Upload
destiny-otley
View
220
Download
1
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
The Reproductive Advantage of ReligiosityReligious Demography benefitting Evolutionary Fitness
Dr. Michael Blume
( www.blume-religionswissenschaft.de )Conference “Explaining Religion 2010”, Bristol University
Observation & Hypothesis
Religiously affiliated humans reproduce (on average) more successfully than
their secular peers.
Of course, this doesn‘t mean that Religion is the ONLY demographic factor, but that it is an
INDEPENDENT one.
As assumed by Charles Darwin, Religiosity evolved – and is evolving - as
an adaptive, biocultural trait.
Example Judaism & Israel
Cp. Eric Kaufmann: „Shall the Religious inherit the Earth? Demography and Politics in the 21st century“, London 2010
Haredim growth in Israel: 6-8 children per woman throughout generations
Example Old Order Amish in the USA
Other high-fertile religious
communities in the US (Example):
- Hutterites- Old Order Mennonites- Mormons
- Orthodox Jews
Cp. D.B. Kraybill & C.D. Bowman: „On the Backroad to Heaven. Old Order Hutterites, Mennonites, Amish and Brethren“, Johns Hopkins Univ. 2002
Secular demographics
In contrast, we still found NOT A SINGLE CASE of a SECULAR population retaining
replacement fertility rates of more than two children per woman for a century!
Religious Non-Affiliation
Note: Demographically, it is NOT possible to fully substitute the potentials of Religiosity!
Cp. P. Norris & R. Inglehart: „ Sacred and Secular: Religion and Politics Worldwide“, Cambridge 2004
Swiss Census 2000Denominational category
(CFR) Births per woman
% academiceducation
% higher occupational class
Hinduism* 2,79 (1) 17,0% (12) 7,4% (14)
Islam* 2,44 (2) 11,4% (15) 6,1% (15)
Jewish 2,06 (3) 42,7% (1) 42,4% (1)
Other (smaller) Protestant 2,04 (4) 20,1% (5) 19,2% (6)
New Pietism / Evangelical 2,02 (5) 19,2% (6) 17,9% (8)
Pentecostal 1,96 (6) 17,1% (11) 15,7% (10)
Other (smaller) Christian 1,82 (7) 39,1% (2) 31,8% (2)
Didn’t answer 1,74 (8) 19,1% (7) 5,3% (16)
Christian-Orthodox* 1,62 (9) 18,0% (10) 9,8% (13)
Swiss Average 1,43 19,2% 19,6%Buddhist* 1,42 (10) 20,3% (4) 13,4% (11)
Roman-Catholic 1,41 (11) 16,8% (13) 18,5% (7)
New Apostolic 1,39 (12) 13,9% (14) 17,6% (9)
Reformed Protestant 1,35 (13) 18,9% (8) 22,2% (4)
Yehova’s Witnesses 1,24 (14) 6,8% (16) 11,2% (12)
Christian-Catholic 1,21 (15) 18,4% (9) 22,2% (5)
Non-affiliated 1,11 (16) 30,6% (3) 26,7% (3)
r / Spearman Rank Correl. 0,054 -0,269
USA, General Social Surveys
Data Source: V. Skirbekk, A. Goujon & E. Kaufmann, Vienna Institute of Demography 2008
Exploring Bio-Cultural Evolution I
Religiosity is bringing forth VARIANTS of RELIGIONS pursuing diverse reproductive (r- and K-)strategies!
Examples from the USA:
High-Fertile Old Order Amish (expanding)
All-Celibate Shakers (dissolving)
Methodist Variants
19th century: K-Strategy20th century: r-Strategy
Exploring Bio-Cultural Evolution II
Religiosity is offering POTENTIALS to culturally diverse, reproductive strategies
Hutterites, Haredim, Old Order Amish
etc.
Shakers
Non-Affiliated
USA, China, France, Sweden,
Austria etc.
Religion & Fertility
Data Source: Dominik Enste, Institut der deutschen Wirtschaft Köln 2007
Worship Attendance Adults / No. of Children 82 Nations & Germany
World Value Surveys 1981 - 2004, IW 2007
1,661,8
1,67
2,01
2,23
2,5
1,98
1,441,39
1,78
1
1,21,4
1,61,8
2
2,22,4
2,6
never onHolidays
once perMonth
once perWeek
> more often
Children Germany Children globally
Proximate Mechanisms• Individual Level:
1. Belief in Supernatural Agents selecting for prolific Commandments
• Social Level:
2. Belief in Supernatural Agents selecting for prolific Cooperations
• Institutional Level:
3. Belief in Supernatural Agents selecting for prolific Institutions
1.1 Belief in Supernatural Agents perpetuating prolific Commandments
Cp. Charles Darwin („Religion = Belief in spiritual Beings“), F.A. von Hayek („Guardians of Traditions - Reproductive
Advantage“), Pascal Boyer, Scott Atran, Jesse Bering („The God Instinct“), Deborah Kelemen („Intuitive Theism“), Bruce
Hood, Jay Feierman, Paolo Mantovani et al.
Natural Animism by HAD & TOM
1.2 Belief in Supernatural Agents perpetuating prolific Commandments
Comparative Examples:
„Be fruitful and multiply!“, Bible, Genesis 1.28 Authoritative Motivation for Believers
„Reproductive success is defined as the passing of genes onto the next generation in a way that
they too can pass those genes on.“, T. H. Clutton-Brock, University of Chicago 1990
Explanation. Motivation would constitute a Naturalistic Fallacy
Allensbach Survey 2006: People aged 16 to 29 in Germany were asked if they were religious and which
values they would deem „important“ for their lives
Having Fun
Non Rel. / Rel.
76%67%
Helping Others in Need
46%
69%
Assuming Responsibilities
for Others
26%
43%
Having Children
42%
61%
1.3 Belief in Supernatural Agents perpetuating prolific Commandments
2 Belief in Supernatural Agents perpetuating prolific Cooperations
„We propose that the clearest identifiable effect of religious behavior is the formation of close kinship-like
cooperative social relationships.“
* Craig Palmer, Ryan Ellsworth & Lyle Steadman: „Talk and Tradition. Why the Least Interesting Components of Religion May Be the Most
Evolutionary Important.“, in: E. Voland, W. Schiefenhövel (eds.): The Biological Evolution of Religious Mind and Behaviour. Springer 2009Cp. Charles Darwin, F.A. von Hayek, Ara Norenzayan & Azim
Shariff, Richard Sosis, Matt Rossano, Montserrat Soler, Jesse Bering, Dominic Johnson, Ryan McKay, David Lahti et al.
Cooperative Signalling: From religious networks to religious groups
Cooperation in Reproduction: Marriage vowsAllbus Survey 2002, Germany
„A married man has a love affair with another woman…“
95,7%82,5%
78,9%69,1%
78,6%74,1%
64,7%58,7%
0,0% 20,0% 40,0% 60,0% 80,0% 100,0%
Women
Men
...is considered "bad" or "very bad"
Independent Protestant Roman-Catholic
Mainstream Protestant Non-Affiliated
Data: ALLBUS 2002, Germany / fowid 2005
Gretchen‘s Question
‚Gretchenfrage‘
by Johann Wolfgang von
Goethe
FAUST, Martha‘s Garden
Margaret: Promise me, Henry!
Faust: What I can!
Margaret: How do you feel about religion? Tell me, pray.You are a dear, good-hearted man,But I believe you've little good of it to say.
Faust.: Hush, hush, my child! You feel my love for you.For those I love, I'd give my blood and body too,Would no one of his feelings or of church bereave.
Margaret: That's not enough. We must believe!
Comments of Goethe‘s Devil
MEPHISTOPHELES: I've heard it all and understood,The Doctor was put through the catechisms.I hope that it will do you good.Girls have a great desire to know, it's true,If one is sleek and pious, true to ancient isms.They think: if there he knuckles, us he'll follow too.
On average, stronger Beliefs of WomenShell Youth Study Germany 2006, p. 210
28%31%33%
26%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
Belief in Personal God Neither God norSupernatural Power
Male Female (Aged 12 to 25)
Distribution of Voluntary ActivityVoluntary Survey Report, Baden-Württemberg 2007
4%
1% 1%
11%
8%
10%
5%5%
3%
5%
0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
12%
Politics Fire & RescueServices
Kindergardens /Schools
Social Work ReligiousCommunities
Males Females aged 14+
Specific Beliefs of Male and Female Students (Kassel University 2004, Harald Euler)
1 = strong disbelief to 5 = strong belief
2,772,43 2,36
2
3,053,31
3,07 2,912,52
2,24
0
0,5
1
1,5
2
2,5
3
3,5
Life afterDeath
Effects ofPrayer
Miracles Astrology Aliens &UFOs
Male Female Students
Swiss Census 2000Denominational category
% of membersfemale
% pairs married % pairs living with children
% single parents
Yehova’s Witnesses 57,4% (1) 99,3% (1) 53,3% (4) 5,2% (6)
Protest.-Methodists 56,4% (2) 97,1% (5) 49,8% (8) 3,0% (1)
Smaller Christian 54,9% (3) 93,9% (6) 51,2% (6) 6,8% (7)
Pentecostal 54,6% (4) 98,5% (3) 63,8% (2) 5,1% (5)
Independent Protestant 54,6% (5) 97,8% (4) 59,4% (3) 4,2% (4)
New Apostolic Church 54,1% (6) 91,1% (8) 44,6% (9) 5,9% (10)
Christian-Catholic 53,9% (7) 89,4% (10) 41,7% (11) 5,6% (9)
Evangelicals 53,5% (8) 98,9% (2) 65,6% (1) 5,9% (10)
Protestant-Reform. (M) 52,7% (9) 88,2% (11) 44,0% (10) 5,4% (7)
Roman-Catholic (M) 51,6% (10) 89,8% (9) 51,4% (5) 5,5% (8)
Judaism 51,0% (11) 93,9% (7) 51,0% (7) 6,3% (11)
Swiss Average 51,0% 89,0% 48,5% 5,8%
Non-affiliated 45,9% (12) 81,5% (12) 40,0% (12) 7,8% (12)
r / Spearman Rank C. 0,696 0,622 0,378
Marriage vows and Sexual Selection
No. of Children living with Women 35-44 yrs., Switzerland Censusses 1970 - 2000
0,40
0,90
1,40
1,90
2,40
Average 1,99 1,74 1,50 1,33
Catholics 2,05 1,83 1,59 1,39
Reformed 1,95 1,71 1,48 1,33
Non-Aff. 1,23 1,09 1,02 0,87
Indep. Prot. 2,3 1,77 1,98 2,24
1970 1980 1990 2000
Belief in Supernatural Agents perpetuating prolific Institutions
„The nuns/catholic effect provides evidence that religion affects fertility not only through preferences
but also functionally, through social service provision.“
* Eli Berman, Laurence Iannaccone, Giuseppe Ragusa: „From Empty Pews to Empty Cradles. Fertility Decline among European Catholics.“, UC
San Diego 2007
Cp. Adam Smith, Eric Kaufmann, Richard Sosis
Cooperative Breeding / As-if Kin
Teachers & Celibates as As-if kin - „Helpers at the Nest“, enhancing survival &
reproduction of community members
Cp.:
Pater = Father (syn.)
Nun, etym. from nonna, nana = tutor, aunt, grandmother, same root with „Nanny“!
Reopening of the Jewish Grammar School in Stuttgart / Germany, 08.09.2008
Offering Education, All-Day Care & Religious Knowledge
No. of Children living with Women 35-44 yrs., Switzerland Censusses 1970 - 2000
0,50
1,00
1,50
2,00
2,50
Average 1,99 1,74 1,50 1,33
Jews 1,79 1,86 1,94 1,73
New Apost. 2,11 1,75 1,48 1,34
Non-Aff. 1,23 1,09 1,02 0,87
1970 1980 1990 2000
Swiss Census 2000Denominational category
(CFR) Births per woman
% academiceducation
% higher occupational class
Hinduism* 2,79 (1) 17,0% (12) 7,4% (14)
Islam* 2,44 (2) 11,4% (15) 6,1% (15)
Jewish 2,06 (3) 42,7% (1) 42,4% (1)
Other (smaller) Protestant 2,04 (4) 20,1% (5) 19,2% (6)
New Pietism / Evangelical 2,02 (5) 19,2% (6) 17,9% (8)
Pentecostal 1,96 (6) 17,1% (11) 15,7% (10)
Other (smaller) Christian 1,82 (7) 39,1% (2) 31,8% (2)
Didn’t answer 1,74 (8) 19,1% (7) 5,3% (16)
Christian-Orthodox* 1,62 (9) 18,0% (10) 9,8% (13)
Swiss Average 1,43 19,2% 19,6%Buddhist* 1,42 (10) 20,3% (4) 13,4% (11)
Roman-Catholic 1,41 (11) 16,8% (13) 18,5% (7)
New Apostolic 1,39 (12) 13,9% (14) 17,6% (9)
Reformed Protestant 1,35 (13) 18,9% (8) 22,2% (4)
Yehova’s Witnesses 1,24 (14) 6,8% (16) 11,2% (12)
Christian-Catholic 1,21 (15) 18,4% (9) 22,2% (5)
Non-affiliated 1,11 (16) 30,6% (3) 26,7% (3)
r / Spearman Rank Correl. 0,054 -0,269
Religion and Fertility – A long-lived Team
Willendorf, ca. 22.000 BCE
Hohle Fels, ca. 36.000 BCE
Laussel, ca. 25.000 BCE
Tursac, ca. 20.000 BCE
3. The Evolution of Religiosity – Naturalistic? Emergent? Materialistic? (Latin Materia from Mater = Mother!)
2. The Role of Women in the Evolution of Religiosity and Religions has been greatly underestimated (Cp. David Hume, Volker Sommer)
1. Religiosity is evolutionary advantageous. The trait is showing the potential and tendency to raise the reproductive success throughout generations