{"title":"竞争力量是宗教信仰稳定和演变的原因","authors":"Theiss Bendixen, B. Purzycki","doi":"10.1080/10508619.2020.1844969","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Beebe and Duffy (2020) offer another addition to a growing body of theoretical and empirical work that questions the explanatory power of so-called minimal counterintuitiveness (MCI). On the basis of three memory experiments and one survey, Beebe and Duffy argue that 1) MCI concepts are at a mnemonic disadvantage relative to both concepts with moral valence as well as concepts that elicit existential anxiety; and 2) these results cannot be explained by the degree of visualizability in the test items. In this commentary, we reflect on the future of MCI theory and situate Beebe and Duffy’s study in an integrative cultural evolutionary framework. We argue that future studies in the cognitive and evolutionary sciences of religion should not only focus on the content that makes some religious beliefs cognitively and culturally attractive but also on how different cultural evolutionary forces – including social and ecological contexts – compete and interact.","PeriodicalId":47234,"journal":{"name":"International Journal for the Psychology of Religion","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2020-12-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/10508619.2020.1844969","citationCount":"6","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Competing Forces Account for the Stability and Evolution of Religious Beliefs\",\"authors\":\"Theiss Bendixen, B. Purzycki\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/10508619.2020.1844969\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT Beebe and Duffy (2020) offer another addition to a growing body of theoretical and empirical work that questions the explanatory power of so-called minimal counterintuitiveness (MCI). On the basis of three memory experiments and one survey, Beebe and Duffy argue that 1) MCI concepts are at a mnemonic disadvantage relative to both concepts with moral valence as well as concepts that elicit existential anxiety; and 2) these results cannot be explained by the degree of visualizability in the test items. In this commentary, we reflect on the future of MCI theory and situate Beebe and Duffy’s study in an integrative cultural evolutionary framework. We argue that future studies in the cognitive and evolutionary sciences of religion should not only focus on the content that makes some religious beliefs cognitively and culturally attractive but also on how different cultural evolutionary forces – including social and ecological contexts – compete and interact.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47234,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal for the Psychology of Religion\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-12-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/10508619.2020.1844969\",\"citationCount\":\"6\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal for the Psychology of Religion\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/10508619.2020.1844969\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal for the Psychology of Religion","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10508619.2020.1844969","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Competing Forces Account for the Stability and Evolution of Religious Beliefs
ABSTRACT Beebe and Duffy (2020) offer another addition to a growing body of theoretical and empirical work that questions the explanatory power of so-called minimal counterintuitiveness (MCI). On the basis of three memory experiments and one survey, Beebe and Duffy argue that 1) MCI concepts are at a mnemonic disadvantage relative to both concepts with moral valence as well as concepts that elicit existential anxiety; and 2) these results cannot be explained by the degree of visualizability in the test items. In this commentary, we reflect on the future of MCI theory and situate Beebe and Duffy’s study in an integrative cultural evolutionary framework. We argue that future studies in the cognitive and evolutionary sciences of religion should not only focus on the content that makes some religious beliefs cognitively and culturally attractive but also on how different cultural evolutionary forces – including social and ecological contexts – compete and interact.
期刊介绍:
The International Journal for the Psychology of Religion (IJPR) is devoted to psychological studies of religious processes and phenomena in all religious traditions. This journal provides a means for sustained discussion of psychologically relevant issues that can be examined empirically and concern religion in the most general sense. It presents articles covering a variety of important topics, such as the social psychology of religion, religious development, conversion, religious experience, religion and social attitudes and behavior, religion and mental health, and psychoanalytic and other theoretical interpretations of religion. The journal publishes research reports, brief research reports, commentaries on relevant topical issues, book reviews, and statements addressing articles published in previous issues. The journal may also include a major essay and commentaries, perspective papers of the theory, and articles on the psychology of religion in a specific country.