The moralization bias of gods’ minds: A cross-cultural test

Benjamin Grant Purzycki; Aiyana K Willard; Eva Kundtová  Klocová; Coren L. Apicella; Quentin Atkinson; Alexander Bolyanatz; Emma Cohen; Carla Handley; Joseph Henrich; Martin Lang; Carolyn Lesorogol; Sarah Mathew; Rita Anne McNamara; Cristina Moya; Ara Norenzayan; Caitlyn D. Placek; Montserrat Soler; Tom Vardy; Jonathan L. Weigel; Dimitris Xygalatas; Cody Ross

doi:10.1080/2153599X.2021.2006291

The moralization bias of gods’ minds: A cross-cultural test

Benjamin Grant Purzycki^*, Aiyana K Willard, Eva Kundtová Klocová, Coren L. Apicella, Quentin Atkinson, Alexander Bolyanatz, Emma Cohen, Carla Handley, Joseph Henrich, Martin Lang, Carolyn Lesorogol, Sarah Mathew, Rita Anne McNamara, Cristina Moya, Ara Norenzayan, Caitlyn D. Placek, Montserrat Soler, Tom Vardy, Jonathan L. Weigel, Dimitris XygalatasCody Ross

^*Corresponding author for this work

School of Culture and Society - Department of the Study of Religion

Research output: Contribution to journal/Conference contribution in journal/Contribution to newspaper › Journal article › Research › peer-review

Abstract

There are compelling reasons to expect that cognitively representing any active, powerful deity motivates cooperative behavior. One mechanism underlying this association could be a cognitive bias toward generally attributing moral concern to anthropomorphic agents. If humans cognitively represent the minds of deities and humans in the same way, and if human agents are generally conceptualized as having moral concern, a broad tendency to attribute moral concern—a “moralization bias”—to supernatural deities follows. Using data from 2,228 individuals in 15 different field sites, we test for the existence of such a bias. We find that people are indeed more likely than chance to indicate that local deities care about punishing theft, murder, and deceit. This effect is stable even after holding beliefs about explicitly moralistic deities constant. Additionally, we take a close look at data collected among Hadza foragers and find two of their deities to be morally interested. There is no evidence to suggest that this effect is due to direct missionary contact. We posit that the “moralization bias of gods’ minds” is part of a widespread but variable religious phenotype, and a candidate mechanism that contributes to the well-recognized association between religion and cooperation.

Original language	English
Journal	Religion, Brain and Behavior
Volume	12
Issue	1-2
Pages (from-to)	38-60
Number of pages	23
ISSN	2153-599X
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1080/2153599X.2021.2006291
Publication status	Published - Apr 2022

Keywords

Supernatural punishment
cognitive science of religion
gods’ minds
morality

Access to Document

10.1080/2153599X.2021.2006291

Cite this

Purzycki, B. G., Willard, A. K., Klocová, E. K., Apicella, C. L., Atkinson, Q., Bolyanatz, A., Cohen, E., Handley, C., Henrich, J., Lang, M., Lesorogol, C., Mathew, S., McNamara, R. A., Moya, C., Norenzayan, A., Placek, C. D., Soler, M., Vardy, T., Weigel, J. L., ... Ross, C. (2022). The moralization bias of gods’ minds: A cross-cultural test. Religion, Brain and Behavior, 12(1-2), 38-60. https://doi.org/10.1080/2153599X.2021.2006291

@article{cb539d0f44564e29b334d7a67039435a,

title = "The moralization bias of gods{\textquoteright} minds: A cross-cultural test",

abstract = "There are compelling reasons to expect that cognitively representing any active, powerful deity motivates cooperative behavior. One mechanism underlying this association could be a cognitive bias toward generally attributing moral concern to anthropomorphic agents. If humans cognitively represent the minds of deities and humans in the same way, and if human agents are generally conceptualized as having moral concern, a broad tendency to attribute moral concern—a “moralization bias”—to supernatural deities follows. Using data from 2,228 individuals in 15 different field sites, we test for the existence of such a bias. We find that people are indeed more likely than chance to indicate that local deities care about punishing theft, murder, and deceit. This effect is stable even after holding beliefs about explicitly moralistic deities constant. Additionally, we take a close look at data collected among Hadza foragers and find two of their deities to be morally interested. There is no evidence to suggest that this effect is due to direct missionary contact. We posit that the “moralization bias of gods{\textquoteright} minds” is part of a widespread but variable religious phenotype, and a candidate mechanism that contributes to the well-recognized association between religion and cooperation.",

keywords = "Supernatural punishment, cognitive science of religion, gods{\textquoteright} minds, morality",

author = "Purzycki, {Benjamin Grant} and Willard, {Aiyana K} and Klocov{\'a}, {Eva Kundtov{\'a}} and Apicella, {Coren L.} and Quentin Atkinson and Alexander Bolyanatz and Emma Cohen and Carla Handley and Joseph Henrich and Martin Lang and Carolyn Lesorogol and Sarah Mathew and McNamara, {Rita Anne} and Cristina Moya and Ara Norenzayan and Placek, {Caitlyn D.} and Montserrat Soler and Tom Vardy and Weigel, {Jonathan L.} and Dimitris Xygalatas and Cody Ross",

year = "2022",

month = apr,

doi = "10.1080/2153599X.2021.2006291",

language = "English",

volume = "12",

pages = "38--60",

journal = "Religion, Brain and Behavior",

issn = "2153-599X",

publisher = "Routledge",

number = "1-2",

}

Purzycki, BG, Willard, AK, Klocová, EK, Apicella, CL, Atkinson, Q, Bolyanatz, A, Cohen, E, Handley, C, Henrich, J, Lang, M, Lesorogol, C, Mathew, S, McNamara, RA, Moya, C, Norenzayan, A, Placek, CD, Soler, M, Vardy, T, Weigel, JL, Xygalatas, D & Ross, C 2022, 'The moralization bias of gods’ minds: A cross-cultural test', Religion, Brain and Behavior, vol. 12, no. 1-2, pp. 38-60. https://doi.org/10.1080/2153599X.2021.2006291

TY - JOUR

T1 - The moralization bias of gods’ minds

T2 - A cross-cultural test

AU - Purzycki, Benjamin Grant

AU - Willard, Aiyana K

AU - Klocová, Eva Kundtová

AU - Apicella, Coren L.

AU - Atkinson, Quentin

AU - Bolyanatz, Alexander

AU - Cohen, Emma

AU - Handley, Carla

AU - Henrich, Joseph

AU - Lang, Martin

AU - Lesorogol, Carolyn

AU - Mathew, Sarah

AU - McNamara, Rita Anne

AU - Moya, Cristina

AU - Norenzayan, Ara

AU - Placek, Caitlyn D.

AU - Soler, Montserrat

AU - Vardy, Tom

AU - Weigel, Jonathan L.

AU - Xygalatas, Dimitris

AU - Ross, Cody

PY - 2022/4

Y1 - 2022/4

N2 - There are compelling reasons to expect that cognitively representing any active, powerful deity motivates cooperative behavior. One mechanism underlying this association could be a cognitive bias toward generally attributing moral concern to anthropomorphic agents. If humans cognitively represent the minds of deities and humans in the same way, and if human agents are generally conceptualized as having moral concern, a broad tendency to attribute moral concern—a “moralization bias”—to supernatural deities follows. Using data from 2,228 individuals in 15 different field sites, we test for the existence of such a bias. We find that people are indeed more likely than chance to indicate that local deities care about punishing theft, murder, and deceit. This effect is stable even after holding beliefs about explicitly moralistic deities constant. Additionally, we take a close look at data collected among Hadza foragers and find two of their deities to be morally interested. There is no evidence to suggest that this effect is due to direct missionary contact. We posit that the “moralization bias of gods’ minds” is part of a widespread but variable religious phenotype, and a candidate mechanism that contributes to the well-recognized association between religion and cooperation.

AB - There are compelling reasons to expect that cognitively representing any active, powerful deity motivates cooperative behavior. One mechanism underlying this association could be a cognitive bias toward generally attributing moral concern to anthropomorphic agents. If humans cognitively represent the minds of deities and humans in the same way, and if human agents are generally conceptualized as having moral concern, a broad tendency to attribute moral concern—a “moralization bias”—to supernatural deities follows. Using data from 2,228 individuals in 15 different field sites, we test for the existence of such a bias. We find that people are indeed more likely than chance to indicate that local deities care about punishing theft, murder, and deceit. This effect is stable even after holding beliefs about explicitly moralistic deities constant. Additionally, we take a close look at data collected among Hadza foragers and find two of their deities to be morally interested. There is no evidence to suggest that this effect is due to direct missionary contact. We posit that the “moralization bias of gods’ minds” is part of a widespread but variable religious phenotype, and a candidate mechanism that contributes to the well-recognized association between religion and cooperation.

KW - Supernatural punishment

KW - cognitive science of religion

KW - gods’ minds

KW - morality

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85125073354&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1080/2153599X.2021.2006291

DO - 10.1080/2153599X.2021.2006291

M3 - Journal article

SN - 2153-599X

VL - 12

SP - 38

EP - 60

JO - Religion, Brain and Behavior

JF - Religion, Brain and Behavior

IS - 1-2

ER -

The moralization bias of gods’ minds: A cross-cultural test

Abstract

Keywords

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this