Couldn’t Shermer and Ayala both be correct?  If religion effectively calmed anxiety about death and thereby produced more stable individuals and communities, might that favor religious individuals and communities in natural selection?

You don't have permission to flag this entry.

ClearPusuit is right - is there an editorial issue with the ‘point’ and ‘counterpoint’ slant as indeed the two views do seem entirely compatible.
The more general points, especially in Shermer appear to be an indication of the rapid progress in what might be called ‘comparative’ or ‘evolutionary’ psychology.
It’s a field I know little of - but I did wonder if the primate family is the right level - his example of selection against Type 1 errors would surely apply to many creatures - and may have applied to human ancestors much further back than early primates: reptiles, even fish, in fact anything small that can move would do well to move away rather than trust to luck that swish in the grass or pressure wave in the water is not a prelude to becoming someone’s dinner.
What is more, the part of the brain linked to fear (amygdala) and arguably therefore such avoidance behaviour is deeper and more ancient [evident in ‘older’ species] than the much more recent primate / humanoid expanded frontal cortex - which may articulate but perhaps not originate fear - and has been referred to as the ‘reptilian brain’.
I have no doubt there is evidence for Shermer & Ayala’s points - I would be interested to know more.

You don't have permission to flag this entry.