Reading About Religion

Humans are tribal.

As near as I can tell, religion is more about ritual, practice, and community than about creeds or theology. It seems as though believers and atheists both want to downplay the practical benefits of religion. Atheists commonly refuse to grant that religion has any benefits at all, and believers prefer to think of religion’s benefits as supernatural rather than practical. My understanding of religion’s practical benefits derives largely from reading I’ve done over the last several years. Here are the books that you could read if you wanted to get a better sense of religion as a social institution that promotes group cohesion.

The Righteous Mind: Why Good People Are Divided by Politics and Religion, by Jonathan Haidt

This book talks about the ways that humans are “groupish.” It’s common to see people as selfish, which is how economic theory describes the “ideal human,” but we are also groupish. That is, we have instincts that allowed our ancestors to band together into cohesive groups, especially groups in which one can “lose oneself.” In the West, especially among the educated elite, individualism is so strong that we have a hard time even understanding the way that most humans see society and morality, that is, as oriented toward the needs of the group rather than toward the rights of the singleton. The topic of this book is morality, not religion per se, but it is at the top of my list because it cuts to the heart of the matter. It shows how religion is not primarily about intellectual assent to a creed but rather about practices and rituals that create group identity and mutual cooperation. It also helps educated Westerners see beyond the educated Western worldview. One can’t understand religion without understanding its emotional, group-oriented nature. I’ve run two book studies on Righteous Mind, it’s popular among Unitarian-Universalists, and you can see my supporting material here.

Big Gods: How Religion Transformed Cooperation and Conflict, by Ara Norenzayan

An excellent synthesis of current scientific understanding of religion, especially the historical success of religions with a single, judgmental god. Norenzayan combines findings about how religious beliefs affect group behavior today and applies cultural evolution theory to the history of religion. Basically, when people shared fear of divine judgment, they were able to trust each other in larger and larger groups. Today, secular authorities replace God as the source of social trust, especially in places like Scandinavia. Plus an eye-opening chapter about modern-day atheists.

Religion for Atheists: A Non-Believer's Guide to the Uses of Religion, by Alain de Botton

The author, a Swiss philosopher, challenges secular readers to see the smart systems that religions use for improving human life. He says, for example, that we can emulate how religions derive extra value from community, travel, and art. Some of de Botton’s particular suggestions for secular institutions sound impractical, but he makes a good case that we could come up with some good ones if we tried, and that we should try.

The Faith Instinct: How Religion Evolved and Why It Endures, by Nicholas Wade

A hundred thousand years ago, our ancestors danced all night around the fire. What does their “religious practice” have to do with religion today? This book helps one see religion as derived from these ancient rites, grounding one’s understanding of religion in evolved human nature. In the West, we commonly think of religion as a mental phenomenon, built out of declarative statements of faith. We use the term “creeds” to mean ”religions”. Wade, thankfully, helps us see the communal practices and unconscious instincts that underly religion. The material in the middle of the book about Islam is interesting but off-topic, and there’s no harm in skipping it.

Darwin’s Cathedral: Evolution, Religion, and the Nature of Society, by David Sloan Wilson

If you think religion is bad and don’t want to change your mind, don’t want read this book. Wilson makes the best case ever for religion’s positive role in civilization. Wilson is an evolutionary biologist, and evolutionary theory explains why religion might be important for human group bonding. Without a mechanism for acting in concert, human groups can only accomplish so much. Because of relentless evolutionary factors, cheating beats cooperating in groups of any size. It takes something special, such as religion, to enforce cooperation and overcome free-riding. Wilson controversially argues in favor of group selection, but that technical issue is separate from the value that religion contributes to society.

Moral Tribes: Emotion, Reason, and the Gap Between Us and Them, by Joshua Greene

The neuroscience of tribalism, how individuals unite into tribes and how tribes fight each other. Although the book isn’t explicitly about religions, it provides the framework for understanding the group cohesion that religions so often promote.

The Evolution of God, by Robert Wright

Wright covers thousands of Western history to show how people have used religion to promote trust and cooperation. Not always, but repeatedly.

This Is Your Brain on Music: The Science of a Human Obsession, by Daniel J. Levitin

In the human soul, how deep do music and dance go? Very deep. Can you find a community where the members sing and dance together? 

23 March 2015 Addendum

The Origins of Political Oder, by Francis Fukuyama
An amazing work from a powerful intellect, this book provides an overview of state-building from our chimp-like ancestors to the French Revolution. The focus is on political institutions, but he shows how religion has repeatedly served to help order society and foster cooperation on a broader scale. In particular, he shows how the medieval church in western Europe promoted individual rights and women’s rights against the power of tribal patriarchies, thereby laying the foundation for modern, independent judiciaries.

American Grace: How Religion Divides and Unites Us, by Robert Putnam and David Campbell

This work is saturated with data about religious people in the US and how they differ from each other and from secular people. It explains an important piece of the puzzle of why religious practice in the States is so different from religion in Europe. Believers in the US innovated a new style of religious practice focused on individual congregations, where members support each other in a socially connected group.

2016 Addendum

Thinking, Fast and Slow, by Daniel Kahneman

A Nobel-prize-winning economist summarizes his groundbreaking career to show you just how irrational humans are. A brilliant, sweeping tour de force. National Academy of Sciences Best Book Award in 2012.

2020 Addendum

The Human Swarm, by Mark Moffett

How is it that religion provides a source of group identity that was previously reserved for the tribe or nation? Here’s how. A student of E. O. Wilson’s explains the anonymous societies of Argentine ants, of Homo sapiens, and of a few other animals. Anonymous societies are groups in which individuals can recognize each other as fellow members without first knowing each other as individuals. Most animal groups are undefined (such as herds of gnus) or defined by personal familiarity (such as bands of chimpanzees), but human tribes are defined categorically (where one can identify fellow members even if one has never met them). I reviewed it here.

2021 Addendum

The WEIRDEST People in the World, by Joseph Henrich

Here’s a data-driven account of how modern society developed, with individualism replacing clannishness and analytical thought replacing religious feeling. 

External Link

Have We Evolved to Be Religious? by Jonathan Haidt, 2012

2014

God reportedly loves gays.

God Loves Gays

When an atheist on Twitter promotes a religious billboard, I take notice. So it was that a tweet from @Godless_Mom alerted me to a billboard project in Topeka, Kansas. Topeka is home to Westboro Baptist Church, the infamous organization that for years has pursued a campaign of hatred against gays. In response to WBC, Dustin Lake of California will be erecting a gay-friendly billboard in Topeka. Lake has already raised over $50,000, enough to fund the project. With 45 days to go, he’s going to raise enough money for additional publicity and good works. In the spirit of cooperation, I pitched in with my pledge, tweeted a tweet of my own and am now pitching this project to you on my blog. 

Here’s the link to the God Loves Gays Indiegogo campaign: https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/god-loves-gays-billboard-project

Atheists are split as to whether they should partner with religious groups to do good in the world. In Faitheist, Chris Stedman encourages his fellow atheists to find common ground with liberal religious groups to work for important causes, such as religious liberty. In Breaking the Spell, however, Daniel Dennett suggests that any positive involvement with religion might implicitly strengthen the position of religious extremists. He proposes that we work for a better world strictly through secular organizations. For my part, I’d like atheists to be at least as reasonable and open-minded as religious people are, and if religious people can work together across the barriers of dogma and creed, then maybe those of use with nor dogma or creed can find it in our hearts to do the same. 

As an atheist, how can I justify donating money to support a religious billboard? If I think the statement is false, how can I endorse it? My answer is that the statement “God loves gays” is true, just not literally true. It’s figuratively true or poetically true. It’s an emphatic way of saying, “Gays are natural” or “Homosexuality is the result of evolution, as is heterosexuality.” Some of my fellow atheists will hasten to differ, but as for me I’d rather think up reasons to support this effort than think up reasons to oppose it. The haters of Westboro Baptist Church say that heterosexuality came from one entity (God) and homosexuality from a different one (Satan). I say that both heterosexuality and homosexuality came from the same creator: evolution. 

For me, the fundamental divide between worldviews today is not about faith versus science but about parochialism versus universalism. You could call it provincialism versus cosmopolitanism, or local versus global, or One True Way versus diversity. By default, people take the parochial view, that their way of doing things is the right way. Each of us seems to be at the center of our world, and it seems natural to each of us to judge the rest of the world by our own measures. The great promise of the modern world, however, is that we can each rise above our particular perspectives to achieve an inclusive, global worldview. I’m happy to work with people who are trying to make the world more inclusive, even if they don’t answer certain metaphysical questions the same way I do.

Successful Kickstarter!

Successfully funded!

While I was running the Grandmother Fish Kickstarter campaign, I let this blog go silent. The good news is that our Kickstarter was successful, the book is due out early next year, and the blog is back! We raised over $36,000 with over a thousand backers, which means that a lot of people got excited about this book. Karen Lewis, my artist, really came through with some amazing artwork. My personal highlight was getting the thumbs up from Daniel Dennett and Steven Pinker, two of my all-time favorites. Overall, the response was amazingly positive, and now I have connections in the world of science communication, and it’s gotten me excited about doing more science for kids. 

If you want to see what Grandmother Fish is about, see our Kickstarter page.

If you want to preorder your own copy, see our online preorder store.

The cutest thing you can see is our highlights reel of parents reading the book to their children for the first time. 

Several people have suggested next books for me to write. A popular suggestion is climate change. Climate change is the great big impending catastrophe that doesn’t scare us into action even though we see it coming. Once I got into evolution circles through Grandmother Fish, I was basically in climate change circles, too. Lots of overlap. But how would I write a children’s book about climate change that describes the situation and doesn’t make children cry? Does the parent say, “ That’s right, my child. You and I are killing the planet every day just by leading our daily lives”? Not sure how to make that issue into a children’s book that a child would want read to them a second time. 

Another popular topic is prepping nonreligious children for encounters with religious classmates and friends. Lots of parents report that their kids don’t even understand the question when their peers ask things like, “Are you saved?” A children’s book that explains religion to nonreligious kids—that would attract some attention. Also, plenty of atheists would probably hate it because the book wouldn’t say that religion is a mental illness or a virus. Robert Wright, Nicholas Wade, David Sloan Wilson and former ministers who are now in the atheist movement have all documented some actual good that religions have done. I would keep it positive, but being positive in itself will be controversial.

More science is a another thought. Personally, I like the self-referential nature of Grandmother Fish, and I have been trying to imagine how I would make a second book that also helps a young person place themselves in the world. Maybe it would be about speech, consciousness, or the vast scale of the universe. Grandmother Fish is so special that it will be a hard act to follow. 

Promoting Grandmother Fish also got me involved in the local secular community, and I even went the the Atheist Alliance of America’s national convention here in SeaTac in July. I would go to lots of places to meet Steven Pinker, which I did. As I expected, the secular community includes a lot of people who love to mock religion and who are turned off by anything touchy-feely, such as community or ceremony. But I was also surprised to find a number of people who don’t see the appeal in making fun of Christians. One staffer told me she was a spiritual atheist, which you don’t hear every day. Others seemed to voice a desire to have a venue for a real community, with a lot of interest in Sunday Assembly, the nonreligious “church.”

Being away from the blog and running the Kickstarter means that I have a number of interesting experiences and topics to start blogging about. My plan is to go back to my weekly format, posting on Sundays. Thanks for reading!