Why religions have birthed is that

[SoldierofFortune]

The endeavour of the humankind to give a meaning to the world, and to humankind's self existence in the world...
This endeavour shouldnt be undervalued i think... Because the humankind wonders and wants explanations...
And we must have understood so far that the only way to succeed to understand the universe and our position in the universe is by science.

Science requires to ask questions. But religions are close to asking. Religions want believers to believe in without questions...And religions cannot be falsified. You cannot convince the believers.
But science always improves itself...

Wonder is the key of science and philosophy...The reason of birth of religions is wonder, too...Because they want to explain but failed...

[Baruch]

People who hate philosophy (and most people hate to think in general), might at least support epistemology.  Epistemology is easy, doesn't require value judgements.  You take three stones and count them (mathematics) and weigh them (physics).  The objectivity shields us from the subjectivity we find uncomfortable.  And in epistemology, science does lead.  Personally, I find no meaning in the meaningless universe of epistemology.  How could it?  Meaning doesn't come from epistemology.  It comes from ethics and aesthetics.  The mass of the electron, accurately measured, will never tell you about ethics or aesthetics (collectively called axiology or theory of values).  People who hate anything that two rational people can't agree on (like ethics and aesthetics) have that straw to grasp, three stones in the hand ... hard not to agree with that, little conflict.  But are the stones beautiful?  Are they to be thrown thru someone's window?  We don't like to think about that.

So ethically, did anything bad happen in Charlottesville?  Several things, but one not mentioned is their mayor called off the police, to step aside and let the fighting happen.  Was that ethical?  Was the mayor fulfilling his duty?  Hard questions, and we don't want those, because they might have hard answers.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

The endeavour of the humankind to give a meaning to the world, and to humankind's self existence in the world...
This endeavour shouldnt be undervalued i think... Because the humankind wonders and wants explanations...
And we must have understood so far that the only way to succeed to understand the universe and our position in the universe is by science.

Science requires to ask questions. But religions are close to asking. Religions want believers to believe in without questions...And religions cannot be falsified. You cannot convince the believers.
But science always improves itself...

Wonder is the key of science and philosophy...The reason of birth of religions is wonder, too...Because they want to explain but failed...

Mostly religion is just lies. We can live without it, there are other ways to gain the same goals.

[SGOS]

humankind wonders and wants explanations...

And we must have understood so far that the only way to succeed to understand the universe and our position in the universe is by science.

Both science and religion supply explanations.  For the inquisitive, the answers are imperative.  There is a common human default state that abhors the unknown and demands answers.  Without the answers, people become uncomfortable, feel a loss of control, feel like something is missing, and worst part of this is having to face one's ignorance.  Facing ignorance requires a great deal of acceptance.  One must accept his own littleness, his impotence, and his insignificance.

But ignorance is not a personal failure.  It's a failure of evolution, which creates species that adapt.  It does not create species that are perfect or are born with all knowledge and answers already in place.  If we want to understand things we must learn, and this is sometimes painful, boring, and requires an output of energy, which is often too much to ask.

This is where religion and myth fills the gaps.  It supplies answers to difficult and sometimes impossible questions.  It even answers questions that are irrelevant, and the results are satisfying because they hide us from our horrible human failures that come with evolution, the failures I talked about in the first paragraph.  The point is that the answers must only be satisfying to make us feel better.  They do not have to be correct or logical, they need only satisfy.  And we can then feel a bit of relief from the reality of our own ignorance.

[Baruch]

Mostly religion is just lies. We can live without it, there are other ways to gain the same goals.

Did you ever vote for a politician?  Are you still planning on voting?  Then you must like some kinds of lies.

On comforting answers ... humans need this, and if you can get comfort from facts ... they are superior to the imagination.  But if you can't get comfort from facts ... then imagination is the better alternative.  Retard is OK, full retard isn't.

[Cavebear]

Did you ever vote for a politician?  Are you still planning on voting?  Then you must like some kinds of lies.

On comforting answers ... humans need this, and if you can get comfort from facts ... they are superior to the imagination.  But if you can't get comfort from facts ... then imagination is the better alternative.  Retard is OK, full retard isn't.

Political choices are mostly the lesser of 2 imperfect candidates.  If I could vote among ALL people, I would vote for Al Gore or myself.

[Baruch]

Political choices are mostly the lesser of 2 imperfect candidates.  If I could vote among ALL people, I would vote for Al Gore or myself.

Part of the problem with American politics today, is that we think the only political office that matters is the White House.  Damn monarchists, all of you!

[Cavebear]

Part of the problem with American politics today, is that we think the only political office that matters is the White House.  Damn monarchists, all of you!

No, Congress matters a LOT.  But we can only vote for our own...  In fact, Congress has a lower approval rating than Trump, but we all love our OWN Rep and Sens.

[aitm]

I would argue, not that I am, that the birth of religion is far simpler. We can still examine the process as we watch the cognitive growth of children. They easily assimilate life and inanimate objects to a land of fantasy that is partial reality and part simple imagination that I would suggest is "want" or "desire". Their "friends" can exhibit all the emotions that the parents aim toward the child, or the sibling towards the child and vice versus. The child experiments with differing ways to address these confusing emotions and how to act or interact with them. Children practice animism with the same devotion on short term memory but can easily go back months or years and re-enact those moments upon the introduction of a particular favorite "friend". We have found that the earliest humans buried the dead with items that seem to be reflective of what they liked or perhaps what the person liked.

Later as the "friends" are replaced or set aside as the cognitive growth starts to understand reality better that toy or car or stone is still held to a high degree of semi-worship, they enter the age of totemism without the "monuments". We have seen that later humans have started erecting monuments or totems, and it can easily be simply for the comfort of having these "friends" around to talk to.

It is around this time they enter the "post hoc ergo" that historically leads to the idea of shamanism, witchcraft and hero-worship. This is pretty easy to follow as one can see that since B followed A,  the appearance of A will usually be followed by B. In simpler times when the tall grass started to move, you ran. You always ran. Because when the tall grass moves, something is making it move and coming for you. It may have been one day, for the beginning of any particular shaman or witch doctor, that a person was pre-occupied when the tall grass moved and people scattered but the odd person turned to yell an objection about something completely unrelated and the animal got scared and ran off. Suddenly we have a person who the group believe the animals fear. Thus they go to this person for protection from the animals and the whole world of superstition emerges, and from that we begin to worship, hoping that we can parlay our devotion into protection and eventually prosperity. The successful shamans or priests demanded homage and devotion and started to provide the answers for everything. I would suggest that our real curious nature began when those answers didn't pan out. The evolution of religion and religious beliefs follows quite closely the "evolution" of the child.

[Baruch]

Development of an embryo, closely follows the prior evolution of a species.

[Cavebear]

I would argue, not that I am, that the birth of religion is far simpler. We can still examine the process as we watch the cognitive growth of children. They easily assimilate life and inanimate objects to a land of fantasy that is partial reality and part simple imagination that I would suggest is "want" or "desire". Their "friends" can exhibit all the emotions that the parents aim toward the child, or the sibling towards the child and vice versus. The child experiments with differing ways to address these confusing emotions and how to act or interact with them. Children practice animism with the same devotion on short term memory but can easily go back months or years and re-enact those moments upon the introduction of a particular favorite "friend". We have found that the earliest humans buried the dead with items that seem to be reflective of what they liked or perhaps what the person liked.

Later as the "friends" are replaced or set aside as the cognitive growth starts to understand reality better that toy or car or stone is still held to a high degree of semi-worship, they enter the age of totemism without the "monuments". We have seen that later humans have started erecting monuments or totems, and it can easily be simply for the comfort of having these "friends" around to talk to.

It is around this time they enter the "post hoc ergo" that historically leads to the idea of shamanism, witchcraft and hero-worship. This is pretty easy to follow as one can see that since B followed A,  the appearance of A will usually be followed by B. In simpler times when the tall grass started to move, you ran. You always ran. Because when the tall grass moves, something is making it move and coming for you. It may have been one day, for the beginning of any particular shaman or witch doctor, that a person was pre-occupied when the tall grass moved and people scattered but the odd person turned to yell an objection about something completely unrelated and the animal got scared and ran off. Suddenly we have a person who the group believe the animals fear. Thus they go to this person for protection from the animals and the whole world of superstition emerges, and from that we begin to worship, hoping that we can parlay our devotion into protection and eventually prosperity. The successful shamans or priests demanded homage and devotion and started to provide the answers for everything. I would suggest that our real curious nature began when those answers didn't pan out. The evolution of religion and religious beliefs follows quite closely the "evolution" of the child.

Very well said, though I'm not sure the "tall grass moving" was as late as modern humans.  I think that goes back to original bipedalism and before organized societies involving something as complex as shamanism.  Call it "tribe leader" though and I'll go along provisionally.

But I'm with you all the way on animism.  There were "powers" for anything.  And that is where modern theisms came from. Lightening?  A deity.  Floods?  A deity. Etc. 

As anything became understood, one less deity for that.  But the habit of deities stayed with most of us.  Run out of specific problems needing deities?  Well there were people who lived by those, so let the deities become gradually less specific.

1,00 deities became 100, became 10, become eventually 1.  Just as false, but with just as many people living off them. 

And after 1 comes none...

[Baruch]

Pharaoh Akhenaten invented monotheism, because he was bad at math ;-)

[Cavebear]

Pharaoh Akhenaten invented monotheism, because he was bad at math ;-)

Yeah, and how long did Akhetaten last?  His theory was more of a single bchief god rather than an only god.  Or should I re-watch my National Geographic cds again?  Not that I need any great excuse...

[Baruch]

Yeah, and how long did Akhetaten last?  His theory was more of a single bchief god rather than an only god.  Or should I re-watch my National Geographic cds again?  Not that I need any great excuse...

You can never go wrong with a good documentary.  Yes, technically henotheism.  Technically that is all Judaism was until Islam made Judaism tighten up their standards.  When the Muslims made the Catholics tighten up their standards, Protestantism was the result.  But why one would worship a chicken is beyond me ;-)

[Cavebear]

You can never go wrong with a good documentary.  Yes, technically henotheism.  Technically that is all Judaism was until Islam made Judaism tighten up their standards.  When the Muslims made the Catholics tighten up their standards, Protestantism was the result.  But why one would worship a chicken is beyond me ;-)

Chicken the way *I* make it, smoked, smothered in garlic and ginger is WORTH it.