Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Religion

Showing Original Post only (View all)

cleanhippie

(19,705 posts)
Thu Mar 29, 2012, 10:46 AM Mar 2012

Our brains have evolved to look for patterns and assign meaning, even when none exist. [View all]

All this talk about having evolved to believe in god or how we are born religious got me thinking about a book I read last year by Michael Shermer, The Believing Brain. We are not evolved to believe in god or religion, but instead we are evolved to look for patterns and assign meaning to these patterns, even when no pattern or meaning exist.

Book Review: The Believing Brain. Michael Shermer

Skeptic in-chief, Michael Shermer has an important and fascinating new book. The Believing Brain: From Ghosts and Gods to Politics and Conspiracies – How We Construct Beliefs and Reinforce Them as Truths – describes how our beliefs arise from patterns and that these beliefs come first, and explanations for those beliefs comes second. Shermer reviews 30 years of leading research in cognitive science, neurobiology, evolutionary psychology and anthropology and numerous real-world examples to show how the belief mechanism works. This holds for our beliefs in all manner of important spheres: religion, politics, economics, superstition and the supernatural.

Shermer proposes that our brains are “belief engines” that “look for and find patterns” quite naturally, and it is only following this that our brains assign these patterns with meaning. It is these meaningful patterns that form what Shermer terms “belief-dependent reality.” Additionally, our brains tend to gravitate towards information that further reinforces our beliefs, and ignore data that contradicts these beliefs. This becomes a self-reinforcing loop where beliefs drive explanation seeking behaviors to confirm those beliefs which are further reinforced, and drive further confirmation seeking behavior. In fact, the human brain is so adept at looking for patterns it “sees” them in places where none exist. Shermer calls this “illusory correlation”. Birds do it, rats to it; humans are masters at it. B.F. Skinner’s groundbreaking experiments on partial reinforcement in animals shows this “patternicity” exquisitely.

--snip--

This goes a long way to describing all manner of superstitious behaviors in humans. But Shermer doesn’t stop there. He also describes how and why we look for patterns in the behaviors of others and assign meaning to these as well. Shermer call this “agenticity”. This is “the tendency to infuse patterns with meaning, intention and agency”. As he goes on to describe:

… we often impart the patterns we find with agency and intention, and believe that these intentional agents control the world, sometimes invisibly from the top down, instead of bottom-up causal laws and randomness that makes up much of our world. Souls, spirits, ghosts, gods, demons, angels, aliens, intelligent designers, government conspiracists, and all manner of invisible agents with power and intention are believed to haunt our world and control our lives. Combined with our propensity to find meaningful patterns in both meaningful and meaningless noise, patternicity and agenticity form the cognitive basis of shamanism, paganism, animism, polytheism, monotheism, and all modes of Old and New Age spiritualisms.


Backed with the results of numerous cross-disciplinary scientific studies, Shermer’s arguments are thoroughly engrossing and objectively difficult to refute.

http://thediagonal.com/2011/08/23/book-review-the-believing-brain-michael-shermer/



Published last year, this book uses actual science. And as Shermer is quoted as saying:
"I’m a skeptic not because I do not want to believe, but because I want to know. How can we tell the difference between what we would like to be true and what is actually true? The answer is science."
59 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Thank you for this post! nt Ilsa Mar 2012 #1
Pareidolia longship Mar 2012 #2
Great - ANOTHER form of fundamentalism saras Mar 2012 #3
Your strawman is so adorable. cleanhippie Mar 2012 #4
So basically saying science can be used to study the brain and the evolution of it is... Humanist_Activist Mar 2012 #5
I think you might want to explore the research, a little... SamG Mar 2012 #36
What are science's limitations? EvolveOrConvolve Mar 2012 #39
The simplest example of this would be the constellations and looking for shapes in clouds... Humanist_Activist Mar 2012 #6
Exactly. And unfortunately, people still assign agenticity as seen in horoscopes. cleanhippie Mar 2012 #10
One explanation for certain so-called psychic phenomena TlalocW Mar 2012 #7
I have seen this in real life. tabatha Mar 2012 #8
Why do you suppose evolutionary processes selected-for a brain with beliefs? Jim__ Mar 2012 #9
Shermer addresses this in his book. cleanhippie Mar 2012 #11
Can you explain it? Jim__ Mar 2012 #14
If I could explain it like Shermer, I'd write a book. cleanhippie Mar 2012 #22
If you understand something, you should be able to explain it. Jim__ Mar 2012 #25
Seeing patterns is incredibly useful edhopper Mar 2012 #26
A pattern recognizing brain is not necessarily a "belief engine." Jim__ Mar 2012 #31
The OP post makes it quite clear edhopper Mar 2012 #33
Why would you ask for scientific evidence to counter a postulate? Jim__ Mar 2012 #40
A postulate edhopper Mar 2012 #42
Here are a few different ideas about beliefs, religion, and evolution. Jim__ Mar 2012 #45
You seem to be under the misapprehension. edhopper Mar 2012 #47
See post #48. Jim__ Mar 2012 #49
You're right, and I can. cleanhippie Mar 2012 #28
I'll accept that your explanation is Michael Shermer said so. Jim__ Mar 2012 #30
You can assume what you want to, it matters not a bit to me. cleanhippie Mar 2012 #34
Are you trying hard to be snarky? or just repeating a pattern? SamG Mar 2012 #37
Probably to make us aware of our surroundings more... Humanist_Activist Mar 2012 #12
You say false positives wouldn't adversely affect reproductive success. Jim__ Mar 2012 #17
You forget that we live in groups, and so did our ancestors... Humanist_Activist Mar 2012 #18
I don't forget that we live in groups, your explanation didn't have anything to do with groups. Jim__ Mar 2012 #19
Seeing patterns has survival value because there ARE patterns Jim Lane Mar 2012 #13
Do you have any evidence to support your last sentence? Jim__ Mar 2012 #15
Anecdotal evidence: Astrology columns in newspapers. Useless gambling systems. Jim Lane Mar 2012 #21
Jim, those were awesome responses! cleanhippie Mar 2012 #23
Your answer indicates that you are far more prone to see patterns than to be overly skeptical. Jim__ Mar 2012 #24
What are you disagreeing with? edhopper Mar 2012 #27
Is it me or is Jim being unnecessarily antagonistic? cleanhippie Mar 2012 #35
I was reporting an actual Gallup poll. I personally do not believe in ghosts. Jim Lane Mar 2012 #29
Two points. Jim__ Mar 2012 #32
Try these edhopper Mar 2012 #38
Gallup does not make any such claim in those polls. Jim__ Mar 2012 #41
So your argument is based on edhopper Mar 2012 #43
In the first place, I didn't give an argument. Jim__ Mar 2012 #44
I just don't understand what you are trying to say edhopper Mar 2012 #46
Post #9 was my opening of this sub-thread. Jim__ Mar 2012 #48
All it takes for overzealous pattern recognition to be an evolutionary advantage... Silent3 Mar 2012 #50
Thank you S3 edhopper Mar 2012 #51
I can explain that: laconicsax Mar 2012 #54
Do you mean reproductive "value" or "advantage"? SamG Mar 2012 #52
We do have a brain with beliefs edhopper Mar 2012 #53
That does not answer the question of "why" it was selected-for. Jim__ Apr 2012 #55
So everyone who believes in ghosts is because they had a sudden death edhopper Apr 2012 #56
Read posts #41 and 44. Jim__ Apr 2012 #57
I have no idea what you are trying to argue edhopper Apr 2012 #58
Pareidolia: mr blur Mar 2012 #16
Thanks ch for the review. azul Mar 2012 #20
"Fun Science: Randomness" SamG Apr 2012 #59
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Religion»Our brains have evolved t...»Reply #0