The Reproductive Advantage of Religiosity Religious Demography benefitting Evolutionary Fitness

1. The Reproductive Advantage of ReligiosityReligious Demography benefitting Evolutionary Fitness Dr. Michael Blume ( www.blume-religionswissenschaft.de ) Conference “Explaining Religion 2010”, Bristol University

2. Observation & Hypothesis Religiously affiliated humans reproduce (on average) more successfully than their secular peers. Of course, this doesn‘t mean that Religion is the ONLY demographic factor, but that it is an INDEPENDENT one.  As assumed by Charles Darwin, Religiosity evolved – and is evolving - as an adaptive, biocultural trait.

3. Example Judaism & Israel Haredim growth in Israel: 6-8 children per woman throughout generations Cp. Eric Kaufmann: „ShalltheReligiousinheritthe Earth? Demographyand Politics in the 21st century“, London 2010

4. Example Old Order Amish in the USA • Other high-fertile religious communities in the US (Example): • - Hutterites • Old Order Mennonites • Mormons • Orthodox Jews Cp. D.B. Kraybill & C.D. Bowman: „On theBackroadto Heaven. Old Order Hutterites, Mennonites, AmishandBrethren“, Johns Hopkins Univ. 2002

5. Secular demographics In contrast, we still found NOT A SINGLE CASE of a SECULAR populationretainingreplacementfertilityratesofmorethantwochildren per womanfor a century! Religious Non-Affiliation Note: Demographically, it is NOT possible to fully substitute the potentials of Religiosity! Cp. P. Norris & R. Inglehart: „ Sacred and Secular: Religion and Politics Worldwide“, Cambridge 2004

7. USA, General Social Surveys Data Source: V. Skirbekk, A. Goujon & E. Kaufmann, Vienna Institute of Demography 2008

8. Exploring Bio-Cultural Evolution I Religiosity is bringing forth VARIANTS of RELIGIONS pursuing diverse reproductive (r- and K-)strategies! Examples from the USA: High-Fertile Old Order Amish (expanding) Methodist Variants 19th century: K-Strategy 20th century: r-Strategy All-Celibate Shakers (dissolving)

9. Exploring Bio-Cultural Evolution II Religiosityisoffering POTENTIALS toculturally diverse, reproductivestrategies Hutterites, Haredim, Old Order Amish etc. Non-Affiliated USA, China, France, Sweden, Austria etc. Shakers

10. Worship Attendance Adults / No. of Children 82 Nations & Germany World Value Surveys 1981 - 2004, IW 2007 2,6 2,5 2,4 2,23 2,2 1,98 2,01 2 1,8 1,8 1,78 1,67 1,66 1,6 1,44 1,4 1,39 1,2 1 never on once per once per > more Holidays Month Week often Children Germany Children globally Religion & Fertility Data Source: Dominik Enste, Institut der deutschen Wirtschaft Köln 2007

11. Proximate Mechanisms • Individual Level: 1. Belief in Supernatural Agents selecting for prolific Commandments • Social Level: 2. Belief in Supernatural Agents selecting for prolific Cooperations • Institutional Level: 3. Belief in Supernatural Agents selecting for prolific Institutions

12. 1.1 Belief in Supernatural Agents perpetuating prolific Commandments Natural Animismby HAD & TOM Cp. Charles Darwin („Religion = Belief in spiritual Beings“), F.A. von Hayek („Guardians ofTraditions - Reproductive Advantage“), Pascal Boyer, Scott Atran, Jesse Bering („The GodInstinct“), Deborah Kelemen(„Intuitive Theism“), Bruce Hood, Jay Feierman, Paolo Mantovani et al.

13. 1.2 Belief in Supernatural Agents perpetuating prolific CommandmentsComparative Examples: „Be fruitful and multiply!“, Bible, Genesis 1.28  Authoritative Motivation for Believers „Reproductive success is defined as the passing of genes onto the next generation in a way that they too can pass those genes on.“, T. H. Clutton-Brock, University of Chicago 1990  Explanation. Motivation wouldconstitute a NaturalisticFallacy

14. 76% 69% 67% 61% 46% 42% 43% 26% Having Children Having Fun Non Rel. / Rel. Helping Others in Need Assuming Responsibilities for Others 1.3 Belief in SupernaturalAgentsperpetuatingprolificCommandments Allensbach Survey 2006: People aged 16 to 29 in Germany wereaskediftheywerereligiousandwhichvaluestheywoulddeem „important“ fortheirlives

15. 2 Belief in SupernaturalAgentsperpetuatingprolificCooperations „We propose that the clearest identifiable effect of religious behavior is the formation of close kinship-like cooperative social relationships.“ * Craig Palmer, Ryan Ellsworth & Lyle Steadman: „Talk and Tradition. Why the Least Interesting Components of Religion May Be the Most Evolutionary Important.“, in: E. Voland, W. Schiefenhövel (eds.): The Biological Evolution of Religious Mind and Behaviour. Springer 2009 Cp. Charles Darwin, F.A. von Hayek, Ara Norenzayan & Azim Shariff, Richard Sosis, Matt Rossano, Montserrat Soler, Jesse Bering, Dominic Johnson, Ryan McKay, David Lahti et al.

16. Cooperative Signalling: From religious networks to religious groups                                    

17. Cooperation in Reproduction: Marriage vowsAllbus Survey 2002, Germany„A married man has a love affair with another woman…“ Data: ALLBUS 2002, Germany / fowid 2005

18. ‚Gretchenfrage‘ by Johann Wolfgang von Goethe Gretchen‘s Question FAUST, Martha‘s Garden Margaret: Promise me, Henry! Faust: What I can! Margaret: How do you feel about religion? Tell me, pray.You are a dear, good-hearted man,But I believe you've little good of it to say. Faust.: Hush, hush, my child! You feel my love for you.For those I love, I'd give my blood and body too,Would no one of his feelings or of church bereave. Margaret: That's not enough. We must believe!

19. Comments of Goethe‘s Devil MEPHISTOPHELES: I've heard it all and understood,The Doctor was put through the catechisms.I hope that it will do you good.Girls have a great desire to know, it's true,If one is sleek and pious, true to ancient isms.They think: if there he knuckles, us he'll follow too.

20. On average, stronger Beliefs of WomenShell Youth Study Germany 2006, p. 210

21. Distribution of Voluntary ActivityVoluntary Survey Report, Baden-Württemberg 2007

22. Specific Beliefs of Male and Female Students (Kassel University 2004, Harald Euler)1 = strong disbelief to 5 = strong belief

23. Marriage vows and Sexual Selection

25. Belief in Supernatural Agents perpetuating prolific Institutions „The nuns/catholic effect provides evidence that religion affects fertility not only through preferences but also functionally, through social service provision.“ * Eli Berman, Laurence Iannaccone, Giuseppe Ragusa: „From Empty Pews to Empty Cradles. Fertility Decline among European Catholics.“, UC San Diego 2007 Cp. Adam Smith, Eric Kaufmann, Richard Sosis

26. Cooperative Breeding / As-if Kin

27. Teachers & Celibates as As-if kin - „Helpers at the Nest“, enhancing survival & reproduction of community members Cp.: Pater = Father (syn.) Nun, etym. from nonna, nana = tutor, aunt, grandmother, same root with „Nanny“!

28. Reopening of the Jewish Grammar School in Stuttgart / Germany, 08.09.2008 Offering Education, All-Day Care & Religious Knowledge

31. Religion and Fertility – A long-lived Team Willendorf, ca. 22.000 BCE Laussel, ca. 25.000 BCE Tursac, ca. 20.000 BCE Hohle Fels, ca. 36.000 BCE 1. Religiosity is evolutionary advantageous. The trait is showing the potential and tendency to raise the reproductive success throughout generations 2. The Roleof Women in the Evolution ofReligiosityandReligionshasbeengreatlyunderestimated (Cp. David Hume, Volker Sommer) 3. The Evolution ofReligiosity – Naturalistic? Emergent? Materialistic? (LatinMateriafrom Mater = Mother!)