It's a control thing: Religion and human reproduction

Christianity is, like many other religions, a reproduction control system.

Its various sects take great pains to enforce a sexual code of conduct—and for very good reason. There's no better way for churches to control group behavior and ensure the growth of their flock than through the control of human reproduction. This explains why many Christians find it so important to get involved in biotechnological and bioethical discourse; it's crucial for Christian leaders to show their followers that they have authority over these areas, as authority imbues a sense of ownership.

Catholicism is a prime example. The Vatican's uncompromising stance on virtually all facets of reproduction shows how integral it is to the faith. Birth control, abortion, homosexuality and recreational sex (including sexual acts and positions that cannot lead to procreation) are considered taboos as each of these things represent a kind of subversion. And as far as health science is concerned, procedures like in vitro fertilization (IVF) are shunned upon as such practices wrest control away from the Church and towards individual couples and doctors. The injunction to 'not play God' is a memetic trick which convinces the faithful to avoid certain areas of inquiry traditionally reserved for the Church.

At the same time, Christians work to uphold so-called family values, knowing full well that the family unit is unquestioningly the most important vector for the entrenchment and spread of religious values.

Religious leaders and ideologues may argue that the reasons for their interest in human biology extend beyond mere reproduction. Instead, they argue that their domain extends into the realm of morality and spirituality, and that 'reproductive control' is a trite interpretation of their motives.

Now, I'm sure many of them are sincere when they make this case. That's how memes work, with hosts convinced that they're acting rationally and in the collective best interest. Memetics is, at its core, a study of the tendencies and vulnerabilities in human psychology.

In the case of human reproduction, Christians make the case for such things as embryonic personhood (or ensoulment) and espouse a strong interpretation of naturalism (i.e. humans were created in God's image). The problem with these arguments, however, is that they are rooted in fictions. The subsequent rationalizations and injunctions that emerge from these premises are thus intrinsically flawed.

Ultimately, once the arguments are stripped down and exposed for what they are, it's painfully obvious that the Christian memeplex is merely working to control human reproduction and the makeup of family units for the purpose of producing more willing hosts. One merely needs to stand back and look at the world's most successful religions as proof; those faiths that work to control human reproduction, namely Christianity, Islam and Hinduism (though Islam and Hinduism less so than Christianity) are undeniably the ones who have fared the best over the ages. It's the killer memetic adaptation.

As an example of the opposite effect, take the Shaker movement. It's a 250 year old Christian sect that acquired a rather disadvantageous characteristic—call it a maladaptive trait. According to Shaker law, all members of the faith are forbidden to engage in sexual activity. Reproduction is completely prohibited. The only way for Shakers to have children is through adoption, but even that was rejected in 1960. The only way new members could be acquired was from outside the community, which happened with great infrequency.

Today, the Shakers are all but finished. Their communities started to dwindle in the late 1800s. Although there were 6,000 believers at the peak of the Shaker movement, there were only twelve Shaker communities left by 1920. As of today, they are down to their last three members.

While most Christian sects have avoided this particular problem, they're not immune to changing social patterns and mores. The Vatican is having fits over the whole birth control thing. When it comes to family planning and recreational sex, Catholics and Christians alike are increasingly turning a blind eye to scripture. Couples want to continue engaging in sexual activity without having to have eight children. Additionally, infertile couples are choosing to have babies through IVF despite the Church's admonition against it.

The decline of Christian influence in much of the developed world (especially in Europe, but except, quite perplexingly, the USA) can be attributed to higher living standards and improved education—factors that lead couples to want smaller families and less to do with organized religion. Meanwhile, Christianity and Islam continues to spread in developing nations whose populations are still primed for religious memes.

But given the speed with which the developing world is catching up to the rest, it will only be a matter of time before they too start to shun religious laws that govern sexual activities and reproduction. Mark this as yet another reason to bring everyone up to first world standards.

Susan Blackmore: Memes, temes and the 'third replicator'

Neat article by Susan Blackmore in the New York Times about information and how it's subject to Darwinian processes. Blackmore's focus in the essay is on the copying aspect where she presents the idea of the third replicator, namely 'technological memes', or what she's dubbed 'temes'.

"They are digital information stored, copied, varied and selected by machines," she writes, "We humans like to think we are the designers, creators and controllers of this newly emerging world but really we are stepping stones from one replicator to the next."

Blackmore continues:

Computers handle vast quantities of information with extraordinarily high-fidelity copying and storage. Most variation and selection is still done by human beings, with their biologically evolved desires for stimulation, amusement, communication, sex and food. But this is changing. Already there are examples of computer programs recombining old texts to create new essays or poems, translating texts to create new versions, and selecting between vast quantities of text, images and data. Above all there are search engines. Each request to Google, Alta Vista or Yahoo! elicits a new set of pages — a new combination of items selected by that search engine according to its own clever algorithms and depending on myriad previous searches and link structures.

This is a radically new kind of copying, varying and selecting, and means that a new evolutionary process is starting up. This copying is quite different from the way cells copy strands of DNA or humans copy memes. The information itself is also different, consisting of highly stable digital information stored and processed by machines rather than living cells. This, I submit, signals the emergence of temes and teme machines, the third replicator.

What should we expect of this dramatic step? It might make as much difference as the advent of human imitation did. Just as human meme machines spread over the planet, using up its resources and altering its ecosystems to suit their own needs, so the new teme machines will do the same, only faster. Indeed we might see our current ecological troubles not as primarily our fault, but as the inevitable consequence of earth’s transition to being a three-replicator planet. We willingly provide ever more energy to power the Internet, and there is enormous scope for teme machines to grow, evolve and create ever more extraordinary digital worlds, some aided by humans and others independent of them. We are still needed, not least to run the power stations, but as the temes proliferate, using ever more energy and resources, our own role becomes ever less significant, even though we set the whole new evolutionary process in motion in the first place.

Link.

H/T CC.

Daniel Dennett on domesticating the wild memes of religion

Check out this fantastic talk by philosopher Daniel Dennett from 2006 about religion as a natural phenomenon and how it works to manipulate its hosts for replicative purposes. Be sure to set aside the 40 minutes and watch the entire lecture.

If you're interested in this topic, be sure to check out his book, Breaking the Spell: Religion as a Natural Phenomenon.

Just say no to mind controlling parasites

Genomes can be nasty. All they care about is self-replication, an agenda that often leads to some very strange and not-so-nice reproductive strategies. Genes are truly selfish.

Take mind controlling parasites, for example. These are viruses and simple organisms that have evolved such that they can alter the behavior of their hosts. Essentially, they cognitively re-engineer their victims, turning them into their transmission vectors. It is not uncommon for organisms to leech off several different species in this way as part of their reproductive cycle.

For example, there is Plasmodium gallinaceum, more commonly known as malaria. It's been known for some time that this virus protozoan uses mosquitoes as its vector. What has not been known until recently, however, is how malaria alters the blood sucking behavior of mosquitoes. Malaria has had a significant impact on the evolution of mosquitoes and their behavior, much like flowers have contributed to the evolution of its pollinators, namely bees and other flying insects.

Specifically, a mosquito will continue to search for victims until it reaches a threshold volume of blood. When it hits this threshold point, it stops host-seeking. It is thought that the stage-specific effect of the malaria parasite on host-seeking behavior is likely to be an active manipulation to increase its transmission success.

Then there's Dicrocoelium dendriticum. It's a virus that primarily infects sheep -- but it has a rather convoluted way of going about its reproductive business. First, adult worms lay eggs in the bile ducts of the sheep and are excreted. These eggs are in turn ingested by various species of land snails and the eggs hatch in their digestive tracts. This hatching releases a compound that continues to change until it is released by the snail in the form of a slimeball. This slimeball is then eaten by ants. This eventually develops into metacercariae within the abdominal cavity of the ants.

And here's where it gets interesting (not that it hasn't been a riveting tale to this point): the ant's behavior is in turn altered such that it is compelled to climb to the very top of a blade of grass where it waits to get eaten by sheep. The sheep eats the grass with the ant on it and subsequently becomes infected. The cycle is complete.

Similarly, Euhaplorchis californiensis causes fish to shimmy and jump so wading birds will grab them and eat them for the same reason.

Hairworms, which live inside grasshoppers, eventually need to leave their hosts to continue their life cycle. Rather than leave peacefully, however, they release a cocktail of chemicals that makes the grasshoppers commit suicide by leaping into water. The hairworms then swim away from their drowning hosts. Nice, eh?

Think humans are immune to mind controlling parasites? Think again. It is suspected that Toxoplasma gondii, a parasite that is often contracted by humans from their cats, affects human psychology. Normally the parasite works to manipulate rodents, but some scientists speculate that human cognition can also be altered.

Jaroslav Flegr, a parasitologist at Charles University in Prague, administered psychological questionnaires to people infected with Toxoplasma. He discovered that those who are infected show a small tendency to be more self-reproaching and insecure. Strangely, infected women tend to be more outgoing and warmhearted, while infected men tend to be more jealous and suspicious. Flegr has also shown that Toxoplasma may have an effect on human sex ratios -- to the tune of 260 boys for every 100 girls! (As an aside, it's worth noting that Flegr's research has been rejected by 8 journals, usually without formal review). Less controversial are studies that have shown links between Toxoplasma and schizophrenia.

This brings to mind a number of issues (no pun intended), including the freewill problem and the disturbing ease at which a virus can impact on something as important as an agent's behavior. The prospect exists for a deliberately engineered virus that can direct human psychology and decision making. The degree to which a virus could control behavior is an open question, but I'm inclined to think it's fairly limited. There's only so much you can do with germs, and simple organisms seem to be the most manipulable. Nano is a different story altogether, though.

Of course, there are other self-replicating entities that control human psychology much more profoundly than any mind control virus could. I'm thinking, of course, of memes. Cults, most notably Scientology, thrive on manipulating people with memetic techniques. Religions work in a similar manner but the degree to which a person is impacted varies from religion to religion. Propaganda is yet another way in which people's behavior can be modified.

Cults, religions and propaganda aside, a significant portion of human behavior is dictated by memetic influences. You can't escape the memepool; all our thinking is guided in part by the memes we carry. Our individual psychologies are molded by three basic influences: the memes we are exposed to, our genetic predispositions, and how we've been socially conditioned. This is a dynamic process that changes over time. It's my feeling that memes take up the largest chunk of this pie in terms of impact.

Oh, and apparently there's a fourth influence: Toxoplasma gondii. Just keep this in mind the next time you have to clean up your cat's poop.