The New "Religion Vs Science" Thread

In other words, you're going to drift that much further towards cannibalism.

Welcome to Homo sapiens, as evolved.

Both play a role in survival, but sometimes the two compete and one is forced to choose.

Meme evolution

I like the contention that we've moved beyond the "simplicity" of evolution, but my sense of understanding the science is that it is far from "simple" and not only that, it is the stage on which everything plays... and as actors, we don't recognize that stage.

interesting speculation that morality has "negated evolutionary success"
Ed

How do I solve a moral dilemma? Do I return the lost wallet? Do I make such a decision based on my empirical understanding of the universe and the nature of evolution? Moral decisions stand for the most part outside the realm of scientific understanding.

What is the meaning of the Pieta by Michelangelo? How do I understand it? Why is viewing it such a powerful experience? What is that experience? Or substitute a sonnet by Shakespeare, why are these things so affecting. Science does poorly when it comes to aesthetic appreciation/understanding, though much effort has been made in that regard. The notion of art and neuroscience demonstrate little but ignorance with respect to the aesthetic experience and is a perfect example of the notion of “scientism.”

What is virtue and why is it important to me? How do I understand its implications? How can science explain what it is to be virtuous in the face of a relentless and competitive evolutionary process that favors only fitness and survival?

Actually I have great faith in humanity's ability to intellectually and then socially justify anything if a true biological imperative is at stake.

PNAS, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

The ecology of religious beliefs

Carlos A. Boteroa,b,1, Beth Gardnerc, Kathryn R. Kirbyd, Joseph Bulbuliae, Michael C. Gavinf, and Russell D. Grayg,h,i
Author Affiliations

Edited by Ara Norenzayan, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada, and accepted by the Editorial Board October 10, 2014 (received for review May 11, 2014)

Although ecological forces are known to shape the expression of sociality across a broad range of biological taxa, their role in shaping human behavior is currently disputed. Both comparative and experimental evidence indicate that beliefs in moralizing high gods promote cooperation among humans, a behavioral attribute known to correlate with environmental harshness in nonhuman animals. Here we combine fine-grained bioclimatic data with the latest statistical tools from ecology and the social sciences to evaluate the potential effects of environmental forces, language history, and culture on the global distribution of belief in moralizing high gods (n = 583 societies). After simultaneously accounting for potential nonindependence among societies because of shared ancestry and cultural diffusion, we find that these beliefs are more prevalent among societies that inhabit poorer environments and are more prone to ecological duress. In addition, we find that these beliefs are more likely in politically complex societies that recognize rights to movable property. Overall, our multimodel inference approach predicts the global distribution of beliefs in moralizing high gods with an accuracy of 91%, and estimates the relative importance of different potential mechanisms by which this spatial pattern may have arisen. The emerging picture is neither one of pure cultural transmission nor of simple ecological determinism, but rather a complex mixture of social, cultural, and environmental influences. Our methods and findings provide a blueprint for how the increasing wealth of ecological, linguistic, and historical data can be leveraged to understand the forces that have shaped the behavior of our own species.

Yet it is considered unethical to prohibit reproduction