Evolutionary explanation of religion

[Apollo]

It is a hypothesis (interchanged as theory loosely speaking) favored by many evolutionary psychologists —it would be great if there could be some direct genetic proof but there is none at the moment so in my mind the question here really is that is it a plausible hypothesis? And the answer for me is yes. I guess you feel differently.

[The Grand Nudger]

Let's see a link to that effect. I'm completely unaware of any hypothesis which posits that god belief is a heritable trait. At least we could compare whatever this hypothesis is with the consensus view.

[Apollo]

Let's see a link to that effect.  I'm completely unaware of any hypothesis which posits that god belief is a heritable trait.  At least we could compare whatever this hypothesis is with the consensus view.

1- https://www2.psych.ubc.ca/~henrich/pdfs/..._00018.pdf

Excerpt:

Mundane agent concepts are central players in what psychologists refer to as folkpsychology, associated with a Theory of Mind module(s) (ToM), which is a cognitive system devoted to making inferences about the beliefs, desires, and intentions of other minds (Baron-Cohen 1995). Recent functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) studies confirm that people’s statements about God’s involvement in social events, as well as the deity’s purported emotional states, reliably engage ToMrelated regions of the brain (Kapogiannis et al. 2009).

2- Handbook of Evolutionary psychology . by David Buss - Chapter 35 

One key cognitive capacity implicated in religion is mentalizing (theory of mind), which enables people to detect and infer the existence and content of other minds (Epley & Waytz, 2010; Frith & Frith, 2003). This capacity also facilitates two key intuitions that ground religious belief: that minds can operate separately from bodies, or mind-body dualism (Bloom, 2007; Willard & Norenzayan, 2013), and that all people, things, and events exist for a purpose, or teleology (Banerjee & Bloom, 2013; Kelemen, 2004). By recruiting mentalizing abilities, believers treat gods as disembodied beings who possess humanlike goals, beliefs, and desires (Barrett, 2004; Bering, 2011; Epley, Waytz, & Cacioppo, 2007; Guthrie, 1993). Consistent with the by-product argument that religious thinking recruits ordinary capacities for mentalizing, thinking about or praying to God activates brain regions associated with theory of mind (Schjoedt, Stødkilde-Jørgensen, Geertz, & Roepstorff, 2009), and reduced mentalizing tendencies or abilities, as found in the autistic spectrum, predicts reduced belief in God (Norenzayan, Gervais, & Trzesniewski, 2012).

(Page 851). 

Online scanned version of the chapter:

3- https://www2.psych.ubc.ca/~ara/Manuscrip...igion4.pdf


Paper on fMRI study of brain neural network associating concept of god to the areas known to be related to Theory of mind module.

We propose an integrative cognitive neuroscience framework for understanding the cognitive and neural foundations of religious belief. Our analysis reveals 3 psychological dimensions of religious belief (God’s perceived level of involvement, God’s perceived emotion, and doctrinal/experiential religious knowledge), which functional MRI localizes within networks processing Theory of Mind regarding intent and emotion, abstract semantics, and imagery. Our results are unique in demonstrating that specific components of religious belief are mediated by well-known brain networks, and support contemporary psychological theories that ground religious belief within evolutionary adaptive cognitive functions.

https://www.pnas.org/content/pnas/early/...6.full.pdf

[The Grand Nudger]

This doesn't posit god belief as a heritable trait, or present an evolutionary explanation for god belief. It's the boilerplate assertion that human biology is involved in human thought.

If agent mentalization where the evolutionary explanation for god beliefs there would be even more god believers than there are, and we would have expected to see evidence of god belief much sooner in the archaeological record. We're all capable of that, and the possession of that ability does not seem to confer god belief now or in the past.

We seem to have stumbled into exactly the sort of thing that Angrboda cautioned against back on page one.

[Mister Agenda]

It's like we have a set of mental instruments, and we try to calibrate reality to fit them rather than the other way around, so we are prone to errors when we try to over-extend those instruments beyond what they evolved for.

[The Grand Nudger]

It was much easier to leave a hand axe in the past than it has been to leave the brain that made them.

[Apollo]

This doesn't posit god belief as a heritable trait, or present an evolutionary explanation for god belief.  It's the boilerplate assertion that human biology is involved in human thought.  

If agent mentalization where the evolutionary explanation for god beliefs there would be even more god believers than there are, and we would have expected to see evidence of god belief much sooner in the archaeological record.  We're all capable of that, and the possession of that ability does not seem to confer god belief now or in the past.

We seem to have stumbled into exactly the sort of thing that Angrboda cautioned against back on page one.

God belief is a heritable traits are your words, not mine. What I have posited from the beginning is the theorizing (hypothesizing) of cognitive byproduct that gives rise to believing in a supernatural entity due to other cognitive abilities like pattern seeking and theory of mind.

The links you asked and I provided allude to the question, "is there enough there to formulate a hypothesis"? I think so. I think it's a plausible hypothesis.

Saying that is not saying "god belief is heritable" - (although I do believe it, but it's a belief, not a proof –– a lot of people also believe in multiverses on some plausible basis, but they don't have a proof –– so there is a distinction here).

[The Grand Nudger]

I think that the idea that something as specific as a belief in a god could be heritable is interesting. We're somewhere between fate and a blank slate, so it's not out of the realm of plausibility.

[Prycejosh1987]

Evolution in terms of biblical studying is we do evolve but only in intelligence and not physical design.

[Peebothuhlu]

At work.

Hello Chess Pigeon aka Prycejosh1987!

Evolution in terms of biblical studying is we do evolve but only in intelligence and not physical design.

What does the above even mean? Perhapse you could expand or elaborate some more?

Perhaps you're using the word 'Evolution' in/with more than one connotation within the same sentence?