"But to do is to surely make a superstition out of materiality, one which forbids understanding the creative power of the individual."

nope, Amos.."surely" is excessive. I tend towards material explanations, but always examine them, just as I do 'spiritual' ones. I see creative power in many individuals without, I hope, any presumptions regarding where it comes from. Being able to meaningfully use a phrase like "creative power" does not automatically endow it with some alternate form of existence.


"...the purely materialist school of thought leaves precious little room for any ethics except profit, and justifies war at will, random destruction, and mud."

Well, any Kantian would severely disagree with you...there are various ways ethics can be defended and applied, working from logical principles. As to justifying war and random destruction, seems to me the 'spiritually' based systems manage that quite well also. I was not aware mud NEEDED justification...*grin*

as to the original question, it is perhaps not framed correctly, as "we" all seem to "need" different things.
It is not hard to explain (no matter what the 'truth' is) why humans could not have avoided developing religion, and we have only been able to seriously consider alternatives for a relatively short period.

If Mudcat endures for 300-400 years, perhaps scholars researching these threads will wonder why we needed to debate it at all.