Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Religious Concepts are Probably Epiphenomena: A Reply to Pyysiäinen, Boyer, and Barrett

Religious Concepts are Probably Epiphenomena: A Reply to Pyysiäinen, Boyer, and Barrett Religious Concepts are Probably Epiphenomena: A Reply to Pyysiäinen, Boyer, and Barrett J ESSE M. B ERING ¤ It is to the commentators’ great credit that they have managed to cull the conceptual imperfections of my article “The Natural Foundations of Afterlife Beliefs” (Bering 2002a) into a fairly coherent discussion of the “innateness” of representations of dead agents’ minds. In response to their insightful remarks, I will do my best to clarify my position on precisely this topic of the etiology of religious concepts. 1 Unlike Barrett, who stated that “the chicken-and-egg problem of whether intuitive ideas Ž ll in explicit ones or the other way around may be moot” (p. *), I cannot think of a more important, central question for researchers to be concerned with. Still, because experimental research on the cognitive bases of religion has only recently begun in earnest (e.g., Barrett 1998; Barrett & Keil 1996; Barrett, Richert & Driesenga 2001; Bering 2002; Bering & Bjorklund 2003; Barrett & Nyhof 2001; Boyer & Ramble 2001; Evans 2001; Kelemen 1999; Norenzayan & Atran, in press; Walker 1992; Woolley & Phelps 2001), to some extent I feel it premature to forcibly argue the position ¤ Jesse M. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Journal of Cognition and Culture Brill

Religious Concepts are Probably Epiphenomena: A Reply to Pyysiäinen, Boyer, and Barrett

Journal of Cognition and Culture , Volume 3 (3): 11 – Jan 1, 2003

Loading next page...
 
/lp/brill/religious-concepts-are-probably-epiphenomena-a-reply-to-pyysi-inen-h2SWKF3n60

References (25)

Publisher
Brill
Copyright
Copyright © Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands
ISSN
1567-7095
eISSN
1568-5373
DOI
10.1163/156853703322336670
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Religious Concepts are Probably Epiphenomena: A Reply to Pyysiäinen, Boyer, and Barrett J ESSE M. B ERING ¤ It is to the commentators’ great credit that they have managed to cull the conceptual imperfections of my article “The Natural Foundations of Afterlife Beliefs” (Bering 2002a) into a fairly coherent discussion of the “innateness” of representations of dead agents’ minds. In response to their insightful remarks, I will do my best to clarify my position on precisely this topic of the etiology of religious concepts. 1 Unlike Barrett, who stated that “the chicken-and-egg problem of whether intuitive ideas Ž ll in explicit ones or the other way around may be moot” (p. *), I cannot think of a more important, central question for researchers to be concerned with. Still, because experimental research on the cognitive bases of religion has only recently begun in earnest (e.g., Barrett 1998; Barrett & Keil 1996; Barrett, Richert & Driesenga 2001; Bering 2002; Bering & Bjorklund 2003; Barrett & Nyhof 2001; Boyer & Ramble 2001; Evans 2001; Kelemen 1999; Norenzayan & Atran, in press; Walker 1992; Woolley & Phelps 2001), to some extent I feel it premature to forcibly argue the position ¤ Jesse M.

Journal

Journal of Cognition and CultureBrill

Published: Jan 1, 2003

There are no references for this article.