CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 67Study and Philosophy of ReligionLanguage and cultural evolutionEvolutionary Psychology and Human Behavior

Religion re-explained

Sterelny, Kim·2018·Religion, Brain & Behavior
DOI 10.1080/2153599x.2017.1323779
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

This article has three aims. First, it attempts to identify the exact problem religion poses to those developing an account of the evolution of human social life, and of the cognitive capacities that sustain that life. Having done that, the article aims to specify the criteria that an explanation of the evolution of religion should meet. Second, it presents a critique of one popular account: the idea that religion emerges as a result of cognitive biases that favor agentive thinking, that favor minimally counter-intuitive narratives, amplified and entrenched by some form of cultural evolution. Third, it sketches a positive account in which various forms of communal practice and quasi-religious activity precede the emergence of religious belief. The machinery of the cultural transmission of religion is built before religion transitions into (in part) an ideological system. I call this an ethnographic model of the evolution of religion, because the core ideas are implicit (and sometimes partly explicit) in ethnographically oriented anthropology of religion.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/2153599x.2017.1323779

Cites

95 of 95 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The genesis of religious belief and behaviour complexes came as an exaptation from social-cognition and social bonding behaviours that became directly beneficial for cooperation by providing a cognitive middle-man to deter would-be cheaters.

    “the genesis of religious belief and behaviour complexes we call religion came as an exaptation from the social-cognition and social bonding behaviours that became directly beneficial for cooperation by providing a 'cognitive middle-man' to deter would-be cheaters”

    From Cultural Evolution of Religion, Spirituality and Ritual: Impacts On Human Cooperation (2024) · cites this paper as Sterelny 2017

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

3 of the 98 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Sterelny, K.
Affiliations
Australian National University (AU)
Corresponding author
Sterelny, Kim
ORCID
Sterelny, Kim
Venue
Religion, Brain & Behavior
Publisher
Informa UK Limited
Published
2017-07-11
Volume
8
Issue
4
Pages
406-425
ISSN
  • 2153-5981 (ISSN-L)
  • 2153-599X
DOI
10.1080/2153599x.2017.1323779
OpenAlex
W2735159947
Cited by
67
References
98
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 18 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 1
FWCI
44.54
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Religion Brain & Behavior (publishedVersion)
  • ANU Open Research (Australian National University) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Australian Research Council (FL13)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Study and Philosophy of Religion
  • Social Sciences › Cultural Studies › Language and cultural evolution
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Evolutionary Psychology and Human Behavior
Keywords
evolution of religion, cognitive biases, cultural evolution, cultural transmission, communal practices, ideology, ethnographic models, anthropology of religion

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review