Religion Explained: The Evolutionary Origins of Religious Thought

Rating:
Summary: Daring and disturbing insights
Review: I have read some excellent books in Evolutionary Psychology but this one takes the cake. It is absolutely first rate and I recommend it without reservation. The book's goal - explaining religious behavior in humans - is hardly modest but, amazingly, it succeeds to an unimaginably high level. Boyer's insights are at once daring and disturbing. The picture that emerges is of a species so trapped within the evolutionary/architectural constraints of its own minds that insight and change on a mass level seem highly unlikely.
The message of this book will probably antagonize most and enlighten few - but it is essential reading and will remain so for the foreseeable future. Boyer writes in an engaging style, much like Steven Pinker, but probably spends too much time trying to bring the general reader up to speed about Evolutionary Psych and cultural anthropology. However, the central insights, once they come, literally leap off the page with a clarity and precision that are startling.
If the simple premises of this book were widely understood and accepted, the world would be literally changed overnight. Fundamentalists and conservatives needn't fear: such insight stands a snowball's chance in hell. The section dealing with the relationship between religion and morality is particularly important and should be required reading at every seminary on the planet.
Plainly, RELIGION EXPLAINED will not enjoy widespread acceptance in our lifetime. That's a shame, to put it mildly. We will have missed a rare opportunity to examine the roots of the widespread irrationality that continues to plague our species.

Rating:
Summary: Small praise for a great, great work
Review: I'm no anthropologist, and subsequently I would have to re-read this book more than once to fully appreciate everything that Boyer is saying, but let me just say that this is a POWERFUL book. It is a journey deep into the evolution of the human psyche, opening up for the reader many of the myriad of mental systems that have produced a mind with a PROPENSITY for religious thought. Couple this book with the concepts of chaos, quantum physics, and evolution, and you quickly come to understand how religion has naturally, organically and unsurprisingly evolved from our strengths as human beings. According to Boyer (though he doesn't say it...he only infers it, but CLEARLY so...) religious thought in humans is a strange attractor. It happens with enough frequency because of the structure of our minds that it becomes somewhat predictable over time. Predictable in the sense that people and groups of people will always develop some form or fashion of religious understanding, but unpredictable in the sense that you can't know WHAT form of religious thinking will evolve. Witches? Ancestors? Talking Mountains? Supreme Gods? Ultimately, they are one and the same in terms of how they satisfy the brain, even though they seem so divergent and unrelated to us as individuals.

This is not an easy book to read...it's pretty academic, but it is not inaccesible to us non-anthropologists/psychologists, and the stuff that's in there is so compelling, and frankly so important, that I highly recommend this book.

Rating:
Summary: Powerful, Powerful Book
Review: I'm no anthropologist, and subsequently I would have to re-read this book more than once to fully appreciate everything that Boyer is saying, but let me just say that this is a POWERFUL book. It is a journey deep into the evolution of the human psyche, opening up for the reader many of the myriad of mental systems that have produced a mind with a PROPENSITY for religious thought. Couple this book with the concepts of chaos, quantum physics, and evolution, and you quickly come to understand how religion has naturally, organically and unsurprisingly evolved from our strengths as human beings. According to Boyer (though he doesn't say it...he only infers it, but CLEARLY so...) religious thought in humans is a strange attractor. It happens with enough frequency because of the structure of our minds that it becomes somewhat predictable over time. Predictable in the sense that people and groups of people will always develop some form or fashion of religious understanding, but unpredictable in the sense that you can't know WHAT form of religious thinking will evolve. Witches? Ancestors? Talking Mountains? Supreme Gods? Ultimately, they are one and the same in terms of how they satisfy the brain, even though they seem so divergent and unrelated to us as individuals.

This is not an easy book to read...it's pretty academic, but it is not inaccesible to us non-anthropologists/psychologists, and the stuff that's in there is so compelling, and frankly so important, that I highly recommend this book.

Rating:
Summary: Thoughtfully Provocative
Review: I've heard most psychological theories about religion at least once-until I read this book! I found this book very challenging and will need to read it over a few times to make sense of it and to realign my thoughts.

In its essence, this book gleans insights from cognitive and social psychology (via the field of evolutionary psychology) to explain why the brain latches onto religious concepts with such zeal. I found one of the more insightful points near the end of the book; there the author indicates that religion is less a `thing' than a complex of inferences, representations, and biases. This rings true to me. Whatever discipline you study, it is natural to reify that field into a standard set of ideas and explanations. In fact, though, we must be careful to appreciate all these ideas as so much structural framework that may or may not do a good job of representing a more complex reality. In the end, no academic discipline should be monolithic in its approach.

It is always exciting to have a new field or novel set of empirical techniques seed a barren old field, for fresh ideas are bound to sprout. It seems that the emerging science of evolutionary psychology, though it faces many challenges of its own, may lead us to better understand why people the world over cling to counterintuitive (or as the author coins, counterontological) ideas about reality.

This book may or may not convince you of its thesis but it will certainly cause you to revisit your old ideas with a new perspective.

Rating:
Summary: Thoughtfully Provocative
Review: I've heard most psychological theories about religion at least once-until I read this book! I found this book very challenging and will need to read it over a few times to make sense of it and to realign my thoughts.

In its essence, this book gleans insights from cognitive and social psychology (via the field of evolutionary psychology) to explain why the brain latches onto religious concepts with such zeal. I found one of the more insightful points near the end of the book; there the author indicates that religion is less a 'thing' than a complex of inferences, representations, and biases. This rings true to me. Whatever discipline you study, it is natural to reify that field into a standard set of ideas and explanations. In fact, though, we must be careful to appreciate all these ideas as so much structural framework that may or may not do a good job of representing a more complex reality. In the end, no academic discipline should be monolithic in its approach.

It is always exciting to have a new field or novel set of empirical techniques seed a barren old field, for fresh ideas are bound to sprout. It seems that the emerging science of evolutionary psychology, though it faces many challenges of its own, may lead us to better understand why people the world over cling to counterintuitive (or as the author coins, counterontological) ideas about reality.

This book may or may not convince you of its thesis but it will certainly cause you to revisit your old ideas with a new perspective.

Rating:
Summary: What are your standards for "explanation"?
Review: If our problem is that people are resorting to inferred supernatural agents to explain things, how then are we helped if we resort to inferred mental agents? What's science and what's fiction?

William Baum has written: "Mentalistic explanations proceed by inferring a fictional entity from behavior and then asserting the inferred entity is the cause of the behavior." Such explanations, however elaborate, are superfluous. Boyer's explanations seem similar. But the problem may not be with what Boyer has explained. B.F. Skinner wrote: "What is wrong with all this is not what philosophers, psychologists, brain scientists, and computer scientists have found or will find; the error is the direction they are looking. No account of what is happening inside the human body, no matter how complete, will explain the origins of human behavior. What happens inside the body is not a beginning ...?

How long do you want to spend determining what is in your mental basement? Who will help you? Familiar with Freudians who wrote in detail of all sorts of variations based on "ego", "superego" and "id"? Boyer wrote: "If you live in a large enough group, there will probably be some people better skilled at producing convincing messages... These people will probably be considered as having some special internal quality that makes them different from the rest of the group. They will also end up taking a special role in ... performances." Boyer was apparently describing religous leaders, but doesn't it seem like he was also describing himself? But is the message convincing? Will the performance really lead anywhere? Has religion been explained?


Rating:
Summary: "Religious concepts are parasitic"
Review: In his "Religion Explained" Pascal Boyer does a penetrating and meticulous analysis of the psychological and anthropological bases of `religion'. I read his book (hardcover) while researching my own book, "Concepts: A ProtoTheist Quest for Science-Minded Skeptics" and have since re-read it. He examines contemporary religious practices and beliefs -- both aboriginal and civilized -- from every conceivable perspective. He winnows the many usual explanations down to what he proposes as the correct explanation. In my book I propose an alternative explanation for `religion' by taking a more sweeping, narrative look at evolution's trajectory from the Big Bang to the emergence of human consciousness.

While there are important differences in our views, nonetheless I applaud Boyer's adding his authoritative voice to the search for natural explanations of supernatural beliefs. Indeed he says "...what we call `belief' is very often an attempt to justify or explain intuitions..." Yet he doesn't deride believers, unlike Sam Harris in his "The End of Faith." Boyer concludes that human minds have a variety of non-religious inference system onto which religious concepts can attach themselves, saying "religious concepts are parasitic" (altho' he often uses `concept' where I'd use `percept'). Yet he doesn't attempt to explain how our brain produces our mind, as I do. His conclusions counter any idea of a `God gene'.

If you have a taste for exhaustively reasoned logic, you'll enjoy Boyer.


Rating:
Summary: A Groundbreaking Work in Behavioral Science.
Review: In Religion Explained, Boyer attempts what no one else (to my knowledged) has: to present a comprehensive scientific explanation for religion. To undertake such a daunting task, Boyer employees numerous behavioral science disciplines, including evolutionary psychology, experimental social psychology, anthropology, sociology, and archeology just to mention a few. Early on, he debunks common and prevalent explanations for religion (many of which I subscribed to before reading this book) as facile and scientifically invalid.

Using Evolutionary Psychology as a foundation, Boyer describes how specific brain structures evolved to perform specific inferences related to basic survival (especially relevant are predatory and contagion inference) and the numerous inter-related systems used for conspecific interaction and cooperation. [It is especially important to understand that most inferences operate apart from conscious perception.] After comprehensive discussion of the multitudinous, interactive inference systems, Boyer describes how they collectively work to form religion. He explains that most varieties religious concepts (gods, spirits and other supernatural agents and their abilities; morality; death issues, etc.) and public behavior (rituals and prayer, religious-associated violence) can be explained in terms of these inference systems.

While he presents an effective argument for most aspects of religion, Boyer admits that a convincing scientific explanation for some forms of ritualistic behavior is elusive. He offers detailed speculation regarding the etiology of rituals, but admits the research at this time is inconclusive and mostly speculative. He compares rituals to similar non-religious activity, such as the compulsions associated with Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder, but this is only a plausible partial explanation because religious rituals exhibit distinct differences. OCD compulsions are undesired and cause psychological distress in the participant, while participation in rituals is usually voluntary and isn't inherently distressing to the participants (though sometimes it can be). Also, rituals normally occur in a culturally-related social context while compulsions are a repetitive form of individual behavior.

The only element of Religion Explained that was a little disappointing to me was the cursory discussion of secularism. Boyer explains that religion (in one form or another) is conducive to normal human brain functions. This of course evokes discussion of why some people are completely irreligious. Boyer only touches on this issue briefly and in a manner which seems a little obtuse to me (he states the issue isn't completely explanable in the context of his argument).

Religion Explained is a fascinating scientific treatise on a unique and undeniably significant form of human behavior. This is a fairly complex work (a behavioral science background is certainly helpful), but only to the extent necessary to form a coherent, comprehensive argument. Boyer has shown undeniably that the etiology of religion is far more multi-faceted than most people infer (both scientists and non-scientists). While his argument will certainly be refined as the various conceptual elements evolve and more research emerges, this new, scientifically vital approach ro religion will likely prove to be a monumental achievement.

Rating:
Summary: A Groundbreaking Work in Behavioral Science.
Review: In Religion Explained, Boyer attempts what no one else (to my knowledged) has: to present a comprehensive scientific explanation for religion. To undertake such a daunting task, Boyer employees numerous behavioral science disciplines, including evolutionary psychology, experimental social psychology, anthropology, sociology, and archeology just to mention a few. Early on, he debunks common and prevalent explanations for religion (many of which I subscribed to before reading this book) as facile and scientifically invalid.

Using Evolutionary Psychology as a foundation, Boyer describes how specific brain structures evolved to perform specific inferences related to basic survival (especially relevant are predatory and contagion inference) and the numerous inter-related systems used for conspecific interaction and cooperation. [It is especially important to understand that most inferences operate apart from conscious perception.] After comprehensive discussion of the multitudinous, interactive inference systems, Boyer describes how they collectively work to form religion. He explains that most varieties religious concepts (gods, spirits and other supernatural agents and their abilities; morality; death issues, etc.) and public behavior (rituals and prayer, religious-associated violence) can be explained in terms of these inference systems.

While he presents an effective argument for most aspects of religion, Boyer admits that a convincing scientific explanation for some forms of ritualistic behavior is elusive. He offers detailed speculation regarding the etiology of rituals, but admits the research at this time is inconclusive and mostly speculative. He compares rituals to similar non-religious activity, such as the compulsions associated with Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder, but this is only a plausible partial explanation because religious rituals exhibit distinct differences. OCD compulsions are undesired and cause psychological distress in the participant, while participation in rituals is usually voluntary and isn't inherently distressing to the participants (though sometimes it can be). Also, rituals normally occur in a culturally-related social context while compulsions are a repetitive form of individual behavior.

The only element of Religion Explained that was a little disappointing to me was the cursory discussion of secularism. Boyer explains that religion (in one form or another) is conducive to normal human brain functions. This of course evokes discussion of why some people are completely irreligious. Boyer only touches on this issue briefly and in a manner which seems a little obtuse to me (he states the issue isn't completely explanable in the context of his argument).

Religion Explained is a fascinating scientific treatise on a unique and undeniably significant form of human behavior. This is a fairly complex work (a behavioral science background is certainly helpful), but only to the extent necessary to form a coherent, comprehensive argument. Boyer has shown undeniably that the etiology of religion is far more multi-faceted than most people infer (both scientists and non-scientists). While his argument will certainly be refined as the various conceptual elements evolve and more research emerges, this new, scientifically vital approach ro religion will likely prove to be a monumental achievement.

Rating:
Summary: A masterful exploration of how the brain shapes belief
Review: In RELIGION EXPLAINED, Pascal Boyer explores the mental machinery behind belief and the dynamics of belief transmission within human societies. Drawing upon diverse scientific disciplines, including psychology, sociology, neurophysiology, cognitive science, and linguistics, Boyer reveals some of the deep dark secrets of the human brain, and sheds light on the persistent hold that religions have maintained on society throughout recorded history. The essential observation with which Boyer begins is that beliefs are not transmitted among humans verbatim; they survive only by virtue of complex and largely hidden processes in the brain, which predispose us to make certain types of inferences and to form certain types of memories. Thus, what is retained and subsequently transmitted is not merely a function of the input, but also of the medium through which it passes -- that is, the brain. Ideas and beliefs that become stable in a society are those that are efficiently stored, recalled, and transmitted by the human brain. Boyer explores the many intriguing implications of these observations and supports his conclusions with recent findings from diverse areas of science.

This is one of those rare books that can literally change the way you perceive the world; it will give you a new perspective that can demystify many perplexing aspects of human societies -- particularly those involving the bewildering panoply of religious beliefs and rituals. Why are supernatural beings imagined as human-like, with emotions and quirks, yet able to read the minds or transcend space and time? Why are religionists keenly aware of what a supernatural agent does, and why, yet never wonder how his deeds are actually accomplished? Why do religions so frequently involve sacrifices and carefully scripted ceremonies? Boyer argues that all of these oddities can be clearly understood in terms of a small number of basic templates that we unconsciously invoke as we reason about the world. As Boyer puts it,

"People build concepts in ways that activate their inference systems most and produce the richest set of inferences with the least cognitive effort."

For example, people are particularly attuned to factors that impinge on social interactions -- they pick them up very readily, and store them and transmit them efficiently. This fact alone begins to shed light on the human propensity to invent human-like gods that are intimately concerned with human affairs. Simply put, our brains are laden with machinery to discern, interpret, and reason about social interaction; it's what our brains look for and traffic in. We are prepared to draw many detailed inferences from scant social cues. No wonder virtually every god is made in the image of man. Boyer also examines the connection between religions and morality, and argues that

"Religion does not really support morality, it is people's moral intuitions that make religion plausible; religion does not explain misfortune, it is the way people explain misfortune that makes religion easier to acquire."

Boyer supports this type of claim by exploring the underlying templates that give rise to our intuitions. While there is clearly much more to investigate and to corroborate, the explanations that Boyer provides are surprisingly succinct and powerful; they will allow you to see things that have hitherto gone unnoticed because they are so obvious and automatic, such as our propensity to ascribe intentionality to inanimate objects (if only metaphorically), or to irrationally imbue ceremonies with great meaning and power. As Boyer amply demonstrates, these things escape our notice not because they are trivial, but because the cognitive mechanisms responsible for them are highly specialized and hidden from conscious inspection. We can catch the underlying mechanisms in the act only through cleverly designed experiments; introspection is all but useless.

There are a number of instances in which Boyer may be rightly criticized for telling "just so" stories -- that is, engaging in speculation that goes well beyond the evidence. Although this is often necessary when one is framing a new theory, Boyer occasionally neglects to note when we have left the realm of science and entered the realm of speculation. On balance, however, Boyer does a marvelous job of substantiating his assertions with findings from cognitive science and anthropology while managing to keep the discussion lively and engaging.

Religionists should be warned that Boyer does not even entertain the possibility that religions arise from some objective truth. While the astute reader will sense this immediately, Boyer does not state this plainly until page 48: "...people who think that we have religion because religion is TRUE... will find little here to support their views and in fact no discussion of these views." Although I personally have no quarrel with this stance, I would have been happier had Boyer made this disclosure on page 1. One gets the impression that this is left unsaid until page 48 because the author felt it was unimportant to address believers. One side effect of this attitude is that religionists will likely reject the book in toto, and quite vehemently at that. This is unfortunate because the book offers many fascinating insights into human cognition and it is quite conceivable that a religionist could happily agree that it helps to explain all OTHER religions, and the many (wrong-headed) sects within one's own religion.

I anticipate many strong objections to issue from believers. It will be interesting to follow this, provided they refrain from attacking a straw man. For instance, it would be all too easy to assert that Boyer is misguided, given that he has clearly never had a personal relationship with Jesus, or some such deity, implying that the objective reality of certain religious percepts is manifest to those who have had such experiences. Unfortunately, this type of attack would miss the mark by a considerable margin. What one needs to argue is why such "relationships" have any connection with objective reality, given that the human brain is so intrinsically biased toward social interaction that it will frequently perceive human (or supernatural) agency where none exists. In other words, the question is not WHETHER one has such perceptions and beliefs, but WHY. Religionists attribute these experiences to the actual existence of their respective deities, while Boyer and many others argue quite compellingly that they are simply normal epiphenomena of the brain.

If everyone can stay focused on that distinction, it will be a fascinating and lively debate. I have my bucket of popcorn ready.