raise and I got to know this erin girl very well. We were highly compatible emotionaly, sexualy, and our kids got along well. I kept the quarter in my pocket the entire time as a good luck token. She moved in and we were both in heaven. Then I lost the silver quarter and it all fell apart, lost her and the job in 2008. Been on hard luck since then in both the job and relationship arenas. Now I found another one at my current sucky job. It stays in my truck at all times! Just got offered a QC lab job at a local mine! My life is indeed getting better.

My god is the Silver Quarter...not because its true but because my brain likes to make silly connections.
 
  • #5
Utter twaddle.
IBTL.
 
  • #6
I think (in my own opinion) its because there are lots of things that early humans couldn't explain, and because the human mind was evolved enough to perceive self and non self, and had enough imagination to find explanations for unexplained phenomena, that resulted in the creation of Gods, to explain what was a mystery - basically notable stories and legends and real people got mixed together over time and was spread throughout societies over generations.

Why similar Gods in different peoples? I guess because we all had similar minds - we are all of the same species, and all originated from the same place, and we all experienced similar unexplained phenomema - weather, birth, death etc.
I think the early people were quite closely connected - we all evolved from Africa, and in those days I guess everyone had to travel on foot, and people relied on each other for food and protection, so I'm guessing they would have lived together in close tribes.
Those people may have started the thought of there being a God, and then as the tribes got bigger and split further away, the people retained the same beliefs and pass those on. And then each tribe could have modified their beliefs over time in their own way.

I don't think its opposing what Darwin said at all: natural selection acts on genes, not on thoughts themselves- religion is a human thought. natural selection may act on the resulting actions of thoughts, and this may be why there are so many religious people nowadays: those in the past who didnt believe in religion were sometimes killed by the religious people. But this doesn't clash with Darwin either.

I think, a better understanding of evolution might help to answer some of your questions.
I would try to explain, but I'm currently reading about it myself, and I don't want to mislead you with my interpretations.
 
Last edited:
  • #7
madcat8000 said:
Actually that is a very good explination for it. That kinda stuff works well in the human mind. Lemme tell you a story... I met a hot girl named erin at a gas station. She thought I was cute and when she gave me the change for my cup of coffee there was a silver quarter in the register and so she gave it to me saying "guess its your lucky day". And indeed it was I got a raise and I got to know this erin girl very well. We were highly compatible emotionaly, sexualy, and our kids got along well. I kept the quarter in my pocket the entire time as a good luck token. She moved in and we were both in heaven. Then I lost the silver quarter and it all fell apart, lost her and the job in 2008. Been on hard luck since then in both the job and relationship arenas. Now I found another one at my current sucky job. It stays in my truck at all times! Just got offered a QC lab job at a local mine! My life is indeed getting better.

My god is the Silver Quarter...not because its true but because my brain likes to make silly connections.

Ahh the joys of innate teleology and inferred casual relationships, I <3 my human brain :rofl:
 
  • #8
Yanick gave the only real answer: Science tells you "how", not "why".
 
  • #9
nismaratwork said:
Yanick gave the only real answer: Science tells you "how", not "why".

But if we know enough about how things happen, we will know why things happen? Science is understanding the world around us, and if we understand everything, we will know why?
 
  • #10
nucleargirl said:
But if we know enough about how things happen, we will know why things happen? Science is understanding the world around us, and if we understand everything, we will know why?

You can understand every detail of how a bullet pierces a body; every atom which is disturbed all the way to the medical details and never understand why the person was shot. Why and How are different universes, separated and never able to meet unless there is a conscious force directing events. In other words, "why" can only be addressed to a mind, be it that of a shooter, or a god. I personally don't believe in a god, so to me there is no why to be found... just a series of "hows". This further illustrates the divide: HOW is science, WHY is philosophy.
 
  • #11
This needs to be moved to cultural studies or something, a worthy discussion of "How the idea of a higher being came about and evolved" could be had, and the aspect of biology could be worked in, but right now this thing is riding off generalizations and analogies.
Anywho, my 2cents before lockdown.

Higher powers come about because the way we perceive our reality is greatly enhanced if there is cause and effect relationships. Back in the day, humans would perceive seemingly random effects, (e.g. hurricane, drought, infection) and want to put a cause before it. Without knowledge of sciences like meteorology and biology, their best explanation was a metaphysical higher power in the form of a God or three.

That general idea floated around the world until the advent of modern technology and science. Now we assume their to be an observable, quantifiable, and even tangible cause to everything. Although some areas of science, namely quantum and astrophysics, still have a ways to go before all the kinks are worked out, I have Faith that Science will be out there hiding in the depths of space controlling our world.
 
  • #12
nismaratwork said:
You can understand every detail of how a bullet pierces a body; every atom which is disturbed all the way to the medical details and never understand why the person was shot. Why and How are different universes, separated and never able to meet unless there is a conscious force directing events. In other words, "why" can only be addressed to a mind, be it that of a shooter, or a god. I personally don't believe in a god, so to me there is no why to be found... just a series of "hows". This further illustrates the divide: HOW is science, WHY is philosophy.

I don't agree. A lot of our 'why' questions are actually 'how'. what questions are purely about why? I think if we know everything about science there is to know, there would be no more uncertainties of how or why - we would know everything!

so why do people believe in a god? because it helps to provide an explanation about what we don't know. because it makes us feel safe knowing we are not alone. because it gives purpose and meaning to some people's lives. This can all be tested using science, science can answer 'why' questions.
 
  • #13
nucleargirl said:
I don't agree. A lot of our 'why' questions are actually 'how'. what questions are purely about why? I think if we know everything about science there is to know, there would be no more uncertainties of how or why - we would know everything!

so why do people believe in a god? because it helps to provide an explanation about what we don't know. because it makes us feel safe knowing we are not alone. because it gives purpose and meaning to some people's lives. This can all be tested using science, science can answer 'why' questions.

If you know every detail of how the universe came into existence, from the moment of the Big Bang, to its (for the sake of this argument) eventual heat death, you would know ALL of the hows, but none of the "whys". Why = "For what purpose", and that requires a mind to instill a purpose. To ask why, is to invoke something that science does not, and was never meant to be examined. You can know A-Z, but not why that set exists at all. Do you see what I mean?
 
  • #14
nismaratwork said:
If you know every detail of how the universe came into existence, from the moment of the Big Bang, to its (for the sake of this argument) eventual heat death, you would know ALL of the hows, but none of the "whys". Why = "For what purpose", and that requires a mind to instill a purpose. To ask why, is to invoke something that science does not, and was never meant to be examined. You can know A-Z, but not why that set exists at all. Do you see what I mean?

yeah, but surely there is no purpose? the universe just is. there is no why? no?
 
  • #15
nucleargirl said:
yeah, but surely there is no purpose? the universe just is. there is no why? no?

That's what I believe, but of course there are others who would laugh in my face for espousing that view. "why" is infinitely debatable... how is not.
 
  • #16
nismaratwork said:
That's what I believe, but of course there are others who would laugh in my face for espousing that view. "why" is infinitely debatable... how is not.

:) I agree!
 
  • #17
see this is what's good about science - there can only be one truth, and no matter what your background or beliefs, as long as people are logical, there will be an answer that everyone can agree with! no more wars!
 
  • #18
nucleargirl said:
see this is what's good about science - there can only be one truth

Since Gödel even that is not true.
 
  • #19
Borek said:
Since Gödel even that is not true.

Godel? I'm not familiar.
But what I mean was that there can only be one truth. but when people are trying to figure out what that is, there are bound to be disputes cos everyone thinks they have the answer.
 
  • #20
nucleargirl said:
Godel? I'm not familiar.
But what I mean was that there can only be one truth. but when people are trying to figure out what that is, there are bound to be disputes cos everyone thinks they have the answer.

Bucket of a cold water:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goedel#The_Incompleteness_Theorem
 
  • #21
Borek said:

really? is this true? this just made maths much more interesting for me! its kinda like Shroedinger's cat right? probs not but kind of.
well, my inclination is to say that it is because we still don't understand everything, and when we do, everything will be come clear - no unsolvable problems!
maybe its god - like god particle, but god equation :p
 
  • #22
haha when I used to hear fuzzy logic I always thought of something fuzzy... like fluffy. but it probs doesn't mean that :p
 
  • #23
Think fuzzy, like an electron probability cloud... but its still cute. :smile:
 
  • #24
nucleargirl said:
my inclination is to say that it is because we still don't understand everything, and when we do, everything will be come clear

Actually Goedel proved just the opposite.
 
  • #25
Borek said:
Actually Goedel proved just the opposite.

Specifically, he proved that our knowledge will always be incomplete, BUT... does it matter? For the purposes of human endeavors, I'm not sure that completely provable theorems are necessary to advance the practice of science, and the disciplines that benefit as a result. Only those who are truly in search of "ultimate understanding" lose here, and really, was that ever a chance for a bunch of animals on a dirtball?
 
  • #26
It matters in the context of nucleargirl hope that there can be only one truth in science.
 
  • #27
Borek said:
It matters in the context of nucleargirl hope that there can be only one truth in science.

so its like we cannot have understanding of our minds cos we are in it, we cannot understant everything about the universe cos we are in it, it makes sense- like the outsider can see clearly, like how we can see clearly the world of an ant. but it says we can draw on outside knowledge to figure out our system, and what endless world we have in our minds! the human imagination is endless! we can always draw on that to figure out the universe!
 
  • #28
nucleargirl said:
so its like we cannot have understanding of our minds cos we are in it, we cannot understant everything about the universe cos we are in it, it makes sense- like the outsider can see clearly, like how we can see clearly the world of an ant. but it says we can draw on outside knowledge to figure out our system, and what endless world we have in our minds! the human imagination is endless! we can always draw on that to figure out the universe!

The theorem is not so fanciful, it's very literal and mathematical and does not allow for an infinity within the human mind.
 
  • #29
nismaratwork said:
The theorem is not so fanciful, it's very literal and mathematical and does not allow for an infinity within the human mind.

well then perhaps it should be changed to include an infinity, and reignite the hopes of all scientists!
 
  • #30
nismaratwork said:
it's very literal and mathematical and does not allow for an infinity within the human mind.
I'm sorry, I've never heard of Goedel before, and I can't quite grasp what the wikipedia is trying to say about incompleteness theorem. But how does that, "not allow for infinity within the human mind"? Are you saying that Goedel somehow proved we cannot comprehend infinity with a proof? Even so, the concept of infinity may be impossible in the human mind, but actual infinity still exists (i.e. in math and physics) right?
 
  • #31
What do you mean "changed"?

Like "since today pi is 7"?
 
  • #32
Kglocc said:
I'm sorry, I've never heard of Goedel before, and I can't quite grasp what the wikipedia is trying to say about incompleteness theorem. But how does that, "not allow for infinity within the human mind"? Are you saying that Goedel somehow proved we cannot comprehend infinity with a proof? Even so, the concept of infinity may be impossible in the human mind, but actual infinity still exists (i.e. in math and physics) right?

Ah, no, I'm saying that the concept of "infinite imaginative" capacity is not what the theorem is about. That's a happy notion, but not one that's rooted in any science or math, so it just doesn't apply. In fact, there are other principles and theories which limit the capacity of the human mind, or the information content of any discrete entity.
 
  • #33
This thread has no relevance to to biology sub-forum.
 

1. How did apes across the globe develop similar beliefs in a creator?

The development of similar beliefs in a creator among apes across the globe is likely due to the innate human tendency to seek explanations for the unknown and the need for a sense of purpose and meaning in life. Additionally, cultural transmission and social learning may have played a role in the spread and adoption of these beliefs.

2. Is there any scientific evidence to support the idea of a creator among apes?

There is currently no scientific evidence to support the idea of a creator among apes. Belief in a creator is a matter of faith and cannot be proven or disproven by scientific methods.

3. Do all apes across the globe share the same beliefs in a creator?

No, not all apes across the globe share the same beliefs in a creator. Just like humans, apes have diverse cultural and religious beliefs that vary across different regions and groups.

4. Could the belief in a creator among apes be a result of convergent evolution?

It is unlikely that the belief in a creator among apes is a result of convergent evolution. Convergent evolution refers to the independent evolution of similar traits in different species due to similar environmental pressures, and it does not explain the development of complex cultural and religious beliefs.

5. How can we study the development of beliefs in a creator among apes?

The study of the development of beliefs in a creator among apes is challenging due to the lack of direct evidence and the subjective nature of these beliefs. However, researchers can use comparative studies and behavioral observations to understand how these beliefs may have evolved and spread among different ape species.

Similar threads

Replies
10
Views
3K
  • Sci-Fi Writing and World Building
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • General Engineering
Replies
27
Views
8K
  • Biology and Medical
Replies
6
Views
5K
Replies
49
Views
11K
  • General Discussion
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
33
Views
7K
Replies
18
Views
5K
  • General Discussion
Replies
16
Views
4K
Back
Top