LONG before the rise of Christianity, it was a commonplace idea
that wealth and moral decay caused societies to decline. Ancient
Roman historians such as Sallust spoke out against the laxity of
their time. Later, the 14th-century Muslim philosopher Ibn Khaldun
observed how vigorous societies became soft under the influence of
civilisation. And, of course, Christian moralists of all ages have
warned of this danger.
It does seem that wealthy societies that abandon their
traditions tend to decline. The problem is that decline comes only
after a considerable delay. Recently, I was listening to a
wonderful series of lectures on Roman history, in which the speaker
discussed various possible reasons for the decline of Rome.
One cause he dismissed was "decadence", on the grounds that Rome
reached its peak of power as traditional religion and morality
declined in the Late Republic. The same can be said of our own
times, in which religion has declined, while wealth has surged to
unparalleled heights.
Recent advances in science suggest that historical and social
changes can often best be explained in biological terms, an
approach known as "biohistory". Biohistory is, in its general
sense, a school of historiography that developed in the mid-20th
century, but is also the title I have given to my own theories,
which focus on epigenetics and its application to
historiography.
One clear conclusion from biohistory is that wealth and
decadence are the cause of civilisation decline. It starts from the
idea that the nature of a society reflects the tem-perament of the
population.
In his book A Farewell to Alms (Princeton University
Press, 2007), Gregory Clark shows how the Industrial Revolution in
England was made possible by a population that became harder
working, more peaceful, and more willing to invest in areas such as
literacy and work skills that had long-term benefit. This raises
the question of how such a temperament could be formed.
AN IMPORTANT clue can be found in cross-cultural studies that
show that the family patterns of civilised peoples are quite
distinct from others, such as those of hunter-gatherers. They tend
to restrict sexual activity, control their children, form nuclear
monogamous families, and delay marriage. Curiously enough, this
same set of behaviours can be found in animal societies in the
wild, but only those that are short of food.
In a series of experiments with rats over the past seven years,
my research team has shown that all these behaviours can be
explained as a direct result of food shortage, which has
significant hormonal and epigenetic effects (epigenetics is a new
science that shows how environment affects the activity of certain
genes).
An important finding is that the strongest effects are not on
adults, but on the young, and that epigenetic effects can also be
inherited. This means that the full effect of food shortage or
affluence may not be experienced for a generation or more. Thus,
biology explains in principle why wealthy civilisations tend to
decline, but also why the effects of wealth are not immediately
felt.
THIS does not explain, however, how peoples become civilised in
the first place. After all, the disciplined and austere Victorians
were less likely to experience famine, or even hunger, than their
14th-century ancestors; so their "hungry" behaviour could not
simply be a result of food shortage. This is where religion comes
in.
Laboratory studies have shown that restricting sexual activity
in rats, especially in the period just after puberty, has a similar
effect to food restriction. For example, it permanently reduces the
level of hormones such as testosterone and leptin. This is a
significant finding, because lower testosterone is associated with
occupational success, law-abiding behaviour, and religious
commitment. Ministers of religion, for example, typically score
low. This explains why teenagers with limited sexual outlets
achieve more education and greater career success, as detailed in
the Kinsey report, in 1948.
I believe that the same will be found to apply to other
religious traditions, such as sabbath-keeping, disciplined prayers,
and religious rituals - and also, of course, to fasting, which is
an element of most religious traditions. Any code of behaviour that
restrains people, including children, serves to increase this
disciplined or "food-short" temperament. All of these are
hypotheses that could be tested in the laboratory.
ADVANCED religions such as Christianity can be seen as a kind of
"cultural technology", which creates the temperament that makes
civilisation possible. This is also why the decline of religion is
such a problem. As wealth undermines the disciplined, food-short
temperament, it also undermines spirituality and support for
traditional morality. This, in turn, further advances the decline.
The long-term result must be the end of our civilisation, unless
something is done to stop it.
Biohistory does not have anything to say about the truthfulness
of any religious tradition. Indeed, I started on this journey as an
agnostic. Since becoming a Christian, however, I have come to see
it as a buttress to my faith. If the Bible is truly God's word,
then it should be a guide not only for individuals, but also for a
healthy society, and that is what biohistory suggests that it is.
It also suggests that faith and science, working together, are the
only hope for the future of our civilisation.
Dr Penman is an Hon. Fellow and Guest Lecturer at RMIT
University, in Melbourne, and the author of Biohistory:
Decline and fall of the West (Cambridge Scholars Publishing,
2015). www.biohistory.org