Transmission of religion and attitudes.

The col lection of papers in this special edi tion of Twin Research represents a smal l landmark in the study of behavioral genetics. The work publ ished here is the frui t of an invi ted three-day workshop, supported by the John M Templeton Foundation, hosted by the Center for Theology and the Natural Sciences (Berkeley, November 13-15, 1998), which was specifical ly devoted to the task of placing varieties of rel igious experience and practice wi thin a behavior–genetic context. Wi thin the l i fe and the behavioral sciences, the scientific study of rel igion has often been regarded as ‘off l imi ts’. From the perspective of a science that is sti l l ral l ied by the stories of Gal i leo and Darwin, too much interest in rel igion might betoken an intrusive commitment to something other than scientific truth. From the standpoint of theology, science is often viewed as conveniently i rrelevant at best and, at worst, destined only to erode sti l l further the crumbl ing buttresses of rel igious tradi tion. Both these views are inimical to science and the humani ties. Rel igion and the values often associated wi th i t represent towering accompl ishments of biological and cul tural evolution that are quintessential ly ‘human’. An understanding of ‘the human’ is impossible wi thout an understanding of those qual i ties and insti tutions that, in many cul tures, are sti l l intimately connected wi th rel igious bel ief and practice. Anthropology and psychology that ignore rel igion deal nei ther wi th the anthropos in ‘anthropology’ nor the psyche in ‘psychology’ and ‘psychiatry’. It would be presumptuous to suggest that behavior genetics is going to revolutionize our understanding of rel igion and values. However, at the very least, the transmission of rel igion and values presents model systems that i l lustrate many of the subtleties and pi tfal ls in the study of biological and cul tural inheri tance. At the very best, we are addressing the material , evolutionary and historical foundation for humani ty’s fascination wi th the transcendent that, 30 years ago, the evolutionary geneticist Theodosius Dobzhansky named ‘the Biology of Ul timate Concern’. The papers in this volume are unified by thei r authors’ common spi ri t of scientific fascination wi th the problem of relating biology to that which is commonly assumed to be purely ‘cul tural ’ and characteristical ly ‘human’. The authors are also intrigued by the possibi l i ty that behavioral genetics can help unravel some of the complex mechanisms underlying the development of rel igion and values and perhaps yield some insight into thei r role in adaptation. The authors do not make any grandiose claims for the significance of thei r findings, nor do they pretend that they support one or other particular pol i tical , phi losophical , theological or ethical perspective. Indeed, the contributors represent almost every shade and perspective current in western academia and are as divided about the impl ications of thei r work as any group of informed scholars. The participants were selected because they were known to have unpubl ished data, mainly on large samples of tw ins, that might i l luminate some issue in the scientific study or rel igion and values. Partici pants were given considerable freedom to develop whatever l ine of inqui ry seemed most productive. The ini tial versions of the papers were ci rculated among participants, discussed intensively at the workshop and revised for publ ication. It was clear that the workshop model , where there was an intense focus on presenting and discussing models and data, was extremely rewarding and productive for the participants. Existing publ ished behavior–genetic studies have provided prel iminary insight into the transmission of di fferent rel igious constructs (reviewed in D’Onofrio et al 1 ). Rel igious affi l iation appears to be purely cul tural , whereas rel igious atti tudes and behavior, including church attendance, show varying degrees of genetic inheri tance in addi tion to the influence of the shared envi ronment and assortative mating. However, these findings are hindered in that many of the studies only included crude measures of rel igiousness. Likewise, l i ttle behavior–genetic research has addressed more complex issues, such as the relationship between personal i ty/character and rel igiousness, rel igiousness as a mul tidimensional construct, di fferences in inheri tance between ethnici ties and cul tures, developmental trends in rel igious expression or behavior, and the role rel igion Correspondence: Dr Lindon Eaves, Vi rginia Insti tute for Psychiatric and Behavioral Genetics, Vi rginia Commonweal th Universi ty School of Medicine, Richmond, VA, USA Twin Research (1999) 2, 59–61 © 1999 Stockton Press All rights reserved 1369–0523/99 $12.00 http://www.stockton-press.co.uk/tr