You are confusing the thing with the category of the thing.
Religion the category is only a few hundred years old. The things that fall under that category go back at least as far as Neanderthal times.
Religion the category is only a few hundred years old. The things that fall under that category go back at least as far as Neanderthal times.
Casadio details it going back thousands of years across cultures.[2]
[1] https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/concept-religion/index.ht...
[2] https://api.pageplace.de/preview/DT0400.9780191045882_A29773...
the fact that _now_, we have independent traditions referred to by those terms, and so categorize the ancient practices under "religion" is quite confusing, and it may be productive to make the distinction clear.
for a modern example, suppose we build a skyscraper in such a way that it lines up with, or reflects the setting sun on the solstice. we would regard this as "architecture", not "religion". i would be quite offended if, some thousand years from now, the aesthetic decision is dismissed as primitive superstition.
Why? I can't imagine being offended if people today, ignorant of the true motivations, dismissed it as primitive superstition, let alone a thousand years from now when I'm long dead.
did the use of the word "offended" trigger this comment? fine, then i would not take offense. my point is this:
i prefer to be remembered by a future that feels it can learn something from the past. it would be sad to me to find out that the people of tomorrow do not regard my contributions.