Behavioral and Brain Sciences

Table of Contents - 2009 - Volume 32, Issue 06  

Cambridge Journals Online - CUP Full-Text Page
Behavioral and Brain Sciences (2009), 32:523-524 Cambridge University Press
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2010
doi:10.1017/S0140525X09991245

Open Peer Commentary

God would be a costly accident: Supernatural beliefs as adaptive

Dominic D. P. Johnsona1

a1 Department of Politics and International Relations, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, EH8 9LD Scotland, United Kingdom. dominic.johnson@ed.ac.uk http://dominicdpjohnson.com/
Article author query
johnson ddp [PubMed]  [Google Scholar]

Abstract

I take up the challenge of why false beliefs are better than “cautious action policies” (target article, sect. 9) in navigating adaptive problems with asymmetric errors. I then suggest that there are interactions between supernatural beliefs, self-deception, and positive illusions, rendering elements of all such misbeliefs adaptive. Finally, I argue that supernatural beliefs cannot be rejected as adaptive simply because recent experiments are inconclusive. The great costs of religion betray its even greater adaptive benefits – we just have not yet nailed down exactly what they are.

The evolution of misbelief Ryan T. McKay and Daniel C. Dennett Institute for Empirical Research in Economics, University of Zurich, Zurich 8006, Switzerland; and Centre for Anthropology and Mind, University of Oxford, Oxford OX2 6PE, United Kingdom ryantmckay@mac.com http://homepage.mac.com/ryantmckay/; The Center for Cognitive Studies, Tufts University, Medford, MA 02155-7059 ddennett@tufts.edu http://ase.tufts.edu/cogstud/incbios/dennettd/dennettd.htm