Here is the synopsis of our sample research paper on Article Analysis/Crazy Beliefs. Have the paper e-mailed to you 24/7/365.
Essay / Research Paper Abstract
A 3 page analysis of "Why People Believe (What Other People See As) Crazy Ideas" by William Irons. The writer summarizes the main points, which deal with the evolutionary, social purposes of religion in terms of fostering group cohesion, and then offers personal evaluation. No additional sources cited.
Page Count:
3 pages (~225 words per page)
File: D0_khironsc.rtf
Buy This Term Paper »
Unformatted sample text from the term paper:
the author links evidence to these points, as well as the strengths and weaknesses of the authors position. Lastly, this review will offer assessment of the importance of this position.
In his article, Irons argues that commitment to religious beliefs can be understood in terms of the "commitment theory of religion," as it is "easy to monitor" and, "by
its very nature (both) a commitment device and a "hard-to-take signal," which is a description that fits with Irons definition of commitment theory (Irons 39-40). The author goes on
to argue that commitment to certain social relationships requires irrational behavior in that the costs entailed to the individual often outweigh personal benefits, as these commitments "cannot stand up to
rational cost-benefit evaluation" (Irons 40). Irons links his argument to substantiating evidence by drawing on the readers background cultural/societal knowledge, while placing his points within the context of previous
scholarship. Basically, Irons argument rests on the fact that primary relationships, such as marriage and ones loyalty to a group, either to a religion or tribe or nation, depends on
a cognitive framework that prioritizes this loyal over self-interest. The main strength of this argument is that Irons draws on common cultural experience that any reader can comprehend. For
example, one of his main analogies is to compare the irrationality of religious loyalty to the phenomenon of falling of love, which prioritizes a spousal relationship above all others. Irons
explains: A man who is in love with all women would be a lousy partner, as would a woman in love with all men. The object of love needs to
e specific, reflecting commitment to a specific, reflecting commitment to a specific person (Irons 41). When one considers that this specific attachment entails continued commitment, even when a
...