Instinctive versus taught

[Jack]

I was thinking recently about those things we do instinctively as opposed to those things we can do only after being taught to do them, and what it may indicate about natural versus unnatural behaviors.

When babies are born, they can breath, hear, touch, eat (swallow) and defecate. They can even swim. They can see, but not very well at first, and certainly have no frame of reference to interpret what they are seeing. Without instruction, they are able to crawl once they get their arms and legs under control. They can also make noise.

But they cannot speak in a language, not until they are taught to do so. They cannot eat with implements until shown how. They can only use a bathroom once instructed how that works. They also do not instinctively pray or know of any god until taught about religion.

Instinctive behaviors are common to all animals. Taught behaviors such as spoken language and social activities are unique, for the most part, to humans. Instinctive behaviors are natural. Taught behaviors are unnatural.

This is why I don't believe that religion is a natural state for humans. It is not instinctive. If god were a fact of life like breathing or eating, babies would pray and worship god without having to be told how to do that.

Belief in god(s) is a learned behavior, and as such is on a par with driving a car or speaking French. You must learn about it before you can do it, and once you can do it, it remains an option for living, not an essential activity for life.

I know the christians and other theists won't agree with this, but what do you other free-thinkers believe? Am I being reasonable in my assessment, or am I way off base?

[Jimmy the Pro]

This is why I don't believe that religion is a natural state for humans. It is not instinctive. If god were a fact of life like breathing or eating, babies would pray and worship god without having to be told how to do that.

Belief in god(s) is a learned behavior, and as such is on a par with driving a car or speaking French. You must learn about it before you can do it, and once you can do it, it remains an option for living, not an essential activity for life.

No, but we always find man, who is most content, longing for something else, something that worldly powers don't give him. The most man on Earth, if nothing to believe in, could be the lonliest and saddest man on Earth.

One of our instincts is the Inclination to Acceptance. To some, it only extends to the acceptance of others, however, for some, it goes to a higher need for exceptance, an exceptance of a Spritual being. God

[Clarence]

I was thinking recently about those things we do instinctively as opposed to those things we can do only after being taught to do them, and what it may indicate about natural versus unnatural behaviors.

When babies are born, they can breath, hear, touch, eat (swallow) and defecate. They can even swim. They can see, but not very well at first, and certainly have no frame of reference to interpret what they are seeing. Without instruction, they are able to crawl once they get their arms and legs under control. They can also make noise.

But they cannot speak in a language, not until they are taught to do so. They cannot eat with implements until shown how. They can only use a bathroom once instructed how that works.

I agree with all this, as if it were that elusive thing called fact. This is fact.

They also do not instinctively pray or know of any god until taught about religion.

I agree that religion is learned but I'm not certain that spirituality isn't instinctive to most. Maybe because there are so many religious folk, many people have the opportunity to be religious and people need (?) to have an answer to the big questions, I'm sure you know.But if it is something that has to be learned, where did the idea start?

This is why I don't believe that religion is a natural state for humans. It is not instinctive. If god were a fact of life like breathing or eating, babies would pray and worship god without having to be told how to do that.

Religion tends to make God look bad to people who've had to accept that there is nothing. It does feel very unatural IMO to go to church. My Great Grandma died in 1997 when I was 17, and she was born in 1900. They say she always was skeptical of church in private and only when asked. But she also was known to be very religious in private. She believed that organized religion was kinda unnatural, you see. Her and my great grandfather were successful farmers not looneys I don't think. Maybe just simple. I think humans need to become less dependent of God or he's gonna get pissed or something. You know, just act right. calm down quit doing outrageous things to eachother and our environment. Lord, if you're out there, um please let people who see peace and compromise live long in your world and let us sleep when we die.

Belief in god(s) is a learned behavior, and as such is on a par with driving a car or speaking French. You must learn about it before you can do it, and once you can do it, it remains an option for living, not an essential activity for life.

I think god wishes that everyone would do the right thing without fear of punishment. Kinda like worship. When you're very young, mom and dad are kinda like gods to your little world. It is not acceptable to continue to do bad things as long as you kiss ass one day a week. Most parents can tell when thier kids are sucking up. What else is Sunday for? Not to be a cynic. But if there is a god, and I knew it, it would make things a lot clearer. Not.

I know the christians and other theists won't agree with this, but what do you other free-thinkers believe? Am I being reasonable in my assessment, or am I way off base?

I think religion really turns certain types of people off. It's not the ideals of religion that bother me. It's the actions of religious organizations throughout history that turn me off. That's all religion is, organized ideals.IMO Not to be a cynic cuz the ten commandments are as sacred to me as the constitution, God or no God.

Are we born with any social instincts?

[underbear1]

Along with instinct there may be some sort of race memory, transmitted. Infants will resond with fear to the image of a snake or even a serpentine shape, even if they have never seen this image, or seen an adult respond fearfully to this image.I think you are right Isherwood, belief in a higher being is a learned response. Nothing in the primitive brain says fight, flight, or pray.

[SoccerfreakAB2]

I know the christians and other theists won't agree with this, but what do you other free-thinkers believe? Am I being reasonable in my assessment, or am I way off base?

Spirituality itself is not instinctive, however, the desires of man to thirst for more power will eventually lead to spirituality. We want to know more--God provides all the information. We want to feel secure and consolidate our knowledge--God provides security. We want to be happy--God gives loves us and omnipotently wishes to make us so. We fear death--God gives us heaven.

Ish, is it really a huge wonder that man created religion for personal satisfaction? Instinctive? Entirely, but completely unnecessary...

[underbear1]

I can't say all the ten commandments are sacred to me, the honor thy parents seems like it should be conditional that they aren't addicts that beat and rape you.
Most major religions do have some form of the golden rule within their teaching, "do onto others as you'd have others do to you", and any path that gets someone there, is cool with me.I personally subscribe to a higher power{as I understand that},(that last part was added by a queer friend of Bill in the inner circle of people that started AA, Alanon), because he knew too many gays/lesbians had been beaten up with certain faiths to ever trust some God-figure to regain their sobriety.So my Higher Power doesn't need to be like anyone else's concept, and their's doesn't need to be anything like mine.

[Osborn F Enready]

I agree Isherwood.

[Agur]

Instinctive behaviors are common to all animals. Taught behaviors such as spoken language and social activities are unique, for the most part, to humans. Instinctive behaviors are natural. Taught behaviors are unnatural.

What are you trying to say? "Unnatural" = "taught" sounds like a most strange definition to me. Even animals do teach their offspring to hunt, don't they? Is that unnatural too?

They also do not instinctively pray or know of any god until taught about religion.

You can't know this for sure. True, they don't know about Jesus until taught about him, but it is incorrect to dismiss the existence of religious needs because of this. If there really is no instinctive religious longing, how can you explain that virtually every culture in the world have their deities to which they make offerings of prayer and sacrifice?

This is why I believe that religion is a natural state for humans. It is instinctive. Religion is a necessity of life like breathing or eating, and people all over the world pray and worship without having to be told.


.

[Milton Bradley]

Nothing in the primitive brain says fight, flight, or pray.

There is a quotable quote, "fight, flight, or pray".


Everyboby likes more options, right?


That could be bumper sticker material in my opinion.

[Roberto]

What are you trying to say? "Unnatural" = "taught" sounds like a most strange definition to me. Even animals do teach their offspring to hunt, don't they? Is that unnatural too?
.

Yes, he went out on a limb a bit there. Many aspects of animals’ behaviour is learned. Social structure and behavioural norms are learned in many species. Apes, monkeys, wolves etc.

We can’t be sure, but there is no evidence that animals do recognise a higher spirit, god or whatever you want to call it. This may come from animals’ limited abilities with symbolic objects. I have read studies where, for example, a chimp becomes melancholy when reminded of a dear deceased friend/mate. This ape is symbolising the dead ape in her head, but is she entering a spiritual plane? Or is it an egotistical emptiness?

[Athena]

There is evidence that what people believe is so of a Creator or God being, depends on their environment. Wherever life was easy, people imagined a god or goddess or several gods and goddesses, taking care of the universe that benefits humans. The degree that these supernatural beings care about humans varies. The place of humans in relation to the rest of creation varies. Not all people have imagined themselves to be special to a God, at least not more special than the rest of Creation.

Spirituality is another matter. A spirit is not exactly a god. My spirits can be up or down, happy or depressed. So for the spirit of a river and plants and other animals. To be spiritual is to believe in a spiritual reality.

Christianity has a problem with spiriturality. A big problem with spirituality. It is such a problem I don't even know how to tackle it. What is the Holy Ghost if not a spirit? But on the other hand Christianity took a stand against the superstitioun of spirituality and paganism which is very spiritual. Yet Christianity carries a belief in demons and what are demons if not supernatural spirits?

The Christian concept of demons comes from the desert where people can actually see the demons and other wierd stuff like mirages that disappear when a person gets close, like the end of rainbow disappears as we near it.

However, around the area of Tibet where the environment is very harsh and there is not enough farm land for farming so people lived by hunting, people imagined God to be a fearsome sky God, who just assume kill the pathetic creatures we call humans. Genghis Khan thought the idea of there being a caring God who cares about humans, was the most ridulous idea he ever heard. He loved playing with this belief in a God. He would order a city to pay tribute and if the city refused, he sent back a note saying, "Let God's will God be done" and he would wipe the entire city off the face of earth. That seems to be pretty strong evidence to me that this caring God does not save people from their enemies or natural disasters. But to the Christians the mongols were God's way of punishing them for their sins, making them even more defenseless against the Mongols who were not defeated until the third generation of Mongol rule across Europe and China.

What we find believable, depends on our environment, including if our bellies are full or not.
It also depends on personalities and general feeling of well being or threat. I am fortune. I just have a sense that whatever God may be, God loves me. God loves me as mother loves a child. Guys don't seem to like it when I say, fathers tend to have a different kind of love, and tend to expect their children to earn their love, rather to loving them unconditionally. Civilization wouldn't have advanced if it had not been for Goddess cultures developing the arts, and the God cultures devoloping technology. The goddess creates and provides. The gods discipline.

[pubmanager]

But they cannot speak in a language, not until they are taught to do so. They cannot eat with implements until shown how. They can only use a bathroom once instructed how that works. They also do not instinctively pray or know of any god until taught about religion.

Instinctive behaviors are common to all animals. Taught behaviors such as spoken language and social activities are unique, for the most part, to humans. Instinctive behaviors are natural. Taught behaviors are unnatural.

Whilst I broadly agree with the sentiment of your post, I'm not sure that I am able to agree with the point that all taught behaviours are unnatural.

It is natural for Lions to hunt?

I believe that it is and that their ability to hunt and kill is instinctive and so by the logic of your post, natural.

However, lions are taught to hunt and how to hunt through socialisation by the pride. They need to develope their skills and abilities, they are taught through the actions of others. So this need for education and tuition to become an effective hunter would be unnatural, by the definition we are taking (I think?).

The ability to hunt is innate and instintive as a means of survival, but the skills must be taught and developed before a level of profficiency is reached.

Also historically human cultures and societies have always sought to rationalise natural events through ascribing power to a higher source. Nomadic societies tended to have many gods responsible for different aspects of nature/life, a god of earth, moon goddesses, war gods, water gods, sun gods, fertility gods etc and then as these nomadic peoples settled in permanent residences and developed farming techniques, less at the whim of natural forces and built towns etc mono-theism started to become more prevelent.

Is it instinctive for humans to seek to understand their world and explain the events they see, to look for meaning, to bring order to chaos? Is science just a developement of theism ,another way to explain the happenings of the world? Eventually, as in religion, we are told that science will give us the answers, if we have faith in science and the scientifc method we will understand more as time passes, if we have faith in a monotheistic god, he has all the answers and will pass on this knowledge only as he decrees neccessary by his infinite wisdom.

Is a search for understanding instinctive and natural in itself or are we taught to look beyond the physical senses for our explanations?