Sign in

Author of Darwin’s Apple: The Evolutionary Biology of Religion, a new take on the function and purpose of religion.
Photo by Ben White on Unsplash

Placebo effect is one reason beliefs, religious and otherwise, improve health.

For several decades studies have purportedly shown that religiousness enhances health. The studies that purport this have various methodological shortcomings, one of which is that there are so many ways to define and describe religion that it’s extremely difficult to say what characteristics of religion, if any, contribute to possible health benefits. In addition, studies that have claimed health improvements for religious people rarely concern themselves with who the non-religious are and if anything that secular people do or believe might impact their health positively or negatively.

Some recent health survey studies have begun including these non-religious groups and, in…

Photo by Jon Tyson on Unsplash

Is non-religiosity a health liability? Not so fast.

A slew of academic research in recent decades posits that adherence to religion is good for your health. Various studies have concluded that religious people are healthier on average and that religion is a coping mechanism for dealing with physiological and psychological conditions. Researchers have found that religious individuals show improved outcomes on a variety of pathologies including cancer, HIV/AIDS, depression, Alzheimers, and recovery from surgery.

This topic got a big visibility boost when Harold G. Koenig, M.D., director of the Center for the Study of Religion/Spirituality and Health at Duke University and author of The Healing Power of Faith

Photo by Jametlene Reskp on Unsplash

Death anxiety and its ilk are popular but insufficient reasons to account for religious behavior.

Thanks to @Lawrence Bloom for clarifying the need to write this essay.

Academics in the cognitive science of religion (CSR) have proposed various theories to account for why humans engage in religious practices. A particular set of CSR theories presents religion as providing defensive schemes for confronting life’s adversities. There are several variations.

  • terror management theory
  • hazard-precaution systems
  • hyperactive agency detection device

All three describe psychological mechanisms to salve cognitive conflicts, whether internally generated or external, and all are reasonable interpretations of human behaviors. Their faults lie in their efforts to be the primary basis to justify the origin and…

Photo by Demi He on Unsplash

Religious ritual mitigates the downsides of human consciousness.

Philosophers, historians and scientists have long debated the reason why humans have religion. Cognitive science of religion (CSR) academics grind out hundreds of articles in the scientific journals rehashing the same arguments over and over as if repeating the same ideas will somehow make them true. Is religion a byproduct of other cognitive processes? Is it adaptive, which means it evolved and has an innate component? There are glaring shortcomings in all existing perspectives.

Much of the difficulty determining the functional origin of religion is due to the many ways it’s defined and described. Religion can mean many things just…

Photo by Jeremy Zero on Unsplash

Humans mistakenly believe in the immaculacy of their cognitive powers.

In a previous article, I explained how metarepresentation was the best conceptual tool to account for humanity’s greatest achievements — behavioral flexibility and culture. Humans can generate and retain conditional information. They can alter their behavior based on locality and pass those new behaviors to their cohorts and offspring through learning.

Metarepresentation is the ability to represent a representation — being able to attach an abstract concept or meaning to a separate entity — and enables humans to adapt to their environment in real-time unlike most animals who can only adapt through slow genetic change over evolutionary time. Examples are…

Photo by Chinh Le Duc on Unsplash

Ritual behaviors and emotions link our biology to spirituality and religion

I’ve posted a series of articles on Medium that critique various approaches to the evolutionary origin and psychological function of religion (collectively called the cognitive science of religion [CSR]). In my last post I showed how metarepresentation is a better way to explain flexible human cognition than so-called cognitive byproducts, a frequent explanation for the source of religion. Prior to that I explored why cognitive byproduct theory lacks scientific foundational support.

I promised to next examine how metarepresentations provide an alternative interpretation for the reasons humans engage in religion. …

Photo by Vitaliy Lyubezhanin on Unsplash

Metarepresentation is a better way to think about human cognition

In my previous Medium article, I make a case that the use of byproduct theory to account for religion, art, music and similar human predilections is based on faulty premises. The thrust of the article was that the evolutionary science to support cognitive byproducts is lacking (as opposed to morphological or structural byproducts, which have a strong scientific basis). But that approach leans towards the theoretical and doesn’t address the actual complexity of human behavior.

It’s understandable that byproducts are an easy and convenient way to think about human activities. Humans have culture, which enables us to have contingent or…

Photo by Billeasy on Unsplash

Byproduct theory is itself problematic, and its relevancy to religion is misguided.

Every human society has some form of religion, yet the cognitive scientists who study religion are divided about why humans have it. What is its function and purpose? Some believe religion provides benefits and increases evolutionary fitness. In other words, it’s adaptive and is selected for, which means there are genetic predispositions for religion.

Alternatively, a prevailing cohort of academics in the cognitive science of religion (CSR) field believe religion is a byproduct of other evolved cognitive features such as a theory of mind or the hyperactive agency…

Photo by Milada Vigerova on Unsplash

Belief is a fundamental cognitive trait that transcends religion.

In my previous article, Winnowing a Cognitive Science of Religion, I listed three postulates or assumptions necessary to establish the origins, and hence purpose, of religion. Part of that effort was to eliminate aspects that, while certainly religious, were not relevant to why religion first arose. Because institutional, hierachical religions and their written doctrines didn’t arrive until, at best, six thousand years ago following the advent of agriculture, they were omitted from the inquest. Rudimentary religion developed much earlier in hunter-gatherers, which is where we have to think about the conditions in which religion evolved.

Religion is often defined as…

Photo by Pablo Rebolledo on Unsplash

The origin and purpose of religion remain opaque and controversial partly because the topic is too big. Excluding unnecessary content keeps us on a straight and narrow path.

Why do humans have religion? It’s such a fundamental question, and yet it remains an unsettled and contentious topic. A coterie of academics is currently dedicated to exploring what is called the cognitive science of religion (CSR) but has been unable to reach any consensus on its origin and purpose. Is religion a psychological requirement or is it optional? Did it evolve biologically or did religious ideas and beliefs get intentionally or accidentally invented and then passed down the generations? CSR investigators are divided.

Within these frames are additional theories. In the biologically evolved camp there are different proposed adaptations…

Mitchell Diamond

Get the Medium app

A button that says 'Download on the App Store', and if clicked it will lead you to the iOS App store
A button that says 'Get it on, Google Play', and if clicked it will lead you to the Google Play store