Apparently, we are hard-wired for superstition and religion. This is according to Bruce Hood, of Bristol University, in the UK. I learned this from an article in the Guardian by James Randerson, which you can read here. The good professor:
suggests that magical and supernatural beliefs are hardwired into our brains from birth, and that religions are therefore tapping into a powerful psychological force.
He goes on to say (in a speech at the British Association Festival of Science in Norwich, or, more probably the press conference after his session):
“I think it is pointless to think that we can get people to abandon their belief systems because they are operating at such a fundamental level,” …. “No amount of rational evidence is going to be taken on board to get people to abandon those ideas.”
And what is being called “irrational”, by the way? Another quote:
But almost everyone entertains some form of irrational beliefs even if they are not religious.
“For example, many people would be reluctant to part with a wedding ring for an identical ring because of the personal significance it holds.
I’m sorry, but I don’t see why that is irrational. Since when is preferring objects of emotional significance actually irrational? All this seems to do is reinforce for the reader the stereotype that scientists regard emotions as “illogical”. This is of course utter crap, if you’ll pardon my French.
“No amount of rational evidence…” Really? I actually have found that there are a lot of things that people are willing to abandon as “irrational beliefs” if you take the time to explain the “rational” facts behind something. Not everything, I’ll admit, but this statement just seems a bit too broad and, frankly, defeatist, to me. I’m sure he probably said quite a bit more, but this is newspaper science reporting, remember. We should go and read his paper, study his data, and so forth. If he has any. It is not mentioned. In fact, there’s no mention of what I would call an actual scientific study in this report.
His “experiments” are described, for example as follows:
In his lectures, Prof Hood produces a rather boring-looking blue cardigan with large brown buttons and invites people in the audience to put it on, for a £10 reward. As you may expect, there is invariably a sea of raised hands. He then reveals that the notorious murderer Fred West wore the cardigan. Nearly everyone puts their hand down.
And another….
Another experiment involves asking subjects to cut up a photograph. When his team then measures their galvanic skin response – ie sweat production, which is what lie-detector tests monitors – there is a jump in the reading. This does not occur when a person destroys an object of less sentimental significance.
Wow. Could someone explain to me why either of these experiments illustrate that human beings are hard-wired to be superstitious, religious, or “irrational”? No disrespect to the scientist, who may or may not have done excellent work, but this article does not actually have vey much in the way of science in it, nor does it tell you if there was any actual science done, point to maybe some numbers from a study, some physiological input (to back up this phrase “hard-wired”), etc. I’ve no idea what this article is trying to communicate.
It is frustrating, since it is actually an interesting topic. Had there been some discussion of perhaps an evolutionary basis for some things that we now think of as superstition, this might have been interesting. There are several fears, and behaviours that we have based on these fears, that can arguably be traced to our evolutionary history. Or just plain common sense (it makes a lot of sense to me to not walk under a ladder. I don’t know what’s going on up there… why risk it?). Bascially, ignorance -and lack of control- of a lot of factors and variables can lead one to behave in a certain way, or construct a world view based upon the few facts you have control over. This is often a good survival strategy. It is hard to let go of these sometimes. This would be a really good starting point for the “hard-wiring” being discussed. I’m willing to bet the professor knows or has considered this. Or at least I hope so. Is any of this in the article? No.
-cvj
Reminds me of a good definition I once heard.
What is the difference between superstition and religion?
Answer: superstitious people believe in the existence of spirits *outside* human bodies. Religious people believe in the existence of spirits *inside* human bodies.
🙂
Excellent analysis. Sometimes it’s difficult to analyse science reportage unless you’re paying close attention sometimes. It’s very tempting to trust in the authority of the percieved source (ie the publication) without fully engaging your critical mind. I have to confess I’ve been guilty on ocassion of sheeplike reading.
Hi Spyder. I think you were trying to give a link to something in the above, but it did not take as you did not complete the html fully. Want to give it again?
Thanks.
-cvj
I am really surprised that Hood would not of course use some of the recent studies in consciousness and entheogens to support some of his claims. The latest, out of and funded by the NIDA, discusses the use of an entheogenic substance, in this case psilocybin, to induce a “spiritual” state in the test subject. Research in the last couple of decades, as bolstered this view, that indeed, disregarding any discussion on memes (at this time), human beings(and other primates and many mammals) possess the capacity to release specific neurotransmitters that in the presence of an MAO inhibiter induce an altered state of consciousness described as spiritual.
It is not irrational in any sense of that word, that our brains can be triggered to produce these bio-chemical reactions. Nor is it irrational that our brains, when in these states, consciously arrange symbols and mythic constructs in forms that are expressed to others as religious and divinely related. No, what is irrational, would be for people to hold the view that only some divine creator intelligently designed, not only our cerebral cortex, endocrine and limbic systems to develop these altered states, but also evolved angiosperms and fungi to provide alkaloids to aid in the process. Though, for some reason, so many people seem to hold that view.