It is beyond doubt that societal and cultural norms associated with ritual, practice, accepted norms etc have been instrumental in the development of human societies. This is largely because human babies/children take so long to develop and there is a need to create a safe space around then to allow them to learn and develop the skills necessary for survival. If humans popped out and had adult-like attributes within months (as is the case for many other species) then I doubt these societal norms would have been necessary or would have developed.
However I think we need to consider what exactly is meant by religion - it is clearly a subset of complex societal structures, with (I guess) the key element being some reference to the supernatural. So I guess the question is whether this overlay which turns a complex societal structure into a complex religious societal structure is necessary. As you've accepted the earliest structures did not appear to have this religious overlay, and you also seem to think that in the future we might have very complex societal structures but without religious overlay.
So the question is whether this religious overlay (linked to the supernatural) was necessary for the development of human societies from about 10,000 years ago to now or whether it was incidental. There is certainly some strong evidence that many ancient civilisations had a strong atheist element to them, such that belief or otherwise in gods wasn't really an important aspect holding those societies together.
https://www.cam.ac.uk/research/news/disbelieve-it-or-not-ancient-history-suggests-that-atheism-is-as-natural-to-humans-as-religion#
I am not arguing for theism or atheism. I am merely saying that religions have been successful in uniting large groups of people across all differences and have also been responsible for the civilized values that we today believe in.
I don't think atheism by itself has produced any sense of kinship among divergent groups across the world or produced any shared set of values.
Recent Posts