Biological Momentum vs rant

Biological momentum, could that be a suitable term for the force that drives biological life forward? The force behind evolution, growth, and even the desire to eat, aka appetite? Is the desire to eat/overeat a natural force just run amok in this time of excess entertainment, low human physical energy demand, high numbers of sitting/thinking/writing jobs. Jobs? Occupations? Endeavors?

stimulated from http://aaagnostica.org/2015/07/26/rewriting-the-12-steps-for-atheists/

When a new religion comes to town, people of old listened and heard a bit. They likely adopted a few of the memes that were loaded on their existing cultural belief system. It built up into what we see today.  This evolution by district demonstrates the differences we see in religions and cultures we see today. Consider Islam and its capacity to violence from the middle east, or Islam and female mutilation from middle Africa. The hatred for blacks in the US. The dislike of new immigrants and natives in Canada. It is the combination of culture and religion that is the resultant belief and behavioral system. Deletion of  parts of our existing belief system, or over writing are not so easy. We may even know that it is wrong  socially unacceptable, but yet we believe. 

I have known that religion, as it is currently, is man made. Man has adapted the prevailing culture by adding a few beliefs at a time since the beginning of agriculture at least. I take the concept that, in the beginning, god was used as surrogate for nature which they did not understand, and man therefore created god, but nature exists, along with all the laws of nature and forces. This is essentially the Spinoza final view but with my derivation.

Man created the 12 steps, and as such these steps point crudely to an underlying principal. Step one points, I think, to the fact that some things are within our power, and some are not. Within our power are our opinions, motivation, desires, aversions, beliefs; those things totally within our minds, and all else is outside of our direct control. We only have influence at best. Our development can start once we have a clear mental separation between ourselves and our environment. We are in the process of learning all of our lives. It is just what we are learning that is up for debate.

I think, therefore; that there is no need of a god, but at the same time we cannot deny nature. The scientific solution may then be to understand nature and follow what is reasonable. We also must understand that nature generates many false leads to produce the random trials that produce evolution. We with reason, can see when we are on a path that leads to self destruction of one form or another. We can then reasonable, choose to leave the self destruction and direct our efforts in better directions, but regardless of what happens, nature is in charge; of that there can be no doubt.

Faith, hope and charity are all just fine but these are distractions from actions, which can make a difference. We are all subject to the winds of nature; whether we consider these fate or the more positive providence. Positive Psychology is partly right at least.