There is no question that religion has been a prevailing force throughout our history as a species. It has served many purposes -- both good and bad -- but what is it about religion that seems natural to us as a species?
It is my opinion that this affinity we have to religious practice and belief is a phenomenon that naturally occurs within our minds. Since we are a species that perpetually seeks to explain the world around us, it would logically follow that we would assign meaning to the meaningless or give answers born out of ignorance to questions we aren’t yet equipped to answer. I consider this to be one of the greatest reasons as to why religious belief is so irrational; it maintains systems of thought that arose from ignorance.
Well-known philosopher Daniel Dennett studied the reactions that dogs had to various unseen forces, such as snow falling off of a roof, and discovered that despite there being no visible “agent,” the dog would respond as if there was a living being that caused the snow to fall off of the roof. The reaction Dennett studied in his dogs also seems to be a base function that has evolved in humans, as we have the tendency to anthropomorphize nature.
This personification of inanimate objects, the weather, movements and events can be clearly observed as something that humans have always done. In Ancient Greece, Poseidon caused the changing of the tides, commanded ocean life, and controlled the weather at sea. In Norse mythology, Thor represented lighting and thunder. To many cultures, death is considered to be an actual being rather than just an occurrence, and in others the Earth itself is referred to as “Mother Nature” or “Gaia.” When we’re not trying to explain complicated events, we refer to sexless objects as “he” or “she,” such as boats. These are all examples of the need for humans to personify nature.
According to Dennett, modern religions evolved out of the practice of characterizing invisible movements, sounds and forces. In time, these beliefs changed to fit the needs of their respective cultures, generally handing down morals and lifestyles that were considered to be appropriate at the time. These ideals could be seen as beneficial to humanity because they provided guidelines for how to live one’s life, although the morality contained therein can be disputed.
So then it seems that it is human nature to assign meaning, intelligence and divine purpose to nature. As Charles Darwin once wrote in his notebook, “Man in his arrogance thinks himself a great work, worthy the interposition of a Deity,” but it is also reasonably evident that belief in the supernatural is erroneous and flawed.
There was a time in our history when religion was copiously needed – a time when we were incapable of explaining the world around us – but now we have a greater understanding of our surroundings and a greater command of moral theory. There is no need for theocratic rule anymore because, as Dennett also claims in his book “Breaking the Spell: Religion as a Natural Phenomenon,” morality does not come from religion, and we no longer have need for the rules of the gods.
While assigning divine purpose to an act of nature, asking for guidance from a mystical being or believing in ancient myths can be subject to bearing the title of irrationality, it is a phenomenon that is prevalent in human evolution and history. It cannot immediately be allocated to the halls of unreasonable thought because pondering our existence is something that all humans do.
It is when one is willfully ignorant of reality and the facts and blindly follows a doctrine that is contrary to the known facts that one may be considered irrational. The only objective truth is that no one truly knows to what end we are all moving, but to fill the gaps of the unknown with the supernatural is intellectually dishonest.
