The coexistence of natural and supernatural explanations within and across domains and development

Abstract

People across highly diverse cultural contexts use both natural and supernatural explanations to explain questions of fundamental concern such as death, illness, and human origins. The present study examines the development of explanatory coexistence within and across domains of existential concern in individuals in Tanna, Vanuatu. We examined three age groups: 7- to 12-year-old children, 13- to 18-year-old adolescents, and 19- to 70-year-old adults (N = 72). Within the domain of death, biological and spontaneous explanations were most common across all ages. For illness, children showed the highest rates of explanatory coexistence, while adolescents and adults favoured biological explanations. Within the human origins domain, theistic explanations were most common across the age groups. Overall, these data show that coexistence reasoning in these domains is pervasive across cultures, yet at the same time it is deeply contextually specific, reflecting the nuanced differences in local ecologies and cultural beliefs. Statement of contribution What is already known on this subject? Individuals across highly diverse cultural contexts use both natural and supernatural explanations to understand the events that occur in their lives. Context and cultural input play a large role in determining when and how individuals incorporate natural and supernatural explanations. The development of explanatory coexistence has primarily studied explanations for isolated domains. What does this study add? We examined explanatory coexistence in a culture with recent conversion to Christianity and formal education. The current research examines how individuals reason within and across the domains of human origins, illness, and death. Developmental differences associated with explanatory coexistence are examined.

Embracing Death: Mexican Parent and Child Perspectives on Death

“…Astuti and Harris, (), Harris, (, ), and Harris and Giménez, () have argued that afterlife beliefs increase over late childhood and are more likely to be elicited when children are presented with a religious context compared to a non‐religious one. Similar results suggesting that a religious or supernatural context increases afterlife beliefs have been found in several countries including the United States (Lane, Zhu, Evans, & Wellman, ), Spain (Harris & Giménez, ), Madagascar (Astuti, ; Astuti & Harris, ), and Vanuatu (Busch, et al, ; Watson‐Jones, Busch, Harris, & Legare, ). In line with this research, another goal of the current study was to examine the impact of socialization and culture on the prevalence of coexistence beliefs about death in Mexico, a deeply religious country (Lipka, ).…”

“…There has been growing interest in how different types of beliefs (e.g., scientific, spiritual) might coexist in the minds of children and adults (Busch, Watson‐Jones, & Legare, ; Harris & Giménez, ; Legare, Evans, Rosengren, & Harris, ; Rosengren et al, ). This past research has found that co‐existent beliefs are prevalent across different cultural groups, but that the nature and characteristics of these beliefs vary depending on the groups examined (Evans, ; Legare & Gelman, ).…”

“…This past research has found that co‐existent beliefs are prevalent across different cultural groups, but that the nature and characteristics of these beliefs vary depending on the groups examined (Evans, ; Legare & Gelman, ). Death is one topic area where coexistent beliefs have been shown to occur in both children and adults (Astuti, ; Busch et al, ; Harris & Giménez, ; Rosengren et al, ). In many religions, death is believed to mark a transition to an afterlife, and in the United States the majority of adults report believing in some sort of non‐corporeal continuity after death (Greeley & Hout, ).…”

Children’s Emerging Understanding of Death

“…To examine these nonbiological aspects, some researchers have proposed a fifth subcomponent of death, noncorporeal continuity, which focuses on beliefs in the afterlife (Bering & Bjorklund, ; Bering, Blasi, & Bjorklund, ; Rosengren et al, ). Other researchers have acknowledged that cultures vary greatly with respect to the rituals and practices surrounding death (Kagawa‐Singer, ; Lobar, Youngblut, & Brooten, ), and have studied how individuals growing up in different cultures come to understand death (Astuti, ; Busch, Watson‐Jones, & Legare, ; Rosengren et al, ). An important finding resulting from these efforts is the idea that biological and religious concepts of death often coexist in the minds of both children and adults (Busch et al, ; Gutiérrez et al, ; Legare, Evans, Rosengren, & Harris, ).…”

“…Evidence suggests that children come to a biological understanding of death prior to integrating spiritual or religious dimensions, using their biological understanding of death to constrain their religious understanding (Astuti & Harris, ; Giménez & Harris, ; Lane & Harris, ). Ultimately, people often combine these different models, resulting in the coexistence of different explanatory beliefs (Busch et al, ; Legare et al, ). These coexistence models can be target‐dependent (where the belief system used depends on the context) or blended (where two or more belief systems are combined in one explanation).…”