-side note: did you know that out of all the ape species only one is classified as a lesser ape while all others are in the great ape family? Poor, gibbons, the outcast of the ape family
Learned something new today! Didnt know about the Gibbons, odd species then, poor them :(
The book I included, caused some response from the press in NL, relating religion and atheism with the bonobo and humans, many media was against such comparison, but Frank De Waal basically states: "Religion is not required to drive respect for others, Look at the Bonobo".
I have been following this research for a very long time. Humans are primates and share very nearly all the same DNA as the rest of the taxonomic family.
Since we have (or at least the opportunity to have) even greater development of the tools of rationality in our brains, it is clear we are even more capable of deciding which aspects of our biological heritage to accept, which to embrace, and which to firmly control- but this is KNOWN now, or should be, by everyone; throughout most of history, this was not the case- but it's the saints and sages (and the great teachers and philosophers) who understood this in an indirect way and taught those who would listen. Prior to the advent and spread of empirical science throughout most of the cultures of the world, religion has been the ONLY systematic tool to educate entire societies, like it or not.
Another issue that never gets addressed is that science is not easy, and therefore teaching it properly is not easy. Primates, ALL primates, will seek the easiest method- and since I am certain de Waal does not have the methods to communicate with bonobos in any sophisticated way to determine any such thing, his claim they do not have any church shows his shallow understanding of religion (of course they don't have any such buildings, as they don't BUILD structures at all), and he has no clue whether they have anything that could fit the description and/or function of philosophy.
I would not be at all surprised if any or all higher primates have SOMETHING in their minds (and they indubitably have minds, based on their behavior) that approximates some meta-reasoning that could be called philosophy or religion. I'm not claiming that, simply hypothesizing. This should be falsifiable in a relatively straightforward manner.
Thanks for your extensive feedback. Your views were more or less the same as lot of media and journalist went on stating about the statement of De Waal. What I understood from the in-depth interview with De Waal last Sunday is that he wanted to make a strong statement to get more of the scientific community and also the mass to understand humans are not only very close to the chimpanzee but also to the bonobo. Apparently, not so many scientist look at the bonobo at all. And interestingly the bonobo has very human like behaviours, but in manu aspect the opposite of the chimpanzee. The bonobo combined with the chimpanzee seem to gives many of the basic behaviours of humans. Now, making a statement like De Waal did, is controversial, but that caused media attention and that resulted in more awareness of the Bonobo. De Waal seemed to me a very rational person, during the entire 3 hours interview I saw. And he likes the bonobo as other species that have similar behaviours like the bonobo. Religion, well that is indeed not about buildings are other physical things. But to me, religion is something to believe in but not question the things that cannot be explained, However I do realise that religion gave the basic rules for society, those rules are generally the first so many basic laws we have. So although I understand religion was fundamental for larger societies to be able to exist and function, I personally am not religious at all since I dont like the unexplainable to just take it as it is). Up to some point, you could argue Science also to be a form of religion, since in science many assumption are made. However science is much more dynamic then any religion on earth, meaning, science is always looking for answers, and while finding those answers, we realise some assumptions are wrong, science is removing those assumptions and making new ones. That is what I like of science, it is not based on some more or less fixed believe but dynamic by nature.
This is quite an interesting topic. I've always been curious about monkeys in general and I have my own ideas about religion. About a year ago, I met some people who practice a relatively new faith called Bahai. It seems they are seekers of truth and are willing to accept new interpretations of religious writings. This would be consistent with the scientists changing their opinions as new evidence or theories are presented. I was pleasantly surprised when I suggested my own interpretations and instead of defending ancient dogma, they welcomed my opinions. It is refreshing to find people who are willing to actually think about possibilities rather than sticking blindly to what they have been told to believe.
Bahai sounds like an interesting religion than. In Rome they also changed their opinions but generally only after wars and 10s to 100s of years, from the earth is the center of the universe and the, to: maybe the big bang is correct, god created the big bang and with that all what is in the universe. But a religion like Bahia seems to be the mor openminded approach to religion and what can be proven beyond a reasonable doubt.
I feel every day like a monkey
Nice One! :)
thanks :)
interesting read @edje!
-side note: did you know that out of all the ape species only one is classified as a lesser ape while all others are in the great ape family? Poor, gibbons, the outcast of the ape family
Learned something new today! Didnt know about the Gibbons, odd species then, poor them :(
The book I included, caused some response from the press in NL, relating religion and atheism with the bonobo and humans, many media was against such comparison, but Frank De Waal basically states: "Religion is not required to drive respect for others, Look at the Bonobo".
I have been following this research for a very long time. Humans are primates and share very nearly all the same DNA as the rest of the taxonomic family.
Since we have (or at least the opportunity to have) even greater development of the tools of rationality in our brains, it is clear we are even more capable of deciding which aspects of our biological heritage to accept, which to embrace, and which to firmly control- but this is KNOWN now, or should be, by everyone; throughout most of history, this was not the case- but it's the saints and sages (and the great teachers and philosophers) who understood this in an indirect way and taught those who would listen. Prior to the advent and spread of empirical science throughout most of the cultures of the world, religion has been the ONLY systematic tool to educate entire societies, like it or not.
Another issue that never gets addressed is that science is not easy, and therefore teaching it properly is not easy. Primates, ALL primates, will seek the easiest method- and since I am certain de Waal does not have the methods to communicate with bonobos in any sophisticated way to determine any such thing, his claim they do not have any church shows his shallow understanding of religion (of course they don't have any such buildings, as they don't BUILD structures at all), and he has no clue whether they have anything that could fit the description and/or function of philosophy.
I would not be at all surprised if any or all higher primates have SOMETHING in their minds (and they indubitably have minds, based on their behavior) that approximates some meta-reasoning that could be called philosophy or religion. I'm not claiming that, simply hypothesizing. This should be falsifiable in a relatively straightforward manner.
Thanks for your extensive feedback. Your views were more or less the same as lot of media and journalist went on stating about the statement of De Waal. What I understood from the in-depth interview with De Waal last Sunday is that he wanted to make a strong statement to get more of the scientific community and also the mass to understand humans are not only very close to the chimpanzee but also to the bonobo. Apparently, not so many scientist look at the bonobo at all. And interestingly the bonobo has very human like behaviours, but in manu aspect the opposite of the chimpanzee. The bonobo combined with the chimpanzee seem to gives many of the basic behaviours of humans. Now, making a statement like De Waal did, is controversial, but that caused media attention and that resulted in more awareness of the Bonobo. De Waal seemed to me a very rational person, during the entire 3 hours interview I saw. And he likes the bonobo as other species that have similar behaviours like the bonobo. Religion, well that is indeed not about buildings are other physical things. But to me, religion is something to believe in but not question the things that cannot be explained, However I do realise that religion gave the basic rules for society, those rules are generally the first so many basic laws we have. So although I understand religion was fundamental for larger societies to be able to exist and function, I personally am not religious at all since I dont like the unexplainable to just take it as it is). Up to some point, you could argue Science also to be a form of religion, since in science many assumption are made. However science is much more dynamic then any religion on earth, meaning, science is always looking for answers, and while finding those answers, we realise some assumptions are wrong, science is removing those assumptions and making new ones. That is what I like of science, it is not based on some more or less fixed believe but dynamic by nature.
This is quite an interesting topic. I've always been curious about monkeys in general and I have my own ideas about religion. About a year ago, I met some people who practice a relatively new faith called Bahai. It seems they are seekers of truth and are willing to accept new interpretations of religious writings. This would be consistent with the scientists changing their opinions as new evidence or theories are presented. I was pleasantly surprised when I suggested my own interpretations and instead of defending ancient dogma, they welcomed my opinions. It is refreshing to find people who are willing to actually think about possibilities rather than sticking blindly to what they have been told to believe.
Bahai sounds like an interesting religion than. In Rome they also changed their opinions but generally only after wars and 10s to 100s of years, from the earth is the center of the universe and the, to: maybe the big bang is correct, god created the big bang and with that all what is in the universe. But a religion like Bahia seems to be the mor openminded approach to religion and what can be proven beyond a reasonable doubt.
nice thank u for sharing
I'm a human, not a monkey.
Nobody said otherwise