In Chapter Five, “Religion, the Early Days,” of Breaking the Spell (see previous posts
Sept.-Nov. 2013), Daniel Dennett continues to speculate on how religion could
have evolved from what he calls the “intentional stance” of early humans. According to Dennett, our ancestors developed
an instinctive attribution of agency to “anything complicated that moves” as a
survival mechanism. This instinct, he
suggests, over developed into a “Hyperactive Agency Detection Device,” which in
turn led to the population of “imaginary agents” (things, animals, and people
with special powers). This hypothesis
can explain, not only superstitions, divination, shamanic healers, but also
early religions such as animism, totemism, animal deities, etc. (see Nov. 2013
post).
Regardless of whether this is true, it’s a fascinating idea
that does make a certain sense. We also
seem to have evolved as a species that is intent on understanding and
controlling the world around us. Not
only do we seek explanations for phenomena we don’t understand, but we also
seek explanations that are beneficial.
In the case of superstitions, if a repeated act on our part
results in either a good or bad outcome more times than not, we may infer a cause
and effect relationship. We repeat the
acts that have had a good outcome and avoid those that haven’t. If our beneficent act doesn't work on
occasion, it must be because we aren’t always doing it right or with the right
attitude. Psychological studies have
shown that there is a kind of placebo effect to certain superstitions. The athlete develops a ritualistic behavior
before a game in order to ensure a good performance. His or her belief in the efficacy of the act
(or the “lucky charm”) actually does build confidence that contributes to enhanced
performance.
Similarly, as Dennett states, our belief in the healing
power of some agent serves as a kind of “health insurance.” Our belief in the efficacy of the agent
actually contributes to our healing.
Or take prayer. How
many of us, in a moment of panic, will utter a prayer to the universe, even if
we don’t necessarily believe in a supernatural being who hears us? Yet it can have a beneficial comforting
effect, or reassure us that in a situation over which we have no control, at
least we’ve done something! I know
atheists and agnostics who practice prayer, because they benefit from listening
to themselves, akin perhaps to keeping a diary or journal.
Another tactic is to use divination, coin tosses, a roll of
the dice, astrology, Tarot cards, fortune telling, or some other fictive device
to help us make decisions. I’ve done
this myself. Can’t make up my mind? Toss
a coin. If I’m disappointed in the
outcome, then I take the opposite course.
It’s a way to determine my gut feeling when my mind is muddled.
The anthropologist and scholar of myth Claude Levi-Strauss
theorizes that mythology serves to resolve contradictions we encounter in human
experience, or at least create the illusion of resolution. Confronted with
phenomena we don’t understand we seek, not only an explanation, but an
explanation that is psychologically and emotionally satisfying.
In Dennett’s terms, having attributed agency to “something
complicated that moves” how do we explain it when the agent ceases to move and
appears to lose its agency, in other words, when it dies? Where does its animating spirit go? The contradiction between life and death is
no doubt the most overwhelming of all and perhaps the one that gives mythology,
religion, and the arts their most enduring power.
The universal cycle of myth from creation to apocalypse to
resurrection reassures us of life continually reemerging from death, surely as
Spring follows Winter. Religion offers
the promise of our survival in spiritual form.
And the arts externalize the deepest dimensions of our lived experience,
enabling us to enjoy the illusion of resolution, or, in some cases, to resign
ourselves to our fate.
Agnosticism requires us to live with ambiguities and
uncertainties, whether we hold out hope for the existence of an unseen
spiritual reality or not. Atheism
requires us to accept the absence of such a reality. Those who hold these beliefs take refuge in
their conviction that they are not deceiving themselves, though, for all they
KNOW, they may be missing something.
But for many, perhaps most, of us, neither of those
alternatives can provide that psychologically and emotionally satisfying
explanation for the mysteries of the universe, and certainly not for that
ultimate contradiction between life and death.
Such is the enduring power and appeal of religion.
And even the non-believers may find themselves benefiting
from the placebo effect of harmless superstitions, faith in medical treatments,
the practice of prayer, decision-making tricks, or that suspension of
disbelief, which brings them to real tears in the presence of a powerful
fictive illusion. And do we really want
to break those spells?
One wonders if Daniel Dennett has ever experienced the
actual life enhancement, restoration, healing effect, or transformation that follows
from the fabrications, deceptions, and “imaginary agents” of great art, music,
or literature. And does he really want
to break those spells?
