And
the Lord God said, “The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and
evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree
of life and eat, and live forever.”
Genesis 3:22
This
is extracted from Air Water Ground: An
Essay on New Adaptive Strategies,
© 1978-2014 for different part, Jay Moynihan, all rights reserved. Portions of
part 2 published previously in “The Wider View” column, © 1994-2002 Jay
Moynihan.
Cover photo: Copper
Falls, after sunset, © 1986, Jay
Moynihan.
Disclaimer
I am
responsible for the contents herein. It should not be assumed or thought that
anything herein is in anyway the view or opinion of any past, present, or
future clients, employers, acquaintances, friends, family, etc.
The
question of whether or not god(s) exist is not interesting, scientifically. The
characteristics of god(s) are by their nature not subject to scientific study.[1]
But we can observe and study human behavior, tools, and given language and
psychology; symbolic objects. So study of the origins of spirituality, and the
social phenomena of religion can be interesting, scientifically.
In
the last couple of decades this has become an area of significant interest
among some of those interested in evolutionary theory. I intend here, to set forth my own views on
this subject.
Many years ago on a summer day I did a
thought experiment. The day was clear with a few high fluffy clouds and a soft
breeze. I was laying on a lawn, on my back starring up. I decided to cast my
mind back in jumps of about 100 years. Meaning, I would relax, anchored with
the earth under my back and imagine the whole of my specie a century before.
What did I, as a well-educated individual know and believe? When I would get a
gestalt of that space-time, I would jump back another 100 years. After a while
of course, I ran out of track. There I was imagining East Africa. The Rift
Valley, and eventually, nothing. Mind empty. Small white clouds slowly moved
across the sky. Moving.
I
sat up quickly. Yes! If it moves, it is alive.
Animation. Anima. The vital principle,
Animus, the soul. “Latin anima (“a current of air, wind, air, breath, the vital
principle, life, soul”), sometimes equivalent to animus (“mind”); see animus
and compare Greek άνεμος (“wind”).” [2]
Absent modern knowledge, absent even
medieval knowledge, the primitive logic is crystalline. [3]
What moves is alive.
I am, I move, and I intend to move.
What moves is alive.
I am, I move, and I intend to move.
Therefore
What
moves, intends.
If
it intends, I can communicate with it. I can scare it or placate it. Maybe it
will help me.
Sympathetic
magic is born?
The Golden Bough and other books over
the years propose a progression of sorts from sympathetic magic, or animism to
later forms. Some propose a link between the changing conceptions of god(s) to
the changes over time in economic and social complexity. But in animism there
is in essence, a real biogeophysical object or effect (such as wind or heat).
Just as we and some other intelligent and social species exhibit theory of
mind, perhaps animism can be simply described as theory of mind applied to
natural objects generally.[4]
But
what about the other spiritualties? What about god(s)?
Most
writing, with the exception of the Mathew Alper’s “The God Part of the Brain
(1996) seems to explain the belief in god(s) by reference to its value to a
group. And how it develops via tag –mediated contingent altruism into social
structures, competing groups, etc. [5]
My interest is much narrower, and I think, basic. Separate and apart from its
value to a group, what is the benefit of spiritual beliefs/ related symbolic
objects to the phenotype? How is the individual’s fitness enhanced?[6]
It
is an assumption in ethology that if a behavior or set of behaviors is shared
across the population of a specie, it is biological, not learned. The belief in
the supernatural is cross-cultural in humans.[7]
Therefore, we must assume it is not at its origin a cultural or learned
characteristic.[8]
Lets
inventory some of the probable characteristics of our hominid ancestors.
- Endothermic
- social
- Allo-parenting
- Omnivorous
- Kinship Altruism
- Tag-Mediated Contingent Altruism
- Reciprocal Altrusim
- Arboreal
All
of these are found in primates, and their distant past appears to be
arboreal. An arboreal environment is
thought to contribute to complex neural development in some species due to the
necessity of three dimensional navigation, triangulation etc. In a social arboreal specie,
relationships would also take place in three dimensions. Add to this ancestry and the big-brain
& hyper vigilance mechanisms common
in social prey species of arboreal origin. [9]
My
speculation is that self awareness is a spandrel formed by the probable
characteristics of our hominid ancestors listed above. That self awareness then
became an exaptation. That original value[10] of
self awareness to a phenotype was more efficient exercise of reciprocity, and
more precise application of theory of mind.[11]
Self
awareness had a price.[12]
With self awareness comes knowledge of your death and imaginings of harms. This
is not just the fear/instinct reactions to avoid a predator. It is a personal
and existential terror.
The
role of symbolic object(s) of god(s) in lessening this problem and other points
are well explained in Alper’s book. This alone could probably be a fitness
value of such importance to “justify” it alone.
Expanding
on the anxiety aspect. Consider the four foundation principles.[13]
Anxiety can interfere with the pursuit of them. Spirituality can also, enhance
the efficacy of the phenotype in their pursuit.
The
reduction of anxiety can be enhanced by the development of teleological
concepts, which spirituality is a very fertile ground for. Spirituality also can turn anxieties,
including existential ones, into symbolic meta-sets of related symbolic objects
and thoughts. These meta-sets can then themselves become even more abstract,
inclusive symbolic objects. These in turn can then be mentally used and
manipulated with less time expenditure. Also, the greater level of abstraction
reduces anxiety by creating “distance” from the immediacy of the threat.
In
its broadest sense, the fitness value of
spirituality for the phenotype is that it may avoid the mental friction or
disability or lessen the intensity of combinatorial explosion, that I think may
be a danger of self-awareness.[14]
While
the value of spirituality (if shared) by groups is apparent, we should not
forget that the ability of the phenotype to build tag-mediated contingent
altruism with in the group would be to his or her benefit. Assuming that
teleological schema and relevant meta-sets are shared within a group, the
ability to communicate and use them could increase a phenotype’s fitness even
with conspecifics in its group. This would enhance many things, including
alliance building, given the importance of trust, and the role of tag-mediated
contingent altruism in that.[15]
[1] If
a scripture states events occurring in biogeophysical space-time in the past,
those events may be subject to study, assuming there is a sufficient historical
record and evidence for the events. But to argue from the scripture itself as
proof, is an example of argument from authority (also known as appeal to authority)
which is a logical fallacy. That is
where it is argued that a statement is correct because the statement is made by
a person or source that is authoritative. It is also known as argumentum ad
verecundiam (argument to respect), argumentum ad potentiam (argument to power),
Besides, "The weight of evidence for an extraordinary claim must be
proportioned to its strangeness." Marcello Truzzi.
[3] It
is arguable that a linguistic artifact of this can be found in all human
languages. It is called the Pathetic Fallacy (referring to pathos). It is the
treatment of inanimate objects as if they had human feelings, thought, or
sensations. Examples are phrases such as “angry clouds”, vengeful sea, etc.
[4]
The rituals of animism and sympathetic magic can I think be viewed as an early
“technology”, to influence the environment and its creatures.
[5]
Much of the argument made by the so called “New Atheists (Dworkin, Dennet, et al)
seem to dwell in this “benefit to group” landscape, with a bit of a tip of the
hat to anxiety reduction functions, which I do not mean to diminish. The role
of spirituality and its social form religion in behavior is very powerful. As a
binding factor within groups that are comprised of little or no kinships it can
play an important role. It can also provide closure on non-utilitarian
speculation or anxiety within a group during times of stress. Allows “chunking”
together of higher order abstractions into communicable, reassuring forms.
Obviously, it can be a key element in tag-mediated contingent altruism, with it
minutiae, symbols and other tags acting to build trust, or separate
populations. Spiritual symbolic objects and religious symbols/rituals can reinforce
trusted behavior patterns, define and identify cheaters, and given an “unseen”
observer, can even decrease the frequency of social cheating. All of this would
reinforce cooperation. I recommend to
the reader the many papers by Robert Axelrod, such as Evolution of Cooperation
without Reciprocity (2001). Speech, and shared symbolic metasets would lend to
an ever stronger tag-mediated contingent altruism. Unfortunately, with
isolation and divergence between groups, pseudospeciation could also be stronger.
[6] In
a strictly Neo-Darwinian view, a characteristic will continue if it is survival
neutral and gets “carried along” or it is positive to survival. Therefore, the
most important examination of this has to be at the individual level, not the
group level. Something had to have formed at the phenotypic level, and have
been more favorable than not to persist, and to be available for group (social)
use.
[7] A
biological predisposition in a specie does not always express exactly alike.
The more social and complex a species’ behavioral ability, the more diverse the
expression.
[8]
Obviously, its detail’s and forms would be learned and passed on social, in
whatever social group is involved. For a list of cross cultural behaviors,
usually termed “Universal Behaviors”, see: The Evolution of Childhood, M.
Konner, p. 715, (2010).
[9]
Hyper vigilance mechanisms “keep people alert and ready, but also make them
overly inclined to attribute a natural event as some kind of intentional act.”
The Cognitive Psychology of Belief in the Super-Natural, Jessie M. Bering. American Scientist v94 #2, p. 149.
Also see: Hyper Vigilance and (Inferred Intent) Religion , Justin Bartlett,
Institute of Cognition and Culture (Belfast) and Scott Atran, University of
Michigan. These papers include interesting discussions of among other things;
an innate mind-body dualism in very young children, innate belief in
consciousness surviving death, and various theory of mind matters also.
[10]
Obviously self awareness can be seen as enabling a wide variety of new
behaviors. For example, I would strongly doubt language could develop without self awareness.
[11] A
spandrel is a feature passed down as part and parcel with another trait(s), and is not in and of
itself, “naturally selected”. (S.J. Gould & R. Lewontin). An exaptation is
a feature or characteristic that has come with time to have a utility, but in
the past it had a different utility or no utility at all. (Gould & Vrba).
The classic example of an exaptation is feathers. Originally associated with thermal
regulation, and only later as an aid to flight.
[12]
As Adam & Eve, Prometheus and other characters in creation stories would
attest. I
have always been found of an ancient Greek story about this. When Prometheus’s
gift to humans made them become self aware, they experienced great fear and
anxiety. The goddess Ceres took pity upon them, and taught them how to make
beer, so they could at least for a while forget their pain.
[13] .
Four “foundation” principles:
Maximization of positive reinforcement (a phenotype
will seek stimuli that are a reward),
Freedom from predation (a phenotype will seek a state
free from predation).
Reproductive opportunity (a phenotype will seek
replication or reproduction).
Maximization of advantage of progeny (a phenotype will
act in an environment ( or fitness landscape ) to increase the relative fitness
of its progeny).
[14]
Combinatorial explosion is an idea from cybernetics. It is a problem that can
arise in systems engaged in automated theorem proving. A search must be used to
try all choices, known as an exhaustive search. The problem in such a search is
that “the number of intermediate expressions we must generate grows
super-exponentially with the length of the desired proof.” The exhaustive
search becomes unfeasible due to time and storage necessary to prove the
theorem. http://www.aaai.org/Papers/AIPS/1996/AIPS96-033.pdf
& http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Combinatorial_explosion
Posts
