Advertisement

Simulating Religions as Adaptive Systems

  • Connor WoodEmail author
  • Richard Sosis
Chapter
Part of the New Approaches to the Scientific Study of Religion book series (NASR, volume 7)

Abstract

Religious communities exhibit many features of complex adaptive systems (CASs). They are open systems whose global features nonlinearly emerge from the interactions of their components, are complexly internally structured, and must adaptively respond to continual perturbations in their environments. This chapter presents a system dynamics model (SDM) of a generic religious organization represented as a CAS. The simulated community extracts energy from an ecological resource base and expends energy on distinct, mutually exclusive goals: reproduction, energy-seeking, and ritual. Although energy that is spent on ritual cannot be spent on utilitarian objectives, ritual performance increases the perceived legitimacy of the religious system, thereby motivating higher levels of cooperation. Low levels of perceived legitimacy can trigger a switch to a charismatic version of authority. In experiments, we found that many simulated communities maximized their populations by outstripping their resource base shortly before collapsing, in a classic example of boom-and-bust ecological overshoot. However, certain communities showed greater longevity if the Charisma parameter was maximized. We interpret our results to suggest that increasing social flexibility in response to crises of legitimacy may contribute to the resilience of certain types of social, including religious, systems.

Keywords

Complex adaptive system Religion Ritual Charisma Resource overshoot Supernatural beings Structural hierarchy 

References

  1. Anderson, B. 1991. Imagined communities: Reflections on the origin and spread of nationalism. London: Verso.Google Scholar
  2. Asad, T. 1993. Genealogies of religion: Discipline and reasons of power in Christianity and Islam. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Atran, S. 2002. In gods we trust: The evolutionary landscape of religion. Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Atran, S., and J. Ginges. 2012. Religious and sacred imperatives in human conflict. Science 336 (6083): 855–857.  https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1216902.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Barrett, J.L. 2012. Born believers: The science of childhood religion belief. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  6. Baumard, N., and C. Chevallier. 2015. The nature and dynamics of world religions: A life-history approach. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 282 (1818): 20151593.  https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2015.1593.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Baumeister, R.F., K.D. Vohs, J.L. Aaker, and E.N. Garbinsky. 2013. Some key differences between a happy life and a meaningful life. The Journal of Positive Psychology 8 (6): 505–516.  https://doi.org/10.1080/17439760.2013.830764.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bloch, M. 2008. Why religion is nothing special but is central. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 363 (1499): 2055–2061.  https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2008.0007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Boster, J.S., R.R. Hudson, and S.J.C. Gaulin. 1998. High paternity certainties of Jewish priests. American Anthropologist 100 (4): 967–971.  https://doi.org/10.1525/aa.1998.100.4.967.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bourguignon, E., ed. 1973. Religion altered states of consciousness and social change. Columbus: Ohio State University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Bourguignon, E. 1976. Possession. San Francisco: Chandler & Sharp.Google Scholar
  12. Cleary, E.L. 2018. The rise of charismatic Catholicism in Latin America. Gainesville: University Press of Florida.Google Scholar
  13. Dempster, M., ed. 2011. The globalization of Pentecostalism: A religion made to travel. Eugene: Wipf & Stock Pub.Google Scholar
  14. Doniger, W. 1973. Asceticism and eroticism in the mythology of Śiva. London: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Douglas, M. 1986. How institutions think. Syracuse: Syracuse University Press.Google Scholar
  16. ———. 2004. Natural symbols: Explorations in cosmology. Routledge.Google Scholar
  17. Durkheim, É. 2008. The elementary forms of religious life. Trans. C. Cosman. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  18. Forrester, J.W. 1971. Counterintuitive behavior of social systems. Theory and Decision 2 (2): 109–140.  https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00148991.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. ———. 1973. World dynamics. Wright-Allen Press.Google Scholar
  20. Frankl, V.E. 2006. Man’s search for meaning. Boston: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
  21. Goode, W.J. 1951. Religion among the primitives. New York: The Free Press.Google Scholar
  22. Iannaccone, L. 1994. Why strict churches are strong. American Journal of Sociology 99 (5): 1180–1211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Luckmann, T. 1967. The invisible religion: The problem of religion in modern society. NewYork: MacMillan Publishing Company.Google Scholar
  24. Marshall, J. 2000. The Buddhist art of Gandhara: The story of the early school; its birth, growth and decline. New Delhi: Coronet Books Inc.Google Scholar
  25. Maturana, H.R., and F.J. Varela. 1980. Autopoiesis and cognition: The realization of the living. 1st ed. Dordrecht/Boston: D. Reidel Publishing Company.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Morgan, J., C. Wood, and C. Caldwell-Harris. 2018. Reflective thought, religious belief, and the social foundations hypothesis. In The new reflectionism in cognitive psychology: Why reason matters, ed. G. Pennycook. Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  27. Purzycki, B.G., C. Apicella, Q.D. Atkinson, E. Cohen, R.A. McNamara, A.K. Willard, et al. 2016. Moralistic gods, supernatural punishment and the expansion of human sociality. Nature 530 (7590): 327–330.  https://doi.org/10.1038/nature16980.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Rappaport, R.A. 1968. Pigs for the ancestors: Ritual in the ecology of a New Guinea people. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  29. ———. 1979. Ecology, meaning, and religion. North Atlantic Books.Google Scholar
  30. ———. 1999. Ritual and religion in the making of humanity, vol. 110. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  31. Searle, J.R. 1995. The construction of social reality. New York: Simon and Schuster.Google Scholar
  32. Shaver, J.H., G. Fraser, and J.A. Bulbulia. 2017. Charismatic signaling: How religion stabilizes cooperation and entrenches inequality. In The Oxford handbook of evolutionary psychology and religion, ed. T.K. Shackelford and J.R. Liddle, 1–31. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  33. Simon, Y.R. 1991. A general theory of authority. 1st ed. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press.Google Scholar
  34. Smith, J.Z. 1982. Imagining religion: From Babylon to Jonestown. Chicago: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
  35. Sosis, R. 2003. Why aren’t we all hutterites?: Costly signaling theory and religious behavior. Human Nature (Hawthorne, NY) 14 (2): 91–127.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s12110-003-1000-6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Sosis, R. 2017. Religions as complex adaptive systems. In Mental religion: The brain, cognition, and culture, ed. N. Clements. Farmington Hills: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  37. Sosis, R. 2019. The building blocks of religious systems: Approaching religion as a complex system. In Evolution, development and complexity: Multiscale evolutionary models of complex adaptive systems, ed. G. Georgiev, J. Smart, C.L.F. Martinez, and M. Price. New York: Springer International.Google Scholar
  38. Sosis, R., and E.R. Bressler. 2003. Cooperation and commune longevity: A test of the costly signaling theory of religion. Cross-Cultural Research 37 (2): 211–239.  https://doi.org/10.1177/1069397103037002003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Sosis, R., and J. Kiper. 2014. Why religion is better conceived as a complex system than a norm-enforcing institution. The Behavioral and Brain Sciences 37 (3): 275–276.  https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X13003038.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Sosis, R., and J. Kiper. 2017. Sacred versus secular values: Cognitive and evolutionary sciences of religion and religious freedom. In Homo Religiosus? Exploring the roots of religion and religious freedom in human experience, 89–119.Google Scholar
  41. Stark, R., and R. Finke. 2000. Acts of faith: Explaining the human side of religion. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  42. Tetlock, P.E., O.V. Kristel, S.B. Elson, M.C. Green, and J.S. Lerner. 2000. The psychology of the unthinkable: Taboo trade-offs, forbidden base rates, and heretical counterfactuals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 78 (5): 853–870.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Turner, V. 1996. The ritual process: Structure and anti-structure. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  44. Vail, K.E., Z.K. Rothschild, D.R. Weise, S. Solomon, T. Pyszczynski, and J. Greenberg. 2010. A terror management analysis of the psychological functions of religion. Personality and Social Psychology Review: An Official Journal of the Society for Personality and Social Psychology, Inc 14 (1): 84–94.  https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868309351165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Weber, M. 2012. The Theory of Social and Economic Organization, ed. T. Parsons, A.M. Henderson and Trans. T. Parsons. Mansfield Centre: Martino Fine Books.Google Scholar
  46. Weeden, J., and R. Kurzban. 2013. What predicts religiosity? A multinational analysis of reproductive and cooperative morals. Evolution and Human Behavior 34 (6): 440–445.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2013.08.006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Willard, A.K., and L. Cingl. 2017. Testing theories of secularization and religious belief in the Czech Republic and Slovakia. Evolution and Human Behavior 38: 604–615.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2017.01.002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Wood, C. 2017. Ritual and the logic of self-regulation: Response to commentators. Religion, Brain & Behavior 7(3): 266–275.  https://doi.org/10.1080/2153599X.2016.1156565.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Wood, C., and J. Shaver 2018. Religion, evolution, and the basis of institutions: The institutional cognition model of religion. Evolutionary Studies in Imaginative Culture 2 (2): 1–20. http://doi.org/10.26613/esic.2.2.89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Wood, C.P., and K.J. Stockly. 2018. Complexity and possession: Gender and social structure in the variability of shamanic traits. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 41: E91.  https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X17002229.

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Center for Mind and CultureBostonUSA
  2. 2.University of ConnecticutStorrsUSA

Personalised recommendations