>>18271 >people ask questions about their origins and the nature of death >try to figure out and make stories to fill in the gaps >stories spread by word of mouth >new stories are made that are heavily influenced by others >the most popular themes eventually meld into a mythology structure >social castes emerge from amongst the followers
>>18271 Honestly, most, if not all religions (and yes, this includes you, Abrahamic religions), can trace their origins back to heavy usage of psychedelics. I think there is a hidden wisdom in psychedelics that only someone with intimate experience with them can truly understand and take seriously. In man's quest to answer those deep questions science was not yet able to answer, psychedelics lent insight. Describing the knowledge gained from these trips to the layperson required a more simplistic explanation. Hence the formation of "god." Over the centuries of a religion's existence, it gradually drifts from the original message into a unique religion of its own.
>>18612 >can trace their origins back to heavy usage of psychedelics thanks but that's nothing but conjecture. and beyond that if you've ever tried psychedelics you would know that the key change comes from widening your understanding, not seeing funny shapes then worshiping them.
look into cultures that still do utilize drugs like this and how they see them.
This + The additional need for an explanation of natural phenomenon and a way to discourage dangerous acts.
e.g. Don't go into the forest (and get subsequently mauled by wolves), because the forest is "filled with dangerous spirits that spirit people away." The ground is shaking because the gods beneath it are angry
>>18662 Not really conjecture. Most religions straight out discuss the drug use. Others, such as Abrahamic ones, strongly hint towards it. Additionally, I have heavy experience in psychedelics. I'm not talking about worshipping shapes. I'm talking about gaining an understanding, "widening your view" as you put it, but needing a more simplistic way to relate this back to the tribe when you come back. It's much easier to say "god" than it is to try to explain the unifying universal consciousness that binds all things.
When talking about our actions, or those of others, we talk in terms of motivations, reasons, or intentions. We also often use that language when talking about inanimate processes, so it seems reasonable that our ancestors would have done the same. At a time when explanations in terms of physics and whatnot, were unavailable, it seems like teleological explanations would just take root, and likely be elaborated on, until you end up with full-blown religions.
A lot of early religions deal with lesser "gods" or spirits that are directly connected to things that are dangerous or otherwise noteworthy. Things like the sun, rivers, forests, predatory animals, the ocean, etc. It seems like a fairly believable progression. Someone from your village goes into the forest at night, you hear screaming and animal sounds, you go to look for them the next day and they are shredded into little bits, so you give form to the thing that took them. Someone goes into a river/lake, they get caught in reeds or some other plant on the bottom and struggle and drown--you see a giant salamander partially obscured by mud and plants--so suddenly the lake has a water spirit in it that drowns people and its not safe to go in.
IIRC A lot of Native American spiritualism deals with origin myths explaining why things are the way they are.
>>19132 a lot of early religions from what we know of them have a mix of lesser spirits and supreme gods (often those at the top are merely creative forces and largely unconnected to creation itself from then after)
like in Hellenic faith for example, Zeus is the primary deity, but he neither created humans nor the world itself, if anything he was more akin to a demiurge.
beyond that we have been lulled into this strict materialism today to the point where anything else is ridiculed or thrown out when we know reality to be far less orderly than we hope it to be.
At first, we believed with our ancestor's souls always be with us eventhough they were dead and they would protect us. Then it moved to, we believed that fire/forest/river/sun/any nonliving things has protected us or we called it animism. Then it branched, becomes polytheism (which is modernization of animism) and monotheism.
>>19261 >At first >we believed more conjecture don't equate isolated faiths existing today as some archaic forms representing the early stages of other faiths, its dishonest and not terribly accurate knowing what we do from early records.
>>19355 Well, I mean, it's a question for each of us to answer. There's bound to be a level of conjecture in every response, as obviously no one objectively knows exactly how and why each specific religion, or religion in general was created.
>>18385 This is not why it started. People were making up god WAY before "social norms" or "states" were even conceivable. What you are talking about is much later on. As religion gained power, states naturally co-opted the power, or were inter-mingled for the benefit of the leadership.
People would see flames explode from a mountain top and didn't understand what was happening. So people would say that this volcano was some kind of god. Whenever the god became angry it would erupt and fire would explode out from it.
They didn't understand the laws of nature and had to make up things that sounded nice.
>>19951 >>19954 >>20003 >>20007 Philosophy is still part of your thinking because your thinking is stuck in the stone age. The greatest thinkers of our age are scientists, not philosophers or theologians.
To illustrate my point, consider metaphysics. Metaphysics is gibberish from before we had science and here's why: metaphysicians "logically deduce" the existence of imperceptible transcendent entities. You can literally find metaphysicians that believe in invisible pink unicorns. And if you ask for evidence, they will all claim to have "logically deduced" the existence of their spooks. So there's no actual evidence that their "logic" at all conforms to reality, it's literally bullshit they pulled out of their ass. If you put such people in a physics conference, they would get laughed out of the room.
>>18271 With culture. Religion is just concentrated culture expounded upon enough that it covers the full range of experiences one is likely to encounter in life and flexible enough to not be completely replaced every time the world changes.
>>20251 Nigger, philosophy is just another part of think. Like what is the origin of every living being here, then science explains it. Literally scientist is just modernization of philosopher but now unlike philosopher who use only use logical deduction, scientist also use science fact (like chromosome, DNA relation, and some shit).
Thread replies: 56 Thread images: 6
Thread DB ID: 68884
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the content originated from them. If you need IP information for a Poster - you need to contact them. This website shows only archived content.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content you can contact me at email@example.com with that post and thread number and it will be removed as soon as possible.