Six Impossible Things Before Breakfast: The Evolutionary Origins of Belief

Six Impossible Things before Breakfast, by Lewis Wolpert. This book was very interesting to me as an analysis of human understanding of causation and the importance of our understanding of causation in how we perform other intellectual functions. In particular, we formulate beliefs. One of the characteristics that separates us even from the closest animals is our ability to understand and rationalize cause and effect. Animals, even the great apes, have very limited understanding -- if any -- of causality. We know that from subjecting those animals to experiments in which they would be rewarded for exercising any intellectual capacity that they have. Human beings have a strong motive to understand causation. Sometimes the intellectual process by which we reach conclusions about causation is described as a "belief engine." There is no doubt that our belief engine is somewhat faulty. Our belief engine "prefers quick decisions, it is bad with numbers, loves representativeness, and sees patterns where often there is only randomness. It is too often influenced by authority, and it has a liking for mysticism." p. 220. We suffer from the "Pollyanna principle," being far more likely to focus on and remember positive rather than negative reports about ourselves. The "Lake Wobegon effect," explains why 94% of college professors believe that they are better than their average colleague at their jobs. The "interviewer illusion" guarantees that we will, as a rule, feel far more confident in our ability to predict the future of others than an objective retrospective analysis would justify. We are overconfident in the correctness of our own judgments. The "Barnum effect" means that we will see merit in vague and generalized descriptions. We tend to make up stories to explain what we have observed, and the stories often overcome the actual memories. We jump to conclusions on inadequate evidence and then hold to those conclusions with vigor. Placebos work. We are capable of internalizing "forced beliefs," manufactured beliefs forced on us by society or authority. These "forced beliefs" are often manufactured to support other beliefs "that are poorly supported by evidence." Page 88. We are pathetically bad at evaluating risks, fearing the airplane flight more than the automobile trip to the airport. We have no natural ability to infer what we learn from statistics. We are good at acquiring superstitious beliefs, and terrible at getting rid of them. We are vulnerable to both hypnotic and ordinary suggestion. Studies have shown just how susceptible we are to the implantation of false memories. We are subject to a strong confirmation bias, which means that once we have formed a belief, we are far more likely to credit new evidence that conforms to those beliefs then evidence that challenges them. It is difficult to understand the human mind because the instrument with which we must understand it is, of course, the human mind. Studi

It is interesting to compare this book with Richard Dawkins' The God Delusion. This is the anti-God book Dawkins would have written had he not been so consumed with hatred of religion. The tolerant and understanding style is very different from Dawkins'. Wolpert knows that religious belief is irrational but thinks that the motivation for all sorts of irrational ideas, not just religion, is that we have evolved to develop causative theories which make sense of our lives and provide solace. Unlike Dawkins, he doesn't think that religious belief is a "meme" which corrupts our thought processes whilst providing us with no selection benefits. In fact, although Wolpert doesn't say this, you get the feeling that he thinks the idea of memes is nonsense. My only criticism of the book is that it should have been longer. He doesn't do more than touch upon some topics which could have been elaborated. He is clearly writing for a scientifically literate readership, but these aren't the people who most need this book. Also, I don't believe anyone will be able to read it without examining some of their most deeply-cherished ideas, so perhaps he could have have given us more specific instructions about how to analyse our own false beliefs. Another book?

The basic concept of Lewis Wolpert's book is Darwinism: chance events lead to variation followed by selection. Its key notion is causality, the necessary connections among things and actions. The understanding of causality was a crucial breakthrough for mankind in the struggle for survival. It made complex tool manufacturing, conceptual thinking and language possible. Technology drives human evolution: there are only 20.000 years between the first bow and arrow and the International Space Station. Language requires causal thinking, because verbs like `go, hit, throw' don't have any meaning without belief in cause and effect. Experiencing the efficiency of causality in tool making, people sought to apply this principle for the understanding of the causes of all events, and certainly of life, death and disease. Through experience (tool making), cognition, intuition and also emotion (which helped already animals to make appropriate motor movements for survival), together with cultural transmission, people arrived at certain `beliefs', which became part of our genes. The belief engine in our brain created religious, moral, ethical and scientific beliefs. Religion is a belief in spiritual things. Its importance for survival could lay in its promotion of hope and optimism. Until recently, the whole world population was constantly confronted with war, death, disease, hunger, bad hygiene. The average lifespan was not more than 30 years. Moral and ethical beliefs can have devastating effects because they are often imposed by those in power on its population (religious and ideological oppression). Scientific beliefs have no moral or ethical content and are in conflict with religion, because there is no scientific evidence of God. However, science is the most reliable method for determining which beliefs are valid. But, why is religion still so popular today? For many people the scientific evidence of Darwinism that man is not created by God is unacceptable. Into the bargain, the real (scientific) world (relativity, quantum mechanics, the history of the universe) is not a commonsense reality. But, on the other hand, our brain operates on commonsense (quick decisions, illusory patterns, bad with numbers, influenced by authority and likes mysticism). The author is not optimistic for mankind in the near future: religion and irrational beliefs will continue to flourish. This book shows astonishingly how irrational beliefs still dominate the behavior of the vast majority of mankind. Lewis Wolpert's hypothesis of the origin of belief and language could constitute a new starting point for research in these difficult fields. As a reductionist materialist atheist, he has written an extremely tolerant book, which is a must read for all those interested in the future of mankind. I highly recommend his other book `The unnatural nature of science.'

A very thoughtful examination of belief. I read it in one sitting. I was delighted to see that Wolpert referenced the work of John F. Schumaker. Long before Harris, Dennett, Dawkins, and Shermer began writing about the dangers of irrational beliefs Schumaker wrote two books on the subject that remain unsurpassed: "Wings of Illusion" and "The Corruption of Reality." It's ironic that these two timeless books were before their time.

It seems quirky, claiming to "imagine six impossible things" as Alice's White Queen did. Before breakfast or at any time. Wolpert shows, however, that most of us are firmly convinced of many things that aren't so: gods, unlikely events, strange medical practices - the list seems almost endless. The lack of tangible evidence supporting or even evidence countering, those things we have faith in seems to have little impact on our credulity. In a dozen illuminating chapters, this award-winning biologist examines this almost inexplicable facet of our lives. Written with precision and deep insight, Wolpert demonstrates his command of how belief is a fundamental aspect of our society. Why do we believe the things we do? As a biologist, Wolpert naturally turns to our evolutionary roots for clues to the origins of belief. That which sets us apart from the other animals - our oversized brain, our use of tools, and our ability to use language - as the indicators. The brain's capacity to store, retrieve and assemble information is tied to our abilities in technology and language. For Wolpert, the prime element is the making of tools. Making tools means envisioning the final product, and devising how to bring it about. Put more simply, understanding cause and effect - something even other primates have trouble with. From this beginning, he argues, come social relationships and a sense of values. Along the way, we also developed the idea of agency which we assigned to events or circumstances that were out of ordinary, everyday experience. If the process of flaking stone went wrong, why did that happen. The best-laid plans, etc. From this beginning, Wolpert shows how the panoply of modern beliefs has come into our lives. The onset of conceiving an agency either began or enhanced the mind's "belief engine". The belief engine demands an identifiable cause for circumstances. When that's not readily apparent, we extend our belief to things we must imagine. These explanations can, and are, passed around the community, establishing both a bond among its members and reinforcing the interpretation. Once the idea gains prominence, it resists challenge and is difficult to overturn. Religion, of course, is the ultimate organised form of belief, often touted as society's best glue. Wolpert accepts this situation without rancour, even admitting his disturbed son's conversion to a fundamentalist Christian sect has improved the boy's behaviour. That given, Wolpert cannot excuse rigid adherence to dogmas that have no basis in reality. Science has disproven so many religious and other belief systems that he insists the wider society examine their beliefs more critically. There are other facets than family relations to consider. Recent claims that religious folk, or even those with faith in such things as homeopathy or "crystal healing", actually feel or live better may have statistical substance. Wolpert wants these claims investigated fully, since