For a number of years I have been ruminating on the connection between our genetic make up and the human proclivity for creating gods, demons, ghosts, goblins, long legged beasties and things that go bump in the night. I am 99% convinced that a large percent of human beings are genetically predisposed to irrational belief to one degree or another. The most pronounced irrationality being religion.
The best demonstrable evidence of the genetic predisposition toward religion is that every human population, with few if any exceptions, embrace a supernatural religion or supernatural beliefs in one form or another. Many populations (gene pools) have been separated from each other by tens of thousands of years, (African populations were separated from the European and Asian populations by at least 70,000 years) .
This acceptance of the supernatural is not a cultural phenomenon as cultural traditions don't survive for millenniums – but the essential human genome does, as does our brain structure and brain chemistry. This strongly suggests that the genetic mechanism existed very early in human evolution. There is good evidence that the Neanderthal believed in an afterlife and practiced totemic rituals. As both H. sapient and H. neanderthalisis are descendant of H. erectus the traits very likely existed within that hominid line as well.
This predisposition did not arise from some errant mutation. Complex structures or behaviors do not appear, created out of whole cloth, due to a mutated gene, but rather, they arise from precursor, well established, traits; traits that were present in other animals to some degree but modified to new uses in humans. This is the same process by which complex organic structures such as the mammalian eye or bacterial flagella evolve.
It is my contention that the two principle precursor traits were the ability to connect cause and effect and the ability to recognize patterns in the environment, traits shared with many animals.
However, humans (and possibly the entire Hominid line) went beyond simple recognition and begin to actively seek out the causes for the phenomenon they witnessed and patterns in their environment (both premium survival traits). But, patterns changed with no apparent reason and events occurred with no observable cause.
This did not curtail the human desire to find cause for what they witnessed. Unfortunately, finding cause was well beyond their capacity to understand much of the natural phenomena around them. As such, they attributed volition to weather, earthquakes, fires, floods and the animals they relied on and feared – Animism.
Although primitive, even at this very early stage of religious development, the notion of a “personal god” or guardian spirit in the form of totemic animal spirits existed.
This evolved from "the spirit within the thing"-Animism, to a god figure ruling the elements ( rain gods, season gods, sun gods, fertility gods, harvest gods, volcano gods, and many others) and further to, protective gods of broad powers, but limited to a locality, (henotheism), then gods of human attributes and human form (war gods, hunter gods, pleasure gods, chief gods) and finally to the all powerful, omnipresent creator gods and monotheism.
The progression of religious sophistication is a cultural artifact that parallels other levels of cultural sophistication, however, the genetics, brain architecture and brain chemistry, specifically the proteins produced by those genes (proteomes); that apparatus was already in place.
Like many traits within a species there is generally a variability as to the expression of the gene or genes (the phenotype) and there are epigenetic factors that may trigger, suppress or enhance the genes expression . This could range from strong, phenotype , expression to weak or no expression

The continuation of the trait or traits was strongly re-enforced by society. Religion was the most enduring dictator of the local moral and behavioral standards. It had an influence on society that constrained secular rule and the whims of temporal rulers by providing a continuity of the values and structure of the society despite the temporal ruler's efforts to the contrary - the perpetual church/state tension that has existed throughout recorded history on who controls the populace and the wealth. [I use church in the broadest sense of the word]
Unfortunately this didn't just apply to bad decisions by temporal leaders but also to decisions that would have bettered the social condition for the people or eliminated human suffering and , in fact, more often than not the church in league with the state championed the worst subjugation of the people.
Institutionalized religion also had a definite influence on the increase in frequency of the relevant gene(s) within the gene pool, in that, those that did not hold to the religious dictates were likely shunned, ostracized, exiled or even killed – the effect being those unbelievers and doubters were less likely to reproduce within the population and did not pass their “genetic defect” to the next generation.

All of this, however, begs the question; how does the genetic and subsequent brain chemistry and brain anatomy lead to the irrational acceptance of a transcendent, non-corporeal entity(s) that directly interacts with and influences the real world ? Further, why do large segments of the population succumb to the irrationality with unwavering acceptance while other parts of the population (like here on A/N) completely reject such notions ​?
Some of the answers may reside in a region of the brain, in the parietal lobe, that functions to distinguish between the perception of the self (a concept as elusive as “soul” and “free will”) and that which is outside of the self. In other words it allows us to recognize that which is an external phenomenon and that which is generated internally. It is, I speculate, this architecture of the brain and the associated brain-chemistry that controls the degree of religiosity demonstrated by the human species.
Andy Newberg, a neuroscientist/physician with a background in space medicine, writes, ”When we think of religious and spiritual beliefs and practices, we see a tremendous similarity across practices and across traditions.
The frontal lobe, the area right behind our foreheads, helps us focus our attention in prayer and meditation.
The parietal lobe, located near the backs of our skulls, is the seat of our sensory information. Newberg says it's involved in that feeling of becoming part of something greater than oneself.
The limbic system, nestled deep in the center, regulates our emotions and is responsible for feelings of awe and joy”

Newberg calls religion the great equalizer and points out that similar areas of the brain are affected during prayer and meditation. Newberg suggests that these brain scans may provide proof that our brains are built to believe in God. He says there may be universal features of the human mind that actually make it easier for us to believe in a higher power.”

The effect would, in all likelihood, be a variable trait, with it's expression ranging from a strong affective behavior to a weak or no affective behavior.
One extreme of affectation would be the inability to separate strong internal perceptions with the real world. The result would be one who experiences that internal perception as reality and can no more be dissuaded of it's authenticity than one can be dissuaded that they have a nose on their face.
At the other extreme are ...well... us. If god showed up on any of our front porches, preformed several miracles including turning an empty beer can into a case of Maker's Mark Whiskey and a pound of sticky, skunky weed, we would still want to see some ID (although the whiskey and weed trick would probably peak my interest).
For us godless heathens the line of separation between internal and external phenomenon is to pronounced to allow our internal world to overflow in to the real world, unless we are suffering brain damage or a mental disorder, under the influence of a hallucinogenic drug , or willing suspend belief for our temporary entertainment. Even then, the aforementioned phenomenon shows the brain is capably of such distortion between self and non-self.
For the believer end of the genetic spectrum the experience can produce the illusion of voices, visions and the perception of paranormal powers; the culture, however, supplies the mythic framework around which the delusion takes form.
This phenomenon of human behavior is not limited to a belief in a supernatural deity , but extends to other areas of irrational thinking. Ancient alien contact, alien abductions, reincarnation, haunted places, curses, hexes, psychic powers, astrology and a dizzying array of other examples of irrational thinking; they are, most likely, a function of the same genetic makeup and brain chemistry/architecture.
A recent example of the power of the brain to switch its operating paradigm has been accounted by a number of astronauts.
Newburg is trying to discover, ”how to identify the markers of someone who has experienced space travel. He says there is a palpable difference in someone who has been in space, and he wants to know why. Newberg specializes in finding the neurological markers of brains in states of altered consciousness: Praying nuns, transcendental mediators, and others in focused or transcendent states”.
The transcendent state drifts into the fuzzy area of self/non-self and the ability to distinguish between the two. With the feeling of transcendent oneness and the limbic rewards of awe and pleasure, an individual could easily become addicted to their transcendent state of “holiness”.
In February, 1971, Apollo 14 astronaut Edgar Mitchell experienced the little understood phenomenon sometimes called the “Overview Effect”. He describes being completely engulfed by a profound sense of universal connectedness. Without warning, he says, a feeing of bliss, timelessness, and connectedness began to overwhelm him.
“Rusty Schweikart experienced it on March 6th 1969 during a spacewalk outside his Apollo 9 vehicle: “When you go around the Earth in an hour and a half, you begin to recognize that your identity is with that whole thing. That makes a change…it comes through to you so powerfully that you’re the sensing element for Man.”

The interesting thing about the “Overview Effect” is that it is not an overwhelming feeling of oneness with god, but rather, one of being god like.
One additional bit of evidence has raised some speculations on the historical “Giants of Religion” comes from Orrin Devinsky, who directs the epilepsy center at New York University.
“Some 2,500 years ago, Devinsky notes, Hippocrates wrote one of the very first texts we have on epilepsy — and he named it 'On the Sacred Disease.' The disease was considered sacred because the ancients thought that sufferers were possessed by demons, or blessed with divine messages and visions. Devinsky says neurologists suspect some of the religious giants were epileptics themselves. Did Paul hear Jesus on the road to Damascus, or was he experiencing an auditory hallucination? What about Joseph Smith and the two angels? Muhammad? Joan of Arc? And what about Moses and that burning bush?”
The “transcendent” mental state has been identified in brains scans that show a high level of activity in the parietal lobe. This information has been cited by theist as proof of god's communication with us by direct communication into our minds (souls?). Conversely, rationalist offer it as evidence that the transcendent, religious experience is simply a matter of genetics and the subsequent brain anatomy and chemistry .
All things considered, I think I have to concede the sad notion that the proclivity for irrational thinking among a great many members of the human species is an unfortunate part of our genetic heritage.
Genetics is a bitch to overcome – possible – but a bitch.

Views: 35

Replies to This Discussion

Carver,
You have psychic skills, perceiving and acting on an issue that is in my mind. "I am 99% convinced that a large percent of human beings are genetically predisposed to irrational belief to one degree or another. " you extracted that thought out of my brain. spooky.

Seriously, I like that you posted this. It's thoughtful and useful. I don't have enough time (useful attention span, anyway) to read your entire post, but I have saved it in my inbox to come back to it. Thanks for posting.
That's me the mind vampire.
Seriously I think most atheist have suspected that there is more to the appeal of theism than a loudmouth minister in a person's youth can can muster.
My father dumped the Catholic church at 18 and my mother looked at church as a social event and not much more. My father was a first generation Italian Catholic and my mother was a So. Carolina fundamentalist Baptist in their upbringing - I think they neutralized each other. Both my brother and I and our children and grand children are just a bunch of heathens.
Hey Carver,
Since today is my day off and I'm supposed to be catching up on important things, I read through your post instead. Probably, you are right in thinking about the presence of a "god gene" or "god genes" that are intrinsic to humans having an inclination to beleive. That desire to look for cause and effect is probably as important as being bipedal & having opposable thumbs, in the evolutionary process that moved humans from hunter-gatherer cave dwellers, to the present state.

Your thesis has a number of separate parts that would be interesting to address separately. For example -

1. Religion is universal among humans. I suspect this is true, but it is know that there are, say, primitive societies in the amazon or pacifica, that do not have religion? I'm fairly sure that there are no complex societies, in modern or ancient times, that do not have heirarchical religious structures - so I suspect that religion was a driving force in the develpment of complex, urban societies.

2. Religion has a biochemical basis. That might be testable, although it's a long shot. I would be curious about levels of biochemical markers, such as serotonin, dopamine, norepinephrine. Can a difference be found in the religious vs. nonreligious? do the levels change with religious thought or prayer? Would those changes be different from what might be seen in an ardent atheist, gazing lovingly at a photo of Sam Harris :-) Or reading one of his books?

3. Religion has a neuroanatomic basis. That might also be testable. A correlation has been seen in hypothalamic anatomy, with sexual orientation. So autopsies of free-thinker brains, vs. religious brains, could show differences. Similar with scans, including scans that not only show anatomy but actually show metabolic activity in various parts of the brain. Again, these could be done with freethinkers vs. relligionists, or people engaging in religious thought or prayer, vs. a freethinker comtemplating something nonreligious, say, Planet of the Apes.

4. Religioun has a genetic basis. OK, can we look for markers, similar to what was done in studying the evolution of races and ethnicity (an example can be found, paging down here to the you tube video). What if a religious marker could be found in the DNA - would those who are not religious be less likley to have the marker, or to have fewer copies?

This biological determinism can be debated. It would be interesting to see if it can be tested. Once I win the powerball lottery, I will fund that research. Pray for me. :-) Im aware that Sam Harris has been studying neuroanatomy, so maybe he's doing some of these things now. I seem to remember something about scans.
You've brought something to mind for me. Very early religions made sense to me. They worshiped ancestral spirits that they believed looked after them, and they believe in the many spirits in nature. However, all of their "gods" had clearly human traits, jealousy being most prominent. Having limited cognition and language capabilities it still further makes sense that the earth, the sun, the "givers of life" would me next to be worshiped exclusively. It's seems as if there had to be definitive evolution of religious ideologies. As people grew more intelligent the models of the universe had to adapt. Much like Neils Bohr's interpretation of Quantum Mechanics led to the understanding of what Alfred Korzybski called "mistaking the map for the territory". Falling into the illusion that what we see isn't all there is to be experienced.

This could explain a deep cellular level emotive response to feeling gratitude towards an earthly (Gaian) force for our very existence. I'm not sure that this was a direction you were taking this, but its causing some wild revelations for me. It doesn't explain the irrational behavior we typically find in modern society, except that perhaps society is partly to blame as well. All those rules, authorities, establishments... so many things to try to keep us from doing anything that may be "dangerous" for us. Come to think of it there isn't a whole lot of difference in governments and religions. Never really thought of that, at least not in the current context.

Whoa, that thought caught me up in some weird think-vortex... I apologize. :) Excellent post and so far equally excellent responses. I'm excited to see what direction this gets taken. That is quite a lot of information to ruminate upon in a succinct manner.
Thanks for your comments. I like the comparison of the model to the reality concerning Bohr's model of the atom.
One of our principle methods of understanding new concepts is by means of metaphor - associating a new process or model with a well understood process or model. One of the difficulties that the average educated person has with understanding much of theoretical physics is there are no useful real world metaphors that can be applied. (what's the metaphor that makes sense of the 11 dimensions of string theory?).
The problem comes in when the metaphor is confused with the reality.
, except that perhaps society is partly to blame as well.

A combination of forces at work upon human consciousness? These are very interesting ideas.
Am I correct in saying that this also connects to the old idea of the reptilian mind buried deep within our genetic make up? Or has my lack of education caused me to start mixing up hypothesis?
I think the the reptilian core may be responsible for the ritualized nature of religions as neuroanatomist believe that region governs ritualistic behaviour.

This could explain a deep cellular level emotive response to feeling gratitude towards an earthly (Gaian) force for our very existence.

This seems to be the direction of many of the settled agricultural societies who worshipped the "Mother, Hearth goddesses" as opposed to the nomadic pastoral societies that tended toward the "Father, Sky gods" as a tribe of middle eastern, nomadic goat herders did - guy named Abraham started it IIRC.
The current Newsweek has an article relevant to this discussion - here. This article discusses controversies related to the evolution of specific behaviors - "Why Do We Rape, Kill and Sleep Around?".

Even though these behaviors are not what is in this topic (granted, in religion there is rape, killing, and sleeping around), there is the concept of inherited behaviors, genetic and evolutionary basis for certain behaviors. The author has her own take on the matter. Sharing the idea may give some insight into the concept of genetic basis for spirituality. Some of the arguments related to "evolutionary psychology" and "behavioral ecology" are interesting.
The evolution of behavior is the core of Sociobiology, the founder of the discipline being E.O. Wilson (who,IMO, is one of the top 10 biologist of the 20th century) His writings made me a strong believer in the genetic basis of human (and other animals) behaviour and social constructs. The subject is fascinating to me.
tl;dr after the first third or so or something.

The development of deities to take care of things is a byproduct of sociality. The characterization of external events as actions taken by a character is useful. If allows the identification of characters as entities with connected histories of actions. It's like being on a site where you have to have an account to post things as compared to 4chan. Instead of the vague and useless "Newf*gs are the cancer that's killing /b/." type of statement that could be made prior to the development of the concept of a character, those earlier humans could say things more like "banme12345, jaxcons, and TehFlon0100 are the cancer that's killing /b/."

This trait of assigning characters to things is a biological process like any other, and, just as having *some* fur may be better than having none, taking that too far and having a hell of a lot of fur all over the place all the time will produce results that get in the way of more important things. This is just what happened.

The trait of assigning character-values to things came about and was successful and good 'cause it was correct for the every-minute dealings of the organisms that had it; however, when, in humans, this trait's effect was applied onto the broad observations of creatures with more intelligence, things that are not characters got parsed as characters. A perfect example is the sun. ( 0:52 to 3:17 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M2ZyGcy2g7g )

Religion came about with intelligence. It *was* intelligence about imaginary things, and with false results, but it didn't really affect anything, since the technology level of the day was fingers and sharpened rocks. True intelligence comes (and this is me really musing) with the conjunction "but". Whenever "but" comes into a sentence, it is due to context and considerations of conditions outside the current location or time. "The sun gives us bounty, but we have to respect the sun." I can imagine being said. Perhaps intelligence wouldn't have arisen at all if people weren't able to have their feelings hurt.

Intelligence itself is the result of evolution in the most beautiful and subtle manipulations of an extended phenotype, coming about as the result of people having hurt feelings, the concepts of respect and status, other social traits such as boxing events away as the products of actions by characters, and one last mutation to some genes or the spontaneous arrival of the meme that not all things are characters in the personal sense.

It is due to religion, in the old past, that we have the intelligence today to recognize that it's a load of crap. Ironic, eh? And, just as the spine, in it's curvéd glory, did a good job of supporting the bodies of quadrupeds and does a not-so-good job on us upright humans, while it is a holdover from an earlier state of affairs and fails to due it's job as well as it might and did and produces some side effects as well, it was the precursor to our current, good, situation, if we were to go through it again, we'd damn well better do that same thing again, and all there is to do now is to clean up the mess.
(Breaking eggs is messy, but it's the only way to eat what's inside. Just don't forget to take care of the mess afterward.)
I wish I had read your article before writing my own. Although I am comforted by the fact that at least two people have originated the "cause-and-effect to animism to polytheism to monotheism" argument to explain the origin of the singular god.

RSS

Support Atheist Nexus

Donate Today

Donate

 

Help Nexus When You Buy From Amazon

Amazon

AJY

 

© 2014   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service