MECHANISMS OF RELIGIOUS BEHAVIOUR








A Study in Thought

sa086



by





Marius Heuff

Chapter 1

Content

It is far more natural to be religious than to deny the existence of, or any knowledge about, a Superior Being.
A brief review of the mechanisms of symbolic representation.
Tricks that help us to remember.
Belief-structures are "tricks" to help us grasp the realities we are confronted with.
The function of "comprehension".
When we have suddenly lost our "sense of familiarity".
Mental and cerebral systems of classification.
The feature of "predictability"; recognising an event on the basis of a "similar profile", and visualising its internal mechanisms.
The "inner logic" of an event that can be analysed in terms of causes and their effects.
Predictions are never completely accurate.
Predicting variations in the course of an event, when some of the participating factors have changed.
Deliberately manipulating and controling the causative factors of an event.
A rapidly enlarging repertoir of symbolically representable awarenesses.
Why we need to construct a framework of logical coherence.
Visualising a state of "pre-symbolic conscious awareness".
Differences between events and static conditions of existence.
Three categories of events; those, that are obviously outside human control; those, that are "routine" and barely noticed, and those, that appear to fall within reach of our manipulative capabilities.

Let us make it clear, right from the beginning, that it is far more natural to be religious and to be guided in our behaviour by religious beliefs and principles, than to deny the existence of, or any knowledge about, a Superior Being; and yet, at our contemporary level of understanding and psychological insights, it seems, that a penetrating inquiry into the nature of our existence and beliefs makes it impossible, or, at least, very difficult, to maintain an honest belief in the accuracy of any religious imagery.

The earliest beginnings of "conscious awareness" were characterised by the spontaneous recall of a vivid mental imagery of a significant recent event. Such an event would be represented by memory-traces of a commonly shared experience. Some of these commonly shared experiences had found a measure of symbolic representation through acts of imitation with the potential to evoke the relevant memory-traces in the other members of a socially integrated grouping, and these memory-traces could, therefore, be recalled into a focus of conscious awareness by the voluntary manipulation of such symbolic representations. These symbolic representations were, at this stage of the evolution of conscious awareness, almost certainly elaborate gesticular imitations of the mental image they portrayed, rather than the swift and fluent recall that was made possible by the development of speech, or "language".

Yet, soon, the number of symbolic representations and their corresponding mental images, or memory-traces, grew large, and, the number of symbolically represented awarenesses must have become so numerous, that it became a "burden" to know them all. Anyone, who has tried to remember a series of isolated or disconnected facts, knows, how limited our capabilities are to retain such "knowledge", and, even, if we know, that the facts we are trying to memorise, are totally arbitrary and unrelated to each other, (such as the digits of a series of telephone numbers), we often employ an artificial and arbitrary scheme of correlations, (a mnemo-technical aid), to help us master and "re-construct" these unrelated data. For example, we may find some sort of a symmetry or regularity in a group of arbitrarily chosen digits, and, by noticing and remembering this artifical and essentially non-existent correlation, we are able to "deduce" the sequence of the digits, and, as a result, we have lessened the number of variables we have to "know", or memorise.

We are all familiar with this experience, but, we hardly pay any attention to it, just because it is so familiar to us. Nevertheless, it reveals a fundamental trend in the way we learn and use our mental faculties, and, as we have discussed so extensively before, we know, that the processes of symbolic representation and the faculty of conscious awareness would never have taken-off, if the human being had not developed the ability to create correlations between the many, apparently isolated symbolic representations and their awarenesses.

The faculty of verbalisable awareness would not have emerged, if these correlations had not led to a system of classification with categories that were based upon largely subconscious classifying principles. Later, a full-fledged belief-structure would emerge, where awarenesses of objects and events could be classified and fitted into a wide-ranging network of "cause and effect" relationships.

We have discussed all these aspects before, and, we want to remind ourselves, here, only about the importance of correlative features between awarenesses. We experience an enormous increase in the volume of data we can handle and manipulate, if we are able to relate our awarenesses and experiences to a well-ordened set of categories, which form themselves a coherent network of relationships. These relationships are then grasped, or "comprehended", in a structure of beliefs, or reality perceptions.

Without categories into which we can classify the continuously incoming stream of sense-impressions, we would be totally bewildered, because we could not experience this all-important "sense of familiarity", and, without familiarity, we could not have any confidence in the behavioural decisions we have to make. Let us look, briefly, at another "familiar" experience. If we are suddenly placed in an environment that is totally unfamiliar to us, which happens when we have "lost our way", or, if we suddenly lose the sense of familiarity because of hallucinogenic drugs or great fatigue and stress, we lose "our bearings", as well as the ability to make sensible decisions. It is, then, easy to make a fatal mistake in the choice of a behavioural act, and, it is not surprising, therefore, that such a sense of complete disorientation, is associated with a profound sense of anxiety.

Let us accept, therefore, the fact, that the natural experiment with the voluntary manipulation and recall of memory-traces, would have been doomed to failure; at least, it would never have developed into the most dominant feature of evolutionary success for our species, unless these symbolic representations, together with their conscious awarenesses, were ordened, from the beginning, into a well-ordened system of classifications. This "mental" classification-system of conscious awarenesses parallels, thereby, the system of cerebral classifications, which allows an animal without the faculty of "verbalisable awareness", to experience, also, a sense of familiarity. It is clear, that no animal could survive without this sense of recognising its surroundings, because it would not be able to seek its food, or avoid its predators.

However, the mere presence of a system of categories with similar and, therefore, recognisable sense-impressions and experiences, is not sufficient, because we all know, from looking around and thinking about the myriad of sense-impressions we are potentially aware of, that the number of categories is still confusingly large. We seek, therefore, again for correlations or similarities between the various categories. These correlations form the beginning of a coherent structure of beliefs.

In order to make this final step in the construction of structures of beliefs comprehensible, we have to look, first, at the distinction between objects and events. The recognition of similarities between events was an important development that made the primary classification of sense-impressions possible, because so many of our awarenesses contain a significant element of change within the time-span of an observation. This element of change, is, of course, the essence of an event, in contrast to an object, or a static set of circumstances, which remains essentially the same within the period of an observation. The ability to recognise a familiar happening gives us a "feel" for the way a particular event is unfolding.

However, from an awareness that we may be able to predict an event, at least, to some extent, on the basis of an overall similarity with other, familiar events, man made a giant leap forward in his ability to recognise an event and predict its outcome, when he learned to abstract and categorise a large number of detailed awarenesses that constitute the "internal mechanisms" of an event. Man learned to correlate many detailed categories of events and awarenesses in a coherent set of "explanations", which gave him, not only, a detailed insight into the event itself, as it was taking place, but, it gave man the ability to "predict" the next phase, or step, of an on-going event because of an understanding of the "inner logic" of this event.

An event was, therefore, not only predictable on the basis of the recognition of a similarity in the outline or "contour" of an event, but, an event became predictable on the basis of an understanding of the cause and effect relationships that play a role in the numerous sub-events which constitute together "the event". Here, we see an important and fundamental difference between the two forms of predictability man has developed. The first one, is the sense, and experience, of predictablity on the basis of the recognition of a similarity in the event as a whole, and, the second method derives its sense of predictability from an understanding of the internal mechanisms. In the first type of predictability, we learn to see that a similar event, recognised on the basis of a similar onset, will also have a similar outcome. In this sort of predictability, we know nothing of the "inner workings" of an event, and, our predictability is solely based on the fact, that we recognised the category an event belongs to. On the other hand, the ability to analyse many of the details of events into a scheme of coherent correlations of cause and effect, gives us the ability to predict the event by building-up a composite picture of the "anatomy" of an event.

However, a prediction on the basis of causes and their effects, is never perfectly accurate, because our perception and analysis of the underlying facts and mechanisms is rarely complete. However, there is an important advantage over the recognition of an overall outline. If we understand the "inner logic" of an event, we can, also, predict, at least, to some extent, variations in the evolution of an event.

The variability of events within a category of similarity, must remain a mystery if our predictability is based exclusively on the recognition of a "contour", and the beauty of a perception of an event in terms of a coherent set of internal mechanisms, lies in the fact, that we can also predict, at least, to some extent, in what way the evolution of an event is going to change, if we notice that one or more of the factors involved in the event, have changed. On this sort of detailed conceptualisation of correlative factors and coherent structures of causes and effects depends the ability to understand phenomena in a scientific manner, but, even, the sciences work, frequently, with categories of similar events, without the ability to understand the events in terms of causative, internal mechanisms.

If we manipulate the factors that control or regulate an event, we may be able to elucidate, more clearly, the role of a particular factor. By keeping a large number of factors constant, and, by manipulating, carefully, step by step, a single factor or a small group of factors, we may gain a great deal of insight into the "internal mechanisms" of an event, and, this insight is the essence of the concept of "comprehension".

However, we are dealing, here, with modern, scientific and experimental techniques, which are often necessary to elucidate a particular detail of a mechanism in a carefully controled laboratory environment. Let us now go back to early man. Early man had just stepped successfully over the threshold of symbolic representation, and, the rapidly enlarging repertoir of symbolically representable awarenesses was "seeking" rather urgently for a system of classification into categories of similarity, as well as a rudimental system of correlation into cause and effect mechanisms, in order to remain manageable.

Only with the help of such a correlating structure could the faculty of symbolic representation be a help to man's chores of survival, and, it would then not just represent a burden on his memory capabilities. Let us see, whether or not we can develop a plausible picture of the sort of awarenesses man became aware of in this earliest phase of the development of conscious awareness, and, let us see, what sort of "belief structures" were most likely to emerge, as man struggled, in those misty prehistoric times, with the task to give his reality perception a measure of "communicable familiarity", or validity.

We will see, that, in many ways, our ideas and concepts about these early developments of man's conscious awarenesses and beliefs will have to remain speculative, because we have only a few sketchy clues about the way man's thinking processes developed. Only recently, have we formulated a somewhat coherent mental imagery about the ways conscious awareness could have emerged. If these ideas and concepts change, the speculative structure of likely developments and evolutionary changes, will change too.

Let us assume, for the time being, that, indeed, the ability to re-stimulate a particular memory-trace into a focus of awareness, such as a scene of the hunt, or a particularly dangerous or exciting episode of a hunting expedition, was the corner-stone upon which the evolution of conscious awareness and thought was based. If we place ourselves in the position of these pre-human animals, we have a great deal of difficulty imaging what they would feel, sense or experience, because we are so adept at handling a complex stream of mental images with the tools of conscious or verbalisable awarenesses, that we can not really imagine a reality perception which is completely stripped from all these notions, knowledge and ideas. However, we have to make an effort to imagine such a form of "pre-symbolic consciousness", and, perhaps, it is justifiable to start, again, with this basic difference between change and stability in the world of our perceptions.

The difference in perception between static phenomena and events is based upon the significance of the element of change. We know, now, that there is no absolute stability of existence, and, we know, that, all those phenomena that appear "static" to us, are subject to change, eventually, but, this change occurs over a period of time that falls, as a rule, outside a practical framework of observations. For practical purposes, we are therefore justified to distinguish between events that have an important element of change during the period of observation, and, static objects or circumstances, which do not change during the period of observation. A rock, a tool, a utensil, or a landscape, are all examples of "static objects", and the hunt, the flight, a fight, a fall or injury, all these are "events", where the significance of the observation lies in the aspect of change.

It is probably reasonable to divide events into three categories. If we look at the perceptions of early human beings, we see, that there were events, which were so powerful and imposing or threatening, that man felt a great sense of awe or insignificance, when watching them. On the other hand, there were events that were so routine, and so predictable, like the trek of the sun and the moon, or the rushing of a brook, the falling of leaves, that they acquired almost a quality of "stability", of being "static". In between these two extreme categories of events, there were the innumerable events of the hunt, the actions and inter-actions of human beings and animals, which were much more under the influence of man's will. This third category of events shaped man's powers of manipulation and interference, and, the experiences of all these events shaped, also, the interpretations and belief-structures of the realities man was subjected to.

There were many dramatic, highly significant and essentially unpredictable events, which must have awed, as well as puzzled, our ancestors. In between the routine or familiar events and those awe-inspiring happenings that were obviously beyond man's control, we see a group of events and phenomena that were more regular in their occurrence, and, therefore, more predictable and less frightening, but, for the reflective members of early man, perhaps, not less awe-inspring. We are thinking, here, about the cycles of day and night, the changing faces of the moon, the revolving sky, the seasons with their changes in vegetation and climate, the tides, the migration of animals, etc.

If we keep in mind these three broad categories of more or less "static events", the rapid, violent and awe-inspiring events, and the more manageable and more predictable events of nature, we have a good basis upon which we can re-construct, tentatively, the growth of human awarenesses and their correlative belief-structures. Early man was beginning to become aware of his environment, his own existence, the vagaries of fortune, as well as the fragility of this most mysterious "thing of existence"; the living organism.

.......

Chapter 2

Content

The awarenesses of early mankind.
An emphasis on the evolution of principles, rather than detailed descriptions in the development of conscious awareness.
Reconstructing a level of awareness from the way people lived.
Spontaneous outbursts of mimicry, and their existential significance.
The significance of the ability to engage in factual communications.
Recalling "en bloc" a specific memory-trace.
A constant struggle for survival.
Verbalisable awareness arose as a result of existential and competitive pressures.
The wide-ranging repertoir of symbolic recall.
The "onto-genetic" repetition of a "phylo-genetic" history.
A child grows-up in an environment with a "cultural pool" of verbalisable awarenesses.
The importance of "secondary learning" mechanisms.
Most of us appreciate, only much later, the significance of what we learned at school.
The onto-genetic recapitulation gives only a short and fragmented view of the tortuous path of phylo-genetic developments.
The evolution of broad and abstract awarenesses is a slow process.
A variety of mechanisms of classification, including the orientation "for or against" the interests of an individual or a grouping.
The beneficial or harmful intentions of "deities".
Learning to "wait-out" adverse force-fields.
The hunt, and its influence on the faculty of conscious awareness.
Evolutionary success and rising population pressures.

"What did early man become aware of, when he started to experiment with symbolic representations", you may ask, "and how do we have to visualise the evolution of language?". We know, now, that the modern capabilities of the spoken and written laguage are the result of many millions of years of evolutionary changes, and, the level of insight and comprehension, as well as the tools of language, are still evolving.

Yet, it is difficult to give a clear-cut answer to the question that has been raised, here, and, even, if we accept the speculative nature of an inquiry into the evolutionary steps of language development, it is still difficult to imagine a coherent sequence of events. We probably have to be satisfied with the evolution of principles, rather than specific stages in the development of conscious awareness, and, we have to re-state the idea, that this evolutionary process, which led, eventually, to the universal capability of language throughout the entire human gene pool, started tentatively, on many occasions, before it finally succeeded and conquered the world of human existence.

We know, that our ancestors lived in small groups, because they had already developed a social structure, just like so many other socially organised, flexible species'. This social structure was characterised by a hierarchical stratification, where the small grouping formed a functional unit of leaders and followers, and, it is probably reasonable to imagine, that a measure of task-division had already taken place. Most of the stronger animals would go out to "hunt", while the pregnant females, the younger children, and, perhaps, a few older members, would stay behind, take care of "domestic chores" and gather some edibles, such as fruits, berries, roots and nuts.

This task-division in the chores of survival led, as we have discussed, to a natural trend to "exchange information" when the parties would re-unite, again, at the end of the day, and, we have described, on several occasions, the tentative imagery, how, suddenly, a member of the group, after a satisfying meal, would get-up and imitate an event, an animal, or a particular fragment of what happened. If such an imitative dance or elaborate gesticulation would trigger a wave of recognition in the others, we may imagine, how other members of the group started to participate in such a spontaneous "happening", and, how they would begin to act-out a particular event, or an experience that had re-emerged into the focus of their conscious awareness.

However, such spontaneous outbursts of mimicry and gesticulations must have depended upon a measure of security after a successful hunt, and, there must have been a certain "existential advantage" in these activities, if we want to explain, why such activities became increasingly more important, leading, eventually, to a rapid form of symbolic communication with stylised gestures and vocalisations. We have advanced the argument, that, a frequent recall of significant memory-traces outside the existentially dangerous circumstances of an analogous experience, led to a marked sharpening of these mental images, as well as the ability to communicate specific items of awareness with each other. Such a communication became "factual", and, it could provide useful information, or, perhaps, specific instructions, which would not be possible with the pre-symbolic forms of communication, because these forms of communication could only establish a synchrony in mood or state of alertness.

The penetration of this capability of symbolic communication throughout the species of man, has been complete. It progressed to the point, that the surviving lineage of humanity arose, solely, from those segments of the human gene-pool, which included a genetic propensity to develop language communications. This means, that the selective processes of evolutionary development attributed, fairly quickly, a remarkable degree of survival-value to this sort of "esoteric", dance-like play-acting. However, this does not really answer the question, what sort of memory-recall was made possible by these early, elaborate acts of imitation and gesticulation, but, it does, perhaps, answer the question, why such a development took place in the first place.

Let us consider the question, in what way memory-traces would be recalled. It seems logical to come to the conclusion, that, large fragments of happenings or events would be recalled "en bloc". For example, a hunter may suddenly relive the most exciting and dangerous moments of the hunt, and, he may begin to imitate, how the prey was turning on him, after it had been wounded, and, how he, the hunter, gave the final blow to the animal, which is now being devoured by a victorious and happy group of anthropoids

Life for our anthropoid ancestors, must, indeed, have been a constant and dangerous struggle for survival. Probably, we are here looking at a period, where the pre-symbolic evolution of anthropoids had been quite successful. Hunting techniques were being sharpened and directed towards ever larger animals, as fierce competition between anthropoid groupings led to the need for a more intensive harvesting of the available "natural resources". The need to defend territories against neighbouring competitors increased also, because evolutionary success always leads to increased population pressures, a more intense level of competitive strife, as well as a need to exploit the available resources more fully. Just because of the fact that capabilities and attributes develop as the result of a search for continued viability under harsher conditions and deteriorating circumstances, so is it logical to conclude, that the capabilities of symbolic representation and language-communication were the result of existential and competitive pressures.

Let us come back to the idea, that, the earliest forms of memory-recall reflected, indeed, the re-enactment of a whole scene, which was either recognised, or, it was not, and, there was no representation possible, as yet, of details or sub-events, objects, personalities or qualities of sensation and observation. Only, later, after it became much easier to evoke the most recent and significant happenings with such a process of re-enactment and imitation, only, then, became the author and his audience aware of the fact, that, in spite of the similarities between a number of events, there were also slight differences and variations. Actually, it is probably more correct to say, that, slowly, as the most significant events were routinely recalled by mimicry and gesticulations, the members of the small socially integrated grouping became aware of the fact, that certain aspects would recur, time and again, and, these aspects would then come into a focus of attention and would, after many trials and errors, acquire their own expression or symbolic representation.

In this way, we may visualise, that the recall of an entire memory-sequence could be "analysed", or, it could, eventually, be represented by a series of successive, imitative actions, and, as the recall of events began to require a series of symbols rather than just a single one, we see the ability emerge to express variations, nuances and differences in a particular experience, as well as the ability to indicate certain similarities between different events.

It does not seem useful to speculate, in more detail, about the emergence of symbolically representable awarenesses, and, even, the hypothesis that an awareness starts as a massive, monolithic and undifferentiated representation of an entire complex of potentially analysable events and awarenesses, may well require a fair amount of time and reflection, before it can be accepted as a plausible explanation of the evolution of conscious awarenesses and structures of belief. Indeed, as I have mentioned before, on many occasions, I believe, that the concept of a slow differentiation of details and features from an initially massive, undifferentiated and complex awareness or experience, is crucial to an understanding of the evolution of conscious awareness and language-communication. However, to speculate in what manner, or sequence, the many details and qualities could have evolved, may not be useful at this time, because we have little indication, as yet, how this evolution may have taken place.

If we look at the way a child develops its innate capabilities to form and use language-symbols, we see, that the "onto-genetic" repetition of this evlutionary process, may only give us a very partial, and, perhaps, even, somewhat superficial look at the way the "phylo-genetic" evolution of language came-about. One of the important differences between a child growing-up in a social environment, where language communications have already been well-developed, and, the evolutionary search for possibilities to represent awarenesses without an available model, lies in the fact, that a child is shown a particular object, quality, event or small detail, and, it is, then, "given" the appropriate name for it.

In this way, the attention of the child can be focussed, arbitrarily or deliberately, by its educators on small details, which, normally, or "naturally", would not catch this child's attention, because for this child there is, as yet no particular existential significance associated with such a detail. The development of the language capabilties of a child, born into an existing, sophisticated and complex social environment, takes place as a form of "secondary learning", and, this is the reason, why it can learn a large conceptual vocabulary, as well as a complex classification system of categories and belief-structures. A child would never be able to acquire such a structure of symbolic representations "on its own", because it would never be able to "invent" such a large and detailed vocabulary of awarenesses. This is a perfect example of the way the "cultural code" works, and, it shows us, also, how similar the functions of the cultural and genetic codes are, when bringing a particular capability to the fore.

We see, indeed, that the significance of a particular conceptual structure has to be taught during the onto-genetic development of language, and, in spite of the fact, that, many, if not most normal children and adolescents can develop a genuine "feel" for the importance of what they have been taught, we see, also, that numerous people never learn to grasp the meaning or significance of the material their teachers and educators have exposed them to during the years of formal education. True, most of us appreciate, only much later, the significance of what we learned at school, and, we learn to judge, better, what was truly valuable and what turned-out to be less meaningful in the curriculum we were exposed to.

The study of the development of language skills, and, perhaps, even, more importantly, the development of conceptual precision and mastery, will give us a good insight, how, and why, we learn, and, how, and why, we may acquire the intellectual skills we are capable of, but, we should remain very cautious to draw conclusions about the evolution of language and conceptual mastery from the way a contemporary child learns and acquires these capabilities.

Similarly, the onto-genetic, embryological development of a complex, multi-cellular individual under the guidance of the genetic code, reveals some aspects of the way this genetic code has been "put-together" by the forces of natural selection, but, it gives only a very limited and fragmented view of the winding and tortuous path of the actual evolution of the species; before the forces of evolution could "come-up" with, or "put-together", this particular genetic code, regulating the processes of onto-genetic development and the metabolic requirements of the living individual or actualised member of a particular species.

What sort of awareness may have been extremely important or striking for our early ancestors? We have discussed the fact, that, some objects of awareness would hardly change at all, while others would be overwhelming in their force, swiftness, unpredictability or magnitude. Some forces or events would oscillate, or fluctuate, in a much gentler way, lending, automatically, an aura of familiarity and predictability to such cyclical events.

Yet, it is doubtful that early man could classify his awarenesses in such broad and abstract categories. Nevertheless, an intuitive, pragmatic or subconscious awareness of such a difference must have played a role during the evolution of the faculty of conscious awareness. However, the degree of predictability, or familiarity, of events can not have been the only distinction that impressed the early human mind. Man must have experienced, subconsciously, or pragmatically, that the world of force or change could be divided into those he could steer or direct, and those, which were beyond his control, but, perhaps, even more important was the observation that a force could act, sometimes, to his advantage, and, at other times, to his disadvantage.

When we imagine early man to be looking around for an edible fruit or a berry to pick, it is obvious, that he could decide, from moment to moment, which particular berry or fruit was left on the tree, and, which was picked and eaten. A reflective human being must have realised, that he could exert a force, that was either beneficial or disastrous for the berries he was picking, and, he may have been able to postulate, that, all the forces around him, could have a similar change in meaning, depending upon the "orientation", or the mood, of the deities which were thought to be behind all the forces of nature.

Some of these forces were so mighty and awe-inspiring, that man could only wait and hide to the best of his abilities, until these mysterious and unpredictable forces had gone away again. Man must have learned, that all natural forces, regardless, how strong, would, eventually, "go away", and, that there was a chance to survive, as long as he stayed in his shelter or hiding place. It may be justified to speculate, that man learned, slowly, to "manipulate", even, the strongest forces of nature by "waiting them out". However, anthropomorphic early man interpreted the changing aspects of these overwhelming forces as the result of a change in the moods of the gods.

Then, there was a large category of forces, which were about equal to his own. For example, in the small community, each individual would occupy his or her particular niche in the hierarchy, and, this meant, that everybody was placed into two different categories; those, who could be dominated and those, who did the dominating. However, the emhasis on hunting larger game, meant, that the prey offered a formidable resistance and required skill, cooperation, intelligence and courage, before it could be brought-down. Many of the forces man had to work with were, therefore, quite unpredictable. The dangers were numerous; there was always the chance of getting hurt or killed, and, life seemed to fluctuate, almost on a daily basis, between the antipodes of failure and success; between the ability to "dominate" the surrounding forces, or being dominated by them.

No wonder, man became a highly emotional, but, also, a ferocious and often fearless animal, as his survival depended, increasingly, upon a clever and audacious course of action. Such an audacious attitude or course of action could take the form of an attack upon a large prey, but, it could also be an attack upon a neighbouring group of competitive relatives, as the population presures were rising continuously.

Man experienced, continuously, a field of forces around himself, and the outcome, or "orientation", of these force-fields must have been man's primary and over-riding concern, as his survival depended upon it. We are not surprised, then, to learn, that man quickly divided the world of forces into those that were helpful or beneficial, and those that were hostile and harmful.

........

Chapter 3

Content

The orientation of man's own activities.
Time and again, man was reminded about the fragility of his existence.
When the web of force-fields and the vagaries of fortune became more complex.
Man became burdened by the awareness of an ever enlarging repertoir of potential disasters.
Chronic anxieties.
A vivid flow of mental images.
The instinct of curiosity.
The influence of naturally selective force-fields upon symbolically representable awarenesses.
A variety of common themes in structures of belief.
"Faulty" beliefs.
A belief is "correct", or useful, when it contributes to viability.
Beliefs will accentuate specific behaviour-patterns.
The stress of dealing with accidents, sickness and death.
The mechanisms of secondary social integration preceded the emergence of conceptual communications.
Early man "found himself" existing in small, nomadic, socially integrated groupings.
A portrait of the early human personality.
Dominance shifted from an excercise in brute strength to intelligence and the ability to persuade.
The cohesive influence of an attitude of "loyalty".
An instinctive gratitude for good and beneficial natural leadership.
Socially desirable attitudes.
Concept formation should support beneficial and viable patterns of behaviour.
Religious beliefs stengthen resolve and assist in managing stressful conditions.

The awareness, that the forces encountered in life, either in the natural environment or the small community, could be directed for or against an individual, was re-enforced by the fact, that man could use his own will to direct the force of his being, either for or against something or someone. Man could swat a fly, hunt small game, or uproot a plant and eat it, and, every day, almost every moment of his waking life, he noticed, at least, in an intuitive, subconscious sense, that he could decide over the life or death of many life-forms in his vicinity.

Man also experienced the fact, that he could be hurt, quite unexpectedly, because, throughout his entire life, he was confronted with the facts of injuries, disease and death. Now and then, a strong and trusted member of the community would be killed, or die from injuries or disease. Time and again, he was reminded about his own fragility and vulnerability, and, he knew, that he was subjected to a vast and unoverseeable web of forces that could help or harm him, protect or kill him, at will. He knew, that he was often powerless to do anything about a force that was threatening to destroy him or his small community. Just as man himself, killed and destroyed, almost continuously, as an unavoidable corollary of the need to eat and stay alive, so was he himself subjected to forces that could suddenly decide to make an end to his existence.

While man slowly learned to perceive the realities in a more complex conceptual framework of causal relationships, the web of force-fields, as well as the vagaries of fortune, became more complex, too. When man became more adept at manipulating his immediate environment with tools and weapons, he also learned to anticipate, more accurately, the threatening forces by fore-sight and an improved ability to predict the outcome of an event, but, at the same time, man was also burdened by the awareness of an ever larger repertoir of potential disasters that could befall him at any time.

An improvement in the power of prediction led to a vastly improved ability to make use of chances for survival in the ever-changing force-fields of threats and opportunities, but, the ability to predict the outcome of events more accurately, together with an enlarging memory-repertoir, also led to the anticipation of old-age and physical decline, the likelyhood of fights and injuries, as well as the inevitability of death. While the non-conceptualising animals could drift-off into a content sleep, whenever the chorus of environmental and internal stimuli indicated security and satiation, man was left to reflect, with a vivid, somewhat anxious or excited imagination, upon what had just happened, and, what could happen shortly. An increase in opportunities for gain and survival, was off-set by the awareness of a similar increase in the possibilities of death and disaster, and, it is not surprising, that man was, and still is, nearly always emotionally aroused.

A constant exposure to existentially significant stimuli, as well as an ever-widening conceptual awareness, meant, that, short periods of rest were often filled with the mental activities of symbolic communication, as well as a review of happenings and possible dangers. Even the younger generations, which could still bask in the luxury of leaving all the worrying to the parental generations, could not fall so easily into a content sleep, because the vivid flow of mental images, stimulated, almost continuously, by some sort of a symbolic communication between the adults, caused a flurry of excitement and expectations. Perhaps, this is the reason, why the instinct of curiosity was stimulated to such an extent in the human being. Curiosity has become indeed a somewhat instinctive drive, especially, when a youngster, or a group of youngsters, begins to explore this exciting, yet mysterious and dangerous environment.

Throughout the evolution of conscious or symbolically representable awarenesses, we see the forces of natural selection at work. If reality perceptions become a confusing burden, or, if a belief-structure evolves that hampers the viability of a small community, we may safely assume, that such beliefs, or "faulty" reality perceptions, disappear again. They are either dropped as "useless", or, they disappear as the community loses its viability and dies-out.

However, it is worthwhile exploring the question what a "faulty" reality perception really means. If we look at the contents of somewhat primitive, or "faulty" beliefs that are being adhered-to by some people in our own times, we see, that so much of these reality perceptions is "faulty", or, at least, inaccurate, if we compare these beliefs and ideas with the imagery of the modern sciences. We also know, from our historical studies, that a bewildering variety of beliefs and reality perceptions have flourished at one time or another, even, in civilisations that were highly developed, and, perhaps, the most advanced of their time, long before any of the modern scientific images were available. How do we determine the "accuracy" of a reality perception? Do we have the right to consider our scientific imagery "faultless", or completely accurate?

We see a variety of common themes in the beliefs of people come to the fore, throughout history, and, we can extract a number of common principles from these early or "primitive" belief structures. However, we have to acknowledge, that, all these differing beliefs must, at one time or another, have been experienced as valuable and reliable truths by a fairly large community over a number of generations. If such would not be the case, we would be at a loss to explain, why such beliefs developed, and, why they were accepted as absolute truths; at least, for a while. We see, therefore, that a "faulty" belief-structure for a particular community or society can not be judged against another belief structure, in another era of time, because, such a comparison is arbitrary and makes these beliefs only more incomprehensible. We have to say, that a belief-structure is "correct", or, at least, "useful", for a particular society, at a particuar time, if the belief-structure contributes, in one way or another, to the strength and viability of the group.

What sort of attitudes and practices by the members of a small social entity would enhance the strength and viability of this particular grouping? Let us see, whether or not we can find common qualities or characteristics in the early religious beliefs of mankind; qualities, that would foster desirable attitudes and viable behavioural characteristics. Clearly, a sick and defective organism has a handicap in the struggle for survival, and, we start our discussion of the belief-structure on the assumption, that we are dealing, in essence, with a healthy individual, in a small and socially "healthy" group. On previous occasions, we have defined the concept of health, and, let us say, here, only, that the definition of health is not a static or precisely outlined concept.

Even healthy individuals may go through periods, where they become more vulnerable to stress and attack, when a strong healthy hunter has been injured, or a woman has become pregnant. Youth may also be a liability, in spite of a state of vigorous health, especially, when a youngster or adolescent still has to learn about all the dangers and the opportunities of his particular world; or, an individual may be past his prime, declining in physical strength and plagued by a chronic illness. All such variations in the level of stress an individual or a community has to cope with, influence the perception of reality, and, it is logical to see, that those beliefs are favoured, which help an individual or a community to cope, better, with the specific stresses that are making themselves felt.

These stressful experiences form a major part of the growing awarenesses of the emerging human mind, but, it is doubtful, that our early ancestors were aware of the fact that the social grouping they found themselves in, was already a mechanism of natural evolution to cope with a significant level of stress. We know, now, that the socially integrated unit is a form of existence, brought-about by the forces of natural selection in an effort to cope with the dangerous and stressful situations that were encountered in the struggle for survival. As we have discussed before, the processes of secondary social integration, or socialisation, preceded, by far, the emergence of the ability to communicate conceptually, and, it preceded, of course, also, any conscious awareness of the need to stay and work together.

The human being, or, rather, our pre-human ancestors were just beginning to cross the threshold of conscious awareness, and, they found themselves in a small, nomadic, social grouping with a hierarchical stratification. The members of such a small social grouping experienced a number of somewhat contradictory impulses and trends, which nature had already sharpened into the genetically encoded behaviour-patterns of the evolving pre-human being. For example, the strongly egocentric instincts of individual survival were mitigated, because the accent of survival shifted, at least, to some extent, from the individual to the group as a whole. Therefore, strength and courage, ferocity, as well as a willingnes to engage in a fight or endure the pressures and stresses of existence, were supplemented by the ability to submit to the authority and leadership of the more dominant members of the group.

Successful behaviour meant, a strongly aggressive attitude towards enemies and dangers faced by the group as a whole, coupled with a behaviour of loyalty, cooperation and submissiveness to the structures of authority within the group. We may postulate, that the attitudes of cooperation and submissiveness to authority were associated with an active attitude of help and care towards the weaker and more vulnerable members of the group, and, we have outlined, on previous occasions, how we can visualise such a development on the basis of a genetically sharpened instinct of maternal or parental care.

We should keep in mind, that, the earliest social groupings were, probably, made-up by members who were all related to each other. The need to cooperate in complex tasks, primarily, the hunt and defense of the territory, or the aggressive exploration and conquest of new territories, resulted in a shift of the criteria of viability. From brute strength and dominance, the emphasis came to lie upon intelligence, the ability to communicate, the ability to promote cooperation by persuasion, and, by fostering a sense of loyalty.

Loyalty is the binding of an individual or a group to a leader, not by the force of dominance or coercion, but, by an act of good-will and trust. The ability to inspire loyalty is a cardinal characteristic of great natural leadership. Such an ability is appreciated, intuitively, by those, who need such an input for their well-being.

If a group of followers experiences genuinely concerned and helpful leadership, their sense of well-being and gratitude is enormous, and their willingness to follow the beneficial leader knows no bounds. We often see, that, an attitude of genuine loyalty and devotion for a respected leader reaches the point, that the followers are willing to risk their lives for the sake of their leader, or, for the group as a whole.

The point we want to make is this. In a viable social grouping, the criteria of primary viability, such as strength, health, courage, intelligence and alertness, are supplemented with attitudes that indicate a willingness to follow leadership. This implies, of course, that the leader has the ability to give good leadership, and, that he has the ability to create a sense of loyalty in his followers by virtue of the fact, that the leadership is experienced to be highly beneficial for each individual member, as well as the group as a whole.

These attitudes include a willingness to accept each other's hierachical position, to help those, who are temporarily weakened for one reason or another, to avoid damaging internal fights, to use the methods of cooperation and communication to accomplish complex tasks, and, the ability to share food throughout the entire group. These "socially desirable" attitudes are quite remarkable, and, they are, obviously, the result of a long, natural-evolutionary experiment in the behaviourally flexible and socially integrated species'.

Conceptualisation, or, at least, the beginnings of conscious awareness arose against this background, and, we should recognise the fact, that most of these socially desirable behavioural trends had already been sharpened as parental and maternal instincts into the behavioural code of these pre-human animals. Those animals groupings, which did not have a sufficient level, and quality, of socially desirable behavioural traits, would lose their social cohesion, and, their viability with it. A number of solitary animals lose-out in the struggle for survival against a socially coherent group, in spite of the fact, that, solitary animals often excel in strength, courage and intelligence.

The emerging faculties of symbolic awareness and factual communications consolidated and refined these genetically shaped instinctive behavioural trends of behavioural flexibility, and, if we analyse the religious attitudes, practices and beliefs of early mankind, we see, indeed, that the religious beliefs strengthen resolve, and assist the members of the small community to cope with stress and adversity; by consciously encouraging and fortifying socially desirable attitudes and viable patterns of behaviour.

.......

Chapter 4

Content

Early man did not distinguish between the intellectual and behavioural functions of a belief-structure.
The "afferent" or sensory side of a belief-structure.
The behavioural, motoric, or "efferent" side of a belief-structure.
The physiology of a behavioural response.
The function of familiarity, and the ability to respond routinely.
The "experimental stage", where we try-out a variety of hypothetical responses and evaluate their likely consequences.
Conscious awareness is unthinkable without an effective system for the classification of sense impressions.
The abstraction.
We want to grasp reality in one "swoop of comprehension".
The ability to "name" an item of awareness.
Limitations associated with a "holistic" memory-recall.
Experiencing a lack of control over the recalled imagery.
To excercise a measure of control requires "elaborate work".
The aspects of analytic, detail-adding techniques, and, synthetic, comprehension-increasing features, go hand in hand.
The function of a coherent story of events.
It is not easy to reconstruct the logic of early man's thinking because of large discrepancies in awareness-content between early man and ourselves.
A belief can persist long after its relevance has declined, because of the factor of "authority" and a slovenly cultural transfer.
A "satisfying" look at reality refers to the importance of intellectual as well as emotional mechanisms.
The inevitability of a religious interpretation of our sense impressions, when reality is experienced without the help of sense-enlarging instruments.
Macroscopic, meso-scopic and microscopic worlds of existence.
The logical assumption that there are "willed forces" in the world of meso-scopic existence.
The logic of seeing ourselves as part of some sort of hierarchical order of awareness and power.
The logic of atonement and punishment for sinful behaviour.
Finding useful correlations, interpreted as causes and their effects in a world of willed, anthropomorphic force-fields.
Why it is difficult to understand the "reasons" for essentially randomly occurring variables, leading to natural disasters or adverse climatological changes.
The emergence of far-fetched and counter-productive beliefs.
Interpreting adversity and disaster as a result of random chance is a typically modern way of interpreting reality.
We tend to over-utilise the explanation of "bad luck", and, we are inclined to deny our share of responsibility for the predicament we are in.
We have to learn to carry, again, the burden of guilt.
Belief-structures have to be able to solve the problems we face.

It is clear, that the modern distinction between the various functions of a belief-structure, (as an intellectual scaffold for the interpretation of our sense-impressions, or, as a rallying point for promoting fortitude, courage, patriotism and other, socially desirable attitudes), did not have a place in the early awarenesses of man. However, as contemporary students of the phenomena of the past, we are perfectly justified to make such a distinction in an effort the grasp the thrust of historical developments. We should concentrate, therefore, first, on the intellectual characteristics of a belief-structure, and, then, on the attitudes and practices such a belief structure would, or could, bring-about.

If we emphasise the role of a belief-structure as a scaffold for the interpretation of reality, we look at the "sensory" or afferent side of a belief. This aspect is characterised by the reception of a stimulus, its recognition, and the placement of this stimulus in an overall conceptual framework. If we look at the behavioural response or attitude, resulting from such a classification of a sense-impression, we see the "motoric" side, or efferent part of a structure of beliefs.

We assume, here, that the behavioural response requires a significant input from our concious, decision-making will, and, the actual behavioural response to the stimulus may, then, be a series of coordinated actions, but, it may also take the form of an opinion or an attitude. These three elements; the behavioural action or response, the attitudes or prejudices resulting from our beliefs, as well as the intellectual integration or interpretation of a series of sense-impressions, are inter-twined, and, we see, rarely, that one characteristic occurs without the others.

Complex behavioural responses consist of a series of motoric, or "moving responses", where our musculature is in action, associated with, or "prepared" by, an appropriate attitude that is accompanied by a more or less consciously elaborated intellectual reality-perception. It is unusual to see all three aspects fully developed in a particular response, but frequently, these three elements are, to some extent, involved in an inter-action between a human being and his or her environment.

Most of the time, a behavioural response is a quickly flowing answer to the reception and recognition of a particular set of stimuli. If the stimuli, or, rather, if the environmental conditions to which we respond, are well known and familiar, the response emerges almost automatically, or "routinely", without the need to think about it. Then, the input from our decision-making "will" is minimal, and we by-pass the "experimental stage", where we try-out, in the imagery of our mind, a series of responses and analyse these responses for their possible consequences, before we actually choose and carry-out a particular behavioural response.

We have elaborated these ideas before, because they lie at the heart of our concepts about conscious awareness and thought, but, we need to remind ourselves of these mechanisms, if we want to have some idea what happened to the behaviour of man, when the faculty of conscious awareness arose. After all, these awarenesses started to play a role in the intepretation of reality, as well as in the choice of a behavioural response. We have discussed, how a rapidly accumulating number of symbolically representable and communicable awarenesses "cry out" for a system of classification; at least, the mind, or the brain, on the verge of becoming human, would quickly have rejected this experiment with symbolic representations and conscious awarenesses as a useless burden upon the faculty of memory, if it would not have been possible to classify the many awarenesses into categories of similarities.

As we have discussed, the act of classification requires the ability to "abstract" a classifying principle, intially, by a process of intuition, but, eventually, these classifying principles become a conscious awareness in their own right, whenever they have found a representative symbol for themselves. We have, then, completed the first step towards a "secondary abstraction". I believe, that it is justified to call this a secondary abstraction, because the primary abstraction takes place, when an object or event is given a "name". All objects, or events, represent, already, a class or category of similarities, and, this means, that the name applies to a class of objects or events and not to a single item, as we see in the name of a person or a geographical location.

However, the mind is not satisfied with a large number of categories and their classifying principles. In essence, we want to grasp reality in one big swoop of comprehension, just like our ability to see an object or item in the focus of our vision "in its totality". The ability to "name" gives us the impression, that we are comprehending this reality "at once", without the need to build-up a composite picture by a complex juxta-position of details and variables.

As long as man could be satisfied with the "holistic" effect of his memory-recall, a single symbol, or, a short, unified re-enactment was sufficient to recall an entire sequence of significant events, but, man realised, subconsciously, of course, that such a wholesale recall of a series of significant events and happenings was a rather haphazard affair, lacking precision and manipulability.

Man had very little control over such an act of wholesale recall, and, there was no mechanism to make a recall more precise, or, to focus attention upon a specific feature, or detail, of the complex memory-trace that had been recalled. Therefore, as man tried to gain more control and precision over these matters, he necessarily made the process of symbolic representation and manipulation more complex. A greater degree of control over the mental images of conscious awareness that were being recalled, was paid-for with a much more difficult and elaborate presentation of a series of symbols. We see a good example of these mechanisms in our contemporary world, because we have to use many words and sentences, or, even, a large number of paragraphs and chapters, if we want to focus the attention of our audience upon something that is not readily noticed or understood.

In short, as soon as we try to increase the level of control over the type of imagery, or the content of an awareness, that is being evoked by a communication, we increase the length and the complexity of our symbolic manipulations, until we find a new, generally acceptable way to express this particular intellectual entity by a new word; a new idea, or, a new concept that can be recalled or evoked by a single word, or, perhaps, a single sentence; in the form of a definition.

However, a new word, a new idea or concept, is something that is added to the repertoir of knowable facts and ideas, and poses, therefore, an additional burden upon the ability to manipulate or know a large number of symbolic representations. Therefore, in addition to our constant efforts to add clarity and precision of understanding with analytical or "burden-adding" techniques, we also strive, continuously, to reduce the number of data and symbols we need to know, by relating the various categories, awarenesses and classifying principles into a coherent structure of cause-and-effect relationships.

Such a framework of relationships is called a "structure of beliefs", because an individual, as well as the community as a whole, relies, heavily, on the validity or truthfulness of such a mental framework for the organisation of conscious awarenesses. The interpretation of our existence, as well as our inter-actions with the environment, progresses, then, from a series of categories and classifying principles to a coherent "story", where we can explain a happening, an event, even, our own existence and the vagaries of fortune in a way, that explains, how it all came-about; how, and why, we came to exist, where we are, and, how, and why, we came to face the problems, challenges and dangers as we find them.

Let us remind ourselves, here, that the logic and coherence of primitive belief structures may not be clear to us, and, we may be so far removed in our contemporary interpretation of reality from a pre-historic belief-structure, that we find it difficult to see any form of cohesion, or any sense of logic, in these "explanatory stories". We can be sure, however, that none of these religious belief-structures would have gained prominence, and, none of these mental images would have been elevated into a sacred belief, if the people who practiced these beliefs, would not have found such structures of explanation, ritualistic manipulations and reverent attitudes to be highly satisfying; emotionally as well as intellectually.

Perhaps, you want to point-out, that a belief-structure can persist and endure long past its point of relevance, partly, because the attitudes of reverence and awe prevent a close intellectual scrutiny, and, partly, because man tends to derive a sense of stability and comfort in the performance of a sacred ritual, even, if the meaning of such a ritual has become obscure.

Indeed, once a belief-structure has been enshrined in an atmosphere of sacredness and unquestionability, it becomes rigid, and, it tends to persist long past its point of relevance or irrelevance, but, the fact, that, at one time in the past, such a ritual, belief, practice or attitude was able to gain a foothold as a sacred and unquestionable "truth", must mean, that it was, at least, during a specific formative phase in the evolution of a small society or community, a convincing and satisfying way of looking at reality.

A "satisfying" way of looking at reality, implies, not only, that a particular story or explanation is intellectually satisfying, but it has to be emotionally satisfying as well. Let us not forget, that the art of scrutiny, as well as the sharpening of mental images with pointed questions, logical arguments and precise scientific observations, is a typically modern ability of the human mind, and, we would fail to understand the fusion between a feeling of intellectual truth and emotional satisfaction, if we only look at these primitive beliefs with our critical, scientific eyes.

We have discussed the idea, that, our early ancestors, (and, perhaps, a majority of people living today), had no choice, but to interpret the realities of their existence without any coherent knowledge of the world as it has been opened-up by scientific instrumentation. We know, now, that the instruments of science and technology have opened-up a world, that exceeds, by far, the narrow range of sense-perceptions we are capable of receiving with our "naked senses"; without the help of a sensory transducer, such as a microscope, a telescope, a thermometer, a spectroscope, as well as the many other instruments that have enlarged our ability to perceive and record the physical stimuli that are present around us.

The world of perception has been enlarged into a microscopic world that is far smaller than we can perceive with the naked eye, but, technological instruments and pain-staking studies and interpretations have also revealed the presence of a "macroscopic", or galactic world, which is far beyond the reach of our senses. Even, a comprehensive view of the world as a whole, of mankind, of a whole nation, would be impossible without the modern tools of communication and the instruments of science and technology. Without knowledge of these scientific and technological enlargements of the world of perception and interpretation, we exist in some sort of a "meso-scopic" environment, and, this applies, not only, to those who have remained ignorant, by misfortune or deliberate choice, of the macroscopic and microscopic worlds, but, it applies, also, to all the reality perceptions that were formulated, before the scientific and technological worlds of perception came into being.

In the "meso-scopic" world, we come, inevitably, to an "anthropomorphic" explanation of the world around us, and, it is, not only, perfectly logical, but unavoidable, that "meso-scopic man" would take the "willed force" of his own existence, and the fact, that he can arbitrarily choose to help or destroy, as the model for the force-fields he is aware of.

It is therefore perfectly logical, that man sees himself in some sort of a larger hierachical order, because, in his small community, he is also "ordened" into a hierarchical order reflecting the power relationships between the members of the community. Even, the most powerful leaders and warriors experienced the fact, that many of the forces they encountered and were aware of, were far greater, than their own limited abilities, and they had a tendency to see themselves as being sub-ordinated to a power-structure, where the "top leadership", or, perhaps, even, many strata of leadership and force-fields, extended well above the level of power excercised by the leaders of a small nomadic community.

Just as members of a social entity always tend to revert to quarrelsome and destructive behaviour-patterns inviting a much needed correction after a period of easy existence, so can the leadership, and the community as a whole, develop the notion, that, they too, have done "something wrong" in the larger, "superior" order of the existing force-fields. Just as a "sinner" in society can atone for his mistakes and avoid harsh punishment by showing contrition and by promising to mend his ways, so can the community as a whole feel "sinful", atone for its wrong-doings, and avoid even harsher punishment.

Extra-ordinary stressful situations and disastrous events were, logically, interpreted as "punishment" for some sort of wrong-doing, even, if it was, often, not clear to the community and its leaders, why, and where, they had done wrong. If a disastrous situation developed as a result of laxity, unbridled behaviour or a reckless decision, then, of course, it was not difficult to "make sense" of the adversity and the disaster that followed, and, even, in the anthropomorphic and pan-theistic reality perceptions of early man, a useful correlation between cause-and-effect relationships had been found, and a variety of equally useful, if harsh, counter-measures could be instituted in an effort to restore a situation of normality.

However, in random natural disasters, or, as a result of disastrous climatological changes, the exhaustion of the natural food-supply, or a change in the migration routes of relied-upon herds of prey, we see, that, early man had a much more difficult time to "understand" the reasons for adversity. A prolonged period of stress and soul-searching, led, sometimes, to apparently far-fetched, or, even, counter-productive beliefs, attitudes and practices, as the community searched blindly and desperately for an answer and a way to survive. Extreme practices of sacrifice did evolve, because these strong feelings of doubt and guilt had to be purged.

We should not forget, that the ability to interpret adversity and disaster as a result of random chance or variability, for which we do not have to feel guilty, is a typically modern way of coping with the problems of stress and the feelings of guilt, and, we may argue, that, we, in our modern times, often, try to absolve ourselves unjustifiably from these feelings of guilt by attributing our actions to "bad luck"; not realising, or, not wanting to admit, that we are, at least, partially responsible for the predicament we are in.

Perhaps, our ancestors erred on the side of trying to find guilt were there was none, and, they would have suffered a lot less agony and anxiety, if they had learned to formulate the principles of random variability and chance much sooner, but, we, in our modern times, have an equally disastrous tendency, in particular as a large community or society, to deny any responsibility for the stresses and disastrous conditions we encounter, such as the dangerous trends and tendencies of industrial pollution, unbridled economic expansion, or social unrest. We seem so impotent to do something about these large-scale social mechanisms, that it is tempting to hide behind the belief, that these forces are not of our own making, or, that they are not under our control. We will have to learn, again, to carry the burden of guilt, at least, to some extent. We have to acknowledge, again, the gigantic influence of man's collective and individual existence upon our environment, as well as upon our social structures.

Let us apply the techniques of logical analysis and clear thought to the tasks of making an accurate diagnosis of the problems we face, and, let us design a rational alternative to the reckless course of development we seem to be heading into. If we fail in our efforts to design a rational alternative, we may be tempted to revert to a primitive form of magic, which may be soothing to an uneducated and anxious mind, but, we can be sure, that such a primitive solution will be completely inadequate to solve the many problems we face.

.......

Chapter 5

Content

The act of "prayer".
The attitudes of submission and placation.
We experience a powerful psychological advantage, when we are able to acknowledge a sin or a mistake.
How quickly should we make a fresh start?
A variable balance-point between flexibility and tenacity.
Astonishingly destructive behaviour-patterns, when people destroy in a short time what took the greater part of a life-time to build-up.
The limited variability of behaviour in the small, tightly-knit communities of early man.
Archeological evidence for structures of beliefs.
The rituals of burial.
An inter-twining of belief and behaviour.
A poorly developed sense of individuality.
Religious practices and beliefs, often, appear to have been inhuman, harsh and self-defeating.
Religious beliefs and practices were harsh and uncompromising, just like life itself.
When man began to live in much larger groupings.
Rising population pressures.
A brief review of what has been discussed.
A viable belief must increase resilience and resistance to stress.

So far, we have described, only in general terms, what the consequences are of a religious, anthropomorphic reality perception. We have seen the logic of some of the attitudes resulting from primitive belief-structures, and, we see the reasons for prayer, sacrifice and atonement. Let us discuss these concepts somewhat more in detail, because, in the act of "prayer", we encounter an attempt to communicate with those stronger powers of nature, which an anthropomorphic reality perception perceives to be present. Logically, such an attempt to communicate is associated with an attitude of sub-mission and a feeling of fear and awe, because one experiences to be at the mercy of a superior and inscrutable power.

Just as a sub-missive individual may try to placate a stronger foe or bully by offering a gift, so is the idea of a sacrifice related to an attempt to pacify or placate a superior power, who may have been offended for one obscure reason or another. Atonement is a general attitude of contriteness; of feeling humbled and subdued in response to collective or individual wrong-doings. We should look, for a moment, at the powerful psychological mechanisms that lie behind the ability to acknowledge a sin or a mistake, together with the ability to adopt an attitude, where one begs for forgivenness and the opportunity to have another chance.

It is difficult to say, precisely, how quick, or, how slow, we should acknowledge, that we have been wrong and should make a fresh start. We are thinking, here, not so much about being "wrong" in the sense of having done something wrong against another member of the community. This is a criminal form of "wrong-doing", and, it should be punished and avoided. As a rule, there is little doubt, whether or not one has done something wrong in a criminal or unethical sense. We are thinking, here, about the many decisions we have to take throughout life, as well as the fact, that we have to be able to "stick" with a decision, in order to give it a chance to "work".

If we would be changing our plans all the time, there would be no continuity in our existence. On the other hand, we should be able to acknowledge, after a certain period of time, that we have embarked upon a "dead-end" pathway, and, that we should abandon it, as quickly as possible, in order to "cut our losses". Extreme attitudes are always inflexible and, therefore, harmful.

If we are looking at a personality who is never sure of itself and has to be guided, step by step, all its life, we are rightfully considering such a personality to have some sort of a maturation defect, which has resulted in a chronic dependency and neurotic insecurity. However, if we see a stubborn mentality, where an individual has great difficulties acknowledging to him- or herself that serious mistakes have been made, and, that it is time to start with a clean slate, we see astonishingly destructive behaviour, where people destroy, in a short period of time, what took the greater part of a life-time to build-up.

However, in the tightly-knit, primitive, but coherent societies of early mankind, we see, that individual variability is far less developed than in the large, modern, affluent societies. In a small community, individual members are given far less latitude in their behaviour than people in modern, chaotic societies, but, the small grouping will fluctuate in its moods and behaviour far more strongly between the peaks of ebullience and strength, and the valleys of defeat and despair.

Natural evolution has had a reasonably long time to shape a viable behaviour-pattern for the small, nomadic community, which has developed, at least, to some extent, a repertoir of symbolic awarenesses; and, perhaps, even, a primitive belief-structure, especially, if we include in the concept of a "belief-structure", not only, an elaborate story of existential significance, but, also, the most rudimentary and primitive "notions" about life and death, good and evil, right and wrong.

It is difficult to know, when a group of human or pre-human beings started to develop a belief-structure, and, during archeological excavations, scientists try to find evidence for behaviour-patterns, indicating, that a particular group had developed a notion about life and death. If we see in the archeological remains evidence for rites or rituals that were centered around the need to cope with the stress of death and disease, as well as the practice to bury or dispose off a deceased member in a way that indicates some feeling of awe and reverence for the deceased individual, we take this as evidence for the existence of a primitive belief-structure, and, such evidence has become an aid in determining, whether or not a particular fossil was "human".

It remains difficult for us to re-create the beginnings of conceptual awareness or conscious thought, and, it seems, indeed, reasonable to look at the way these primitive nomadic groupings disposed off their dead, as an indication for the existence of an early belief-structure. Here, we want to emphasise the idea, that natural selection favoured viability, and, that viability for the symbolically manipulating early human beings must have meant, that they experienced some sort of an existential advantage from the formation of a primitive belief-structure.

It is interesting, and, probably, helpful, in understanding our own nature and the nature of our awarenesses, if we understand, why a crude and undifferentiated perception of reality, became, eventually, a helpful tool for early man; why man formulated a belief in a few, for us, often, incongruous or illogical causal relationships, that are grasped in a "story"; a story, that tells something about the way this particular community came into existence; what experiences it has had, what attitudes, practices and activities were necessary to continue its existence; what the nature was of the hardships and difficulties it had to endure; what happened, when a member died; what was right and wrong; what had to be done to placate powerful foes or adversaries, and, which forces were potentially beneficial to the little community.

All these aspects of belief and behaviour were inter-twined, and, they still are. Let us not forget, that, the sense of individuality was still poorly developed in these small nomadic groupings, because awarenesses arose as an act of communication between people, and the abilities of abstraction and reflection were still rudimentary. (As we have discussed before, indviduality, together with the awareness of individual existence, is, essentially, an act of abstraction, and, it is often a fleeting, temporary awareness, that depends on the abilities of thought and reflection, as well as upon the leisure-time and tolerance excercised by the society in which a reflective, somewhat isolated and introspective individual lived.)

In the small community, members were not puzzled by the intracies of relativistic thought or relative truths, neither, were they troubled by psychological insights and the difference between a truth "as it is" and as "I believe it to be". Certainty was absolute, as long as the leadership and the small community were confident, but, doubt and despair were deep and communally shared, whenever such a small community tried to survive hard times, threatened at all sides, and, without any visible help to turn to; except a few vaguely conceptualised and unreliable deities, who had to be placated or bribed with extra-ordinary sacrifices.

Often, religious practices and beliefs seemed to be inhumane, harsh and self-defeating, if we look at the practice of human sacrifice, or, the arbitrary trials of alleged criminals or scapegoats. Religion in primitive societies was harsh and uncompromising, but, so was life. The treatment of adversaries and criminals was merciless, at least, on many occasions, but, we should not forget, that our clearest records about inter-human strife stem from fairly recent times, and, we have discussed, before, that, most likely, the ferocity of strife between human groupings rose gradually as a result of the gradually rising density of the human population. These trends led, eventually, to the establishment of much larger social groupings, which abandoned their nomadic existence as they learned to domesticate animals and cultivate a variety of plants. We see, here, the prodromal stage of the civilisations of man, which led, eventually, to the break-through of writing, as well as an explicit code of justice, laying the foundations for the first large civilisations of recorded history.

Before this time of early recorded history, nomadic groupings that were extra-ordinarily successful, would grow in size, until a natural "instability" would arise, based on the limitations of natural leadership and mutual recognition. A new nucleus of leadership would emerge, and, it would, eventually, break-away from the larger social environment, taking a number of followers from the old or existing grouping. This new social nucleus or group would settle in an adjacent territory, where the process of growth and "mitotic division" of the small social grouping would repeat itself. Just like a colony of bees would, eventually, "split" and swarm to form a new hive, so do we visualise, that, a growing social grouping would eventually split and become two societies or communities, closely adjacent to each other.

We have discussed these ideas before, and, we do not want to elaborate them any further. We like to continue the train of thought, which lets us see the further evolution of religious thought and behaviour. I am fully aware of the fact, that, in sketching a small, hypothetical community, we have only hinted, in general outlines, upon the correlations between the rise of specific faculties, (such as the natural experiment with conscious awareness), and, the role this burgeoning awareness was going to play in the beliefs and behaviour-patterns of these small social groupings and their members.

We have emphasised the idea, that the small community developed the rudiments of conscious awareness and symbolically representable and manipulable memory-traces, as a community of communicating individuals, where individualised awareness and individualistic behaviour-patterns were limited. We saw, how such a grouping developed attitudes and practices that were perfectly logical, as long as we keep in mind the meso-scopic range of perceptions, as well as the inevitably anthropomorphic interpretations of their reality perceptions. We have seen, that there is a close link between perception, interpretation and behaviour, just as there is a unified inter-action between all these aspects in each of us, as we inter-react with our environment and the people in it.

We have briefly indicated the role of thought as a forum where we "try out", in our imagination, a series of behavioural responses, and analyse their possible effects, before we actually embark upon the execution of a behavioural response, which is, at least, to some extent, shaped by our conscious will.

We have seen, how beliefs and behavioural regulators fuse, because the interpretation of reality does not distinguish between intellectual and emotional needs. The small community will only continue to experiment with the possibilities of symbolic representation, memory-recall and conceptualisation, if it experiences that such an activity is helpful, and, it can only be helpful, if these activities constitute an existential advantage. A belief structure can only be an existential advantage, if it is helpful in coordinating, more precisely, a necessary activity, such as the hunt; if it is helpful in settling disputes and fostering a sense of togetherness; if it encourages feelings of loyalty, and, if it contributes to the attitudes of care and concern towards the weaker and more vulnerable members of the group.

The existential needs of the small group are served, whenever a belief structure is helpful in fostering courage and loyalty, intelligence and determination, as well as fostering a more precise analysis of the reality as it presents itself to the group. In short, a belief, together with the resulting attitudes and behavioural responses, must increase the viability of the group as a whole. It must increase the resilience and resistance to stress, and, it must enhance the intelligence and effectiveness of collective behaviour, otherwise, the experiment of conscious awareness, together with the resulting religious reality perceptions, would have become an evolutionary "dead-end", a long time ago.

.......

Chapter 6

Content

A giant leap through the early history of mankind.
Social environments with a membership in the millions.
Attempts to cope with our confusing times.
The all-important period of transition during the change-over from a small-scale to a large-scale social unit.
A lessening dominance of the genetic code.
The evolution of multi-individual leadership.
Task-divisions and specialisations in function.
The world of the insect-colony.
The road of behavioural flexibility.
The "herd".
Why the off-spring of behaviourally flexible animals is vulnerable.
Members of a small, nomadic grouping are related to each other.
The ability to tolerate each other at close quarters.
The change from territoriality to hierarchical positioning.
The main obstacles to the growth of a social grouping has always been the physical and psychological limitations of the participating members, and, especially, of the single leader.
An overwhelming complexity of social events, leading to a loss of social transparence.
The "split".
Increasing population pressures, and rising demands for the continuous defense of a favourable territory.
Pressures that encouraged a spurt of cultural evolution.
The art of record-keeping.
Principles of administration.
Internal security.
Regaining control over a large, essentially ungovernable social entity.
The essential role of a code of justice.
A greater control over environmental conditions.
Profound and dramatic changes in life-style.
When the leadership became increasingly complex and remote.
A multitude of differing "cultural veneers", co-existing under the umbrella of a dominant structure of religious beliefs.
The mechanisms of cultural cross-fertilisation.
A burden upon the adaptability of beliefs.
When the members fail to identify with the "society as a whole".
Large societies remain volatile, potentially explosive conglomerates of people.

We should, now, make a giant leap through the early history of mankind, and concentrate on the large, modern, complex, somewhat chaotic societies, with a membership reaching into the millions. The larger societies of the past always displayed divergent and, often, contradictory cultural codes and religious beliefs, and, we should analyse the role of the "reality perception", for the society as a whole, as well as for individual people living in these large, conglomerate societies.

Again, we will discuss only general principles, without referring to any specific social or historical development, but, hopefully, these general principles will be helpful to cope with our confusing times, and, hopefully, they make us understand the mechanisms of our own behavioural reactions, whenever we are confronted with the many confusing stimuli arising from our social environment.

Before we can discuss the large, contemporary societies, we have to trace, once again, the fundamental changes that took place, when the small nomadic grouping started to give-way to a much larger, more permanently settled social environment. These changes are, indeed, profound, and, we have discussed them extensively before. However, in order to appreciate the changes that took place in man's behaviour, and, in particular, the changes in the nature and function of man's religious beliefs, we have to review the main points of this transition, including the cultural innovations that were necessary to give the larger society a chance to enjoy a measure of success.

During the social integration of the behaviourally flexible animals, nature had a chance to shape, over many millions of years, the genetic instructions for a viable mode of socially integrated behaviour. These behavioural instructions included a willingness to settle into a hierarchical order, where the instinct of territoriality was subdued and a conflict of interest was settled by a test-fight in order to determine who could dominate whom. Territories fused and the members of such a socially integrated grouping differentiated into followers and a leader, who was probably assisted by a group of hierachically highly placed individuals.

Together with the differentiation in leaders and followers, we see, in the pre-human, anthropoid groupings, a trend towards task-division or specialisation in function, which increases the level of inter-dependence. We should remind ourselves, here, that many insect-colonies show a degree of specialisation and interdependence that exceeds, by far, anything seen in the behaviourally flexible animals species', but, we know, now, that insects are rigidly controled by genetically instructed behaviour-patterns, and, such forms of a multi-individual social organisation, resemble more the cohesion and integration of a multi-cellular unit than the experiment of social integration with a group of behaviourally flexible animals. When nature embarked upon the road of behavioural flexibility, it was impossible to prescribe a rigid code of social behaviour, because this would negate the trend of behavioural flexibility.

All these trends; hierarchical positioning, the suppression of internal conflicts, the test-fight, the fusion of territories, the qualities and responsibilities of natural leadership, as well as the requirements of being a good follower in a socially coherent grouping; all these changes required a profound modification of the behavioural complex, compared to a solitary existence, or, even, an existence in a "herd". (In a herd there is no significant overall social organisation, except a sense of safety in being together, because it allows a swift response of the entire herd to a rapidly spreading state of alarm.)

If you find it difficult to visualise, how the behaviour of flexible animals was molded to make its behaviour compatible with a development of social integration, we should recall, that, in essence, the road towards behavioural flexibility was, at the same time, a road towards social integration. Behavioural flexibility required a sharpening of the attitudes of parental care and concern, because the offspring of behaviourally flexible animals was, necessarily, more vulnerable than the offspring of species' that came into the world with a full complement of genetically endowed behavioural instructions.

As we have discussed on previous occasions, behavioural flexibility requires a far greater input upon the behavioural decision-making processes by a non-genetic, secondarily acquired or experienced input, and, it takes time to learn and acquire this experience. This is the reason, why the off-spring of behaviourally flexible animals is much more vulnerable than the off-spring of non-flexible species'. However, the processes of parental care and protection, complemented by an instinctive drive in the off-spring to be guided by the examples of parental behaviour, are, at the same time, the mechanisms that make the nucleus of the social grouping possible, because, as we have argued before, the members of the more primitive social groupings were all related to each other.

One of the main features of socially integrated behaviour is the ability to tolerate each other at close quarters. Members of a species tend to disperse themselves over a wide territory, each claiming and defending a certain territory in order to secure their existence. The step from territoriality to hierarchical positioning was a gigantic one, but, it may be more accurate to accept the idea, that, many flexible species' form a temporary social grouping during the period of bringing-up their off-spring, and, a full-fledged social unit may arise from a persistent bonding between parents and off-spring, even, after the off-spring has reached maturity.

Indeed, the break-through towards a nomadic, socially integrated grouping occurred, probably, when the members of the anthropoid species' remained together in a sort of family-grouping, even, after they had reached maturity. This "lingering" of a kinship bond, based upon innate parental attitudes and behaviour-patterns, is, perhaps, a more plausible concept in the emergence of socialisation compared to the imagery we have often implied before; where we visualise that a fully developed territorial behaviour would slowly give-way to tolerance and hierarchical positioning, with a fusion of the territories into a larger unit. This enlarged territory is, then, guarded by the leader and the most dominant members, while those, who are lower down on the hierarchical scale, develop a variety of supporting roles.

However, we do not want to lose ourselves into speculations, how the phenomenon of hierarchical positioning came-about, and, there are, probably, several evolutionary roads, for different species', which all led, eventually, to some sort of social integration. Our purpose here, is to trace a summary of the changes that took place, when a small social grouping of, perhaps, at the most, a dozen or a few dozen members, transformed itself into a community that became more settled and occupied, permanently, a much larger territory; with a membership into the hundreds, or, even, many thousands of individuals, and, eventually, with a membership reaching into the millions, if we look at the federal nations of our modern times.

The main obstacles to the growth of a social grouping have always been the natural physiological and psychological limitations of a "single leader". With the growth of a social unit, it becomes impossible to know everything that is going-on. It becomes impossible to settle disputes quickly and fairly, and, the social unit becomes torn-apart by the competitive strife and the break-down of the mechanisms of natural leadership, which nature shaped so carefully and painstakingly for the small, nomadic grouping.

The most natural solution for a successful social grouping that had become too large and too unstable to be manageable, was to split. A younger leader would break-away and establish his own grouping on an adjacent territory. We have compared this mechanism to the mitotic division of a cell, but, we have also seen, that there are limitations to this method, in particular, when a rising population of smaller groupings that still live a nomadic way of life, makes it increasingly more difficult for a group to split-off and find a suitable territory. Besides, the increasing population pressures and confrontations between nomadic groupings, started to place a premium on the ability to assemble a larger group of fighters. In addition, the need to carry-out more complex and demanding tasks in order to harvest a difficult natural resource, such as a large animal, also favoured the establishment of larger groupings.

It was logical, therefore, that natural selection started to put a pressure upon the innovativeness and intelligence of social leaderships which had to deal with large and successful, but, potentially unstable and volatile social units. It will remain a matter of speculation in what order the various innovations arose, but, there is little doubt, that, in a relatively short period of time, a large number of break-throughs occurred, and, we are probably correct to say, that, many of these trends, which turned-out to be such extra-ordinarily successful cultural innovations, took place, more or less simultaneously.

For example, the first major innovation may well have been a form of multi-individual leadership. The tasks of leadership were then distributed over a number of "assistants", where each assistant was given a part of the overall leadership responsibilities. The processes of specialisation in function were, therefore, also applied to the tasks of the leadership itself, and, we are probably correct to see the successful evolution of multi-individual leadership, with all the ramifications of this process, as the main reason for the emergence of the larger societies.

We see, also, the art of record-keeping arise. Initially, this came-about as a result of the need to tabulate inventories and record commercial transactions, but, quickly, the art of recording language-symbols led to a much more precise form of communication between a burgeoning leadership and its administrative and executive arms.

We see principles of administration, justice and organisation arise, and, as we have discussed before, the concept of a complex hierarchical order gives-way to a more simple stratification; a leadership with its officials, bureaucrats, assistants and its inevitable source of power; an army of warriors, which has the task to maintain external, as well as internal order, or "security". We see a large group of more or less equally placed members in society. These people tend to specialise, increasingly, into a large variety of trades and skills; and, there is, inevitably, a lower class; strangers, criminals and prisoners of war, or slaves, who have been forcefully subjugated by the ruling society.

The point we want to emphasise, here, is the fact, that the natural limitations on the ability to know details of happenings and events taking place within a complex social environment, as well as the inability to know the detailed behaviour-patterns of all the members of a larger grouping, made such a large social entity completely ungovernable, until it became possible to organise an effective, multi-individual and specialised leadership with its many administrative and executive functions.

These functions included the ability to levy a more or less fair taxation, or obligatory contribution upon the membership, as well as the ability to organise a specialised group of warriors, who would be loyal to the leadership and could be called-upon to enforce its decrees. Such a development could only take place in an atmosphere of cooperation and a situation of justice. We see, indeed, the emergence of a code of justice, where civil disputes and criminal behaviour-patterns were judged and dealt with by an impartial and competent body of specialised people.

However, let us not come to the conclusion, that the relative success of the larger societies can easily be grasped by a few mechanisms or principles. Undoubteldy, an increasing number of people must have been able to recognise the essential need to orden themselves into such a large, complex, and, often, confusing society. Harsh realities were a significant spur in the evolution of the larger social environment. People were driven to seek shelter in ever enlarging communities, as the safety of small nomadic groupings was quickly deteriorating, at least, in the more fertile and densely populated regions of the globe.

We may consider, therefore, the birth of the great civilisations, as well as the beginnings of recorded history, as a development that was made necessary by the need to seek shelter and safety in larger numbers. This experiment with a radically different way of social organisation was not really foreshadowed by natural instincts or genetically given behaviour-patterns, but, it was only made possible, and relatively stable, because of a great number of cultural innovations, which took place more or less simultaneously, or, at least, in rapid succession.

All these developments made it possible to govern a large society more effectively, and, it also allowed an increase in the natural yield of a fertile area with the help of the techniques of cultivation, irrigation and the domestication of animals. Periods of drought, adverse weather conditions as well as other temporary interruptions of the supply of food and water could, then, be overcome with the techniques of preservation, conservation and storage, which increased the viability of these larger social entities significantly.

In short, we see, that the principles of specialised leadership and the conscious administration of justice, the techniques of a fair system of taxation; the development of trade, manufacture, agriculture, irrigation and storage techniques, the mechanisms to maintain law and order internally, and, to defend against external threats, all these elements of large-scale social viability arose together, and, they had to evolve together, in order to give the larger society a possibility to exist.

However, the changes in life-style and exposure were profound and dramatic. People were exposed to a much larger variety of powers and influences than ever before, and, the small social grouping in which an individual was born and grew-up, was, now, only a small fraction of the "society as a whole". Yet, the sense of belonging and allegiance could not be directed exclusively at the small group one belonged to. After all, every citizen had to obey and pay tribute to a leadership that was complex and remote, but powerful, and everyone had to acknowledge as fellow-citizens, people one did not really know, and, who were essentially strangers in the way they talked, dressed or behaved.

As soon as a fairly large number of nomadic groupings were forced to seek shelter in the security of a much larger social entity, we see the clash of beliefs and attitudes, of different ways to interpret reality and relate to each other, as well as the forced togetherness of a multitude of somewhat differing "cultural veneers", often, under the umbrella of an "official culture" and a dominant religious belief. These were all important factors in the changing experiences of man.

On the one hand, the cross-fertilisation of many ideas opened-up numerous possibilities for those who were alert, clever and open-minded, but, the great variety of different beliefs, the close quarters at which virtual strangers had to tolerate each other, as well as the enormous complexity of the society as a whole, including the numerous happenings that were taking place in such a large social environment, placed a severe burden on the adaptability and belief structures of the individual members.

It is not surprising, that, many people failed to identify with the "society as a whole", and, these people remained, primarily, loyal to their own culture or ethnic grouping, grudgingly tolerating the dominant segments in their society, as well as the overall social leadership that always came from these dominating segments. No wonder, many groupings lived under chronic tensions, because they had lost the ability to leave the social environment and set-up their own little social unit, on their own territory. No wonder, the larger societies, regardless at what stage we examine them in the annals of recorded history, remained volatile, potentially explosive conglomerates of people, which were held-together into a semblance of unity, as often by the power of the sword, as by the persuasivenes of a benevolent and intelligent leadership with its many bureaucratic channels.

.......

Chapter 7

Content

A look at ordinary people and their religious reality perceptions.
Most of us receive contradictory signals.
Influences from the family and the immediate social surroundings.
Children are often subjected to different rules.
Coping with disagreements amongst the adults.
What is the purpose of a religious belief?
When leisure activities become an important pass-time.
A resurgence of egocentric and individualising trends.
A sense of awe for the widespread manifestations of human existence.
The importance of cultural roots.
The world of "the career".
We all find our niche, somewhere.
The cycle of life.
Fundamentalist religious reality perceptions find a fertile soil amongst people who are looking for simple solutions.
The individual who has been widely exposed to a variety of beliefs, remains the exception.
Strains upon a religious and cultural heritage; beneficial and harmful effects.
Every belief has to be re-enforced, from time to time.

We have sketched, rather summarily, an overview of the transition from a small nomadic grouping to a large, complex, tension-ridden, partially, persuasive, and, partially, co-ercive society with much larger dimensions. However, in order to do justice to the title of our essay, we should concentrate in the last two chapters upon the experiences of ordinary people in our large, contemporary societies, and, we should see, how, and why, the large variety of religious reality perceptions may, either help, or burden them in their inter-actions with each other; how, and why, religious reality perceptions may help or hinder them in fulfilling their existential needs and requirements.

It is useful to review, briefly, the various "worlds", we, as individuals in a complex society, are likely to be confronted with, and, such a review will show us, clearly, that, indeed, many, if not most of us, receive chaotic, contradictory and confusing signals and impulses as we go through life. As a rule, we grow-up in the family we have been born into, but, it is rare, that we receive all the answers, or the totality of the cultural input, determining the perception of our realities, from this one family, unless we live in extreme isolation; in a clan of family relationships that is nearly totally self-sufficient.

Most of us will come into contact with people who grew-up in a different family; where the way of life, as well as the beliefs and attitudes, are somewhat different. Even, if we come into contact with people, who speak the same language and go to the same Church, there are numerous variations in attitudes and beliefs, and, we experience the fact, that there are many different ways in which a particular situation can be dealt with. As a child, it is often confusing, that we are not subjected to the same rules, or lack of rules, as the children in the neighbourhood, and, we are puzzled, that some seem to be able to do, freely, what we are told is wrong or "sinful".

We see, that adults often disagree amongst themselves, and, even, the answers about right and wrong, about God and Heaven, sin and punishment, pride and honour, all these questions and judgements are different, but, by and large, the questions of right and wrong, or good and bad, are answered in a religious context, where the guiding principles of a religion are used to enforce the rules, or laws, of a community. We see, then, that the main purpose of a religious reality perception, at least, from the view-point of society and its leadership, is the guidance and regulation of individual behaviour. In this way anti-social behaviour is curbed, and, the behaviour of the membership is galvanised into a courageous and militant attitude for the sake of coping with perilous times.

We have seen, that, individuals always tend to revert to egocentric and essentially anti-social behaviour-patterns, as soon as a period of stress has eased-off. Security and ease of existence are quickly taken for granted, and, people have a surplus of energies at their disposal, which does not have to be channeled, anymore, into strenuous programs of social maintenance or construction. This is the time, that leisure becomes an important pass-time, and, if the memories of a difficult and turbulent past are still vivid amongst the living generations, a variety of artistic expressions may come to the fore, glorifying the past, while recalling the tragedies and accomplishments of the past in a mood of nostalgic reminiscence.

However, at the same time, discipline is relaxing; individual differences arise in life-style, opinions and beliefs. Conflicts and disputes come to the fore, and, it does not take long, before the energies that were liberated by the emergence of a strong and successful social unit, are being absorbed by strife and disputes; by extravagance and waste, as people become pre-occupied with egocentric pleasures and pursuits. This is the time, that a wealth of divergent opinions emerges, but, it may also be a time of numerous experiments with trade, commerce, manufacture and cultural contacts, and, the momentum of a rapid economic development can compensate, for a considerable period of time, the beginnings of chaos and decay, which are ushered-in by a loosening of discipline and moral standards.

A rapidly developing society, with numerous cultural and economic contacts, opens-up a new world of existence possibilities for active and intelligent members, who are willing to learn something more than the cultural environment into which they have been born. The possibility of a "career" emerges, but, as a result of the development of a career, an individual is exposed to different worlds; realities change; the certainties of one's cultural background are challenged by opinions and beliefs that seem equally as convincing as those with which one has grown-up. On the one hand, these rich cultural contacts, the willingness and the ability to learn new ways of doing things or looking at reality, the extensive contacts with a large variety of people who satisfy the basic requirements of life in such different ways, gives a sense of awe to the widely ranging manifestations of human existence, as well as the apparently equal validity of a large variety of differing life-styles.

Any individual, who is genuinely interested in learning about the worlds that exist outside his own, is exposed to a large variety of highly contradictory and confusing reality perceptions, and, unless one is aware of this confusion and contradiction, and, unless one makes a serious attempt to find a pragmatic common-sense link between the various cultural manifestations of diverse peoples, it will be tempting to revel in a sense of nostalgia, where one looks back with a measure of envy to the simplicity and easy certainty of one's childhood environment, as well as the belief structures that went with it.

The response of people can, therefore, be classified as follows; some people are able to manage some sort of a synthesis, based on common-sense and the common denominators of human existence. These are largely perceived intuitively, but, most people seek their security by maintaining a link with the community they came from. These are the people, who go "back to their roots" and are proud of it, and, they remain somewhat suspicious of the influences of strange cultures or societies, because they have never learned to appreciate the fact, that the culture of the stranger is not any less valid than the more familiar culture of their own up-bringing.

Some become completely confused and intimidated by a foreign or strange culture, and they are then "ashamed" of their own roots. This is a neurotic and unhealthy attitude, which seldom leads to a significant contribution. However, an individual, who is exposed to a new world in the course of pursuing a career, is not always consciously engaged in an evaluation of the world he came from. Life is a continuous struggle between our ambitions, dreams and goals, on the one hand, and, the obstacles we find in our way, on the other, because there are always people who compete for the same skills, opportunities and possibilities of existence. This is the reason, why the world of a professional career is a hierarchically ordened world, where we slowly advance through the ranks.

We begin as a newcomer, become a pupil or an apprentice, and, eventually, we graduate as a "master", and, perhaps, we earn a "degree" as a specialist, or, as a master-craftsman and teacher. In the world of the career, we may reach any stage, just as in the world we came from. We may be exceptionally talented and ambitious, and, we may happen to be in the right place at the right moment. We may have the right kind of pliable personality, where we attract the attention of a gifted teacher, and, we are then given a chance to advance to the highest levels; yet, we may not advance all that far, and, we may, eventually, function adequately, somewhere in society, after reaching, at least, a level of acknowledged proficiency.

This means, that, regardless of our choice of career, we still go through the stages of learning, maturity, consolidation and eventual decline, and each of these stages has its particular moments of stress. If we are young, energetic and ambitious, we are still "growing" and advancing upon the hierarchical scale of our particular career, but, sooner or later, everyone recognises the need to "level-off" and to consolidate. In a competitive, free-enterprise society, the period of apprenticeship and advanced learning is, often, a period of severe financial sacrifices, and, sooner or later, the need to become established and reach a measure of financial security, leads to the need to start "making a living".

Those of us, who drop-out of school early, and, who try to find some sort of steady job or position in the society of our origin, will have a much less prolonged and strenuous period of apprenticeship, but, these people will also never be able to penetrate into the "higher echelons" of their social environment, which are positions filled by people, who have undergone a specialised, academic training. These people have not been exposed to such disturbing foreign influences, and, it is easier for them to keep accepting, without much scrutiny, the basic truths or concepts of their culture of origin.

For this reason, we see, that, fundamentalistic religious believers, who are assimilating the realities of the Scriptures as they present themselves to a community of religious believers, can accept these images without being disturbed by questions of interpretation. Unless one is aware of the large variety of interpretations that are possible about any religious writing, and, unless one has been exposed to the history of a belief and has studied the questions and problems previous generations of scholars had to deal with, it seems all so simple, and, it is so easy to come to the facile conclusion, that the particular perception one happens to develop as a reader of the Sacred Scriptures, is the only true and valid interpretation.

Without education and exposure; without the experience of meeting intelligent people who come from a different background, it is impossible to become aware of the many problems of interpretation that invariably occur in any sort of conceptual communication, including the communication of the basic religious truths, as they are handed-down to us by our particular cultural environment. It certainly is true, that the somewhat simplistic religious beliefs of people who have not been exposed to a great variety of different cultural influences, can be a genuine help to them, but, then, if such would not be the case, this particular belief structure or religious reality perception would never have survived in the first place, would it?

The exception is, therefore, the individual who has been widely exposed to a variety of beliefs, because this is the individual, who can pose the difficult and unanswerable questions that leave the faithful perplexed and irritated at the same time. If a large percentage of the members of a particular culture are widely exposed to "foreign influences", the culture is in danger of becoming extinct, and, it is logical, that a period of intense and often forced intermingling of peoples with widely varying cultural backgrounds, will pose a strain, as well as a demand for change, upon the original cultural guidelines. During a period of intensive contact, the cultural code experiences just as much the phenomena of "competitive strife" as the living members of an evolving species, and, we see the same demands for flexibility and adaptability come to the fore.

Are such strains upon a religious or cultural heritage beneficial or harmful? It all depends; if the changes are too radical, those members, who depend for their intellectual and emotional security upon the validity of the existing cultural and religious truths, will feel uneasy, and, they will group-together and expel those, who challenge, so relentlessly, the accepted truths. However, if the influx of new ideas leads to a deeper insight into the meaning of socially viable attitudes, then, these new ideas and influences may find a cautious welcome, after they have been scrutinised carefully and suspiciously.

If a cultural heritage with its religious truths is too rigid to adapt successfully to new ideas, too few people of the younger generations will find relevance in their cultural heritage, and, such a cultural heritage is in danger of losing its viability all-together, but, too rapid a change may cause confusion and may destroy the core of essential truths. Then, people become confused and rudderless. Just as we see in any cultural or behavioural adaptation, the proposed change in the perception of our realities will only be acceptable, if it is recognised as relevant and helpful, and, the religious reality perceptions are no exception.

The basic reason, why an individual can truly believe in the reality of his perceptions, is the experience, re-enforced, time and again, that it is "really true". "How do these enforcements take place", you may ask, "and does an individual or a community has to seek deliberately for a confirmation of its beliefs"?

.......

Chapter 8

Content

People, brought-up in a meso-scopic world, will easily interpret psychological behaviour-patterns in a religious light.
An enormous gap in reality perceptions and interpretations.
The religious "testimony".
Mathematical "proofs" for Biblical interpretations?
Stretching interpretations with the help of a "liberal" approach to the Scriptures.
The "Gnostics".
The scientific attitude and reality perception is essentially "a-gnostic" in nature.
The concept of a relativistic reality perception.
Religious and scientific beliefs depend on the factor of agreement.
A bridge between religion and science.
What happens, when we replace absolute beliefs with a slippery relativistic interpretation of reality.
The mechanisms of "emotional investment".
The ability to place one's burdens upon the Lord.
The courage to fight with a complete reliance upon one's Faith in God.
Powerful psychological adaptations.
The mechanisms of Hope and Faith.
The conversion from aggression to attitudes of humbleness and forgivenness.
The wide psychological spectrum of Christian beliefs and attitudes.
A gradual intellectual erosion of the Christian reality perception.
A "milder" interpretation of the combative features of human behaviour with the help of scientific and relativistic reality perceptions.

People, who have not been exposed to a cultural diversity, find it much easier to fit the daily experiences of their lives into the religious reality perceptions they have been taught from an early age. It is natural for people who have been brought-up in the meso-scopic world of reality perceptions, to interpret various psychological experiences in a religious light. Such people can really believe, that God had a direct hand in their attitudes and decisions, especially, if they "chose right" in a difficult situation, and, they will easily interpret this experience as a direct intercession by God.

Those, who are familiar with the sciences and commonly acknowledged psychological mechanisms, find it much more difficult, or, even, impossible, to feel any affinity for such an interpretation of the reality experience. These conclusions seem so superficial and facile, and, they seem to be so totally at odds with the fundamental conclusions of the sciences, that there is no discernible anthromoporphic force at work in the world of our observations and experiences. Only, if we remind ourselves about the enormous gap in reality perceptions and interpretations that exists between a widely exposed and well-educated individual, and a meso-scopic individual, can we acknowledge the logic of such behaviour. Ironically, it is impossible to convey in a discussion with meso-scopic people, something of this wide exposure and cultural diversity one is aware of, and, it is even more difficult to convey, accurately, this remarkable but audacious scientific conclusion about the absence of anthropomorphic force-fields, outside our own existence as a human being.

Religious experiences are enforced by the exchange of experiences, or "testimony", between religious believers. They relate to each other, when, and where, God helped and "saved" them from disaster. Their convictions are, often, so strong, that they can only look upon those, who do not share their religious beliefs, as "heathens", who are ignorant of God's Word. Their attempts to convince an unbeliever can be arrogant and naive at the same time. I received a visit, once, from an individual, who came to the door in an attempt to preach his particular interpretation of the Bible. When I asked him, how he knew, that his particular intepretation of the Bible was the correct one, he answered me, in all sincerity, that he would prove this to me "with mathematics", blissfully ignorant of the fact, that many generations of biblical scholars have devoted their lives, throughout the history of Christianity, to the problems associated with diverging biblical interpretations.

The way we enforce our own beliefs with conclusions from our daily experiences, depends, primarily, upon the degree of exposure we have had, and, it is, of course, much easier to be convinced about an absolute certainty and truth, if we are unaware of the many arguments that could be brought against our beliefs. This is the reason why religious people, who have been exposed to the sciences, as well as a large variety of cultural beliefs and guidelines, have a tendency to interpret the Sacred Scriptures "liberally", often, searching for a somewhat vague or ill-defined "common harmony" of the various religious beliefs they have learned something about. However, it remains difficult for these well-meaning searchers to become completely relativistic in their concepts and abandon, categorically, the idea, that God has revealed Himself, somehow, in any of the Scriptures of the major religions.

The power of the intellect, and the creativeness of knowledge and insight, have led some people to believe, that it is, indeed, possible to obtain a glimpse of the Divine Truth with the help of some sort of "secret knowledge", which leads then to a mystical "Beatific Vision". These "Gnostics" are people, who believe, that, such an intellectual route to divine exaltation does, indeed, exist, but, they remain, by and large, oblivious to the many ethical and social guidelines that are given in these same Scriptures, which they acknowledge as a basic core of religious truths.

The scientific attitude can, indeed, be summarised in the position of the "a-gnostic"; the individual, who maintains, that, a careful review of what we know through scientific methods of observation, fails to reveal any evidence for the existence of a personal God, interfering or inter-ceding in the affairs of human beings. The agnostic assumption, or attitude, does not exclude the possibility of a Creator, or, a Prime Mover, who has initiated the existence of the Universe, as well as the oscillating interrelationships between the radiant and the orbiting or "matter" forms of energy. Nevertheless, these agnostic interpretations still give an aura of absoluteness to the scientific realities.

In the concepts of a relativistic truth, we acknowledge, that, all our reality perceptions, scientific as well as religious interpretations, are, in essence, products of our mind, and, these beliefs and interpretations exist as mental images in the conscious awareness of living human beings. By seeing and interpreting scientific reality perceptions in a relativistic and essentially psychological light, we have gone one step further than just "psychologising" our religious realities. By not discriminating against religious realities, and, by placing our scientific observations, also, in the realm of a psychological agreement between a number of people, we can, hopefully, bridge this wide gap between religion and science.

I intended to discuss a number of behavioural reactions and adaptations that are shaped, or influenced, by a religious reality perception, but, I believe that my readers are familiar with most of them. We have discussed, on various occasions, how our reality perceptions, and, in particular, our religious beliefs, play a significant role to help us cope with stress; how they make us courageous and tenacious; resilient and martial; or, on occasion, helpful and cooperative, charitable and magnanimous.

We have discussed all these aspects, and, I think that you are familiar with many of these ideas, but, it may be worthwhile to reflect, for a moment, what is really happening, when we "explain away" a form of behaviour that is based upon a particular perception of reality. What happens, when we undermine with psychological explanations a genuine effort to follow the precepts or dictates of a specific religious belief? What happens, when we replace the absolute beliefs that give us strength and hope, with the concept, that all our beliefs are an instrument to help us cope with stress?

Indeed, we see, that, one can not accept a religious belief, if one is aware of the fact, that one only wants to overcome a particular problem. Occasionally, a luke-warm believer strikes a pact with the Lord and promises to become a more faithful believer, as soon as the Lord has delivered him or her from a particularly dangerous situation, but, then, the essential acceptance of a personal God has always been there. A religous belief can only help and strengthen the resolve of people, if they have already committed themselves to this belief, and, a period of stress is then seen "as a test" of their Faith. If the challenge is successfully resisted, such an individual will experience personally the "help", or support, from God, which is a logical result from a strong and practiced religious Faith. All happenings are, then, strengthening the belief, that God will, in the end, reward those who were faithful to Him, and punish the wicked.

We have discussed, on previous occasions, the remarkable psychological benefits that come with an attitude where one is able to "trust the Lord", and place one's problems upon Him, especially, when there is little room for a rational or logical solution. By placing the burden of worrying upon the Lord; by accepting God's Will, and, by trusting that God will do justice in the end, we see three powerful and nearly simultaneous mechanisms at work. The fear of uncertainty, the apparent hopelessness of a situation and the apparent or imminent triumph of the forces of "evil", (and our enemies are always identified with those evil forces that are an abomination to the Lord), are overcome by the psychological-religious behavioural act, where the burden of responsibility for the situation is transferred to the Will of the Lord. The courage to fight a more powerful enemy at overwhelming odds, can be mustered, only, if one is able to believe, genuinely, that God is on one's side, and, it does not become so difficult to kill and destroy "the enemy", because they are not seen as people, who happen to oppose us and our objectives, but, the enemy is seen as a personification of Evil, and the Lord should be grateful to us that we are willing to help Him stamp-out Evil.

These are, in a nut-shell, some of the psychological adaptations we can see, when we observe religious people in action, in particular, fanatic religious believers. In the same way, we can see powerful psychological adaptations at work in religious people, who are trying to console themselves after the loss of a dear friend or relative, a shattering defeat, or a natural disaster. Here, again, an acceptance of the Will of the Lord, a trust, that God knows what is good for us, a belief, that we are being tested, like Job, for a more glorious after-life, or, a more exalted position in Heaven, or, the belief, that we are rightfully punished for mistakes, short-comings or sins, all these mechanisms give us a resilience and the courage to start again.

Yet, as an outsider, we may be able to see, how these religious beliefs "do their work", but we lack the conviction to really experience their strength. It is, therefore, difficult for any outsider to appreciate the strength of character and the endurance that comes with a genuine act of Faith. What would drive non-believers to despair, and would induce them to give-up and die, may be successfully resisted by a group of strongly religious believers. The elements of hope and faith strengthen their resolve far beyond the point of endurance that is based on a rational evaluation of the circumstances.

Indeed, seen from the point of view of viability, based on sheer strength of endurance, resistance to stress, and the ability to be self-righteously aggressive and ruthless against "evil enemies", there is no doubt, that, a religious belief is far more effective in the struggle for survival than a rational approach. Yet, it is remarkable, that, some of the more sophisticated religious belief structures, such as those of Christianity, also provide a strong "teaching" about the need to convert a combative impulse into an act of mercy, charity, sensitivity, forgivenness and cooperation with our adversaries.

Indeed, the psychological strength of Christianity may well lie, primarily, in the justification and fortification of a wide and contradictory range of human attitudes, which means, that we can find a legitimate Christian justification for a large variety of moods and attitudes we may happen to be in. Christianity may promote a high degree of martiality and combativeness, as well as a fanatic resistance and endurance, but, Christianity may also foster mercy and forgivenness; an attitude of reconciliation and rapprochement; the courage to start again, and to be humble.

However, the intellectual foundations for the Christian Faith are continuously being eroded by the findings and insights of the sciences, but, the remarkable conclusions of our scientific insights allow us, not only, to "psychologise" the behavioural attitudes and beliefs of the various religions, but, they allows us, also, to "psychologise" the imagery of the sciences themselves. The most remarkable feature of our scientific insights is, not so much, the fact, that we learn to explain religious behaviour in terms of psychological mechanisms of causes and their effects, but, the most remarkable aspect is the conclusion, that all scientific imagery is also a product of the living human mind, and, that every conscious awareness, the scientific imagery included, functions, in the final analysis, just like any other-belief structure, as a tool to help us find the most viable behavioural choices.

The scientific insights and reality perceptions allow us to function in an emotionally much more neutral sphere of behaviour, and, perhaps, the greatest importance, or innovation, of the philosophical and scientific belief-structures lies in the fact, that they allow strife and competition to be interpreted as normal manifestations of life. The challenges of our adversaries are, then, not anymore interpreted as "evil forces" which have to be destroyed at all costs, but, they are seen as a logical result of the nature of the living organisation. They are seen as a logical result of the undeniable fact, that, all life-forms, in particular, those with similar requirements, will, eventually, lock themselves into a position of competitive strife.

This relativistic and much milder and more manageable interpretation of the nature of strife, stress, conflict and adversity, may well turn-out to be the most significant contribution which a scientific and relativistic-philosophical reality perception can make to the problems of human survival.

.......

Summary

1. It is far more natural to be religious than to deny the existence of, or any knowledge about, a Superior Being.
   A brief review of the mechanisms of symbolic representation.
   Tricks that help us to remember.
   Belief-structures are "tricks" to help us grasp the realities we are confronted with.
   The function of "comprehension".
   When we have suddenly lost our "sense of familiarity".
   Mental and cerebral systems of classification.
   The feature of "predictability"; recognising an event on the basis of a "similar profile", and visualising its internal mechanisms.
   The "inner logic" of an event that can be analysed in terms of causes and their effects.
   Predictions are never completely accurate.
   Predicting variations in the course of an event, when some of the participating factors have changed.
   Deliberately manipulating and controling the causative factors of an event.
   A rapidly enlarging repertoir of symbolically representable awarenesses.
   Why we need to construct a framework of logical coherence.
   Visualising a state of "pre-symbolic conscious awareness".
   Differences between events and static conditions of existence.
   Three categories of events; those, that are obviously outside human control; those, that are "routine" and barely noticed, and those, that appear to fall within reach of our manipulative capabilities.
   
   
   
2. The awarenesses of early mankind.
   An emphasis on the evolution of principles, rather than detailed descriptions in the development of conscious awareness.
   Reconstructing a level of awareness from the way people lived.
   Spontaneous outbursts of mimicry, and their existential significance.
   The significance of the ability to engage in factual communications.
   Recalling "en bloc" a specific memory-trace.
   A constant struggle for survival.
   Verbalisable awareness arose as a result of existential and competitive pressures.
   The wide-ranging repertoir of symbolic recall.
   The "onto-genetic" repetition of a "phylo-genetic" history.
   A child grows-up in an environment with a "cultural pool" of verbalisable awarenesses.
   The importance of "secondary learning" mechanisms.
   Most of us appreciate, only much later, the significance of what we learned at school.
   The onto-genetic recapitulation gives only a short and fragmented view of the tortuous path of phylo-genetic developments.
   The evolution of broad and abstract awarenesses is a slow process.
   A variety of mechanisms of classification, including the orientation "for or against" the interests of an individual or a grouping.
   The beneficial or harmful intentions of "deities".
   Learning to "wait-out" adverse force-fields.
   The hunt, and its influence on the faculty of conscious awareness.
   Evolutionary success and rising population pressures.
   
   
   
3. The orientation of man's own activities.
   Time and again, man was reminded about the fragility of his existence.
   When the web of force-fields and the vagaries of fortune became more complex.
   Man became burdened by the awareness of an ever enlarging repertoir of potential disasters.
   Chronic anxieties.
   A vivid flow of mental images.
   The instinct of curiosity.
   The influence of naturally selective force-fields upon symbolically representable awarenesses.
   A variety of common themes in structures of belief.
   "Faulty" beliefs.
   A belief is "correct", or useful, when it contributes to viability.
   Beliefs will accentuate specific behaviour-patterns.
   The stress of dealing with accidents, sickness and death.
   The mechanisms of secondary social integration preceded the emergence of conceptual communications.
   Early man "found himself" existing in small, nomadic, socially integrated groupings.
   A portrait of the early human personality.
   Dominance shifted from an excercise in brute strength to intelligence and the ability to persuade.
   The cohesive influence of an attitude of "loyalty".
   An instinctive gratitude for good and beneficial natural leadership.
   Socially desirable attitudes.
   Concept formation should support beneficial and viable patterns of behaviour.
   Religious beliefs stengthen resolve and assist in managing stressful conditions.
   
   
   
4. Early man did not distinguish between the intellectual and behavioural functions of a belief-structure.
   The "afferent" or sensory side of a belief-structure.
   The behavioural, motoric, or "efferent" side of a belief-structure.
   The physiology of a behavioural response.
   The function of familiarity, and the ability to respond routinely.
   The "experimental stage", where we try-out a variety of hypothetical responses and evaluate their likely consequences.
   Conscious awareness is unthinkable without an effective system for the classification of sense impressions.
   The abstraction.
   We want to grasp reality in one "swoop of comprehension".
   The ability to "name" an item of awareness.
   Limitations associated with a "holistic" memory-recall.
   Experiencing a lack of control over the recalled imagery.
   To excercise a measure of control requires "elaborate work".
   The aspects of analytic, detail-adding techniques, and, synthetic, comprehension-increasing features, go hand in hand.
   The function of a coherent story of events.
   It is not easy to reconstruct the logic of early man's thinking because of large discrepancies in awareness-content between early man and ourselves.
   A belief can persist long after its relevance has declined, because of the factor of "authority" and a slovenly cultural transfer.
   A "satisfying" look at reality refers to the importance of intellectual as well as emotional mechanisms.
   The inevitability of a religious interpretation of our sense impressions, when reality is experienced without the help of sense-enlarging instruments.
   Macroscopic, meso-scopic and microscopic worlds of existence.
   The logical assumption that there are "willed forces" in the world of meso-scopic existence.
   The logic of seeing ourselves as part of some sort of hierarchical order of awareness and power.
   The logic of atonement and punishment for sinful behaviour.
   Finding useful correlations, interpreted as causes and their effects in a world of willed, anthropomorphic force-fields.
   Why it is difficult to understand the "reasons" for essentially randomly occurring variables, leading to natural disasters or adverse climatological changes.
   The emergence of far-fetched and counter-productive beliefs.
   Interpreting adversity and disaster as a result of random chance is a typically modern way of interpreting reality.
   We tend to over-utilise the explanation of "bad luck", and, we are inclined to deny our share of responsibility for the predicament we are in.
   We have to learn to carry, again, the burden of guilt.
   Belief-structures have to be able to solve the problems we face.
   
   
   
5. The act of "prayer".
   The attitudes of submission and placation.
   We experience a powerful psychological advantage, when we are able to acknowledge a sin or a mistake.
   How quickly should we make a fresh start?
   A variable balance-point between flexibility and tenacity.
   Astonishingly destructive behaviour-patterns, when people destroy in a short time what took the greater part of a life-time to build-up.
   The limited variability of behaviour in the small, tightly-knit communities of early man.
   Archeological evidence for structures of beliefs.
   The rituals of burial.
   An inter-twining of belief and behaviour.
   A poorly developed sense of individuality.
   Religious practices and beliefs, often, appear to have been inhuman, harsh and self-defeating.
   Religious beliefs and practices were harsh and uncompromising, just like life itself.
   When man began to live in much larger groupings.
   Rising population pressures.
   A brief review of what has been discussed.
   A viable belief must increase resilience and resistance to stress.
   
   
   
6. A giant leap through the early history of mankind.
   Social environments with a membership in the millions.
   Attempts to cope with our confusing times.
   The all-important period of transition during the change-over from a small-scale to a large-scale social unit.
   A lessening dominance of the genetic code.
   The evolution of multi-individual leadership.
   Task-divisions and specialisations in function.
   The world of the insect-colony.
   The road of behavioural flexibility.
   The "herd".
   Why the off-spring of behaviourally flexible animals is vulnerable.
   Members of a small, nomadic grouping are related to each other.
   The ability to tolerate each other at close quarters.
   The change from territoriality to hierarchical positioning.
   The main obstacles to the growth of a social grouping has always been the physical and psychological limitations of the participating members, and, especially, of the single leader.
   An overwhelming complexity of social events, leading to a loss of social transparence.
   The "split".
   Increasing population pressures, and rising demands for the continuous defense of a favourable territory.
   Pressures that encouraged a spurt of cultural evolution.
   The art of record-keeping.
   Principles of administration.
   Internal security.
   Regaining control over a large, essentially ungovernable social entity.
   The essential role of a code of justice.
   A greater control over environmental conditions.
   Profound and dramatic changes in life-style.
   When the leadership became increasingly complex and remote.
   A multitude of differing "cultural veneers", co-existing under the umbrella of a dominant structure of religious beliefs.
   The mechanisms of cultural cross-fertilisation.
   A burden upon the adaptability of beliefs.
   When the members fail to identify with the "society as a whole".
   Large societies remain volatile, potentially explosive conglomerates of people.
   
   
   
7. A look at ordinary people and their religious reality perceptions.
   Most of us receive contradictory signals.
   Influences from the family and the immediate social surroundings.
   Children are often subjected to different rules.
   Coping with disagreements amongst the adults.
   What is the purpose of a religious belief?
   When leisure activities become an important pass-time.
   A resurgence of egocentric and individualising trends.
   A sense of awe for the widespread manifestations of human existence.
   The importance of cultural roots.
   The world of "the career".
   We all find our niche, somewhere.
   The cycle of life.
   Fundamentalist religious reality perceptions find a fertile soil amongst people who are looking for simple solutions.
   The individual who has been widely exposed to a variety of beliefs, remains the exception.
   Strains upon a religious and cultural heritage; beneficial and harmful effects.
   Every belief has to be re-enforced, from time to time.
   
   
   
8. People, brought-up in a meso-scopic world, will easily interpret psychological behaviour-patterns in a religious light.
   An enormous gap in reality perceptions and interpretations.
   The religious "testimony".
   Mathematical "proofs" for Biblical interpretations?
   Stretching interpretations with the help of a "liberal" approach to the Scriptures.
   The "Gnostics".
   The scientific attitude and reality perception is essentially "a-gnostic" in nature.
   The concept of a relativistic reality perception.
   Religious and scientific beliefs depend on the factor of agreement.
   A bridge between religion and science.
   What happens, when we replace absolute beliefs with a slippery relativistic interpretation of reality.
   The mechanisms of "emotional investment".
   The ability to place one's burdens upon the Lord.
   The courage to fight with a complete reliance upon one's Faith in God.
   Powerful psychological adaptations.
   The mechanisms of Hope and Faith.
   The conversion from aggression to attitudes of humbleness and forgivenness.
   The wide psychological spectrum of Christian beliefs and attitudes.
   A gradual intellectual erosion of the Christian reality perception.
   A "milder" interpretation of the combative features of human behaviour with the help of scientific and relativistic reality perceptions.

.......