Religion from the Mind

In The Nature of Paleolithic Art, R. Dale Guthrie contends that the Paleolithic art that has been excavated by archaeologists shouldn't be interpreted merely on religious or symbolic grounds because it is such a tiny fragment of ancient peoples' art. He makes the point that although some art is religious, it's only part of the larger whole (10). According to Guthrie, we shouldn't think of Paleolithic peoples as so "mystically preoccupied" (10). He prefers to look at them as humans just like us--united through evolution (11). Our humanness is most exemplefied in our "shared rational ability" which allows us to see outside of ourselves and imagine other perspectives. Because we can thus see things objectively, we can have reason, which distinguishes us from other animals. (12-13)

Although Guthrie doesn't discuss religion very much in his book, the above statements provide some interesting implications about religion. As we've discussed in class, humans are the only species that seems to have a religion. If our ability to reason is also unique to humans, do reason and religion go together? Many people would say they don't, claiming that religion blinds people to their own common sense. For example, Richard Dawkins states that Catholic priests and monks are denying themselves their instincts to reproduce because they ignorantly obey an imagined God (The Selfish Gene). While it's true that some religious behaviors go against biological/evolutionary logic, this is not true of all. We've already established in class that religion can be beneficial to groups and individuals--it brings people together, promotes altruism, and gives people hope. Robin Marantz Henig addressed some of these benefits in the article, "Why Do We Believe?" from last week.

Our reading about Neanderthals earlier this week supports the idea that complex thoughts and highly developed minds brought about religion, although in that case it is cognitive fluidity rather than reason that is the main difference between human and animal brains. However, cognitive fluidity, or the ability to make connections between different areas of the brain and produce metaphors, is closely related with the ability to reason, or to see outside of oneself. This is because the connections involved in cognitive fluidity are what allow people to make analogies to things outside of themselves. Early humans could gain understanding of fellow humans and of the natural world through their rational abilities, and it is logical to think that they came to other conclusions as well--namely, the existance of spiritual beings. I believe we also discussed this idea briefly in class. The only other way I can think of religion originating is the way described in Genesis of God deliberately appearing to humans and telling them who he was. But if humans did come to the conclusion that there is a god through their rational thought, then either they're right and there is a god, or their reasoning led them astray to a mistaken conclusion. I realize that our systems of reasoning have been significantly changed/improved since then, but the fact remains that it may have been the very same process by which some people try to disprove religion that religion actually started.

This seems slightly ironic to me... if we're looking for the rationale behind the origin of religion yet are concentrating on the rational/scientific, i.e. physical, explanations, we're ignoring the whole spiritual aspect of religion. And that is not a small part, either; what is religion without the spiritual?