tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-969156055853914313.post7869631371735695656..comments2023-05-20T13:45:03.656+02:00Comments on Ego sum Daniel: Young kids can't help believing what they're told - including religionUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-969156055853914313.post-49795012107186577892010-10-24T09:47:12.354+02:002010-10-24T09:47:12.354+02:00An addendum:
I've been very critical of thes...An addendum: <br /><br />I've been very critical of these type of evo-psych explanations before. For example - <a href="http://egosumdaniel.blogspot.com/2010/03/why-do-we-believe-and-are-atheists.html" rel="nofollow">"Why do we believe", and are atheists really more intelligent?</a> plus <a href="http://epiphenom.fieldofscience.com/2010/03/is-this-why-atheists-are-on-average.html?showComment=1268077087704#c1819059472538858058" rel="nofollow">a comment on Epiphenom</a>. But my objections there were that the difference in intelligence (6 IQ points) was not biologically relevant and thus the conclusion that atheists are on average more intelligent because intelligence evolved as a way of adapting to novel situations (atheism being a novel attitude) is pure conjecture based on a few assumptions too many.<br /><br />I still think that in order to definitely <i>prove</i> that the selective advantages of believing exactly what your elders tell you (like <i>"don't run off that cliff, you'll fall and hurt yourself"</i> or <i>"I believe in god, the father almighty, creator of heaven and earth. I believe in Jesus Christ, his only son, our lord"</i>) are larger than the disadvantages, requires a lot of evidence that we don't have. But in the case of small children believing what they're told I do think that there is a biological basis behind the observations. I like that it also makes it possible to argue for an opposing hypothesis; that in fact this bias in children could has come about through random non-selective processes or through the co-option of another selectively advantageous trait and not necessarily because <i>"you believe what your family and community tells you because they aren't dead, and so believing them ups the chances you won't be either"</i>, as John S. Wilking argues in his comment. In the absence of clear evidence for either hypothesis, I buy the explanation as detailed in the post.Daniel Ocampo Dazahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02921446445402838678noreply@blogger.com