I think there is some missing context here that makes this an unfair comparison. In general, tribal cultures didnāt treat their creation myths as literal fact. It was more of a poetic way to explain to the children of the tribe where their people had come from and give the tribe a sense of identity. Since they didnāt have Science to actually explain how they got there, this seems as reasonable as anything honestly.
If someone from a different nation were to come visit and relate their account of creation, they wouldnāt argue with the person and insist that their creation myth was the ācorrectā one and that the visitor was wrong. They were a different people so it makes sense they were ācreatedā in a different way. Since neither was attempting to explain things in a literal way, the two different stories werenāt incompatible with each other.
Itās likely that the creation myths of the ancient Hebrew people were looked at in a similar way at first, they were a tribal people after all. At some point (likely to do with the Agricultural Revolution, but thatās a whole different topic) they started conquering and subjugating the neighboring tribes and insisting those people adopt their spiritual practice, thatās when the whole deal of insisting it was the literal truth came about.
In the bible Yahweh and the Hebrews spend a lot of time worrying about what āgodsā the other tribes worshiped. Much more so than would be rational if you considered Yahweh to be the one, true, only and actual God. The reason that so much time was spent on it was because Yahweh was just a story, just like all the other Gods and you had to go out of your way to get people to follow along with the narrative that that one story was ātrueā, otherwise who would believe it?
So while itās easy for us to look back on the beliefs of tribal cultures and dismiss them as stupid, we are misunderstanding the purpose and intent of these stories. Itās only āstupidā if you take it literally. In context it was a lot less dumb and probably somewhat necessary to a harmonious life.
We have the benefit of pretty much knowing exactly how humans and the world got here, so we were never in a situation of having one of our children come up to us and ask how we got here and only being able to answer with āI have no idea.ā That would have been the situation that tribal societies would have been in if you were expecting them to give a scientific answer to the question. So itās really not the case that their creation myths were āStupidā, but more it was the best system they could possibly have had at the time.
I see what youāre getting at, and I personally think thatās probably how a lot of the myths/religions start, but I donāt think you can outright say that tribes only thought of them as childrenās stories.
In the book I was referencing, the author noted the ācostā of a religion, in that the tribes were usually required to spend a significant amount of their time worshiping, and/or discarded resources in the name of sacrifice. One of the tribes studied spent 1 out of every 3 days worshiping. A very large commitment for people who have a very real risk of starvation if their hunts go badly. He then goes on to argue that there must be an evolutionary benefit to religion or an atheist tribe would have out-competed all of these tribes (but thatās another tangent). I bring this up because it implies that they do actually believe their āstoriesā, otherwise why risk starvation?
Thatās a good point, I worded it poorly. I didnāt mean to imply that the adults didnāt ābelieveā it and just told that to their children. I think that it was more the case that they believed in the spiritual truths behind the stories and not necessarily that they were literal, although I canāt say for certain that was the case in all instances. Maybe some of them did believe it literally or didnāt really make a distinction between spiritually true and literally true. Itās not like they had the scientific knowledge to know what the alternative was.
I think itās natural to try and explain the world around you, and if you donāt have the tools to know what is really going on- then yeah you will probably make some crazy guesses. And then if you tell it to your children as if it were fact, then they might not question it seeing as how you are a trusted elder.
I think my point though was that it really isnāt what I would call āstupidā to do something like create a silly myth and pass it on. For me where it becomes stupid is when you insist itās the literal truth and that other people believe it, or when you refuse to update your worldview in the case where better evidence comes along because you are a zealot about your mythology.
Yeah youāre right, I didnāt mean to imply that theyāre stupid. Itās stupid to us, but thatās only because weāre standing on the shoulders of giants.
I think there is some missing context here that makes this an unfair comparison. In general, tribal cultures didnāt treat their creation myths as literal fact. It was more of a poetic way to explain to the children of the tribe where their people had come from and give the tribe a sense of identity. Since they didnāt have Science to actually explain how they got there, this seems as reasonable as anything honestly.
If someone from a different nation were to come visit and relate their account of creation, they wouldnāt argue with the person and insist that their creation myth was the ācorrectā one and that the visitor was wrong. They were a different people so it makes sense they were ācreatedā in a different way. Since neither was attempting to explain things in a literal way, the two different stories werenāt incompatible with each other.
Itās likely that the creation myths of the ancient Hebrew people were looked at in a similar way at first, they were a tribal people after all. At some point (likely to do with the Agricultural Revolution, but thatās a whole different topic) they started conquering and subjugating the neighboring tribes and insisting those people adopt their spiritual practice, thatās when the whole deal of insisting it was the literal truth came about.
In the bible Yahweh and the Hebrews spend a lot of time worrying about what āgodsā the other tribes worshiped. Much more so than would be rational if you considered Yahweh to be the one, true, only and actual God. The reason that so much time was spent on it was because Yahweh was just a story, just like all the other Gods and you had to go out of your way to get people to follow along with the narrative that that one story was ātrueā, otherwise who would believe it?
So while itās easy for us to look back on the beliefs of tribal cultures and dismiss them as stupid, we are misunderstanding the purpose and intent of these stories. Itās only āstupidā if you take it literally. In context it was a lot less dumb and probably somewhat necessary to a harmonious life.
We have the benefit of pretty much knowing exactly how humans and the world got here, so we were never in a situation of having one of our children come up to us and ask how we got here and only being able to answer with āI have no idea.ā That would have been the situation that tribal societies would have been in if you were expecting them to give a scientific answer to the question. So itās really not the case that their creation myths were āStupidā, but more it was the best system they could possibly have had at the time.
I see what youāre getting at, and I personally think thatās probably how a lot of the myths/religions start, but I donāt think you can outright say that tribes only thought of them as childrenās stories.
In the book I was referencing, the author noted the ācostā of a religion, in that the tribes were usually required to spend a significant amount of their time worshiping, and/or discarded resources in the name of sacrifice. One of the tribes studied spent 1 out of every 3 days worshiping. A very large commitment for people who have a very real risk of starvation if their hunts go badly. He then goes on to argue that there must be an evolutionary benefit to religion or an atheist tribe would have out-competed all of these tribes (but thatās another tangent). I bring this up because it implies that they do actually believe their āstoriesā, otherwise why risk starvation?
Thatās a good point, I worded it poorly. I didnāt mean to imply that the adults didnāt ābelieveā it and just told that to their children. I think that it was more the case that they believed in the spiritual truths behind the stories and not necessarily that they were literal, although I canāt say for certain that was the case in all instances. Maybe some of them did believe it literally or didnāt really make a distinction between spiritually true and literally true. Itās not like they had the scientific knowledge to know what the alternative was.
I think itās natural to try and explain the world around you, and if you donāt have the tools to know what is really going on- then yeah you will probably make some crazy guesses. And then if you tell it to your children as if it were fact, then they might not question it seeing as how you are a trusted elder.
I think my point though was that it really isnāt what I would call āstupidā to do something like create a silly myth and pass it on. For me where it becomes stupid is when you insist itās the literal truth and that other people believe it, or when you refuse to update your worldview in the case where better evidence comes along because you are a zealot about your mythology.
Yeah youāre right, I didnāt mean to imply that theyāre stupid. Itās stupid to us, but thatās only because weāre standing on the shoulders of giants.