Schoenfeld wonders why scientific Psychology has for so long ignored religious behavior when billions of people through the ages have come to practice some form of religion. To stimulate discussion, he abstracts features that are common to all religions, describes the behavior we must observe in order to identify those features, and explores principles that underlie the genesis and continuance of that behavior. From what behavioral properties are key religious concepts drawn? What makes a given religious dogma believable by an ordinary man? What makes the utterances of one man, say a religion's founder, attractive to a potential convert? What makes one religion viable in the behavioral repertory of people, and therefore 'successful,' while another religion is not? There is no definitive reason why, when religious behavior is studied as natural phenomena, the results of a scientific analysis should not illuminate, and even strengthen, the conclusions of religion about behavior.
Despite his assurances, you need a behavior analytic background to glean the true shape of what he is saying. I suppose a theologian could work it out with some research on operant conditioning. However, I suspect he or she would need to establish fluency before true discriminative responding would occur.
I’d recommend this to a fellow Behavior analytic nerd who wanted to read Behavior analytic literature on religion. There isn’t much, and like the author said, religion is one of the most common human behaviors we engage in. It’s surprising there isn’t more time spent on it.
BT
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.