Slajd 1

1
Dual inheritance explains distinction between
magic religion and theirco-occurrence
Konrad Talmont-Kaminski Marie Curie-Sklodowska
U., Poland
2
Line of argument
Magic/religion distinctions Dual
inheritance Factors of stability Epistemology
function A dilemma Magico-religious complexes
3
Magic / Religion
Malinowski Only magical practices have goals
Magic
Religion
?
Cause
Practice
Practice
F
F
Supernatural
Explanation
PyysiäinenReligion has supernatural goals
magic has supernatural causes
Effect
Mundane
Supernatural
4
Conceptual distinction
Religious practicesBelieved to have
supernatural effects Magical practicesBelieved
to have mundane effects Magico-religious
complexes are the norm
5
Dual inheritance

See Atran, S., Henrich, J. The Evolution of
Religion Biological Theory 5.1 (2010)
Genetic Evolution
l
Mental Mechanisms
z
Cultural Evolution
Magical BP
k
Cognitive Byproducts
Cultural Traditions
q
y
Religious BP
Prosocial Adaptations
Grossly simplified version
6
Evolutionary distinction
Religious beliefs practicesCognitive
byproducts recruited for prosocial functions

Magical beliefs practicesUnexapted cognitive
byproducts of the same type
Ancestral traits in W.E.I.R.D. societies
7
Function Effect
But theres a bigger question!
Magical BP
Religious BP
Purported effect
Mundane
Supernatural
What does this mean?
l
Adaptive function
None
Prosocial
8
Q Why are supernatural effects correlated with
prosocial functions?
A Because of epistemic status of supernatural
claims
9
Factors of stability
What stabilises beliefs? Cognitive factors
Cultural factors Empirical factors What
determines which factors important?
Investigable
Not investigable
Cognitive Cultural
Empirical
Magic Religion
Commonsense
Science
Cog function
D
Noncog function
Superempirical
10
Beliefs protected against counterevidence are
mainly stabilised by cognitive cultural factors
11
Superempirical
Invisible Dangerous Far away
Superempirical gt Unfalsifiable
Content
Social Context
Methodological Context
Sacred
Available methods Available tools
12
Empirical distinction
Religious practicesBelieved to have
superempirical effects Magical practicesBelieved
to have empirical effects
13
Function Effect II
Adaptive function is noncognitive Noncog function
stabilises superempirical beliefs
Magical BP
Religious BP
Purported effect
Mundane
Supernatural
Empirical
Superempirical
F
F
Empirical factors
More import
Less import
Adaptive function
None
Prosocial
F
F
Stability
Lesser
Greater
j
Check for intercessory prayer!
14
Magical BP less suitable for noncognitive
functionsbecause empirical limitations decrease
their malleability
15
Q Why are most religious traditions
magico-religious complexes?
A Because evidence can cut both ways
16
Superempirical dilemma
Psychologically satisfactory evidence ? Scientific
evidence
Magical BP
Religious BP
Destabilised by empirical evidence
Largely protected
Only motivated by cultural learning CREDs
Motivated by illusory causal connections
Relevant to supernatural concerns only
Relevant to mundane concerns
l
Reinterpreted for increased relevance
Reinterpreted when prophecy fails
l
17
M-R complexes
l
Religions need magical BP Magical BP not
stable Especially in rationalist cultures
Religious beliefs
CREDs
l
F
F
l
l
Magical beliefs
Magical beliefs
CREDs
CREDs
l
l
Deist religions unattractive
F
F
Illusory causal connections
Illusory causal connections
18
Conclusions
Magical BP are unrecruited cognitive
byproducts Magic religion respond differently
to same epistemic dilemma Magico-religious
complexes stabilised by interaction of magic
religion
19
Konrad Talmont-Kaminski In a Mirror, Darkly How
the Supernatural Reflects Rationality
(forthcoming) konrad_at_talmont.com deisidaimon.word
press.com
Thank you