Only the biggest God builds a civilization: Author posits religion is essential building block of society | National Post
Among more militant atheist circles, the argument is often made that religion is a human invention serving only to stand in the way of societal progress. In the new book, Big Gods: How Religion Transformed Cooperation and Conflict, University of British Columbia psychology professor Ara Norenzayan argues the exact opposite: Religions — at least those equipped with an omniscient, omnipresent “Big God” — are not only important, but the source of almost all known earthly civilization. The Post’s Tristin Hopper reached Mr. Norenzayan in Vancouver.
If religion is the “glue” that bonded modern civilization together, as your book asserts, what did human society look like before?
Let’s go back 12,000 years; you have all of humanity living in small bands of hunter-gatherers. Then something happened which, still, we’re trying to understand: In only a few thousands years, which is nothing from an evolutionary perspective, people settle down, populations skyrocket and societies start to build monumental architecture like the pyramids. At exactly the same time you have the growth of religion. My argument is that this is not a coincidence. Maybe what happened was, these human groups stumbled on the idea of a Big God, found they could solve co-operation dilemmas much better, and as a result they expanded. Other things then kicked in: Agriculture, specialization, more efficient armies, etc.
Your book makes a clear distinction between the tribal gods worshipped by most hunter-gatherer societies and “Big Gods”; omniscient all-powerful beings like the Judeo-Christian God. What’s the difference?
I’m arguing that some gods are more effective than other gods in creating civilization. Limited gods [tribal gods] know very little about what people do, they might demand sacrifices, maybe not; these gods are not going to build large-scale societies. The big, omniscient, all-powerful, morally-demanding gods, they’re the ones that are going to do the job. If you just count the number of supernatural beliefs people have in the world, there are thousands of them. Yet, the vast majority of human beings are devoted to Big Gods; probably more than 80%. So, how do you get from tribal gods to the vast majority of human beings worshipping big gods? There has to be an explanation.
If the Big Gods idea suddenly cropped up 12,000 years ago, where did it come from? Was it something people “discovered” or — here’s where things might get controversial — do you assert it was something that somebody made up?
The backbone of the book is looking at that question: How did these ideas come about? Are we naturally endowed with these ideas? Did we invent them? It’s possible religious visionaries thought of them, were charismatic, and spread the idea. Or the idea was spread by conquest. But it’s not an intentional process, necessarily. There wasn’t a committee of Machiavellian priests who sat down and said, “Let’s think of an idea that would really make people co-operate.”
Your book notes that while religion — and particularly the threat of Hell — was instrumental in keeping order in the ancient world, some of the modern world’s most secular societies, like Norway and Canada, are also some of the most well behaved. How?
In places like Canada and Northern Europe, societies develop solutions to co-operation and trust through secular means, religion declines. Then, the religion that is left is much more benevolent, a much kinder more gentler kind of religion; there much more laxness about what people can believe. There’s an interesting recent trend — and we find a lot of it here in Vancouver — where people say they’re spiritual but not religious. You custom-make your own religion.
Many of the ideas in your book have been floating around for some time, but Big Gods seeks to back it up with research. How?
You can’t rely on one single type of evidence; part of it is psychology, part of it is anthropology, part of it is history, so I was weaving together a lot of this evidence from different fields.
As well as crediting religion with forming the modern world, your book notes the “toxic” sides of faith. Is the same force that helps religion to build civilizations also the same force that causes people to raise their sword against an infidel?
The niceness that religion encourages is primarily directed towards your in-group. People who are going to sacrifice for their co-religionists are the same people who are going to be, under the condition of threat or conflict, intolerant or even violent to people who are not of their own religion. A great example is suicide terrorism; it’s the ultimate altruism. It’s a toxic form of altruism.
Among more militant atheist circles, the argument is often made that religion is a human invention serving only to stand in the way of societal progress. In the new book, Big Gods: How Religion Transformed Cooperation and Conflict, University of British Columbia psychology professor Ara Norenzayan argues the exact opposite: Religions — at least those equipped with an omniscient, omnipresent “Big God” — are not only important, but the source of almost all known earthly civilization. The Post’s Tristin Hopper reached Mr. Norenzayan in Vancouver.
If religion is the “glue” that bonded modern civilization together, as your book asserts, what did human society look like before?
Let’s go back 12,000 years; you have all of humanity living in small bands of hunter-gatherers. Then something happened which, still, we’re trying to understand: In only a few thousands years, which is nothing from an evolutionary perspective, people settle down, populations skyrocket and societies start to build monumental architecture like the pyramids. At exactly the same time you have the growth of religion. My argument is that this is not a coincidence. Maybe what happened was, these human groups stumbled on the idea of a Big God, found they could solve co-operation dilemmas much better, and as a result they expanded. Other things then kicked in: Agriculture, specialization, more efficient armies, etc.
Your book makes a clear distinction between the tribal gods worshipped by most hunter-gatherer societies and “Big Gods”; omniscient all-powerful beings like the Judeo-Christian God. What’s the difference?
I’m arguing that some gods are more effective than other gods in creating civilization. Limited gods [tribal gods] know very little about what people do, they might demand sacrifices, maybe not; these gods are not going to build large-scale societies. The big, omniscient, all-powerful, morally-demanding gods, they’re the ones that are going to do the job. If you just count the number of supernatural beliefs people have in the world, there are thousands of them. Yet, the vast majority of human beings are devoted to Big Gods; probably more than 80%. So, how do you get from tribal gods to the vast majority of human beings worshipping big gods? There has to be an explanation.
If the Big Gods idea suddenly cropped up 12,000 years ago, where did it come from? Was it something people “discovered” or — here’s where things might get controversial — do you assert it was something that somebody made up?
The backbone of the book is looking at that question: How did these ideas come about? Are we naturally endowed with these ideas? Did we invent them? It’s possible religious visionaries thought of them, were charismatic, and spread the idea. Or the idea was spread by conquest. But it’s not an intentional process, necessarily. There wasn’t a committee of Machiavellian priests who sat down and said, “Let’s think of an idea that would really make people co-operate.”
Your book notes that while religion — and particularly the threat of Hell — was instrumental in keeping order in the ancient world, some of the modern world’s most secular societies, like Norway and Canada, are also some of the most well behaved. How?
In places like Canada and Northern Europe, societies develop solutions to co-operation and trust through secular means, religion declines. Then, the religion that is left is much more benevolent, a much kinder more gentler kind of religion; there much more laxness about what people can believe. There’s an interesting recent trend — and we find a lot of it here in Vancouver — where people say they’re spiritual but not religious. You custom-make your own religion.
Many of the ideas in your book have been floating around for some time, but Big Gods seeks to back it up with research. How?
You can’t rely on one single type of evidence; part of it is psychology, part of it is anthropology, part of it is history, so I was weaving together a lot of this evidence from different fields.
As well as crediting religion with forming the modern world, your book notes the “toxic” sides of faith. Is the same force that helps religion to build civilizations also the same force that causes people to raise their sword against an infidel?
The niceness that religion encourages is primarily directed towards your in-group. People who are going to sacrifice for their co-religionists are the same people who are going to be, under the condition of threat or conflict, intolerant or even violent to people who are not of their own religion. A great example is suicide terrorism; it’s the ultimate altruism. It’s a toxic form of altruism.
