How Are Religious Systems Ultimately Adaptive?
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1558/jcsr.24118Keywords:
religions, religious cognition, Religious rituals, Sexual SelectionAbstract
In their new book, Religion Evolving: Cultural, Cognitive, and Ecological Dynamics, B. G. Purzycki and R. Sosis (2022) argue that religions should be viewed as adaptive systems not just by-products of cognitive capacities that evolved for other purposes. In this essay, I argue that they are correct that the types of religious systems that are widespread across cultures and eras (i.e., “world religions”) have been selected for because they help individuals to solve adaptive problems. However, I disagree with their claim that this fact proves the by-product camp wrong. Rather, I argue, religious systems that are successful are both cognitively catchy and provide adaptive benefits. It is not either/or, it is both/and. Further, I argue that to be truly adaptive, religious systems must accomplish the ultimate evolutionary goal of genetic replication by sexual reproduction and not just the proximate goal of pro-sociality or group cohesion.
References
Barrett, J. (1999). Theological correctness: Cognitive constraint and the study of religion. Method & Theory in the Study of Religion, 11(4), 325–339. http://www.jstor.org/stable/23555537
Boyer, P. (1994). The naturalness of religious ideas: A cognitive theory of religion. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Buss, D. (2016). The evolution of desire: Strategies of human mating. 4th ed. New York: Basic Books.
Dawkins, R. (1982). The extended phenotype: The gene as the unit of selection. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Guthrie, S. (1993). Faces in the clouds: A new theory of religion. New York: Oxford University Press.
Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking fast and slow. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
Krakauer, J. (2003). Under the banner of heaven: A story of violent faith. New York: Doubleday Press.
Lawson, E. T., & McCauley, R. N. (1990). Rethinking religion: Connecting cognition and culture. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
McCauley, R. N., & Lawson, E. T. (2004). Bringing ritual to mind: Psychological foundations of cultural forms. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Norenzayan, A. (2013). Big gods: How religion transformed cooperation and conflict. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Purzycki, B. G., & Sosis, R. (2022). Religion evolving: Cultural, cognitive, and ecological dynamics. Sheffield: Equinox Publishing Ltd.
Ridley, M. (2003). The red queen: Sex and the evolution of human nature. 2nd Edition. New York: Harper Perennial.
Slone, D. J. (2004). Theological incorrectness: Why religious people believe what they shouldn’t. New York: Oxford University Press.
———. (2008). The attraction of religion: A sexual selectionist account. In J. Bulbulia, R. Sosis, E. Harris, R. Genet, C. Genet, K. Wyman (Eds.). The evolution of religion: Studies, theories, and critiques, pp. 181–187. Santa Margarita: The Collins Foundation Press.
Slone, D. J., & Van Slyke, J. (Eds.). (2015). The attraction of religion: A new evolutionary psychology of religion. London: Bloomsbury Academic.
Whitehouse, H. (1995). Inside the cult: Religious innovation and transmission in Papua New Guinea. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Xygalatas, D. (2022). Ritual: How seemingly senseless actions make life worth living. New York: Little, Brown Spark.
Xygalatas, D., Mano, P., Kundt, R., & Kundtová-Klocová, E. (2022). Religion as a signal of mate quality. Current Research in Ecological and Social Psychology, 3, 100048. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cresp.2022.100048
Published
Issue
Section
License
Equinox Publishing Ltd.
