Evolutionary Perspectives on Religion and Violence (Elements in Religion and Violence)

108 Pages·2022·1.368 MB·English

by  Candace Alcorta, Richard Sosis

sse
rP
y
tisre
v
in
U
e
g
d
irb
m
a
C
y
b
e
n
iln
o
d
e
h
silb
u
P
8
2
3
8
3
2
9
0
0
1
8
7
9
/7
1
0
1
.0
1
/g
ro
.io
d
//:sp
tth
ElementsinReligionandViolence
editedby
JamesR.Lewis
WuhanUniversity
MargoKitts
Hawai’iPacificUniversity
EVOLUTIONARY PERSPECTIVES
ON RELIGION AND VIOLENCE
sse
rP Candace Alcorta
y
tisre University of Connecticut
v
in
U
e Richard Sosis
g
d
irbm University of Connecticut
a
C
y
b
e
n
iln
o
d
e
h
silb
u
P
8
2
3
8
3
2
9
0
0
1
8
7
9
/7
1
0
1
.0
1
/g
ro
.io
d
//:sp
tth
ShaftesburyRoad,CambridgeCB28EA,UnitedKingdom
OneLibertyPlaza,20thFloor,NewYork,NY10006,USA
477WilliamstownRoad,PortMelbourne,VIC3207,Australia
314–321,3rdFloor,Plot3,SplendorForum,JasolaDistrictCentre,
NewDelhi–110025,India
103PenangRoad,#05–06/07,VisioncrestCommercial,Singapore238467
CambridgeUniversityPressispartofCambridgeUniversityPress&Assessment,
adepartmentoftheUniversityofCambridge.
WesharetheUniversity’smissiontocontributetosocietythroughthepursuitof
education,learningandresearchatthehighestinternationallevelsofexcellence.
www.cambridge.org
sse Informationonthistitle:www.cambridge.org/9781009238342
rP
y DOI:10.1017/9781009238328
tisrev ©CandaceAlcortaandRichardSosis2022
in
U
e Thispublicationisincopyright.Subjecttostatutoryexceptionandtotheprovisions
g
dirb ofrelevantcollectivelicensingagreements,noreproductionofanypartmaytake
m placewithoutthewrittenpermissionofCambridgeUniversityPress&Assessment.
a
C
yb Firstpublished2022
e
n
iln AcataloguerecordforthispublicationisavailablefromtheBritishLibrary.
o
d
e ISBN978-1-009-23834-2Paperback
h
silb ISSN2397-9496(online)
u
P ISSN2514-3786(print)
8
2
38 CambridgeUniversityPress&Assessmenthasnoresponsibilityforthepersistence
3
29 oraccuracyofURLsforexternalorthird-partyinternetwebsitesreferredtointhis
0
01 publicationanddoesnotguaranteethatanycontentonsuchwebsitesis,orwill
8
79 remain,accurateorappropriate.
/7
1
0
1
.0
1
/g
ro
.io
d
//:sp
tth

Contents
1 Introduction 1
2 What Is Violence? 3
3 Social Groups, Signals, and Symbols 15
4 What Is Religion? 21
sse 5 Cooperation and Conflict 38
rP
y
tisre
vin 6 The Paradox of Violence and Religion 54
U
e
g
d
irb 7 Religion and Human Evolution 70
m
a
C
y
b
en 8 Conclusion 74
iln
o
d
e
h
silb
u
P References 78
8
2
3
8
3
2
9
0
0
1
8
7
9
/7
1
0
1
.0
1
/g
ro
.io
d
//:sp
tth
EvolutionaryPerspectivesonReligionandViolence 1
1 Introduction
On September 11, 2001, life in the United States was fundamentally
transformedwhennineteenyoungmenhijackedfourcommercialaircrafts
and perpetrated a multi pronged attack on the World Trade Center in
NewYorkCityandthePentagoninWashington,DC.Thatattackkilled
nearly3,000unsuspectingmen,women,andchildreninasingledayandhad
profound impacts on both the United States and the world. The 9/11
bombingsnotonlyshatteredAmerica’sperceivedchimeraofinvincibility,
theyalsonourishedawaveofviolentreligioussuicideterrorismacrossthe
world. Over the two decades prior to 9/11, a total of 188 suicide attacks
occurred(Pape2005);duringthethreeyearsfollowing9/11,morethan300
suchassaultskilledmorethan5,300peopleinseventeendifferentcountries.
Unliketheearlierattacks,atleast70percentofthesemorerecentassaults
werereligiouslymotivated(Atran2004:69).
Since9/11muchscholarlyresearchhasfocusedontheroleofreligionin
motivatingterrorism.PredominantWesternstereotypesofsuicideterror
ess ists as either desperate or deranged have been largely refuted by this
y Pr research. Anthropologist and terrorism expert Scott Atran notes, “study
ersit afterstudydemonstratesthatsuicideterroristsandtheirsupportersarenot
niv abjectlypoor,illiterate,orsociallyestranged”(Atran2004:75).Nordothey
U
ge exhibitadistinctive“suicideterrorist”psychologicalprofileorpersonality
d
bri (Hudson1999).Whatissharedbymostsuicideterrorists,bothsecularand
m
Ca religious, are certain demographic characteristics nearly all are young,
y
e b male,andunattached.Religiouslymotivatedterroristsshareanadditional
nlin experience,aswell.Atranreports“morethan80percentofknownjihadis
o
ed currentlyliveindiasporacommunities,whichareoftenmarginalizedfrom
h
blis thehostsocietyandphysicallydisconnectedfromeachother”(2006:135).In
u
8 P thegovernmental report, TheSociology andPsychologyof Terrorism:Who
832 BecomesaTerroristandWhy?authorRexHudsonconcludes“Terroristsare
3
92 generally people whofeel alienatedfrom societyand havea grievanceor
0
810 regardthemselvesasvictimsofaninjustice”(Hudson1999:50).
7
7/9 Religiouslymotivatedterrorismandtheresearchithasengenderedoffer
1
10 important insights into the paradoxical relationship between religion and
0.
g/1 violence. Yet, such terrorism is certainly not the only manifestation of
or
oi.
d
ps://
htt
2 ReligionandViolence
religiousviolence.Theethnographic,archaeological,andhistoricalrecords
portray a long and complex relationship between religion and violence
acrossdiverseculturesandsocietiesthroughouthumanevolution.Violent
shamanicritualsaimedatdispellingdemonsandappeasingspirits,harrow
ingtribalinitiationceremoniesrequiringtoothablations,painfulpiercings,
scarifications, and genital mutilations, and the martyrdom and religious
wars of monotheistic World Religions together illustrate the ubiquity,
tenacity,anddiversityofthereligion violencerelationship.
Numerous theories have been advanced to explain the complex and
persistent relationship between religion and violence. Beginning with the
classicworkofEmileDurkheim,sociologistsandreligiousstudyscholars,
including terrorism experts Mark Juergensmeyer, Michael Jerryson, and
Margo Kitts, have examined religious violence vis a vis the norms and
needs of the social group. Social theorists, including Freud, Marx,
and Baudrillard, viewed religious violence through the lens of power,
emphasizingboth itsperformativeandpoliticalfunctions.Otherscholars,
such as Ariel Glucklich, Victor Turner, and Harvey Whitehouse, have
ess focusedonthepsychologicaleffectsofreligiousviolenceontheindividual.
Pr
ersity Aronlethroofpo“ltohgeistismAagnidnraerwy”StoranthverionleanncdePaanmdelamSotreewasprtec(i2fi0c0a5l)lydioscnuswshthaet
v
Uni Juergensmeyer(2003)hastermed“themindofGod”inrelationtoreligious
e
dg violence. And prominent historians, notably Walter Burkert and Rene
bri
m Girard,havearguedthatreligionisrootedinviolence,withtheritualact
a
y C ofsacrificecomprisingtheverygenesisofreligioussystems.Morerecently,
b
ne evolutionary scientists, such as Joseph Bulbulia, John Shaver, and the
onli authorsofthisvolume,haveutilizedtheframeworkofevolutionarytheory
d
he toexaminethereligion violencerelationship.
ublis Thesections thatfollow summarizemuchofthis workwithparticular
P
8 focus on evolutionary scholarship. We begin by deconstructing violence
2
3
38 and religion separately, aiming to assess their evolutionary development
2
9
0 and adaptive functions. We then turn toward understanding variation in
0
1
78 religionscross culturallybyexaminingthesocioecologicalfactorsthatcan
9
17/ explain this variation. Next, we clarify how religions work; that is, we
0
1
0. explore the underlying mechanisms that are essential for religions to
1
org/ operate. Understanding how religions work and how they evolved will
oi.
d
ps://
htt
EvolutionaryPerspectivesonReligionandViolence 3
provide us with a framework for understanding the complex relationship
betweenreligionandviolence,whichweaddressextensivelyinthepenul
timate section of this Element. We rely on diverse sets of data from
ethnography, archaeology, primatology, psychology, neuroscience, and
other fields, and in the final section we draw these data together and
summarizehowanevolutionaryperspectivehelpsexplaintheunfortunate,
butreal,relationshipbetweenreligionandviolence.
Throughout this work we employ a simple but important framework
that was first introduced to evolutionary biology by the ethologist and
Nobel laureate Niko Tinbergen. Tinbergen argued that when answering
questions about the behavior of an organism it is vital to distinguish
between what has become known as proximate level and ultimate level
explanations.Theformerdealswiththeunderlyingcausalmechanismsthat
produce behavior, including cognition, physiology, and neurology.
Proximate level explanations answer questions about how behaviors are
produced.Ultimate levelexplanations,ontheotherhand,answerquestions
aboutwhyabehaviorevolved.Theyaddressquestionsaboutthephyloge
ess netichistoryofabehavior inotherwords,whereabehavioraltraitcame
Pr
ersity fisr,oimtsadaaspwtivelelvasaltuhee.sPurrovxivimalaatendanrdepurlotidmuactteiveexfpulnanctaitoionnosfaarebechoamvpiolerm,tehnat
v
ni
U taryandaswillbecomequicklyevident,wethinkbothtypesofexplanations
e
dg arecriticalforunderstandingthereligion violencerelationship.
bri
m Religionandviolencehaveacomplexandenduringhistorythroughout
a
y C humanevolution.Unravelingtherelationshipbetweenthemrequiresthat
b
ne wefirstdeconstructtheoccurrenceandfunctionofeach,bothacrossspecies
onli andthroughouthumanevolution.Thisiswherewebegin.
d
e
h
blis
Pu 2 What Is Violence?
8
2
3
38 Violence has long been a feature of human life. Phylogenetic studies
2
09 demonstrate “a genetic component with high heritability” for human
0
1
78 aggression (Gomez et al. 2016:233), a propensity shared with our closest
9
17/ primatekin,aswellaswithothersocialcarnivores(Gomezetal.2016:233).
0
0.1 And violence is manifest in many ways. Anthropologists, in their ethno
1
org/ graphic fieldwork, have documented child and domestic abuse, rape,
oi.
d
ps://
htt
4 ReligionandViolence
infanticide,revengekillings,intergroupraiding,andwarfareacrossdiverse
culturesthroughouttheworld.
What is violence? The Oxford English Dictionary (1989) defines vio
lenceas“Theexerciseofphysicalforcesoastoinflictinjuryon,orcause
damage to, persons or property; action or conduct characterized by this;
treatment or usage tending to cause bodily injury or forcibly interfering
withpersonalfreedom.”InitsWorldReportonViolenceandHealth(2002),
theWorldHealthOrganizationemploysasomewhatdifferentdefinitionof
violence: “The intentional use of physical force or power, threatened or
actual, againstoneself,anotherperson,or againsta grouporcommunity,
thateitherresultsinorhasahighlikelihoodofresultingininjury,death,
psychological harm, maldevelopment, or deprivation” (World Health
Organization 2002:4). The OED definition focuses on behavior. The
WHO definition incorporates the additional requirement of “intent,” an
additionconsideredbysometobeacriticalfeatureseparatinghumanand
nonhumanviolence(Bushman2018:iv v).
Itis,ofcourse,currentlyimpossibletoascertaintheintentofnonhuman
ess speciesengaginginaggressionandviolence.Nonverbalsignalsofaggres
ersity Pr sniiocnatethdataccoronsvseywsiudcehlyindteivnetrtsoecsopnescpieecs,ifiicnsc,lhuodwinegveor,urareowrena.diDlyirceocmtmeyue
v
Uni contact,baredteeth, andinflatedbodystanceallcommunicate aggression
e
dg inbeagles,baboons,andbarbrawlersalike.Theseaggressivebehaviorsare
bri
m spontaneously and subconsciously motivated in response to threat and
a
y C conveyaclearmessagetopotentialaggressors.Neuroimagingdataindicate
b
ne that such signals are spontaneously and subconsciously processed by
onli humans,aswell.
d
e
h
blis Defining Violence from an Evolutionary Perspective
u
P
28 Fromanevolutionaryperspective,itisnotwhatindividualsintendtodobut
3
8
3 what they, in fact, do that matters. Evolutionary scientists, therefore,
2
009 typicallyemploydefinitionsofviolencethatfocusonobservablebehaviors
1
78 ratherthanintent.Suchdefinitionsareabletoencompassnonhumanspecies
9
17/ andtheysituateviolencewithinanevolutionaryframework,facilitatingthe
0
0.1 examination of its impacts on individual fitness. Behaviorally based
1
g/
or
oi.
d
ps://
htt