Theological Incorrectness: Why Religious People Believe What They Shouldn't 1st Edition, Kindle Edition

In order to have a good scientific study of religions, says Slone, you have to know why people believe. You have to know why people believe certain things and not others (which involves finding what is common in religions). And you have to know why people believe things that are not “theologically correct”–things that actually go contrary to what the religion’s authorities say a believer should believe. To do this, you need to know what is common in people’s minds.

Slone describes a number of findings in psychology that are relevant. For example, those who have read Daniel Kahneman’s Thinking Fast and Slow will find similarities to Slone’s “online” and “offline” thinking. Offline thinking is like Kahneman’s System 2: slow, logical, requiring time and substantial mental effort. Online thinking is like his System 1: intuitive, requiring less mental effort. Much theological incorrectness occurs because the brain is partial to System 1.

I found the book very interesting. However ... Maybe half of the book’s 125 pages are about the title. Much of the rest is a history and critique of the academic study of religion. Fascinating, a little catty (e.g., the title of chapter 2, which characterizes the two most common early approaches as “Religion for Dummies and Romantics”), but not always relevant.

I frequently found his explanations of the link between brain and belief too skimpy. There was a fair amount of jargon and, though he usually defined terms, all too often there was little beyond definition: not enough context, not enough examples. An exception was the important word abduction, which is not even defined. If you do read the book (and I recommend it), be sure you know what it is and how it differs from deduction and induction.

Why do human beings find religious ideas such an appealing explanation for events and why is supernatural attribution so ubiquitous and often more satisfying than naturalistic accounts? Jason Slone goes a long way in answering these questions and the short version is somewhat paradoxical - supernatural beliefs are a natural by-product of cognition.

For anyone read in the literature in this field, you will find many ideas that aren't new - Slone draws heavily on the ideas of Scott Atran, Pascal Boyer, and Stewart Guthrie among many others. But the book isn't just rehash and regurgitation as its thesis weaves the ideas into a coherent and refreshing look into religion and how human beings interact with it, generate it, and often use it to understand the world around them.

The main thrust of the book, from which the title is derived, is that the often simple ways religious beliefs contradict or are inconsistent with each other in the minds of believers can offer a keen insight into the nature of religion. To paraphrase an example given in the book: Christians were asked if God was omnipotent and of course they gave the "theologically correct" response of yes. They then were asked about the idea in practice as such how God operates with prayer requests. Their description consisted of a "naturalized" account more in tune with intuition - that God dealt with them one at a time. The key here being that as per the professed theological doctrine, God would be capable of dealing with all prayer requests devoid of any chronological constraints. But that turned out to be inconsistent with the "online" thinking of the prompted conceptualizations. The conclusion that reverberates here is that religion is constrained by cognition, not that cognition is constrained by religion.

Another large portion of the book deals with luck beliefs and how this is related (very closely) with religious beliefs. Slone expounds how luck beliefs are related to the human propensity to attribute things to causes and how even innocuous superstitious beliefs such as uttering "Gimme sevens" before rolling dice can offer clues. He explains how these often arise from the "illusion of correlation" as well as the tendency to blur the lines between psychological and mechanical causation.

The book should definitely be on the short list of to-read for any student of religion as it is full of powerful ideas and is conveyed in a well written, conversational style.

It's a book, what does one say about a product like this. I wanted one and I now have it.

While this has some good points and provides some insightful information, it is actually pretty boring. Going on and on about the human condition and mind, many times without connecting it to theology, makes for quite a boring book (particularly if you are a psychology graduate). Several chapters will be devoted to the mind without making any reference to theology, then suddenly connecting it in about one paragraph of explanation. Not good,

The author describes sociological and psychological ideas pertaining to religion. The title is a bit misleading as the author covers a wide range of topics. My objection to the book is that the treatments are thin and superficial. There is no real depth of coverage or insights one couldn't find elsewhere. I did not see much that was completely wrong and readers unfamiliar with the topic and wanting a brief treatment may find it somewhat helpful. In the interests of full disclosure I am a Christian and the author seems anti-religious.

Jason Slone early on shares a joke that goes something like this: If you ask two people of the same religion one question, why do you always get three answers?

If you "get" this joke -- and it seems most folks do -- then you may pass through the door of a new understanding of how it is that we humans so deftly yet "unreasonably" avow one belief or hallowed truth and so often live or manifest its antithesis simultaneously.

Jesus's focus on the poor and disposessed / Prosperity Theology.

Religion of peace and submission / Sept. 11, 2001.

Religious disestablishment / National Prayer Breakfast.

The hallowed value of TRUTH and its pursuit / Intelligent Design, Creationism, the Wedge Document (Wedge Strategy), David Barton, et al, and their revised American histories.

We humans are some odd creatures indeed, and Slone provides a new looking glass. Look and laugh or look and cringe. Who said self knowledge comes without a price?