竞争力量是宗教信仰稳定和演变的原因

IF 1.7 2区 哲学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Theiss Bendixen, B. Purzycki
{"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}
引用次数: 6

摘要

Beebe和Duffy(2020)为越来越多的理论和实证研究提供了另一个补充,这些研究质疑所谓的最小反直觉性(MCI)的解释能力。在三个记忆实验和一个调查的基础上,Beebe和Duffy认为:1)MCI概念相对于具有道德效价的概念和引起存在焦虑的概念都处于记忆劣势;2)这些结果不能用测试项目的可视化程度来解释。在这篇评论中,我们反思了MCI理论的未来,并将Beebe和Duffy的研究置于一个综合的文化进化框架中。我们认为,未来的宗教认知和进化科学研究不仅应该关注使某些宗教信仰在认知和文化上具有吸引力的内容,还应该关注不同的文化进化力量(包括社会和生态背景)如何竞争和相互作用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.20
自引率
4.50%
发文量
15
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.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信