Could natural selection have led to religion?

Kaldayen · 10-16-2004, 07:37 PM

I recently stumbled upon a Robert Winston's theory about religion in his book "Human instinct". In my words :

Nature would have selected the "religious' mutants" (people who had developped a sense of the divine) because this thought favoured a stronger sense of community, thus, a safer place to procreate.

A starter for discussion, as Brian would say.

Kal

alexa · 10-16-2004, 09:27 PM

A scientist, TV presenter and politician's opinion about religion ? Mmm ? I wouldn't count on it !

Kaldayen · 10-16-2004, 10:21 PM

Why?

From an evolutionist point of view, doesn't it make sense?

Kal

alexa · 10-16-2004, 11:36 PM

Kal,

There are no "religious' mutants". Did Winston use this term in his book ? I don't know why, but I don't like the connotation of this expression.

Kaldayen · 10-17-2004, 05:57 AM

Hehe, no that's my own words.. Let me try to clarify what I meant :

Every so often, a mutation will happen in living beings. It could be positive or negative. Most often it will be negative and will create disorders (i.e. hereditary troubles) but sometimes it will make the new "mutant" more adapted to his environment (i.e. a brown butterfly vs a yellow butterfly in a forest).

What I meant by "religious mutant" is a mutation that would have created a sense of the divine in the human conciousness.

Kal

alexa · 10-17-2004, 02:11 PM

Hi Kal,

Oh, I see you are caught up with genetic studies !

If I understand you right, in your opinion, there are some people born with the sense of the divine.

What about those who become religious only after a very traumatical experience in their lives ?

Regards,

Alexa

I, Brian · 10-17-2004, 03:45 PM

It is an interesting question - the particular danger I see with it is that to some of Dawkin's following, to argue that there was an evolutionary disposition for religion is to argue that relgion is entirely a material phenomena that has no "divine fraction". In short, that "man invented God" as per Nietsche, but simply adding a sociobiological "but nature made him do it".

Certainly religion is highly tied up in the social order of our animal - but it is also quite possible that just as the human species has realised other abstract concepts - maths, music, literature, and storytelling - so with concepts of theology.

So rather than restrict the argument to religion being a product of evolution, I'd make the point that it is a set of tools for abstract realisation that have been favoured in our species. And among those tools has come bothe science and religion. After all, both are simply different ways of attributing causality in our perception of reality - but both work from a different set of founding principles from which to explore the same events.

Hope that helps. And a good starter for discussion indeed.

alexa · 10-18-2004, 12:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by I, Brian

After all, both are simply different ways of attributing causality in our perception of reality - but both work from a different set of founding principles from which to explore the same events.

I agree.

juantoo3 · 10-19-2004, 01:02 AM

Kindest Regards, Kaldayen!

I don't recall if we've met, but welcome just the same!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kaldayen

Nature would have selected the "religious' mutants" (people who had developped a sense of the divine) because this thought favoured a stronger sense of community, thus, a safer place to procreate.

I love chicken and egg puzzles: which came first, awareness of spirit, or rational thought?

Kaldayen · 10-19-2004, 04:58 AM

Hi Alexa, yes indeed. I'm studying anthropology. I must say that sometimes, the texts I'm reading are quite rough on one's beliefs!

Brian, I agree too... it all comes up to how you look at it : many possibilities, no real answer...

Hi juantoo3, yes we have met already in a not-quite-succesful way there :
http://www.comparative-religion.com/...read.php?t=835 I've been roaming in the shadows for some time now

Kal

juantoo3 · 10-22-2004, 02:32 AM

Kindest Regards, Kaldayen!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kaldayen

Hi juantoo3, yes we have met already in a not-quite-succesful way there :
http://www.comparative-religion.com/...read.php?t=835 I've been roaming in the shadows for some time now

Ah, thank you for the reminder.

If you have been roaming in the shadows for a while, then you know I mean no harm, even when I disagree!

Might I ask if your original question in this thread is implying a connection or link of some type from this physical existence to a spiritual existence or plane or something? And whether or not this connection is an evolutionary development of chance and circumstance? Just curious...

Kaldayen · 10-22-2004, 06:11 AM

Hi Juantoo3, I know you mean no harm

As for your question : no, my question doesn't imply any connection to a spiritual existence. Whether the link has always been there, that we imagined it at some time, that our consciousness awoke to it sometime, or that no such divine exists.. I have no idea.

This thread is simply another possible answer to The question, a very pessimist one I must say... I wish it was false but many other known people agree with it (i.e. Dawkins).

I guess we'll never know.

Kal

lunamoth · 10-22-2004, 06:42 PM

Just wanted to bring to attention the current issue of Time magazine (Oct 21) featuring a cover article on "The God Gene." Just purchased a copy for myself and have not yet read the article.

http://www.time.com/time/

peace,
lunamoth

alexa · 10-23-2004, 04:39 AM

Hello lunamoth,

Can you do a copy of the article here, please ? It seems you need to be a Time magazine subscriber to read it.

Greetings from my corner of woods !

lunamoth · 10-23-2004, 05:25 AM

Good Evening, Alexa,

Well, first of all, I would have to type it in since I am not a subscriber and so only have a "hard" copy. Second, I would worry about copyright issues--perhaps I, Brian can give us some guidance about this.

However, I read the article and the gist of it is that in one study a scientist (Dean Hamer, Chief of gene stucture at the National Cancer Institute)originally studying smoking and addiction included some questions related to spiritual experiences (self transcendence) in his survey. So, he got a lot of data and used these to find linked genes (no details on how this was done--I assume they used linked markers to identify candidate genes; he does say he took a guess at looked at the family of genes known to affect brain chemistry). He came up with a gene VMAT2--vesicular monoamine transporter--which affects the brain chemicals that regulate mood and motor control (oh, shock!).

"...more than 1000 men and women, who agreed to take a standardized, 240-question personality test called the Temperament and Character Inventory."

...which consists of the traits: "self-forgetfulness, or the ability to get entirely lost in an experience; transpersonal identification, or a feeling of connectedness to a larger universe; and mysticism, or an openness to things not literally provable. Put them all together, and you come as close as science can to measuring what it feels like to be spiritual."

Anyway, he found a correlation between high ranking on the self-transcendence questions and a mutation in this particular gene.

Hamer says, "My findings are agonostic on the existence of God. If there's a God, there's a God. Just knowing what brain chemicals are involved in acknowledging that is not going to change the fact."

There is some interesting commentary, mostly from religionists, some from other scientists. Of note:

Michael Persinger, professor of behavioral neuroscience at Laurentian University in Sudbury, Ont. "God (he says) is an artifact of the brain."

Robert Thurman, professor of Buddhist studies at Columbia University discusses the idea that we "inherit a spirituality gene from the person we were in a previous life." "Buddhists, he adds, would find Hamer's possible discovery 'amusing and fun.'" Thurman says further "In India in Buddha's time, there were philosophers who said there was no soul; the mind was just chemistry," "the Buddha disagreed with their extreme materialism, but also rejected the 'absolute soul' theologians."

Of course there is pontification over the idea that a Creator would certainly plan for his creatures to be wired to search for and experience Him (my words). There is also quite a lot of commentary about divine law and the societal usefulness of such a gene. Persinger says "In many ways, [a God experience] is a brialliant adaptation; It's a built-in pacifier."

All-in-all, quite on point for the discussions that we've seen lately here.

There is 20-question quiz called How Spiritual Are You?, adapted from the personality inventory used in the study. However, this is something I hesitate to reproduce here due to copyright.

Vaj's favorite Einstein quote is featured prominently: "Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind."

cheers,
lunamoth