[I would qualify the statement on the right by adding that it is the depth to which you identify yourself primarily and solely with your particular beliefs, culture, race or nation, that is the depth by which you separate yourself from all that you share with the rest of humanity.]
On the topic of religion and violence, one cannot help but notice how religions piggy back on the horrors of war to both strengthen themselves and grow, or to strengthen the soldierʼs resolve, which usually makes wars last longer and grow bloodier. That includes when the cause of war is not religious. See for instance, The Civil War as a Theological Crisis by Evangelical Christian and historian of Christianity, Mark Noll. Or see what religion made of World War I. Religion made out like a bandit in that war, emphasizing it as the beginning of the worldʼs final judgment, even piggybacking on apocalyptic wartime fears to help the Pentecostal faith grow, see The Great and Holy War: How World War I Became a Religious Crusade (received Christianity Todayʼs Book Award of Merit for 2015).
Second, scholars who claim religion has little to do with violence define “religious wars” in an extremely narrow fashion, as if they could only be deemed religious wars if Martin Luther and the pope literally led the troops themselves and they were fighting solely over the meaning and practice of the Lordʼs Supper. But in reality religion is interwoven into culture, society and governance and has been implicated in many tragic events for centuries, helping to heighten tensions and divisions not only between theologians, but between kings and kingdoms, and energized troops to fight and kill with greater ferocity and more firmly reject talk of compromise. See the hyperlinks to parts 1. to 5. of Things Christians Have Been Against to understand the scope of religion-related animosity throughout history.
Also, fighting over land and the extension of oneʼs kingdom (as well as cases of colonization of foreign lands) were related to spreading the religious beliefs of oneʼs kingdom, literally, back then. By the same token, to spread questions or heretical views of Christianity in such kingdoms was labeled not only a crime against God but also equated with treason and sedition. The idea that heretics must be persecuted was the rule for fourteen hundred or more years in European Christian society, defended by the papacy as well as the Reformers, Luther and Calvin, etc. (I also have posts on why that was so, biblically speaking.)
On the other hand one must not focus solely on religionʼs role in promoting divisiveness and violence, because mass movements also arise that are not strictly religious but resemble religionʼs claims and its ability to inspire devotion to a cause. Such mass movements arise in politics (progressive/liberal vs. conservative, unions vs labor, eco-warriors vs industrialists, etc.). Pride in oneʼs nation can become religion-like, so can pride in oneʼs heritage or race. And such movements can be coupled with claims that they are the best or only way. Sometimes such movements even promise a heavenly paradise on earth, be it a ‘workerʼs paradise’ or a ‘land of Aryan supremacy,’ or a world of Japanese supremacy, and like religion they often rely on scapegoats—‘outsiders’ ‘heretics’ to blame for why things arenʼt going the ‘right’ way (something religions also do) which helps unite and energize members of such movements via shared fears/hatreds. Such scapegoats have included in religion, Satan, while in other mass movments, ‘the Jews,’ ‘the Bolsheviks,‘ ‘the bourgeoisie,’ ‘the running dogs and paper dragons of the West.’ See Eric Hofferʼs classic study of the psychological traits shared by people attracted to enthusiastic mass movements, be they Christian, Muslim, fascist or communist.
Religious, political, nationalistic, racist mass movements, especially those employing generalized scapegoats and drawing sharp distinctions between ‘us’ and ‘them’ most certainly contribute to animosities and violence. Religion of that sort also elevates cases of disagreement to celestially high levels whereby neither side can compromise because eternity is at stake.
Chimps Are Naturally Violent, Study Suggests
ReplyDelete"...For years, anthropologists have watched wild chimpanzees "go ape" and attack each other in coordinated assaults. But until now, scientists were unsure whether interactions with humans had brought on this violent behavior or if it was part of the apes' basic nature.
A new, 54-year study suggests this coordinated aggression is innate to chimpanzees, and is not linked to human interference.
"Violence is a natural part of life for chimpanzees," Michael Wilson, the study's lead researcher and an associate professor of anthropology at the University of Minnesota in Minneapolis, told Live Science in an email. "They don't need to be fed bananas to kill each other."
As one of humanity's closest living relatives, chimps can shed light on the evolution of people, such as when humans adopted warlike behaviors, Wilson said.
"Studies of chimpanzee violence have been especially influential in how people think about the origins of human warfare," Wilson explained. "Some people have argued that human warfare is a recent cultural invention, the result of some other recent development such as the origin of agriculture."
But observations of chimpanzees by legendary primatologist Jane Goodall and other researchers challenged the idea that warfare is a modern human development. After all, humans and chimpanzees are the only two species in the world known to attack each other in organized onslaughts. Perhaps this behavior originated with a common ancestor some 5 to 7 million years ago, Wilson said.
Yet other scientists counter that human intrusions are to blame for the chimps' coordinated, lethal aggression. As populations in Africa grow, people are infringing on chimpanzee habitats. Loggers cut down forests; farmers clear land for crops, and hunters kill chimps for food.
"People have argued that these increasing human impacts could also be putting more pressure on chimpanzee populations, leading to more chimpanzee violence," Wilson said.
He and his colleagues collaborated with researchers who are studying chimpanzees and bonobos, another ape that shares a common ancestor with humans. In all, the scientists collected data on 18 chimpanzee groups and four bonobo groups living in Africa.
The chimpanzees exhibited 152 killings, including 58 that the scientists observed, 41 that were inferred and 53 suspected killings in 15 communities, the researchers said. The bonobos had one suspected killing, the researchers said. The different acts of violence did not depend on human impacts, Wilson said.
Instead, attacks were more common at sites with many males and high population densities. Also, chimpanzees in East Africa killed more frequently than did chimps in West Africa, the study found.
Unsurprisingly, the bonobos showed little violence. "We didn't find any definite cases of killing by bonobos, though there was one case of a male bonobo who was severely attacked by members of his own group and never seen again," Wilson said.
http://www.livescience.com/47885-chimpanzee-aggression-evolution.html
Perhaps we should be asking, ‘Are Chimps Religious?’
ReplyDeleteThere is this case.
ReplyDeleteBurning Man: the Documentary
“The tailor, King, owns the Custom Clothing and Accessories shop. Every year he, along with his Chimp, religiously makes his way to the The Burning Man Festival, a week-long festival that is held at Playa in Black Rock City in Nevada. For a week, this stretch of desert turns into a city that is dedicated to community, art and self-expression. The festival has a carnival-like atmosphere and ends with the burning of an effigy.”
https://burners.me/2013/01/22/burning-man-the-documentary/
Poor chimp getting proselytized into the hippie lifestyle.