Religion, Morality, Evolution
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
PS63CH08-Bloom ARI 31 October 2011 11:26 Religion, Morality, Evolution Paul Bloom Department of Psychology, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut 06520; email: [email protected] Annu. Rev. Psychol. 2012. 63:179–99 Keywords First published online as a Review in Advance on altruism, atheism, faith, kindness, prejudice, religiosity, supernatural September 21, 2011 belief Annu. Rev. Psychol. 2012.63:179-199. Downloaded from www.annualreviews.org The Annual Review of Psychology is online at psych.annualreviews.org Abstract by Yale University - STERLING CHEMISTRY LIBRARY on 01/18/12. For personal use only. This article’s doi: How did religion evolve? What effect does religion have on our moral 10.1146/annurev-psych-120710-100334 beliefs and moral actions? These questions are related, as some scholars Copyright c 2012 by Annual Reviews. propose that religion has evolved to enhance altruistic behavior toward All rights reserved members of one’s group. I review here data from survey studies (both 0066-4308/12/0110-0179$20.00 within and across countries), priming experiments, and correlational studies of the effects of religion on racial prejudice. I conclude that religion has powerfully good moral effects and powerfully bad moral effects, but these are due to aspects of religion that are shared by other human practices. There is surprisingly little evidence for a moral effect of specifically religious beliefs. 179 PS63CH08-Bloom ARI 31 October 2011 11:26 not talked about. Many would go further Contents and insist that religion isn’t a fit topic for science at all. To study it as a psychologist INTRODUCTION.................. 180 is to commit the sins of “scientism” and “re- TWO PUZZLES. 181 ductionism” (see Wieseltier 2006 for such an Religion and Morality . 181 attack). Evolution of Religion . 182 Since this article explores religious belief SENSESOFRELIGION............. 183 and practice, it’s worth addressing this concern RELIGION AND MORALITY: at the outset. One way to do so is to insist on POSSIBLE CONNECTIONS. 184 a distinction made by David Hume. In 1757, MORALITY AND THE Hume began The Natural History of Religion EVOLUTIONARY ORIGIN with this: “As every enquiry which regards reli- OFRELIGION................... 185 gion is of the utmost importance, there are two MORALITY WITHOUT questions in particular which challenge our at- RELIGION?...................... 187 tention, to wit, that concerning its foundation RELIGION AND GOODNESS, in reason, and that concerning its origin in hu- WITHIN AND ACROSS man nature” (p. 21). COUNTRIES..................... 188 There is a lot to be said about Hume’s first RELIGION AND GOODNESS, question and whether it is the proper focus of LABORATORY empirical inquiry. Some scholars believe that MANIPULATIONS.............. 189 religion’s “foundation in reason” falls within RELIGION, INGROUPS, the realm of science, while others disagree. ANDOUTGROUPS.............. 190 But the second question—religion’s “origin in EXPLAINING THE COMPLEX human nature”—is bread-and-butter psychol- EFFECTSOFRELIGION........ 192 ogy. How could psychology not address such DEBATING THE MORAL an important domain of belief, motivation, and RELEVANCE OF BELIEFS . 194 action? Critically, the psychology of religion can be studied independently of one’s belief about the truth of religious claims. Regardless of whether God exists, for instance, the ques- INTRODUCTION tion remains as to why so many people believe Psychologists typically ignore religion. It is he does (see Bloom 2009). barely mentioned in introductory textbooks, Why should psychologists be interested in and the best journals rarely publish papers on the topic? One consideration is the universal- the topic. Religion is seen as an exotic specialty ity of religious belief. Most people characterize Annu. Rev. Psychol. 2012.63:179-199. Downloaded from www.annualreviews.org area, like sexual fetishes or the detection of ran- themselves as belonging to a religion—typically dom number sequences. Christianity and Islam; about half of the by Yale University - STERLING CHEMISTRY LIBRARY on 01/18/12. For personal use only. This neglect isn’t limited to psychology 6.9 billion people on Earth see themselves as proper. McCauley & Whitehouse (2005, p. 3) falling into one of these two faiths. Most peo- note: “...as with so many contemporary intell- ple engage in various religious practices, such ectuals, cognitive scientists, until quite recently, as circumcision and church going and obeying have mostly found topics like religion to be an dietary restrictions, and most people hold reli- embarrassment.” They add: “No topic—not gious beliefs, such as believing in God or in life even sex, death, taxes, or terrorism—can elicit after death. any more quirky, unpredictable responses from Religion is ubiquitous in the United States, intellectuals than religion.” Religion is like sex where well over 90% of the population claims to a Victorian or dreams to a behaviorist—an to believe in God, and about 40% believe that awkward and embarrassing phenomenon best Jesus Christ will return to Earth in the next half 180 Bloom PS63CH08-Bloom ARI 31 October 2011 11:26 century (Appiah 2006). America is admittedly and culture, without some appreciation of reli- unusual compared to the countries of Western gion and how it works. Europe, where the citizens are less likely to af- filiate themselves with a religion and where they often claim not to believe in God. But looking TWO PUZZLES at the world as a whole, it is Western Europe Religion and Morality that is the exception. American religiosity sits well with the countries of Asia and Africa and The main focus of this review is the effect of the rest of the Americas—that is, most of the religious belief and religious affiliation on our rest of the planet. moral lives. To put it crudely, does religion Within the United States, there are politi- make people good, does it make them bad, or cal and social divides, and these correspond to does it have no effect at all? religiosity in the expected ways, with conser- Many people think they know the answer. vatives being more religious than liberals. But In a 2007 Gallup poll, most Americans said that religion is not limited to a conservative sub- they would not vote for an otherwise qualified group. Most people who identify themselves atheist to be president—they were more willing as Democrats pray daily or more often, and to vote for a Mormon, a Jew, or a homosexual. the vast majority believe in life after death Another study found that people ranked athe- (Waldman 2004). Even most American aca- ists lower than Muslims, recent immigrants, demics, who are among the more secular and and homosexuals in “sharing their vision of liberal members of our species, are religious. A American society” and were least willing to recent study of 40,000 faculty members at 421 allow their children to marry them (Edgell colleges (Lindholm et al. 2006) found that al- et al. 2006). When asked why there were so most two thirds said that they considered them- set against atheists, the answers had to do with selves religious either “to some extent” (29%) morality: or “to a great extent” (35%). In 1916, a large selection of scientists were Some people view atheists as problematic be- asked whether they believe in God, and the cause they associate them with illegality, such question was framed in a fairly strict manner, as drug use and prostitution—that is, with referring to a God who one could pray to and immoral people who threaten respectable actually get an answer from. Even with this community from the lower end of the sta- high bar, about 40% of scientists said yes—the tus hierarchy. Others saw atheists as rampant same percentage found in a similar poll in materialists and cultural elitists that threaten 1996 (Larson & Witham 1997). Only when common values from above—the ostenta- we look at the most elite scientists—members tiously wealthy who make a lifestyle out of Annu. Rev. Psychol. 2012.63:179-199. Downloaded from www.annualreviews.org of the National Academy of Sciences—do we consumption or the cultural elites who think find a strong majority of atheists and agnostics they know better than everyone else. Both by Yale University - STERLING CHEMISTRY LIBRARY on 01/18/12. For personal use only. (Larson & Witham 1998). of these themes rest on a view of atheists as Finally, religion is highly relevant to many self-interested individualists who are not con- people’s lives (Shermer 2003). Religious activ- cerned with the common good (pp. 225, 227). ities are a major source of everyday pleasure (Bloom 2010). And many important contempo- This distrust of atheists is shared by many rary social and political debates—over gay mar- scholars, including those who are otherwise riage, abortion, capital punishment, stem cell seen as champions of the Enlightenment. John research, the teaching of evolution in schools, Locke, for instance, did not believe that athe- and so on—are affected by people’s religious ists should be allowed to hold office. He wrote views. It is impossible to make sense of most of (1689, p. 51): “Promises, covenants, and oaths, human existence, including law, morality, war, which are the bonds of human society, can have www.annualreviews.org • Religion, Morality, Evolution 181 PS63CH08-Bloom ARI 31 October 2011 11:26 no hold upon an atheist” (quoted by Haidt & addressed through the study of societies, not Kesebir 2010). through psychological research into the minds There are other scholars who hold the op- of individuals. posite view, arguing that religion makes people Still, as we have seen, many believe that worse. Most would agree, after all, that religious religion does have an effect on individuals fanaticism and extremism can sometimes drive within a society, and they argue, plausibly people to do terrible things, and many would enough, that policy implications follow from agree as well that certain everyday religious this.