yep,I am quite sure you're sure!

Conrad, do you doubt that the aborigines survived prior to arrival of Europeans (or whites)? Do you dispute "survived fine?"

In North and South America the indigenous civilizations had existed for centuries before being conquered and largely obliterated by Europeans. Prior to the conquest it might be reasonably said that they survived fine.

The question in the Opening Post:



Consider evolution and what it must have been like to be at the bottom of the food chain. There we were, with a developing cortex and ever increasing self-awareness. It must have been a scary place to be.

We still depended on our survival instincts and among them was the need for social connectivity as in safety in numbers or call it the herd instinct.Women and children and younger men most likely followed a dominant leader, or a tribal elder, instinctually.

Our brains evolved, as did our through processes. We, cognitively, recognized that there was security in the social order, in other words we no longer maintained social structure, strictly speaking, out of instinct.

But, even today we still have the instinct to be social creatures, and that’s why most people find it necessary to please others, to have need to be accepted, and to see their group as the best and so on.

So it makes sense that some of the first religions evolved in dominantly pantheistic ways. Perhaps, in some way we came to understand our need for social connection as extending to everything in nature that supported our existence. That truly has mystical qualities as everything in the pantheistic physical world is thought to be a living thing that is a part of the whole.

The point from here is that our instincts are still intact however, we have learned to ignore, misinterpret, or simply override them in ways that support our beliefs of self-determinism, mysticism or some combination of both.

SO, the answer to the question could be that people who hold mysticism in high regard are simply misinterpreting key features of our survival instinct.

The problem is, at this stage in the development of our evolutionary psychology, we have also developed many other means of survival skills like the use of heuristics, and making fundamental attribution errors and so many other strange cognitive survival qualities that will continue to prevent most believers from ever changing their fundamentally held beliefs.

The most we can do is separate governance from mystic belief systems and possibly plant seeds to strengthen cognitive processes along the way.

So carry on with your planting, just remember there must two sides to a debate/discussion and ethical communication should provide all parties with an opportunity to learn something.

Does anyone else think that many of our beliefs – whether mystical or scientific – are an extension of or in some way related to our human survival instincts?

I think people look for answers , they take their observations and experiences and combine it with the multiple sources of information available in print from the observations and experiences of others

it so obvious that its a big world and people seek to fill in many of the exponential blanks that are not within their personal expertise

they use the sources available, whether scientific or religious or historic,,, to explain their surroundings and the things beyond their surroundings,,

I've read a few books on the topic, and the most interesting answer I've found as to why religion still exists, lies within the pages of "The God Delusion" By Richard Dawkins.

His theory is that religion is a byproduct of an evolutionary trait, not necessarily directly influenced by evolution. The theory he presented seems very plausible, and provides a good explanation.

Basically the theory is; Believing what our parents say in our youth is beneficial to survival, thus that trait has lived on. Indoctrination is a byproduct of this process, and because of the social norm, is left unchallenged by the general public. This allows for indoctrination to continue.

So why does religion still exist? If Dawkins' theory is correct, it is because we teach it to our kids, mixed in with our teachings of "Don't touch the stove", "Don't stick your fingers in the electrical socket", "Look both ways before crossing", etc. etc.

literally speaking, for our body to survive

we 'need' air, water, rest, shelter, and food


but our minds survive with stimulation, which happens through the senses

what we see
what we feel
what we hear
what we smell
what we taste

religion, like anything else we read and learn about from a book, stimulates our brains,,,

we don't NEED it, we choose it,, like we choose history or philosophy

its a connection to the past that gives us a foundation for where we are capable of going in our future,,,,


its not a big deal, people believe it or they don't, they believe the parts that seem to fit best into the reality they have experienced

so much of what we 'believe' does not rely on hard facts and personal experience, but upon knowledge passed down by others of their experiences or the experiences of others,,,

it's not the matter of how we will live , we can live in modern complex cities or in simple farms ... it's the matter of not needing ancient instructions to gain control over our will and push us to kill each other to win imaginary paradises ....