answer:This research is based on the “2 systems” understanding of how the mind works: that we process experience first on an intuitive level, and then go on to engage our analytical tools to either build a case for our intuitive conclusions or (more rarely) check the validity of the intuitive conclusion. The religious impulse originates on the intuitive level. I don’t think there’s any dispute about that. People just have “a sense” of an underlying mystery associated with a feeling of awe. What happens next is that the other system, the analytical one, gets recruited to provide a rational basis for that feeling. That rational system operates by seeing if it can construct a coherent story that accounts for the intuition. Studies show that if a story emerges that seems to hang together in a fairly satisfactory way and provides a pretty good causal explanation in support of the intuition, then our inclination will be to accept it as truth. All religions are, in my view, the various stories that have emerged from this process. But, as I said up top, there is yet a further degree to which the rational system can become involved, and that is to actually undertake a rigorous check of the validity of the story. The research that the article mentions is part of a much larger body of research that confirms this fact of human nature: we rarely take this step. We are usually satisfied with having arrived at some kind of plausible story, and are then loathe to challenge it any further. We do this in all kinds of domains, not just the religious. But in the context of religion, there is immense resistance to seeing the story as just a story and challenging it. The stories get enshrined as unassailable. I think that the tragedy in all this is that the basic intuition of sacred awe is a collateral casualty. That intuition is a magnificent aspect of what it means to be human. But because the stories we spin to explain it don’t hold up well to analysis, we often determine that the intuition itself is invalid and to be ignored. But I think that’s a big mistake. Whether or not we buy into the stories of “god” or “heaven” or “nirvana” or “soul”, this basic sense of mystery that is out of reach to cognition is at the core of our being and drives most of what we consider “good” about humanity.