-----Original Message-----
From: Jim Guinee [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Monday, July 17, 2006 1:50 PM
To: Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS)
Subject: [tips] Re: Deities "R" Us

>Then of course there are the so-called 330 million gods in Hinduism which
are supposedly not separate entities but one actual god

>Whew, and I thought the Christian trinity was mind-boggling!

In Orthodox christianity there is a joke about the dying man being visited
by the priest, which goes something like ... the priest asks "Do you believe
in God the father, God the son, and God as Holy spirit?" The patient sits up
and says "What??? I'm dying and you give me puzzles?!?". Btw, a classic
answer to the multiple-diety issue - in Orthodoxy at least - is that the
trinity is not a statement about "God" (that would be arrogant) but a
description of how humans _experience_ religion. Big difference. 

Jim, thanks for your thoughtful comments, you have inspired me. Being
Russian Orthodox and an unqualified convert to evolutionary psychology
should raise conflicts, but, the fact that I experience so few conflicts
causes me to ponder this issue. Maybe this is like the circular universe -
you move so far in one direction you end up facing the opposite way.

Evolutionary psychology has interesting features. One is that it looks at
human behavior as it IS rather than what OUGHT to be. This makes it ok for
David Buss to say about murder: "killing has been a marvelously effective
solution to an astonishing array of human social conflicts" (last chapter of
'The Murderer Next Door'). The evolutionary perspective does a marvelous job
treating murder as a basic human behavior that exists in our brain circuits
because those who possessed these circuits were more likely to dominate,
gain resources, and spread their genes. 

I hope, in the coming years, there is more study of religion as human
behavior, an evolutionary adaptation to solve ancestral problems. This will
elevate religion-as-behavior to the same status mating and murder have
enjoyed (!) in the evolutionary psych agenda. Our ancestors faced many
issues - still relevant - who do I trust? Who is my friend? Can I deceive
others? Can I detect deception in others? We naturally form groups, regulate
other members of the others, and discriminate in- from out-groups. Religion
unifies groups and regulates behavior. But it is not the only institution
that does so. Spend a day with ANY adolescent clique - they regulate
behavior stricter than any religion. Initiation rites, dissing, rituals,
it's all there. I find the "choice" aspect of religion curious. Human
behavior evolved to be regulated. Even the trivial behavior of diet and
eating. We evolved with a brain circuit to eat when food is available, which
means we suffer in an rich individualistic society in which food is avaiable
24/7 and no social regulation. The French, at least, have a long culinary
tradition that keeps eating in social sphere, and may explain the 'French
paradox' (high fat food, but lower heart disease; portion size/social eating
may be key). Without religious guidance or other cultural traditions we fall
prey to diets created by capitalists, or, ineffective fad diets. As far as I
know, all major religions have dietary traditions as well as fasting
guidelines that keep food a social phenomena. Catholic Lent may have
devolved into some trivial traditions, but many Russian & other Slavic,
Greeks, Middle Eastern, and Ethopian Christians do an aggressive no meat,
dairy, backboned/scaled fish diet for all of Lent. Also no alcohol & TV for
those who want an extra challenge. Your blood work really does improve
without the animal fats. Muslim fasting is strict but is done differently.
Murder may be more serious than diet, and easier to see the importance of
social regulation. If Buss is correct, we have brain circuits to murder that
have triggers, but, we are kept in check by social regulation. 

As far as the excessive regulation of sex, this may be more of a monastic
idea as Jim suggests (but, why should sex escape social regulation?).
Though, I have always thought that what religions really regulate is
marriage. It's pretty simple falling in love and having sex with as many
partners as you wish. What is regulated is the more formal, social aspect -
this is why the marriage ceremony is for the family and community, NOT the
bride and groom, and the marriage ring originally went on the RIGHT hand
(public, visible), but this was before the theory that the heart was
directly connected to the heart and marriage was all about love (I have
heard several versions of the right-to-left hand switch).

I think the really interesting questioin is whether one can be "in the
scene" as a participant as well as "outside the scene" as a scientist. I
find that understanding (or at least convincing myself that I understand)
gender differences in mating and jealousy do not detract from the full
pleasure/pain I experience in these matters. BUT, I find it very rare for
people to do both in religion. Those who discuss religion as a purely human
affair, whether opium-for-the-masses or an evolutionary relic, are not
active in religion. If there are, I would like to hear their stories. At the
risk of mis-representing other religions, I always thought the very strict
intellectual & personal requirements of Catholic and Protstant religions
convince some people they are not religious, and this forces people into
dichotomous camps. But that is sheer speculation. One of the things I really
enjoy about the old christian tradition is the richness of sensation -
acapella music, icons with inverted linear perspective, incense and candles,
touch (perpetual hugs and kissing); the distinction between intellectual and
sensual gets blurred. I suspect there is a lot of "psychology" lurking
beneath the surface, but so many people have had bad experiences with
religion it is a supreme challenge studying religion as psychology.

P.s. I just heard "HEAD ON - APPLY IT TO YOUR FOREHEAD" three times (talk
about a trinity!) and am reminded once again that there are very powerful
forces trying to regulate my behavior, besides religion. I think they want
my money and they really don't care about my head. But that is just an
opinion; I have no peer-reviewed references to prove it :)


-----------------------------
John W. Kulig
Professor of Psychology
Director, Psychology Honors
Plymouth State University
Plymouth NH 03264
-----------------------------
---
To make changes to your subscription go to:
http://acsn.frostburg.edu/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=tips&text_mode=0&lang=engli
sh


---
To make changes to your subscription go to:
http://acsun.frostburg.edu/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=tips&text_mode=0&lang=english

Reply via email to