Religious Evolution and the Axial Age: From Shamans to Priests to Prophets, written by Stephen K. Sanderson

Numen ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 67 (2-3) ◽  
pp. 335-338
Author(s):  
Carole M. Cusack
Keyword(s):  
Axial Age ◽  
Religious Evolution

Religionshistorie og aksetid

2011 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hans J. Lundager Jensen
Keyword(s):  
Cognitive Model ◽  
Religious Studies ◽  
English Summary ◽  
Hominid Evolution ◽  
Axial Age ◽  
Starting Point ◽  
History Of Religions ◽  
History Of ◽  
Robert Bellah ◽  
Religious Evolution

English summary: The article presents and discusses two articles by Robert Bellah, “Religious evolution” from 1964 and “What is Axial about the Axial Age?” (2005). In what seems to be a general lack of interest in a history of religion (different from a history of religions) among academic scholars in the science of religion, Bellahs model, especially in its combination with recent approaches to the ‘axial age’ and to Merlin Donald’s biocultural cognitive model for hominid evolution, is recommended as a useful starting point for revitalization of an honorable branch of religious studies.  Dansk resume: Artiklen præsenterer og diskuterer to artikler af den amerikanske religionssociolog Robert Bellah, “Religious evolution” fra 1964 og “What is Axial about the Axial Age?” (2005). I forhold til en generel mangel på interesse for en religionens historie (forskellig fra religionernes historie) blandt religionsvidenskabelige forskere anbefales Bellahs model som et frugtbart udgangspunkt for en revitalisering af en hæderværdig del af religionsvidenskaben, særlig når den kombineres med aktuelle diskussioner af ‘aksetiden’ og Merlin Donalds biokulturelle, kognitive model for hominid evolution.

scholarly journals Religionshistorie og aksetid

2011 ◽  
pp. 5 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hans J. Lundager Jensen
Keyword(s):  
Hominid Evolution ◽  
Axial Age ◽  
Robert Bellah ◽  
Religious Evolution

Artiklen præsenterer og diskuterer to artikler af den amerikanske religionssociolog Robert Bellah, “Religious evolution” fra 1964 og “What is Axial about the Axial Age?” (2005). I forhold til en generel mangel på interesse for en religionens historie (forskellig fra religionernes historie) blandt religionsvidenskabelige forskere anbefales Bellahs model som et frugtbart udgangspunkt for en revitalisering af en hæderværdig del af religionsvidenskaben, særlig når den kombineres med aktuelle diskussioner af ‘aksetiden’ og Merlin Donalds biokulturelle, kognitive model for hominid evolution.

Subordinate-Deity Models of Ultimate Reality

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wesley J. Wildman
Keyword(s):  
Twentieth Century ◽  
Ultimate Reality ◽  
Post Colonial ◽  
Metaphysical Problem ◽  
Axial Age ◽  
Colonial Resistance ◽  
The Many ◽  
The One

Subordinate-deity models of ultimate reality affirm that God is Highest Being within an ultimate reality that is neither conceptually tractable nor religiously relevant. Subordinate-deity models ceded their dominance to agential-being models of ultimate reality by refusing to supply a comprehensive answer to the metaphysical problem of the One and the Many in the wake of the Axial-Age interest in that problem, but they have revived in the twentieth century due to post-colonial resistance to putatively comprehensive explanations. Subordinate-deity ultimacy models resist the Intentionality Attribution and Narrative Comprehensibility dimensions of anthropomorphism to some degree but continue to employ the Rational Practicality dimension of anthropomorphism, resulting in a strategy of judicious anthropomorphism. Variations, strengths, and weaknesses of the subordinate-deity class of ultimacy models are discussed.

Group Selection in the Evolution of Religion: Genetic Evolution or Cultural Evolution?

2015 ◽  
Vol 15 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 235-253 ◽  
Author(s):  
Taylor Davis
Keyword(s):  
Human Evolution ◽  
Cultural Evolution ◽  
Group Selection ◽  
Genetic Group ◽  
Genetic Evolution ◽  
Psychological Traits ◽  
Religious Psychology ◽  
Religious Evolution ◽  
The Relationship

In the scientific literature on religious evolution, two competing theories appeal to group selection to explain the relationship between religious belief and altruism, or costly, prosocial behavior. Both theories agree that group selection plays an important role in cultural evolution, affecting psychological traits that individuals acquire through social learning. They disagree, however, about whether group selection has also played a role in genetic evolution, affecting traits that are inherited genetically. Recently, Jonathan Haidt has defended the most fully developed account based on genetic group selection, and I argue here that problems with this account reveal good reasons to doubt that genetic group selection has played any important role in human evolution at all. Thus, considering the role of group selection in religious evolution is important not just because of what it reveals about religious psychology and religious evolution, but also because of what it reveals about the role of group selection in human evolution more generally.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document