During the last years, cognitive studies of religion became a lively branch of evolutionary studies. But then, the ensuing consensus integrating modules such as Hyper-Agency Detection (HAD), Theory of Mind (TOM) and Reputation Management started to stagnate, especially as many cognitive scientists hesitated to widen their scope.
Not any more. With "Why Religion is Natural and Science is Not", Robert McCauley managed to connect the field with contemporary debates in surprising as well as convincing ways.
Sometimes people ask me why I am using Twitter (as @BlumeEvolution). Prejudices go as "There are only people babbling around." - "There's nothing relevant you could say in 140 letters." - "It's only used by celebrities promoting their worthless musics." etc.
Well, I disagree. As I started to use Twitter, I started to play around by searching for scientific information. And I found people such as Karla Segura @CRKarla who (re-)tweeted links to science-related news: More than 70.000 up to now, and counting! And I could easily follow her, instead of, say, Lady Gaga. Now, I was able to learn from Karla's researches into the world wide web and to retweet those findings that would be of interest to my followers, too. She could do the same - building a tiny scientific connection in an expanding network.
Then, there are other active scientists such as Fabrice Leclerc @leclercfl, who is not only (re-)tweeting science-related findings, but also publishing a regular "online-paper" with evolution-related topics based on Tweets: The evolution daily.
For me, these aggregations are not only interesting - they are valuable. Think about it: Evolutionary studies are extremely interdisciplinary, ranging from diverse studies on animals and humans, to genetics, mathematics, cultural studies and metaphysics (such as philosophies and theologies). And the same is true with my field of research, evolutionary studies on religion (ERS). Twitter helped me not only to find Jonathan Haidt's great TED-talk but also an essay he wrote on CNN about his atheist appraisal of religion. And I found a way not only to retweet those findings of special interest to ERS, but also to aggregate these for other readers. As religion-editor of "Evolution This View Of Life", I am tweeting special recommendations to Haddasah Head @Haddie who might put them on the ETVOL-religion shelf for free access to everyone!
So, yes, Twitter can be mindless chatter, and it can be "just for fun". But it can be a good and enjoyable way to find and share scientific informations from various fields, being a part of the global stream of scientific communication. That's why I am happily using and recommending it! I even added a mission to my profile: Twitter needs more science tweets!
Another step in the increasingly dynamic history of evolutionary studies of religion has been taken: The respective TED-Talk by Jonathan Haidt has been seen more than 20.000 times on the first day of its appearance on YouTube. And it's worth every minute!
More than ever, the brilliant team with active members such as Robert "@RobertMKadar" Kadar and Hadassah "@Haddie" Head is experimenting with new media possibilities such as videos. Here, leading evolutionary biologist David Sloan Wilson is introducing into the dynamic field of evolutionary studies of religion.
After seeing this well-done tutorial, I decided to add a web-interview and sent him some questions.
1. David, as a leading evolutionary biologist, you initiated the
"Evolution - This View of Life" (ETVOL)-online-magazine which
"approaches anything and everything from an evolutionary perspective".
Why did you do that?
My
professional life is devoted to expanding evolutionary science beyond
the biological sciences to include all aspects of humanity--in my own
research, in higher education (EvoS), and in the formulation of public policy (The Evolution Institute).
The idea for an online general interest magazine was conceived by one
of my graduate students named Robert Kadar, and it has been an excellent
adventure working with him to make it a reality.
2. Evolutionary Biology has
been a field of intensive debate during the last years. Together wih
only a few allies, you brought group or multilevel selection
successfully back into science after it had been condemned and tabooed
for decades. What do you think - why have colleagues such as Richard
Dawkins have been so active in suppressing empirically viable perspectives for so long?
Historians
will have a good time conducting an autopsy on the group selection
controversy (they're already starting in books such as The Price of Altruism by Oren Harmon and Evolutionary Restraints by
Mark Borello). I play the role of historian myself in a series of posts
on my "Evolution for Everyone" blog titled "Truth and Reconciliation
for Group Selection" (start here).
Two major points are worth emphasizing. First, when a large group of
people reaches a consensus that they regard as foundational, it's hard
for them to reconsider, in science no less than other walks of life.
Second, evolutionary theory's individualistic swing in the middle of the
20th century was part of a more general swing toward individualism in
western culture and other branches of academia such as economics.
Evolutionists have been biased by the culture of individualism in the
20th century, much as Darwin and his contemporaries were biased by
Victorian culture in the 19th century.
3.
In your new and partially autobiographical book "The Neighborhood Project", you are reflecting on the
growing sceptisicm among your formerly Protestant family.
Nevertheless, you contributed with "Darwin's Cathedral" heavily to the
now-dynamic field of evolutionary studies of religion. And you won me
over as the religion-editor for ETVOL arguing that the topic should not
be excluded. Why do you think that religion is an important field in
evolutionary studies?
My mother and novelist father (Sloan Wilson, author of The Man in the Grey Flannel Suit and A Summer Place)
were not religious but they had a strong sense of morality, so "do
unto others" was instilled in me as strongly as in most religious
believers. When I started to learn about evolution in college, I was
told that group selection, the most straightforward theory for
explaining the evolution of altruism, had been rejected. I took that as a
challenge. I was also attracted to the study of humans from an
evolutionary perspective from the beginning. I guess you could say that I
had an appetite for controversy!
After decades of studying group
selection and human evolution, it only made sense to study religion from
an evolutionary perspective. It's amazing how fast the field of
Evolutionary Religious Studies has advanced since the publication of
Darwin's Cathedral, thanks to talented people such as yourself and your
great work on the effects of religion on human fertility.
4. In the United States,
evolutionary theory is quite offen criticized on religious grounds. In
Europe, most people accept evolution concerning plants and animals, but
especially older scientists are rejecting it quite often when applied to
human phenomena for the fear of reductionism and social darwinism. Do
you have good advice in dealing with such fears?
Evolution
in relation to human affairs earned a bad reputation during the late
19th and early 20th century, especially with respect to the
justification of social inequality. As a result, most human-related
disciplines have avoided evolutionary thinking since before most of the
current experts were born. Yet, all human-related academic disciplines
strive for consilience--consistency with other branches of knowledge.
In essence, everyone has been saying "My ideas are consistent with
evolution, without requiring much knowledge about evolution." When this
unstated assumption is put to the test, many ideas in the human-related
disciplines fail the consilience test. The best way to allay fears about
evolution is to show how modern evolutionary science can be used not
just to understand, but also to improve the human condition.
I couldn't agree more. Evolution rocks, and I am looking forward to contributing more to Evolution: This View of Live (ETVOL)! Thank you very much for promoting science, cooperation and evolutionary studies, David.
Today is Evolution Day - the 203rd birthday of Charles Darwin. And a growing number of christian, jewish, muslim aand other communities is joining the Evolution-Day-celebrations, insisting that both religious traditions and scientific discoveries should be greeted as gifts from above. Or as protestant pastor Michael Dowd and evolutionary biologist Connie Barlow put it: Thank God for Evolution! This position is called evolutionary theism.
Others disagree, claiming that evolutionary studies are presenting a distinct worldview incommensurable with their religious teachings. Rejecting evolutionary theory for the sake of their written creation myths, these people are called creationists. As surveys among various denominations are showing, members of some religious traditions are more ready to embrace evolutionary studies than others.
But there is still another perspective on the subject of Evolution and Religion: The scientific studies on the evolution of religious beliefs and behaviors themselves. Where did they come from? How are they influencing human lives and cultures? Are our genes and brains hard-wired for religious and spiritual experiences?
And this evolutionary perspective on religion is not particularly new, but has been present from the start: Charles Darwin himself (a learned, anglican theologian, after all!) devoted many sentences of his "Descent of Man" to this topic. And during the last years, many scientists from diverse faculties, nations and worldviews joined the interdisciplinary field of evolutionary religious studies, which is bringing forth new discoveries and dynamics almost on a weekly basis.
Ever wondered why so many people are investing lots of hours into social media such as Facebook, Twitter or Blogs, vying for some more "friends", "followers", comments or clicks?
It's long been assumed that the reason is our evolutionary history. Whether we are studying obtaining food, organizing security, labour or - the feature most distinguishing us from other primates - cooperative child care, our species learned to rely on social cooperation for successful survival and reproduction. In fact, Charles Darwin dubbed "Man" as a "Social Animal" - although he was not yet aware i.e. of the importance of cooperative childcare. Now, a new Harvard-study by Coren Apicella et al. explored social networks among the contemporary hunters and gatherers of the African Hadza - and found them to resemble those we are building in "modern" ways, too.
And as a special feature, the colleagues not only featured the results on print, but also with a well-done video-presentation. Enjoy!
Friedrich August von Hayek (1899 - 1992) was one of the most prominent economists of the 20th century, scientifically taking a stand for liberalism and fighting nationalistic and internationalistic versions of socialism in Europe and abroad since his eminent "Road to Serfdom" (1944). Here is a nice "economy-rap", depicting the debates between him and (students of) John Maynard Keynes (1883 - 1946). Please note their trainers Ludwig von Mises (1881 - 1973) and Thomas Robert Malthus (1766 - 1834), as well as appearances of Ben Bernanke and Carl Levin. Enjoy the show.
F.A. von Hayek as an Evolutionist
Far less known than Hayeks image as a free-market-economist is the root of his scientific perspectives and arguments: Evolution. Coming from an Austrian family deeply embedded in natural sciences as well as philosophy (i.e. he served together with his nephew Wittgenstein in the army and read the first drafts of the tractatus) Hayek urged his fellow economists to study real humans instead of the "spectre" of homo oeconomicus.
In 1952 he published "The Sensory Order" about the evolution of human perception, preceding contemporary works on neurocognition and evolutionary psychology by decades.
F.A. von Hayek about the Evolution of Religion
In his last decade, the professing agnostic Hayek turned to the subject of religion and started to explore it from his evolutionary perspective. Personally, I would count his German lecture of 1982 about the topic at Klessheim castle and his final chapter "Religion and the Guardians of Tradition" in his final book "The Fatal Conceit" (1991) among the most important works in this field and time. For example, he rightfully observed the reproductive potential of religious groups.
Of course, you should find out for yourself! But if you were interested for a start, I discussed and tested some of his hypotheses here:
Today, I want to use this scilog in a new way: As a tool for presenting a question. I stumbled upon the topic while preparing a German book about Charles Darwin's works on religion & evolution. In his last year, the great Victorian became captivated by a book on the topic and wrote to its author William Graham:
Dear Sir
I hope that you will not think it intrusive on my part to thank you
heartily for the pleasure which I have derived from reading your
admirably written `Creed of Science,’ though I have not yet quite
finished it, as now that I am old I read very slowly. It is a very long
time since any other book has interested me so much. The work must have
cost you several years and much hard labour with full leisure for work.
Therefore, I wanted to ask abroad if someone out there is having some bibliographic informations or scientific references to William Graham (1839 - 1911). Please don't hesitate to post a comment or contact me via my homepage.
Maybe you have been wondering why so many people are freaking out because of another "end of the world" destined for 2012. After all, there have been numerous respective dates in the past, and it never happened.
But we are, simply put, products of evolution. And as a deeply social species, we have evolved to become addicted to experiencing and sharing captivating narratives. And what could be more fascinating than a story about the very topics of survival and reproduction: About great catastrophes wiping out nearly everyone, with the few survivors then going forth to be fruitful and multiply. It's a classic.
From Floods to the Apocalypse
Therefore, we shouldn't be too surprised to find respective narratives abundant among religious mythologies. There's plenty of popular end-of-the-world-myths available, ranging from the biblical, noachidic flood (which is only a late version of many older flood narratives) to the Norse Ragnarök and the genre-naming Christian apocalypse (greek: revelation). Ironically, the Mayan calendar is not among them - december 21st 2012 is just the non-specified end of a cyclus.
But modern "secular" culture is craving for apocalyptic tales as any human culture did before. The image of a punishing God may be replaced by those of a vengeful nature. Instead of demons and angels, aliens and asteroids are descending from the sky. And those lucky or worthy few that survive are destined to sire children and to turn the eternal circle of life...
Thus, whether you are secular or religious, you may want to "enjoy" the subsequent collection of some apocalypses. I'd be glad if you would share some of the ideas and emotions you experienced while watching.
Let us take a look at those five introductory sentences framing Darwin's evolutionary perspective on "Belief in God - Religion".
"There is no evidence that man was aboriginally endowed with the ennobling belief in the existence of an Omnipotent God. On the contrary there is ample evidence, derived not from hasty travellers, but from men who have long resided with savages, that numerous races have existed and still exist, who have no idea of one or more gods, and who have no words in their languages to express such an idea.”
In his opening sentences, Darwin is refuting the idea of an "Urmonotheismus", a primordial monotheism. Instead, he asserts that some "savage" traditions have no concept of higher deities (such as mono-, poly- or henotheism), thereby bringing up his central argument: That contemporary beliefs and religions evolved from very simple beginnings, too.
“The question is of course wholly distinct from that higher one, whether there exists a Creator and Ruler of the universe; and this has been answered in the af-firmative by the highest intellects that have ever lived.”
Proving his sound education in anglican theology (the only university degree Darwin mastered throughout his life), Darwin then explains that evolutionary (that is: empirical) studies of religiosity and religions neither proves nor disproves the existence of (a) God. Instead, these questions are to be discussed in the metaphysical realms of philosophies and theologies. Darwin is adding a curteous nod to (evolutionary) theists, many of whom - i.e. Alfred Russel Wallace - accompanied and supported his scientific mission.
“If, however, we include under the term "religion" the belief in unseen or spiritual agencies, the case is wholly different; for this belief seems to be almost universal with the less civilised races. Nor is it difficult to comprehend how it arose.”
If theistic religions evolved from earlier forms, we would need a broad and workable definition. Darwin is offering "the belief in unseen or spiritual agencies" - in contemporary words: supernatural agents (or, even more precisely: superempirical agents). Ancestors, spirits, angels are encompassed by this definition as are sentient mountains and trees, Buddhist bodhisatvas, Jain tirthankaras, Shintoist khami or even Raelian space aliens and, of course, any poly-, heno- or monotheistic deities.
It is an interesting coincidence that, although only a small number of contemporary colleagues are aware of Darwin's own works on the matter, contemporary definitions of supernatural (superempirical) agents became the most successful and prevalent working definitions in interdisciplinary studies of religion.
For that, I am assuming a single reason: Charles Darwin had been right on this topic.
Maybe the most exciting finding of this year has been the result of genetic studies comparing DNA from Homo sapiens and Homo neanderthalensis. To the surprise of most, some of those Homo sapiens that left Africa and spread throughout Asia, Europe and beyond have been found to have interbred with Homo neanderthalensis. As a result, non-African humans have neanderthals among their ancestors. I am looking forward to observing whether these findings might contribute to changes in our self-understanding.
I found a YouTube-clip putting together the respective news-coverage from various TV stations. Enjoy.
As I started to blog about my field of study some years ago (at first in German only), it started as a playful trial. But readers and commentators got surprisingly interested in the topics at hand, I was invited into the Scilogs-community and decided to open this English version, too. And I learned that it can be hard work to offer regular contributions as well as reactions to comments and discussions. As anybody would (especially anybody with a family with a wonderful wife and now three young kids, a captivating job and a lot of scientific and publishing schedules), I pondered now and then whether I should reduce my blogging activities. But today, I am a happy blogger.
Some time ago, I presented the awesome Khan Academy at my German blog "Natur des Glaubens". Founded by former hedgefund-manager Salman Khan, the online-academy is offering thousands of teaching videos via YouTube, thereby reaching out to people and especially learning teenagers around the world looking for better education. Personally, I think it is one of the very best online-ideas. You might want to take a look at the Khan Academy page or Salman Khan's talk at TED 2011.
Applying evolutionary studies to human politics? Socialised as a German
scientist, I winced on the spot. But then, I began to read "The Neighborhood Project"
- and became more than convinced. For years, the eminent evolutionary
biologist David Sloan Wilson has embarked on adventurous quests to
broaden evolutionary studies into classic humanities - working together
with scholars of literature, education and religion. In the captivating,
autobiographic parts of "The Neighborhood Project",
he is explaining why - his father has been the great novelist Sloan
Wilson, who remained deeply curious about human emotions and behaviors
throughout his life. After decades of doing scientific studies on plants
and animals, his son finally came home.
