<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Which cognitive revolution?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blogs.ssrc.org/tif/2008/07/18/which-cognitive-revolution/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blogs.ssrc.org/tif/2008/07/18/which-cognitive-revolution/</link>
	<description>Secularism, religion, and the public sphere</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 16 May 2013 19:41:38 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>By: Michael Grossman</title>
		<link>http://blogs.ssrc.org/tif/2008/07/18/which-cognitive-revolution/comment-page-1/#comment-4415</link>
		<dc:creator>Michael Grossman</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 31 Jul 2008 19:32:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.ssrc.org/tif/?p=303#comment-4415</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Great article, one point to make though: the statement that, &quot;these cognitive predilections to believe in gods can be overridden by special types of enculturation but experimental, historical, archaeological, and ethnographic evidence suggests that as a species we are prone to belief in gods,&quot; very well implies the possibility that belief in a personal God may well be threatened if certain strands of modernist secularism are allowed to flourish, such as those stands that find the idea of non-personal agency abhorrent and ultimately immoral in its perceived contribution to a general lack of responsibility for one&#039;s actions and/or the limiting of personal agency (a strand that has recently been well covered by anthropologist Webb Keane). However, the evidence that such a strand of modernist secular thought will, in fact, come to dominate the earth as a whole is, of course, by no means extremely compelling.

A very interesting discussion overall, the draw toward such a &quot;piecemeal&quot; classification of religious phenomena as the CSR advocates is certainly compelling analytically, and offers theorists an approach that is perhaps more &quot;scientific&quot; in terms of the exactness of its application than other more general methodologies.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great article, one point to make though: the statement that, &#8220;these cognitive predilections to believe in gods can be overridden by special types of enculturation but experimental, historical, archaeological, and ethnographic evidence suggests that as a species we are prone to belief in gods,&#8221; very well implies the possibility that belief in a personal God may well be threatened if certain strands of modernist secularism are allowed to flourish, such as those stands that find the idea of non-personal agency abhorrent and ultimately immoral in its perceived contribution to a general lack of responsibility for one&#8217;s actions and/or the limiting of personal agency (a strand that has recently been well covered by anthropologist Webb Keane). However, the evidence that such a strand of modernist secular thought will, in fact, come to dominate the earth as a whole is, of course, by no means extremely compelling.</p>
<p>A very interesting discussion overall, the draw toward such a &#8220;piecemeal&#8221; classification of religious phenomena as the CSR advocates is certainly compelling analytically, and offers theorists an approach that is perhaps more &#8220;scientific&#8221; in terms of the exactness of its application than other more general methodologies.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
