Thursday, March 21, 2019

Big God theory

At The Conversation, a discussion of the historical evolution of the idea of a "Big God":
When you think of religion, you probably think of a god who rewards the good and punishes the wicked. But the idea of morally concerned gods is by no means universal. Social scientists have long known that small-scale traditional societies – the kind missionaries used to dismiss as “pagan” – envisaged a spirit world that cared little about the morality of human behaviour. Their concern was less about whether humans behaved nicely towards one another and more about whether they carried out their obligations to the spirits and displayed suitable deference to them.

Nevertheless, the world religions we know today, and their myriad variants, either demand belief in all-seeing punitive deities or at least postulate some kind of broader mechanism – such as karma – for rewarding the virtuous and punishing the wicked. In recent years, researchers have debated how and why these moralising religions came into being....

One popular theory has argued that moralising gods were necessary for the rise of large-scale societies. Small societies, so the argument goes, were like fish bowls. It was almost impossible to engage in antisocial behaviour without being caught and punished – whether by acts of collective violence, retaliation or long-term reputational damage and risk of ostracism. But as societies grew larger and interactions between relative strangers became more commonplace, would-be transgressors could hope to evade detection under the cloak of anonymity. For cooperation to be possible under such conditions, some system of surveillance was required.

What better than to come up with a supernatural “eye in the sky” – a god who can see inside people’s minds and issue punishments and rewards accordingly. Believing in such a god might make people think twice about stealing or reneging on deals, even in relatively anonymous interactions. Maybe it would also increase trust among traders.

So, looking at a big data base, their conclusions thus far:
One of the earliest questions we’re testing is whether morally concerned deities drove the rise of complex societies. We analysed data on 414 societies from 30 world regions, using 51 measures of social complexity and four measures of supernatural enforcement of moral norms to get to the bottom of the matter. New research we’ve just published in the journal Nature reveals that moralising gods come later than many people thought, well after the sharpest rises in social complexity in world history. In other words, gods who care about whether we are good or bad did not drive the initial rise of civilisations – but came later.  

I'm not sure how Jewish belief fits into that - I didn't think their society was all complicated at the relevant time.

Taking it into the future:   seems to me there's a good case to be made for Google being the new Big God - certainly it's all seeing.   If only it had a way of punishing people, we'd have the Real Thing.

3 comments:

Anonymous said...

I seem to recall one of the aspects of religion that Don Cupitt thought would be useful to retain in his book "After God" was the concept of the Eye of God as a curb to antisocial behaviour.

Geoff

John said...

Monotheism in Israel did not become standard until after the Babylonian Exile circa 587. Moralising gods were not required for complex societies they were an outcome of complex societies. Think about China and India(Indus Valley, Aryans). No BIG Gods there. "The Great Transformation", Karen Armstrong, provides a thorough and somewhat tedious account of how religions changed during the Axial Age(900-300BC).

BTW, the Exodus never happened and Moses probably didn't exist.

Steve said...

Hi Geoff. Yes, I remember that now, too. Make Google tied to all security and web cams across the world, and we might have a de facto "Eye of God". Then let it send out punisher drones.

John: you're no fun on the topic if you're doubting Moses.