Today's post, A Failed Just-So Story was originally published on 05 January 2008. A summary (taken from the LW wiki):
Part of the reason professional evolutionary biologists dislike just-so stories is that many of them are simply wrong.
Discuss the post here (rather than in the comments to the original post).
This post is part of the Rerunning the Sequences series, where we'll be going through Eliezer Yudkowsky's old posts in order so that people who are interested can (re-)read and discuss them. The previous post was Rational vs Scientific Ev-Psych, and you can use the sequence_reruns tag or rss feed to follow the rest of the series.
Sequence reruns are a community-driven effort. You can participate by re-reading the sequence post, discussing it here, posting the next day's sequence reruns post, or summarizing forthcoming articles on the wiki. Go here for more details, or to have meta discussions about the Rerunning the Sequences series.
This selection pressure only exists if religion is already a universal in the society. If Ugg, from three huts over, says that everyone in the tribe must believe in his imaginary friend, or else he will kill them, the selection that actually happens will work against Ugg. If religion arose essentially as an accident (like as a result of anthropomorphizing nature), then EY's proposed selection mechanism could cement it. But if the first impetus towards religion was an evolutionary adaptation, then we need some other rationale to explain it.
Does anyone know of any alternative hypotheses for the rise of religion?
I'm not sure if this is actually true. The idea of religion is appealing enough that Ugg may be able to sell it to them. After all, Christian missionaries often succeed in displacing an old religion.
Besides, is the naïve argument really incorrect? The reason group selection fails is tha... (read more)