Religion Explained

From: MARY ALEXANIAN (MALEXANIAN@EC.RR.COM)
Date: Thu Sep 06 2001 - 21:14:13 EDT

  • Next message: Moorad Alexanian: "Religion Explained"

    WEDNESDAY AUGUST 29 2001

    Religion, Pascal Boyer argues, is nothing more or less than a by-product of
    the human mind

    Religion Explained

    By Pascal Boyer
    Heinemann, £20; 448 pp
    ISBN 0 434 00843 5
    Times offer: £18 (p&p 99p) 0870 160 80 80
    Buy the book
    There are many theories about the origins of and the reasons for religion.
    Faith has been described as an antidote to mortality, an attempt to make
    sense of puzzling phenomena, to account for evil and suffering, or to
    discover how things came to be. The enemies of religion see it as a failure
    of rationality. Pascal Boyer dismisses all these explanations as inexact.

    Religion, he argues, is nothing more or less than a by-product of the human
    mind. It is a side effect of having a particular kind of brain. By far the
    most fascinating part of this highly accessible and informative book is
    Boyer’s description of the way our minds work. We have an inbuilt set of
    ontological expctations and a tendency to dwell on intuitions which violate
    these, such as mountains that float or companions whom we do not see. From
    the dawn of modern consciousness, men and women have focused on certain
    imaginary personalities that transcend the norm, convinced that they can
    help them in strategic ways. These supernatural agents link with other
    mental systems, such as our moral intuitions and social categories, for
    which we can find no conceptual justification.

    These religious beliefs happen to activate a variety of mental systems so
    efficiently that they become compelling. They are easily transmissible,
    because they correspond to the way people’s minds function in all times and
    in all places. That is why religious ideas tend to be so similar. Boyer
    includes some interesting chapters about the reasons why human corpses are
    so especially problematic, he compare ritual to certain pathological
    compulsive behaviours.

    When, however, Boyer abandons neurology and anthropology for theology and
    religious history, he is less convincing. His accounts of modern
    fundamentalism and the political implications of faith are naive. His theory
    probably works very well with the African tribesmen who were the subjects of
    his field work, but is less satisfactory when applied to the so-called
    advanced religions, whose raison d’être was precisely to go beyond the idea
    of a supernatural agent, which often rejected the gods, and aspire to an
    experience that transcends the normal thought processes.

    Early Buddhism, for example, had no interest in any God, but saw the tranced
    states achieved by means of the disciplines of yoga as entirely natural to
    men and women. Yoga itself was designed precisely to get beyond normal
    patterns of thought and intuition. Even in the monotheistic faiths, the most
    eminent Jewish, Christian and Muslim theologians insisted that what we call
    “God” is not another being, and certainly not the counter-intuitive agent
    discussed by Boyer.

    Boyer’s neurological approach to the phenomena of religion is helpful,
    because it reminds us how deeply faith is conditioned by the bias of our
    minds. But it neglects our capacity to build on these to produce ideas and
    experiences that may not be supernatural but which are certainly
    transcendent. As an art form, religion at its best and most creative has
    exploited these innate natural habits, in the same way as poetry has
    transfigured our ability to speak. This urge to go beyond what we do
    naturally is an essential part of the religious project and Boyer’s thesis
    is the poorer for ignoring it. Karen Armstrong

    Copyright 2001 Times Newspapers Ltd.



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Sep 06 2001 - 21:14:34 EDT