scilogs Biology of Religion

Some of your ancestors have been Neanderthals

02. December 2011, 23:25

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.


Geschrieben in General Comments: (1). Trackbacks: (1). Permalink


The Genetic Priming of Religiosity - Guest Post by John Jacob Lyons

24. March 2011, 22:18

Note from the Blogowner: I met John at the "Explaining Religion"-Conference in Bristol, where he presented a well-done poster. And I am glad that he is using this blog to present his works and thoughts online for open debate. Please feel free to ask any questions or to make any suggestions you have. 

 (More)

Geschrieben in General Comments: (39). Trackbacks: (0). Permalink


Religiosity Genes (again) confirmed by (another) Twin Study

12. March 2011, 21:45

For decades, religiosity (defined as beliefs or behaviors towards superempirical agents) has been explored like other traits such as musicality, intelligence or skin color by Twin Studies - which conclusively found it to be partially inherited by genes and partially dependend on environmental (cultural) clues. In fact, religion turns out to be fully comparable to other biocultural traits such as speech or music.

 (More)

Geschrieben in General Comments: (19). Trackbacks: (3). Permalink


Atheists a dying breed as nature 'favours faithful' - Sunday Times Jan 02 2011 - Jonathan Leake - Full Draft Version

06. January 2011, 11:11

For atheists it is the ultimate irony. Evolution, the process they believe is solely responsible for creating humanity, actually weeds out non-believers while favouring the religious, new research has shown.

It suggests that, over evolutionary timescales of hundreds or thousands of years, people with strong religious beliefs tend to have more children, whereas atheists have fewer children and the societies they belong to inevitably disappear.

Religious behaviors are partly inherited by genes.

"It is a great irony but evolution appears to discriminate against atheists and favour those with religious beliefs," said Michael Blume, a researcher at the University of Jena in Germany who carried out the study. "Most societies or communities that have espoused atheistic beliefs have not survived more than a century."

The idea that being religious is an evolutionary advantage is in direct contradiction to theories developed and promoted by atheists like Richard Dawkins who have suggested that religions are like viruses of the mind which infect people and impose great costs in terms of money, time and health risks.

 (More)

Geschrieben in General Comments: (18). Trackbacks: (2). Permalink


The Shakers - and their Importance for Evolutionary Studies

03. October 2010, 20:28

In a recent post and article, I wrote about the high-fertile Old Order Amish and their reproductive success. The United Believers in Christ's Second Appearing commonly called The Shakers are another religious tradition proving that religiosity is able to influence human fertility: They lived all-celibate, with the numbers of births nearly about zero. In fact, the Shakers flourished throughout the 18th and first half of the 19th century due to proselytizing and the adoption of poor children. But finally, the interactive rules of biocultural evolution won out: Without reproducing, the traditions and communities began to overage and to dwindle inevitably.

 (More)

Geschrieben in General Comment: (0). Trackbacks: (2). Permalink


Conference Report - Explaining Religion at Bristol University 2010

05. September 2010, 20:45

Among those scientific conferences I had the pleasure to attend, "Explaining Religion" at Bristol University won (and will hold) a very special place. It had been very well-organized by Finn Spicer, Nathalia Gjersoe, Andrew Atkinson and Samantha Barlow, who not only provided for a beautiful yet concentrated space for lectures, debates and come-togethers, but also for a caring, open and humorous atmosphere among all those attending. Thus, the meeting of diverse scientists interested in the evolution of religiosity and religions managed to bring together hypotheses, fresh data and especially people enjoying to share thoughts and findings during captivating lectures and intensive debates right into the nights. Thanks to Bristol, BIRTHA and Finn, Thalia, Andrew & Sam!

 (More)

Geschrieben in General Comments: (26). Trackbacks: (4). Permalink


Charles Darwin about the Evolution of Religiosity and Religion(s)

01. July 2010, 21:20

As more and more among us start to explore the evolution of religiosity and religions from a range of scientific disciplines and nations, e.g. in the Evolutionary Religious Studies-network initiated by biologist David Sloan Wilson, I keep wondering about a peculiar fact: Why are so many dedicated evolutionists (and even declared "darwinists") ignorant or silent about Charles Darwin's own thoughts on the matter? (More)

Geschrieben in General Comments: (20). Trackbacks: (9). Permalink


Clip about Religious Fertility vs. Richard Dawkins

30. May 2010, 15:39

For a long time, "evolutionary" puns have been an almost exclusive domain of atheists and religious critics such as Richard Dawkins and his followers. But it seems that the tide may begin to turn. Here is a new YouTube-Clip, based on demographic findings published by Eric Kaufmann, contrasting the reproductive advantage of religious people with some "memetic" assumptions of Dawkins, who assumed religious memes to function as mind parasites. And as was to be expected, the clip prompted furious and highly emotional responses - this time predominantly by critics of religion. As human beings, we are ready to enjoy puns only so long as they are aimed at the worldviews of others.

If you are interested in data about the complex interactions of religiosity and fertility, here is a sample:

Von Hayek and the Amish Fertility
How religious communities manage
to be fruitful and multiply – A Case study

* "The Reproductive Benefits of Religious Affiliation", in: Voland, E.; Schiefenhövel, W.: "The Biological Evolution of Religious Mind and Behaviour", Springer Frontiers Collection 2009. 

And there are related blog posts available, e.g. on Eric Kaufmann, the high fertility of religious groups as e.g. the Amish and another clip by Tübingen biologists about the evolutionary relevance of reproductive advantages

Geschrieben in General Comments: (3). Trackbacks: (0). Permalink


The Amish - A Special Case in Evolutionary Studies

01. May 2010, 22:00

At first glance, nothing would appear to be more different than the Amish on the one side and scientific evolutionary studies on the other. After all, the Amish are a Christian group which branched from the Mennonite Anabaptist movement in Europe during the 16th century and whose members do not seek "worldly wisdom" as e.g. higher education. But on the other hand, the Amish are actually living the very riddle of evolutionary religious studies: They are accepting numerous religious commandments and costly requirements and they had to face discrimination and prosecution throughout Europe - and they nevertheless managed to expand demographically and culturally, passing on their genes and religious-cultural traditions with extreme success. While "modern" and secular Germans and Swiss are dwindling due to the lack of children, the Old Order Amish from the same stock are thriving. How do they do that?

 (More)

Geschrieben in General Comments: (54). Trackbacks: (5). Permalink


Shall the Religious inherit the Earth? - New book by Eric Kaufmann

27. March 2010, 22:47

Some months ago, I introduced political sociologist Eric Kaufmann here, with whom I had the joy to share and debate some data and ideas concerning our common field of research, the reproductive potentials of religion(s). Coming from the scientific study of religion(s) and an evolutionary perspective, I was curious (and admittedly a little bit sceptical) whether it would be possible to handle the multidimensional topic in the field of contemporary politics in any meaningful way. Now I know that it is. "Shall the Religious inherit the Earth? Demography and Politics in the twenty-first Century" is a groundbreaking book about religions, demography and our future. It has the potential to change perceptions in sciences, publics and politics.



Eric starts with a discussion of theories concerning secularization and demographics. And he points out a consequence of modern demographic transition: As children are becoming a matter of economically expensive choice for more and more people and fertility rates are plummeting, pro-natalist religious traditions are gaining momentum. If you imagine a population with a median birth rate of 4 and a group of highly religious having a rate of 6, this would account for an advantage of "only" 50%, most of which could be levelled out i.e. by secularization and assimilation. But if both rates would drop collateraly by two to 2 and 4 respectively, the gap would extend to 100%, with only the highly religious population still growing. And in fact, birth rates in almost all free and wealthy societies fell below replacement level, with secular strata going down to one child per women and less. (Here, I want to add that Eric is not only right with the numbers, but with the cases studies, too. We are having lots of highly fertile religious communities but not yet a single find of a demographically stable, secular population!)

Thus, Eric notes the diverse development of three different milieus:

* Especially in wealthy and secure countries lacking extrinsic motivations for religious adherence, many people tend to abandon their religious affiliation. Secularization is taking place - but as seculars tend to have very few children, it is running into demographic dead ends. In fact, almost all secular populations are increasingly depending on immigration - which is in almost all cases bringing new religious identities into the field, i.e. growing Muslim groups to Europe.
* Moderate and mainstream religious tend to have somewhat higher birth rates than their secular neighbours. But then, they have low retention rates: Many of their children are abandoning the shallow faiths, most often secularizing.
* It's the fundamentalist movements that are combining high birth rates with high retention rates. While the moderates are torn apart between secular and fundamentalist critics, the highly devout strengthen their borders, building distinct milieus, worldviews, institutions and languages. Highly fertile groups (termed "endogenous growth sects" by Eric) as i.e. the Amish, the Hutterites or orthodox Jews may even chose not to proselytize in order to protect their demographically expanding community structures.

Going through the USA (i.e. highly fertile Christians as the Amish or the Quiverfull movement), the Muslim world (with plummeting birth rates and forming salafist communities), Europe (with a secularly shrinking native population and growing fringe and immigrant groups) and - especially convincing - Israel (with a shrinking secular or moderate majority pincered by the exponential growth of ultra-orthodox Jews and religious Muslims), Eric is emphasizing the observable processes by sound research and data.

And an avowed secular himself, the author is repeatedly discussing the consequences, dangers and options of the development gaining momentum by the day. Those daring to face these well-written pages will get a fresh perspective on everyday politics, from the local to the global level. John Gray endorsed the book by the citation: "Brilliant and provocative... a book every liberal should read". I would just like to add: "And everyone interested in sciences, religions, politics and thoughts has to read it - quickly!"

Links:

* At the blog of his rightfully proud father is an interview with Eric Kaufmann about his new book available. 

* "Shall the Religious inherit the Earth?" on wikireligiosus

Geschrieben in General Comments: (2). Trackbacks: (3). Permalink


Clips about the Evolution of Homo sapiens

26. February 2010, 21:13

Living in Europe, it is rather easy to assume that people around the world would share a perspective on the evolution of our species. But as I learned from some comments and mails, this is not the case. Therefore, I decided to present the scientific standard of knowledge about the evolution of homo sapiens before proceeding with the specific topic of the evolution of our religiosity and religions.

 (More)

Geschrieben in General Comments: (11). Trackbacks: (0). Permalink


Evolutionary Theism on the Rise!?

02. February 2010, 19:12

Is there an unbridgeable enmity between science(s) and religion(s) - or will they reconvene as in concepts of evolutionary theism? From the perspective of evolutionary studies of religion, that's less of a philosophical question than an empirical one. COULD it happen may be a question of fruitless speculation. But DOES it happen is a question of scientific observation.

 (More)

Geschrieben in General Comments: (5). Trackbacks: (2). Permalink


Beauty in Evolution? Enjoying the Story of Life

09. January 2010, 12:01

Just reading "On the Origin of Stories. Evolution, Cognition and Fiction" by Brian Boyd, I would like to reflect about our human propensity to present facts in the form of narratives. In a sense, that seems to be a very basic universal, with those of us religious just extending the stories into the supernatural realms of mythology. For example, Richard Dawkins offered a retelling of the evolutionary process as "The Ancestor's Tale: A Pilgrimage to the Dawn of Evolution", quite obviously adopting religious terminology. From the very beginnings of scientific biology, scientists began to marvel at the "glory in plants".

 (More)

Geschrieben in General Comment: (0). Trackbacks: (1). Permalink


Social and Secular Progress - Good news for Religion?

19. December 2009, 19:58

For some years, a range of empirical studies (e.g. Inglehart & Norris in "Sacred and Secular", 2004) confirmed a global correlation of religiosity to societal levels of want and income inequality and (especially) insecurity. As respective publications have been made available at the internet for free, a wider public is getting the message. E.g., a sound example of a well-done study has been published by Tom Rees in the Journal of Religion and Society.

 (More)

Geschrieben in General Comment: (0). Trackbacks: (2). Permalink


Biocultural Evolution or Gene-Culture-Coevolution

30. October 2009, 18:39

Every human perception is shaped by underlying assumptions, of which we are aware only partially. For example, Western thinking has been shaped (at least since the classic Greeks) by a strong preference for dualisms: Human and Animal, True and False, Good and Evil, Body and Soul, Brain and Mind, Nature and Culture etc. Although the discovery of evolution clearly bridged these distinctions, they creeped back into place again and again, especially in Western perceptions of sciences. For example, we owe the discovery of distinct cultural traditions among non-human primates to Japanese primatologists (honoured in a beautiful book by Frans de Waal), whose Western successors i.e. as Jane Goodall nevertheless had to fight strong prejudices against giving chimpanzees individual names, attributing them emotions etc. to this day. 

 (More)

Geschrieben in General Comments: (2). Trackbacks: (11). Permalink


1 2  Next»
szmtag