Jeffrey P Schloss
Westmont College, Biology, Faculty Member
- .edit
Research Interests:
Justin Barrett's consideration of some challenges for religious belief raised by evolutionary and cognitive theories of religion was criticized by Howard Van Till for overstating tensions, mischaracterizing the most important... more
Justin Barrett's consideration of some challenges for religious belief raised by evolutionary and cognitive theories of religion was criticized by Howard Van Till for overstating tensions, mischaracterizing the most important epistemological issues, and proposing a solution that perpetuates war on evolution. We argue that each of these claims is untrue, and is not conducive to dialogue that constructively engages and attempts to resolve tensions between science and religion where they do exist.
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
While emerging cognitive and evolutionary sciences of religion have generated important empirical findings and conceptual advances, Nathaniel Barrett is quite right to pursue integration with historical and cultural studies and to... more
While emerging cognitive and evolutionary sciences of religion have generated important empirical findings and conceptual advances, Nathaniel Barrett is quite right to pursue integration with historical and cultural studies and to challenge the reductionism that is, if not endemic to, at least popularly ascribed to these approaches. However, we argue that in proposing an alternative paradigm, he mischarac- terizes the breadth of the current research program in three ways: (1) it is not wedded to defining religion in terms of supernatural or fictive beliefs, (2) it does not construe the disposition to religious belief as “hard-wired” and context-insensitive, and (3) it does not presume an adaptationist, strongly modular account of mind. On each of these issues, the field displays a wide range of perspectives, and it is precisely the latitude of views that welcomes and indeed has spawned—from its founders to the present—interaction with cultural and historical scholars.
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Recent evolutionary accounts seek to explain religious belief and behavior in terms of native cognitive dispositions and culturally transmitted innovations that have persisted because they have adaptive value. Despite the often vitriolic... more
Recent evolutionary accounts seek to explain religious belief and behavior in terms of native cognitive dispositions and culturally transmitted innovations that have persisted because they have adaptive value. Despite the often vitriolic evolution- religion debate, new evolutionary theories typically avoid challenging the truth of religious beliefs. In this paper we do three things. (1) We describe five new devel- opments in evolutionary theory that have potential relevance to whether religious beliefs are truth-tracking or not: adaptive misbeliefs, error management theory, self- deception, signaling, and imitation. (2) We assess both their posited application to religious cognition and their possible entailments for the truth or warrant of religious beliefs. (3) We explore whether and under what conditions scientific explanations of religious belief should (a) remain neutral to the truth status of those beliefs or (b) render judgment about a belief’s falsity – or truth – as important aspects of the phe- nomenon to be explained.
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Although largely unaddressed by evolutionary theory for more than a century after Darwin, over the last decade a wide range of adaptationist, byproduct, and memetic explanations have emerged for various recurrent features of religious... more
Although largely unaddressed by evolutionary theory for more than a century after Darwin, over the last decade a wide range of adaptationist, byproduct, and memetic explanations have emerged for various recurrent features of religious belief and practice. One feature that has figured prominently in adaptationist accounts of religion is belief in the reality of moralizing, punishing supernatural agents. However, there is at present no unified theory of what fitness-relevant feature of the selective environment to which this cognitive predisposition is adapted. We distinguish two divergent and often conflated approaches to supernatural punishment theory which hypothesize the adaptive character of such beliefs arise from the fact that they increase cooperation or decrease the cost of incurring punishment for norm violations. We evaluate these, and group and individual selectionist versions, in view of game theoretic models, experimental studies, and ethnographic data in light of which each proposal is plausible but with which none is fully concordant.
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
This article tries to deal with the issues of biology versus religion. This relates to a conflict between evolutionary and biblical accounts of Earth's history. The most important area involves the question of a transcendent. The... more
This article tries to deal with the issues of biology versus religion. This relates to a conflict between evolutionary and biblical accounts of Earth's history. The most important area involves the question of a transcendent. The second involves the almost universally affirmed but differently joined religious responses to the human suffering. The third area of intersection between evolutionary and religious understandings of human nature involves the biblical notion of human uniqueness. All religions entail some notion of transcendent purpose or sacred meaning. There are developments in biology with important implications for religion because of the vast increase in knowledge of the workings of the brain. This does not prove the nonexistence of the soul, but suggests that the concept of soul as an explanatory construct has outlived its usefulness. This also plays a valuable role in ethics. Biology will prove to be a help in this case.
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
The biologist, who is concerned with questions of physiology and evolutionary history, realizes that self-knowledge is constrained and shaped by the emotional control centers in the hypothalamus and limbic system of the brain. Th ese... more
The biologist, who is concerned with questions of physiology and evolutionary history, realizes that self-knowledge is constrained and shaped by the emotional control centers in the hypothalamus and limbic system of the brain. Th ese centers fl ood our consciousness with all the emotions—love, hate, guilt, fear, and others—that are consulted by ethical philosophers who wish to intuit the standards of good and evil. What, we are then compelled to ask, make the hypothalamus and limbic system? Th ey evolved by natural selection. Th at simple biological statement must be pursued to explain ethics and ethical philosophers, if not epistemology and epistemologists, at all depths . . . the time has come for ethics to be removed temporarily from the hands of philosophers and biologized. –(E. O. Wilson, 1975 ) 1
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Contemporary historiographic critiques of science–religion warfare notwithstanding, there is no denying that Darwinism has been seen by both advocates and critics as challenging important theological beliefs of the Abrahamic traditions.... more
Contemporary historiographic critiques of science–religion warfare notwithstanding, there is no denying that Darwinism has been seen by both advocates and critics as challenging important theological beliefs of the Abrahamic traditions. This article explores the three impacts of Darwin: contradicting Scripture, obviating divine design, and magnifying the problem of evil. The ‘debate’ is not just over scientific and religious understandings of origins, but over the very character of the natural world. Almost every issue involves not a two-sided debate – evolution versus creation – but a continuum, often an entire landscape, of nuanced positions. The nomenclature of evolution and creation fails to represent not only the variable landscape of topics and positions, but also the complex explanatory hierarchy in scientific and religious understanding. Evolutionary biology and theology entail, and therefore interact at, various levels of interpretive scale.
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
The sciences long remained like a lion-cub whose gambols delighted its master in private; it had not yet tasted man’s blood . . . Science was not the business of Man because Man had not yet become the business of science . . . when Darwin... more
The sciences long remained like a lion-cub whose gambols delighted its master in private; it had not yet tasted man’s blood . . . Science was not the business of Man because Man had not yet become the business of science . . . when Darwin starts monkeying with the ancestry of Man, and Freud with his soul, and the economists with all that is his, then indeed the lion will have got out of its cage. C. S. Lewis, ‘Inaugural Lecture’, Cambridge University (1954)1
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
McKay & Dennett (M&D) convincingly argue against many proposals for adaptively functioning misbelief, but the conclusion that true beliefs are generally adaptive does not follow. Adaptive misbeliefs may be few in... more
McKay & Dennett (M&D) convincingly argue against many proposals for adaptively functioning misbelief, but the conclusion that true beliefs are generally adaptive does not follow. Adaptive misbeliefs may be few in kind but many in number; maladaptive misbeliefs may routinely elude selective pruning; reproductively neutral misbeliefs may abound; and adaptively grounded beliefs may reliably covary with but not truthfully represent reality.
Research Interests:
... Natural imperfections may (or may not) be irreconcilable with a divine designer, but this is an entirely theological issue and not a scientific ... Abstract/FREE Full Text. ↵: Young M,; Edis T. , eds (2006) Why Intelligent Design... more
... Natural imperfections may (or may not) be irreconcilable with a divine designer, but this is an entirely theological issue and not a scientific ... Abstract/FREE Full Text. ↵: Young M,; Edis T. , eds (2006) Why Intelligent Design Fails: A Scientific Critique of the New ... Sustainability Science ...
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Recent evolutionary accounts seek to explain religious belief and behavior in terms of native cognitive dispositions and culturally transmitted innovations that have persisted because they have adaptive value. Despite the often vitriolic... more
Recent evolutionary accounts seek to explain religious belief and behavior in terms of native cognitive dispositions and culturally transmitted innovations that have persisted because they have adaptive value. Despite the often vitriolic evolutionreligion debate, new evolutionary theories typically avoid challenging the truth of religious beliefs. In this paper we do three things. (1) We describe five new developments in evolutionary theory that have potential relevance to whether religious beliefs are truth-tracking or not: adaptive misbeliefs, error management theory, selfdeception, signaling, and imitation. (2) We assess both their posited application to religious cognition and their possible entailments for the truth or warrant of religious beliefs. (3) We explore whether and under what conditions scientific explanations of religious belief should (a) remain neutral to the truth status of those beliefs or (b) render judgment about a belief’s falsity – or truth – as important aspects of the phenomenon to be explained.
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Although largely unaddressed by evolutionary theory for more than a century after Darwin, over the last decade a wide range of adaptationist, byproduct, and memetic explanations have emerged for various recurrent features of religious... more
Although largely unaddressed by evolutionary theory for more than a century after Darwin, over the last decade a wide range of adaptationist, byproduct, and memetic explanations have emerged for various recurrent features of religious belief and practice. One feature that has figured prominently in adaptationist accounts of religion is belief in the reality of moralizing, punishing supernatural agents. However, there is at present no unified theory of what fitness-relevant feature of the selective environment to which this cognitive predisposition is adapted. We distinguish two divergent and often conflated approaches to supernatural punishment theory which hypothesize the adaptive character of such beliefs arise from the fact that they increase cooperation or decrease the cost of incurring punishment for norm violations. We evaluate these, and group and individual selectionist versions, in view of game theoretic models, experimental studies, and ethnographic data in light of which each proposal is plausible but with which none is fully concordant.
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Introduction 1. Hand of God, Mind of Man: Punishment and Cognition in the Evolution of Cooperation 2. Religiosity as mental time travel: cognitive adaptations for religious behavior 3. Cognitive Science, Religion & Theology 4. Is Religion... more
Introduction 1. Hand of God, Mind of Man: Punishment and Cognition in the Evolution of Cooperation 2. Religiosity as mental time travel: cognitive adaptations for religious behavior 3. Cognitive Science, Religion & Theology 4. Is Religion Adaptive? Yes, no, neutral, but mostly we don't know 5. Religious Belief as an Evolutionary Accident 6. Explaining Belief in the Supernatural: Some thoughts on Paul Bloom's 'Religious Belief as Evolutionary Accident' 7. Games Scientists Play 8. Scientific Explanations of Religion and the Justification of Religious Belief 9. Evolutionary Accounts of Religion: Explaining and Explaining Away 10. Explaining Religious Experience 11. Humanness in their hearts: Where science and religion fuse 12. Theology and Evolution: How Much Can Biology Explain 13. Cognitive Science and the Evolutionof Religion: A Philosophical and Theological Appraisal 14. Does Naturalism Warrant a Moral Belief in Universal Benevolence and Human Rights? 15. Moral Psyc...
Research Interests: Religion and Philosophy
Research Interests:
... Last, we want to express appreciation to Philip Clayton, Robert Hinde, Michael Rea, and Dean Zimmerman for their helpful ... MJM Franklin and Marshall College, Lancaster, Pennsylvania May 2008 4. Justin Barrett, Paul Bloom, Joseph... more
... Last, we want to express appreciation to Philip Clayton, Robert Hinde, Michael Rea, and Dean Zimmerman for their helpful ... MJM Franklin and Marshall College, Lancaster, Pennsylvania May 2008 4. Justin Barrett, Paul Bloom, Joseph Bulbulia, Dominic Johnson, Michael Murray ...
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Typescript. Thesis (Ph. D.)--Washington University, 1983. Dept. of Biology. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 138-143).