Adaptationists explain the evolution of religion from the cooperative effects of religious commitments, but which cooperation problem does religion evolve to solve? I focus on a class of symmetrical coordination problems for which there are two pure Nash equilibriums: (1) ALL COOPERATE, which is efficient but relies on full cooperation; (2) ALL DEFECT, which is inefficient but pays regardless o...

This work is the VERSION OF RECORD (VoR) This is the fixed version of an article made available by an organization that acts as a publisher by formally and exclusively declaring the article "published". If it is an "early release" article (formally identified as being published even before the compilation of a volume issue and assignment of associated metadata), it is citable via some permanent...

I began my study of religion as a hobby years before I formally entered the academic world. During my informal studies I never gave much thought to just what religion is. I gleaned the bookstore shelves in sections marked " Religion, " never considering why some books appeared on these shelves and others appeared on the " New Age and Occult " section. My study of religion was simple — my concep...

No one has explored the implications of cognitive theories and findings about religion for understanding its history with any more enthusiasm or insight than Luther Martin. Although my focus here is not historical, I assume that I will be employing cognitive tools in ways that he finds congenial. In the paper’s first section, I will make some general comments about standard comparisons of scien...

Theories of religion that are supported with selected examples can be criticized for selection bias. This paper evaluates major evolutionary hypotheses about religion with a random sample of 35 religions drawn from a 16-volume encyclopedia of world religions. The results are supportive of the group-level adaptation hypothesis developed in Darwin's Cathedral: Evolution, Religion, and the Nature ...

The classical theories of sociology, that is, of Max Weber and Emile Durkheim, were both monumental and flawed. Their main weakness lies in the weaknesses inherent in sociology: it is vague, unscientific, and reductive. [Hmmmm. Would you want to shout this out in Social Science? on what grounds do you make such charges?] However, although their analyses of religion built from this flawed social...