True Archy…Molly’s post in a different thread even addresses some of the historical notions of ‘mind’ when it comes to such things…perhaps even another ‘view’. http://www.chomsky.info/debates/1971xxxx.htm
On Feb 13, 1:31 pm, archytas <[email protected]> wrote: > My view Alan is that the 'origin' precedes what we postulate it as, > always locatable only in what we are, leaving us at least potentially > imagining god, but also piecing together our history in steps that at > least seem to let us play jigsaw science. There is always more, > including questions of what use any of it is or is likely to have > (pragmatism). This would not leave your view on one side as > impossible, but we might choose to leave you with it and take other > lines ourselves. We can do this in peace, raising questions as to > what this is and why we value it enough to want to rule out other > views (fascism etc). > > On 13 Feb, 20:27, Alan Wostenberg <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > The scholars seemed to rule out the simplest explanation of the origin > > of religion: God. It would be like asking about the origin of > > science, and neglecting to mention it is because man naturally desires > > truth. > > > In fact, does anybody even ask about the evolutionary origins of the > > the sciences? Do they think of sciences what as they think of religion > > "...can play a role in facilitating and stabilizing cooperation > > between groups"? Possibly so. But that is not the greatest good of > > science, or religion. Love of neighbor is the second greatest > > commandment, not the first. > > > On Feb 9, 8:50 pm, archytas <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > This is an extract from a recent article. > > > The details surrounding the emergence and evolution of religion have > > > not been clearly established and remain a source of much debate among > > > scholars. Now, an article published by Cell Press in the journal > > > Trends in Cognitive Sciences on February 8 brings a new understanding > > > to this long-standing discussion by exploring the fascinating link > > > between morality and religion. > > > > There is no doubt that spiritual experiences and religion, which are > > > ubiquitous across cultures and time and associated exclusively with > > > humans, [actually something similar seems to have been observed in > > > chimps] are ultimately based in the brain. However, there are many > > > unanswered questions about how and why these behaviors originated and > > > how they may have been shaped during evolution. > > > > "Some scholars claim that religion evolved as an adaptation to solve > > > the problem of cooperation among genetically unrelated individuals, > > > while others propose that religion emerged as a by-product of pre- > > > existing cognitive capacities," explains study co-author Dr. Ilkka > > > Pyysiainen from the Helsinki Collegium for Advanced Studies. Although > > > there is some support for both, these alternative proposals have been > > > difficult to investigate. > > > > Dr. Pyysiainen and co-author Dr. Marc Hauser, from the Departments of > > > Psychology and Human Evolutionary Biology at Harvard University, used > > > a fresh perspective based in experimental moral psychology to review > > > these two competing theories. "We were interested in making use of > > > this perspective because religion is linked to morality in different > > > ways," says Dr. Hauser. "For some, there is no morality without > > > religion, while others see religion as merely one way of expressing > > > one's moral intuitions." > > > > Citing several studies in moral psychology, the authors highlight the > > > finding that despite differences in, or even an absence of, religious > > > backgrounds, individuals show no difference in moral judgments for > > > unfamiliar moral dilemmas. The research suggests that intuitive > > > judgments of right and wrong seem to operate independently of explicit > > > religious commitments. > > > > "This supports the theory that religion did not originally emerge as a > > > biological adaptation for cooperation, but evolved as a separate by- > > > product of pre-existing cognitive functions that evolved from non- > > > religious functions," says Dr. Pyysiainen. "However, although it > > > appears as if cooperation is made possible by mental mechanisms that > > > are not specific to religion, religion can play a role in facilitating > > > and stabilizing cooperation between groups." > > > > Perhaps this may help to explain the complex association between > > > morality and religion. "It seems that in many cultures religious > > > concepts and beliefs have become the standard way of conceptualizing > > > moral intuitions. Although, as we discuss in our paper, this link is > > > not a necessary one, many people have become so accustomed to using > > > it, that criticism targeted at religion is experienced as a > > > fundamental threat to our moral existence," concludes Dr. Hauser. > > > > I tend to see religion much as I would view political correctness - > > > that is, peevish, hostile, posturing pretense to be on the moral high > > > ground. Even Orn, who is a splendid example of the opposite most of > > > the time, lapses to this and so do I. I'm sure he won't take offence > > > and think I'm merely pointing to difficulties, not accusing him. Any > > > quest for origin is fraught with self-deception and the struggle to > > > sort wheat from chaff. > > > > I'm not looking for religion, but radical, practical changes in > > > society, the way we live and could live - this, of course, sounds > > > rather religious!- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/minds-eye?hl=en.
