The Evolution of Belief.
From The Times:
SPIRITUALITY and a belief in God may be a result of evolutionary pressure, Lord Winston said yesterday. The Labour peer stepped out of line with mainstream scientific thinking to suggest that religiosity may have a genetic basis. He argued that, in life or death situations, belief can be the key to survival and for this reason has become programmed into human genes. “I take the view, which is quite controversial among scientists, that religious values are worthwhile,” Lord Winston said.
“There may be a selective reason why we have become religious. Evolutionary pressure may have meant it was an advantage to us. My premise is that man was a deeply threatened species from the savannah. I think that having a feeling there’s something above you may have been a powerful help to survival.” The belief in some form of spirituality led, in time, to the development of organised religions such as Christianity, Judaism and Islam, he said.
He dismissed, however, the idea that the identification of a gene that predisposes people to believe in God would get science any closer to answering the question of whether there is a God. It would, though, reduce the gulf that exists between scientific thought and theology because they would cease to be seen as diametrically opposed. “My contention is we cannot explain the universe,” he said. “Religion and science are different views of looking at uncertainty. I don’t think they are opposed.”
The existence of a religiosity gene could have been an important factor in man’s struggle for survival but would by no means have been an over-riding consideration. “It would be a side issue in evolution,” he said. “If it wasn’t, we would all be wholly religious or wholly unreligious.”
Interesting idea I thought. Is there a ‘God’ gene which promotes spirituality/religiosity? Does that explain why so many people believe in some kind of divine being? I also can’t help wondering that, if such a gene exists, whether it would be possible to invent a vaccine that, in effect, turns the gene off. Wouldn’t that be interesting? Finally, if such a gene does exist then what does it say (if anything) about the actually existence of a Creator – is the gene essentially God?
About Me
- CyberKitten
- I have a burning need to know stuff and I love asking awkward questions.
4 comments:
“Religion and science are different views of looking at uncertainty. I don’t think they are opposed.”
Wow, what an interesting concept. I have seen reports of religious people living longer, healthier lives than non-religious people. I think the scientists hypothesized that maybe the positive attitude and not getting so stressed because "God is watching over" them attitude is what helped the religious people. So there might be a genetic "survival" reason that we're religious. It's interesting to think about. If we're truly made up of selfish genes bent on survival, it is interesting the creative lengths genes have gone to, to assure their survival.
Lord Winston is an interesting guy. He's got a 10 part series on the BBC ATM about God. I've watched the first Ep which was fairly reasonable. No doubt it'll be shown on your side of the pond @ some point....
1. there can't be a "god" gene. thats completely not how genetics works. At the most there may be a "belief" (or gullibility) gene that vmakes people more prone to beliving things with no need for substantial scientific evidence.
2. If we found it, why should we invent a vaccine? that is not what science or religion is about surely. The same argument came up about the "gay" gene. Just because you personaly don't agree with it, does not make it a disease!
3. the gene would not be god, nor proof of his existance/non existance. Just a liklihood of that person believing god exists.
I like Lord Winston, but this seems well below his normal programmes. I missed the 1st episode myself though. I know he was brought uo a practising Jew though - methinks he doth protest too much in this instance.
Mrs A said: At the most there may be a "belief" gene that makes people more prone to beliving things with no need for substantial scientific evidence.
I think that's what he was getting at. The article actually called it a "religiosity gene" - a gene that makes a person prone to thinking about the world in a religious way. I called it a 'God' gene.
Mrs A said: If we found it, why should we invent a vaccine?
I was being sarcastic & provocative - would you expect anything less from me? It was a 'left-field' idea that popped into my head. If a 'God' gene could be found - and somehow 'turned off' it would make for interesting consequences or at least an interesting SF story...
Finally Mrs A said: the gene would not be god, nor proof of his existance/non existance. Just a liklihood of that person believing god exists.
What I meant about the gene 'being' God was the idea that maybe the only reason so many people believe in Him is because they have the gene. Maybe without it people would dismiss the idea as pure wish fulfilment fantasy. So the gene actually represents God in our minds. Without it the question of His existence wouldn't even arise. It's an interesting thought... at least I think so.
Post a Comment