tongue out !"

"If you don't finish your meal and waste food, in the afterlife you'll be forced to eat the

leftovers in Hell!"

"If you don't respect your elders, you'll be cast into Hell, where there are eternal

flames and you will be forced to climb a mountain of thorns or be thrown into a cauldron of

boiling oil!"

Were you ever subjected to these kinds of "supernatural threats" when you were young?

Beyond the emotional blackmails of parents, many have come across religious pamphlets

in churches warning about the "End Times" or handed out by missionaries.

Such widely distributed religious literature often resorts to including detailed and terrifying

illustrations of Hell, using fear as a means to encourage people to repent and turn to

the good.

But have you ever wondered if these "supernatural threats" truly promote societal stability

and curb antisocial behaviors?

Furthermore, can this method of teaching cast a shadow over a child's psyche?

Hi, I am Shao Chieh Lo, welcome to what people also ask, where I answered some of the most

Googled questions with even more Googling.

Today's query is “Does the concept of hell actually detter crime?

”, We will discuss some sociological and psychological research related to beliefs

about Hell and explore the effects these universally observed "supernatural threats" might have

on society and individual psychology, with PAA.

So let's start with our first question: So, can the belief in Hell really deter crime?

From a sociological perspective, analyzing the direct relationship between beliefs in

Hell and crime rates is quite challenging.

Firstly, defining the belief in Hell itself is a challenge.

Different cultures and religious beliefs may have vastly different interpretations of the

concept of Hell, making it difficult to measure on a standardized scale.

Additionally, crime rates are influenced by numerous factors, including economic conditions,

education levels, law enforcement strategies, and societal norms.

Even if a correlation exists between beliefs in Hell and crime rates, it may be difficult

to distinguish this relationship from these other factors and establish direct causality

between the two.

Moreover, religious beliefs may change over time within a society, meaning that any correlation

observed at one point in time might not apply to another.

Despite these challenges, many sociologists have tried to analyze the effects of beliefs

in Hell and "supernatural threats" on society.

For instance, a study published in 2011 in "The International Journal for the Psychology

of Religion" pointed out that students who believed in a more benevolent deity were more

likely to cheat in exams than those who believed in a more wrathful god.

Initially, they recruited 61 college students from various religious backgrounds and asked

them to fill out a questionnaire about their views on God.

This survey included positive descriptors like forgiving, loving, and gentle, as well

as negative ones such as strict, angry, and fearful.

The researchers then subjected them to a "cheating test."

Participants were asked to take a 20-question test.

Before the test started, researchers pretended to inform them of a software glitch where

if they didn't press the spacebar immediately after seeing a question, the answer would

appear.

They were urged to press the spacebar promptly after viewing each question.

However, this "bug" was intentionally designed by the researchers to evaluate the participants'

honesty levels, as not pressing the spacebar to see the answer would be cheating.

The results revealed that regardless of the participants' religious beliefs, those who

had a more negative view of God in the previous survey were less likely to cheat than those

with a positive view.

Thus, they inferred that individuals who believe in strict supernatural punishment tend to

adhere more closely to societal moral norms.

Furthermore, a study published in June 2012 by psychologists Azim Shariff from the University

of Oregon and Mijke Rhemtulla from the University of Amsterdam also supported the idea of a

negative correlation between beliefs in Hell and crime rates.

They drew on data from the World Value Survey and European Values Surveys from 1981-2007,

encompassing 26 years and 67 countries with 143,197 participants, including followers

of Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, and Shintoism.

In these surveys, respondents were orally questioned about their beliefs in Heaven,

Hell, God, etc.

They then sourced crime rates for various offenses (like kidnapping, drug trafficking,

murder, theft, etc.) from the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime and analyzed the

relationship between different belief systems and crime rates.

Analysis revealed that countries inclined to believe in Hell had lower crime rates.

In contrast, belief in Heaven not only failed to lower crime rates but was associated with

higher crime rates.

Interestingly, when subtracting the percentage of people in each country who believed in

Hell from those who believed in Heaven and then analyzing the result, there was a clear

positive correlation between the "Heaven minus Hell belief differential" and crime rates.

This means the more a country's population leans towards belief in Hell, the lower its

crime rate, and vice versa for belief in Heaven.

However, the researcher also noted that the study only establishes a possible correlation

between beliefs in Hell and crime rates.

Whether the belief in Hell causes a decrease in crime rates requires further research for

a definitive conclusion.

Does the supernatural threat and religious fear promote genuine altruistic behavior or

is it just obedience to authority?

By now, many progressive people might have already rolled their eyes.

Yes, many people might have already noticed one of the potential issues of using crime

rates as a measure of antisocial behavior: crime doesn't necessarily mean antisocial.

Although we usually consider law-breaking actions as antisocial behaviors, sometimes

certain criminal actions might stem from resistance against unjust laws or systems, rather than

a rebellion against society.

Furthermore, in societies where the law favors specific classes or power holders, or where

privilege or authority exists, the law is more often used to protect the interests of

the powerful rather than the public.

In such scenarios, a lower crime rate might merely reflect the degree of people's obedience,

not their genuine altruistic actions and psychology.

If people are simply obeying the law due to fear of punishment, then a low crime rate

might not signify societal harmony and progress but only demonstrates people's compliance.

So, the topic we must delve further into becomes: does the supernatural threat foster genuine

altruistic behavior, or is it just obedience to authority?

A study published in the Journal of Research on Adolescence in 2019 employed a different

method to investigate this question.

In this study, researchers conducted an online survey of 760 adolescents.

One part of the survey questioned their view of God and analyzed whether the participants

leaned towards seeing God as 'punitive' or 'benevolent'.

Another part surveyed their daily behavior, analyzing how many 'aggressive actions' they

engaged in daily (including physical attacks, such as intentionally pushing someone, or

verbal attacks like cursing, insulting, threatening, spreading rumors, or excluding someone from

a group, etc.)

The results found that those who believed in a benevolent God were associated with fewer

aggressive behaviors, while those who believed in a punitive God were associated with more

aggressive actions.

This blurs the connection between supernatural punishment and antisocial behavior, providing

another direction for studying this topic.

Are supernatural threats and the concept of hell really good for society?

If, in addition to discussing crime rates, we broaden the scope of discussion and further

explore the impact of beliefs in hell and supernatural threats on public interests and

society as a whole, we can see sociologists putting forth various arguments both in support

and opposition.

From an evolutionary perspective, evolutionary biologist Dominic Johnson and psychologist

Jesse Bering proposed an intriguing theory in a paper published in Evolutionary Psychology

in 2006.

They suggest that the concept of supernatural punishment provides an evolutionary advantage

for human societies.

They argue that humans possess two characteristics that distinguish them from other species.

Firstly, humans instinctively use the "Theory of Mind" - the assumption that others possess

a mind similar to one's own, which helps explain their actions.

Secondly, the use of human language enables us to quickly communicate complex ideas.

These two features allowed early humans to leverage social constraints to control others'

selfish behaviors, providing an evolutionary advantage over other species.

For instance, chimpanzees can act selfishly in front of other chimpanzees without being

reported to those not present.

However, for humans, we know people can hear, discover, infer, remember, report, hypothesize,

plan, and act based on others' behaviors.

Meaning, if we commit harmful acts in front of others, we might face group sanctions.

The problem is, early humans didn't have surveillance cameras.

They couldn't possibly monitor everyone's actions at all times.

At this juncture, the concept of an all-knowing and omnipotent deity watching over you and

ready to punish wrongful deeds becomes extremely useful!

Dominic Johnson and Jesse Bering believe that over time, societies that embraced the concept

of a 'punishing deity' would fare better and survive longer than societies that didn't

believe in supernatural punishment.

A 2003 study by Harvard University researchers Robert J. Barro and Rachel M. McCleary found

that in developed countries, nations, where belief in hell outweighed belief in heaven,

had a higher Gross Domestic Product (GDP), seemingly supporting the aforementioned argument.

However, not all scientists endorse this view.

Evolutionary scientist Nicolas Baumard and anthropologist Pascal Boyer, in a paper published

in Evolutionary Psychology in 2013, pointed out that many ancient societies, including

the highly developed civilizations of Ancient Egypt, Greece, Rome, Aztec, Inca, and Maya,

had organized religions.

But a close examination of these civilizations' religions reveals that their gods, apart from

demanding sacrifices and loyalty, weren't overly concerned with human morality or how

humans treated each other.

Those familiar with Greek mythology know that many gods in Greek myths had dubious moral

standards.

Yet, these aforementioned civilizations didn't stagnate or fare worse than others with 'moralized

religions' due to their lack of such beliefs.

Therefore, they challenge the theory that supernatural punishment serves as a driving

force for societal development.

On the contrary, they believe the causality is the other way around.

Present-day religions lean towards moralization because humans have evolved moral intuitions,

and religions that align with these intuitions resonate more with people, ensuring their

continuity.

Does belief of hell cause psychological trauma?

Should parents use the fear of hell to scare their children?

Wow~ So the belief in hell has so many benefits?

Not only does it enhance societal stability but also promotes economic development?

Dear parents, please hold on a moment.

Before you attempt to use the fear of hell to scare the children, making them unable

to sleep at night, it might be wise to consider a few issues.

Firstly, as Azim F. Shariff mentioned, his research only demonstrates that the belief

in hell correlates with crime rates and GDP.

But "correlation" does not equate to "causality."

Furthermore, even though a carefully designed "cheating experiment" seems to indirectly

suggest a causality between hell and crime, this study lies within the domain of social

sciences.

Given the myriad of interconnected factors in a societal system, even with experimental

processes, we cannot be entirely certain if the study's theory can be applied in everyday

decisions.

Moreover, even if the belief in hell does indeed foster societal stability and boost

GDP, according to another study released in 2014 by Shariff and Lara Aknin, a psychologist

from Simon Fraser University, the price for believing in hell might be a decline in personal

happiness and life satisfaction.

This research utilized data from the Gallup World Poll of 455,104 samples from 155 countries

taken between 2005 and 2009.

Participants were asked questions like "How happy have you been these days?" and "Did

you laugh yesterday?"

to assess their life satisfaction and happiness levels.

Then, this data was analyzed in conjunction with religious values data from the World

Value Survey and European Values Surveys.

The analysis showed that the difference between the percentage of a country's population believing

in heaven and that believing in hell correlates positively with happiness levels.

Essentially, the more a nation leans towards believing in heaven, the happier its people

are; the more it leans towards believing in hell, the less happy they are.

However, this statistical analysis only proves a correlation between the belief in hell and

happiness levels.

It doesn't support the hypothesis that "belief in hell leads to decreased happiness."

(For instance, it might be that those with more miserable lives tend to believe in hell,

rather than believing in hell causing unhappiness.)

To further establish a causal relationship, they took a more "individual" approach, using

a priming technique to study the same topic.

They recruited 422 participants and randomly divided them into three groups.

Each group was asked to write a short essay of 100-200 words on "heaven," "hell," or "what

did you do yesterday?"

Then, they were asked to rate their mood after writing, assessing emotions like "happiness,"

"sadness," "guilt," "security," "fear," "shame," or "calmness" on a scale from 1 (very slight

or none) to 5 (very strong).

The result was that those who wrote about heaven felt no significant difference in mood

compared to those who wrote about "what they did yesterday" (aka control group).

However, those who wrote about hell, regardless of their religious beliefs, tended to feel