Network Theory and Religious Innovation

Abstract

Network theory recognizes that ideas and technology are transmitted along social interconnections, and cultural and religious change can be understood as emergent phenomena through analysis of the variability and dynamics of these interconnections. ‘Information cascade’ describes the diffusion of information across a network, providing, when combined with sociological theory of religious conversion, a way of re-approaching the success of the monotheistic ‘innovation’. Instead of viewing success as a measure of inherent merit, using networks means the observed outcomes need not be ‘superior’. This is in conflict with evolutionary theory, and this paper attempts to begin to reconcile these differing approaches.

Keywords:

• Network Theory
• Cult Diffusion
• Evolution

Acknowledgements

This paper summarizes the theoretical framework of my Ph.D. research as part of Stephen Mitchell's AHRC project at the University of Exeter: ‘Pagan Monotheism in Its Intellectual Context’.

Notes

 [1] See Mitchell, ‘The Cult of Theos Hypsistos’.

 [2] Watts, Six Degrees, 45–46.

 [3] Watts, Six Degrees, 53.

 [4] Watts and Strogatz, ‘Collective Dynamics of “Small World” Networks’.

 [5] Granovetter, ‘The Strength of Weak Ties’.

 [6] See Granovetter, ‘The Strength of Weak Ties’; Watts, Six Degrees, 49.

 [7] Shi et al., ‘Networks of Strong Ties’, 1.

 [8] Shi et al., ‘Networks of Strong Ties’, 2.

 [9] Albert and Barabási, ‘Statistical Mechanics of Complex Networks’.

[10] The line creates a curve indicative of the rule of the average — i.e., very few nodes, if any, have no connections, and very few nodes, if any, have an excessive number of connections.

[11] Schnegg, ‘Reciprocity and the Emergence of Power Laws in Social Networks’.

[12] See Dawkins, Selfish Gene, 183–88.

[13] Schnegg, ‘Reciprocity and the Emergence of Power Laws in Social Networks’, 8.

[14] However, in the ancient world, physical distance constricts network closeness in a different way to modern networks.

[15] Watts, Six Degrees, 206.

[16] Watts, Six Degrees, 233. This distinction may be particularly pertinent in modelling religious change.

[17] Watts, Six Degrees, 224.

[18] Rogers, Diffusion of Innovations, 169–71.

[19] Layton, ‘Pellaport’.

[20] Layton, ‘Pellaport’, 50–51.

[21] Watts, Six Degrees, 234.

[22] Watts, Six Degrees, 237–38.

[23] Watts, Six Degrees, 242.

[24] Watts, Six Degrees, 243. This could aid understanding of how cults propagate, through deliberate ‘search’ for individuals with low thresholds or few friends to keep them ‘stable’.

[25] Watts, Six Degrees, 240.

[26] See Knappett, Thinking Through Material Culture.

[27] Philip Jenkins, Penn State University, in response to paper by Bas van Os, University of Groningen, at the SBL/AAR AGM in Washington, DC, November 2006.

[28] Boissevain, Friends of Friends, 25–26.

[29] Stark, The Rise of Christianity.

[30] Stark, The Rise of Christianity, 20.

[31] Dawkins, Selfish Gene, 189–201.

[32] Shennan, ‘Cultural Transmission and Cultural Change’, 330–46.

[33] Shennan, ‘Cultural Transmission and Cultural Change’, 334.

[34] Not to preclude simultaneity—technological innovation bringing with it an ideology or associated religious belief, for those who use it, or who carry it.

[35] In conversation with N. Collar, BirdLife International/Department of Zoology, University of Cambridge.

[36] Stark, Rise of Christianity, 191.

[37] Isaksen, Network Analysis of Transport Vectors in Roman Baetica.

[38] Bentley and Maschner, Complex Systems and Archaeology.

[39] Evans et al. , Thinking Through Material Culture.

[40] Broodbank, An Island Archaeology of the Early Cyclades.

[41] Malkin, ‘Networks and the Emergence of Greek Identity’, 59.

[42] Mitchell, ‘The Cult of Theos Hypsistos’.

[43] Mitchell, ‘The Cult of Theos Hypsistos’, 128.

[44] Barabási used Paul as an example of an ancient hub in his introduction to Linked.