Self-Titled EP: Blog 3

Evolutionary psychology is a field of thought that has tendrils reaching into many other fields, although it is questionable how applicable evolutionary theory really is to some of those fields. An example of an issue that many feel evolutionary psychology does not have anything reasonable to say is religion. Although I do believe that evolutionary psychology, in congruence with social evolution, implies and explains many things relevant to religion, I do have a few questions regarding some of the conclusions people occasionally arrive at, as well as the steps they take to reach those ends.

One specific question I have is in relation to the idea that people act selfless and moral in order to gain approval from potential mates and society as a whole. This idea leads fairly directly down a logical path to the explanation of religion as just an organized example of that evolutionary trait, as do other ideas. However, I see evolutionary theory as completely incapable of explaining most religions, especially those with strict moral codes. For example, in Islamic traditions, cowardice is heavily frowned upon – which makes sense from the perspective that prioritizes the benefit of society, but not at all from a personal genetic standpoint. Similarly, Christian views hold that a man should have only one wife, and vice-versa. This could not have developed from an evolutionary basis, as the goal of a male from the evolutionary stand-point is to have as many mates as possible.

I am not saying that the existence of these moral codes disproves evolutionary psychology, far from it. I just think that if evolution were all that guides our behaviors, these religious traditions would never have developed. Therefore, there must be something else going on as well.