1 / 30

Why do people behave religiously?

Why do people behave religiously?. Prepared for NEI Second International Conference August 13, 2003. Steve Kercel, University of New England Endogenous Systems Research Group Don Mikulecky, Virginia Commonwealth University Center for the Study of Biological Complexity.

abba
Download Presentation

Why do people behave religiously?

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Why do people behave religiously? Prepared for NEI Second International Conference August 13, 2003 Steve Kercel, University of New England Endogenous Systems Research Group Don Mikulecky, Virginia Commonwealth University Center for the Study of Biological Complexity

  2. Common thread: our goal or true end is harmony with an unseen and unseeable world • Does it produce visible effects? • Kant: Moral sense => freewill • Can we produce effects in it? • Do effects there => effects here? • How can we know the unknowable?

  3. “Personal religious experience has its root and centre in mystical states of consciousness” (W. James) • Claims to reveal big ideas • God • The unseen world • Inaccessible by • Evidence of the senses • Rational reflection

  4. Prayer is a process “wherein work is really done” (James) … as is believed in the American South and Midwest

  5. More than just present payoffs,“there is something wrong about us as we naturally stand” “… proper connection with the higher powers” “… we are saved from wrongness by making… (James)

  6. These are the attributes that James found common to religious experience • There is something wrong with Man • Out of touch with the unseen world • Prayer and mysticism put us in touch • Goal: change human nature • Maybe on Earth • Maybe in Heaven

  7. We do make choices and some are self-destructive but, does what is “wrong about us as we naturally stand,” require “connection with higher powers” to put right?

  8. If we know why we do what we do, can we choose to do something else?

  9. The rational consideration of “why” questions goes back at least as far as Aristotle • Why this effect, or transformation? • Material cause: what was transformed? • Efficient cause: by what constraints? • Formal cause: why this form? • Final cause: what is the purpose?

  10. V2 V1 C L E =-B/t B = (J +E/t) Efficient cause forces behavior through constraint Morphology of Natural System Fundamental Relationship Characterized as “Law of Nature”

  11. V2 V1 C L A fundamental relationship constrained by a morphology => specific constraint Transfer function T(S) = (s2LC)/(S2LC + 1) constrains transformation of V1 into V2 The constraint is characterized as efficientcause, “dynamical law,” or “law of behavior”

  12. V2 V1 C L Three Aristotelian causes seem adequate to explain why machines do what they do • Effect: V2 • Material cause: V1 • Efficient cause: • T(s) = (s2LC)/(S2LC + 1) • Formal cause: • Specific instances: L and C • Final cause: There isn’t any T(s)

  13. Subsystem to which X(S) belongs is determined by… X(S) (and similar) which is determined by … T(S) U(S) W(S) X(S) T(S), U(S) and W(S) which are determined by … L, C and other such parts The influence of the parts on the whole is also called upward causation

  14. V2 V1 C L But efficient cause also depends on the parts andthe morphology of the process In a machine, efficient cause is externally entailed

  15. But what entails the entailments of the thing that entailed efficient cause, T(s)?

  16. Aristotle saw this process from large to small terminating in an uncaused First Cause The Hand of God, for some function, entails … the Hand of Man, for some function, entails … the big robot, for some function, entails … the small robot, for some function, entails … T(s) also called downward causation

  17. The parts serve a function in the whole Since it ends with God, discussion of downward, or final, causation is dismissed as unscientific.

  18. God / Immanent cause Mind Mind Biological life Biological life Mechanisms Superstrings From the time of Lamarck, scientists and theologians have neatly split the turf … with each camp getting the “part that matters”

  19. The traditions share some remarkable common ground • Relevant causation is a linear hierarchy • Organization is separable from substrate • Physical substrate matters little • Sufficiently large description • Indistinguishable from process • Will of God, or • Equations of particle dynamics

  20. A entails … C entails … B entails … A entails … C entails … Larger possibility ignored by both: Let multiple processes entail efficient cause of another

  21. A entails B C entails A B entails C Can we form these hierarchies of entailment into a loop? Does this entailment structure make sense?

  22. A  ={{{}}} C {} B {{}} Endogenous causal loop commutes with a hyperset Coherent existence of hypererset => coherence of endogenous loop

  23. Traversing the short path gives downward causation, A entails C via B C entails B via A B entails A via C Traversing the long path gives upward causation

  24. Endogenous causal loops are observed in brain function “Intelligent behavior is characterized by flexible and creative pursuit of endogenously defined goals.” (Freeman)

  25. Endogeny differs from both orthodox science and religion • Relevant causation forms a loop hierarchy • Simultaneously upward and downward • Organization is inseparable from substrate • Physical substrate matters crucially • No largest model of this larger world • Always distinct from process • Impredicatives => partial insight

  26. Endogeny does not disprove the existence of God • By rational inquiry, God is • Neither provable • Nor disprovable • Endogeny of life and mind • neither precludes nor necessitates God • Evidence of God depends on mystical revelation

  27. James: does mysticism yield genuine insights? • Absolutely authoritative to recipient • No duty for others to accept uncritically • Is it another kind of consciousness?

  28. d Formal System (F) Natural System (N) a b c MR={ (a,b) | a = c + b + d} Do entailments revealed by insight commute with those of processes in reality? e.g., Reductionism, the Talmud, Shamanism?

  29. It is unwise to dismiss sudden insights without asking if they commute with reality • Perplexity suddenly resolved • Abduction or revelation? • Subjectively attributed • We all believe something • Self-evident truths • Not provable/disprovable Happens in endogeny, the Talmud, Shamanism, and even Reductionism

  30. This is the third of three answers to “Why do people behave religiously?” • Interpreting insight as inspiration • Metaphor for downward causation • Seeking alternatives to self-destructiveness

More Related