Amazing synthesis of different disciplines but some major flaws. One, assumes death anxiety pretty much a given once awareness of our own mortality occured. Two, oblivious to male bias in own work and those cited. Did not even attempt use of gender neutral or inclusive terms. ( )

Great summary of the evolutionary biology and psychology of the mind/consciousness and how it can be an explanation for the human belief system. ( )

Torrey presents an evolutionary theory for the emergence of religion: gods are the result of complex theory of mind, something that was not possible until relatively late in human evolution. My background is in anthropology, not neurobiology, but the pieces I am familiar with seem good and reliable. Although I would argue with some of Torrey's interpretations, they're not outrageous or even uncommon ones. I am a little skeptical of the neuroscience, largely because I know that things that seem scientific and incomprehensible tend to feel more reliable than they necessarily are, but I'm as impressed as I can be by a book about the functions of the human brain (a subject about which so many people are so tremendously wrong that I don't know that really accurate popular science can be written).

Torrey relies a little bit too much on development as a mirror of evolution - both for human consciousness and for society and culture. The latter offends me more than the former, though both are unreliable guides, particularly when they're the only evidence offered. (Torrey also spends way too much space quoting anthropological texts from two centuries ago, which does not make those arguments more compelling.) However, he does an excellent job of emphasizing the unreliability of dates this old, the gradual effect of even "rapid" cultural change, and the range of human behavior that would have been important at any given time. The final chapter on other theories of religion is a useful summary both of Torrey's position and of the field in general, and provides a great many interesting references to follow up. This is a bit too academically-styled to be accessible to a popular audience, which is unfortunate, because it's an interesting theory that I think has the potential to be compelling. ( )