Agent Detection Bias

Let me start by saying that my intention is not to dissuade anyone from their belief system, but to simply give you something to ponder on. Throughout the course of history, there has always been the question and sometimes assertion that an omnipotent being is responsible for creating the earth. There are also claims that this being holds the power to rule over living things. This has been a topic of much debate because these claims have not been demonstrable in the past or present. On top of not being demonstrable these claims are also unfalsifiable. You can’t prove or disprove which is why I am not going to assert anything here. There is no doubt that a large portion of the population truly believes that there is an omnipotent and omnipresent being, but there is also growing number of people that do not believe this. I recently took a couple of online courses provided by the University of Edinburgh on Science, Philosophy and Religion that touched on some things I found very interesting when it comes to unpacking these beliefs. In these courses, I learned a term that was foreign to me at the time and it is possibly foreign to many others so I decided to look into it a little more. The term I’m referring to is agent detection or “agent detection bias”. The definition of agent detection is the inclination for animals, including humans, to presume the purposeful intervention of a sentient or intelligent agent in situations that may or may not involve one. Some scientists say that the belief in a creator as some spiritual beimg is due to this bias. So how did this theory come about? Well first, let’s define science. Science, meaning knowledge in Latin, builds and organizes knowledge in the form of demonstrable explanations about the universe. In using this method, observations over time suggest that agent detection is not inherent but is actually an evolutionary byproduct and that it’s related to the natural inclination to preserve life. For example, if you hear a door creak in a house you were supposedly alone in, your immediate response may be alarm due to a force or “agent” being behind it that could cause you harm. So in an act of self-preservation, we either act and/or we suddenly become on guard, which is otherwise known as being in “fight or flight” mode as opposed to “rest and digest” mode. Even if the reason for the door creaking turned out to be a draft from a cracked window or a gush of air from the heating/cooling system turning on, at the moment the door creaked there was no visible explanation as to why that happened. As humans we’ll often default to agent detection bias even though there was no visible agent there. Some scientists believe that this trait manifests in other ways in humans as well and is possibly the foundation for the belief in a god. Take note that these scientists are not claiming that agent detection is the ONLY reason for belief in a god because there are other factors involved such as indoctrination which can be powerful. So will we ever know the truth? Maybe and maybe not. Personally, I’ve learned that it’s better to have more questions than answers so at least you’re open to the truth instead of being forced to do mental gymnastics just to support a claim that you already perceived as the truth. Now while many historians of science and religion, scientists of various fields, theologians, philosophers etc., have regarded science and religion as separate forms of knowledge, others believe they are interconnected or even parallel each other. No one seems to have a definite answer with concrete evidence, only theories. Perhaps in the future the mystery of life and it’s origination will be clearly defined by either science or religion. The question is, which one will it be? Will it be one or the other or both? I can’t answer that question but if someone were to ask me this question, my bet would be on science. Science does not claim to be the “truth”, but merely a means on getting to the truth in an evidence based fashion as opposed to mysticism which is faith based. With faith, there is not demonstrable evidence there so you really take a gamble with that. At least science will change its stance and evolve based on new evidence and information but I have yet to see religion do the same. This is just something to ponder on and maybe look into a little deeper because it’s important to be able to look at different perspectives. Critical thinking is crucial when it comes to the evolving of society.

As I get older, I’m less concerned about wrinkles and gray hair as I am keeping my worldview flexible enough that I’m not condescendingly telling the younger generations to play by the rules that worked in my day with no consideration of whether those rules still apply.