It's an interesting hypothesis alright and one I've come across too. There is certainly weight behind the idea but it's still just a theory and like much of the subject matter it evolved from itself, it may never be possible to prove or disprove either way.
I don’t think it is necessarily a matter of not being able to prove it or disprove it. The theory of evolution is one that has already been proven to work among a variety of samples with all sorts of manifestations. The concept that things most suited to survive will survive and will morph and adapt as improvements occur is a proven one. The car that you drive is an example of evolution, so is the cell phone you use to make calls and the computer you use to write messages. None of those things “popped” into existence on their own. They are products of a long process of evolution, with human beings and our needs and discoveries playing the role of the agent of selection.
It is also a theory that exists as it relates to language. In the video, Dr. Dennett makes reference to the theory of language evolution in which language is viewed essentially as its own entity, its own organism, its own animal, if you will. It spread among human beings much in the same way that a virus would spread, morphing, adapting, and evolving, creating distinct species of language as it did. It was an idea that I was first introduced to as I studied language, though I never fully appreciated the genius behind it until recently. Language displays a symbiotic relationship with human beings. It exists alongside us to our benefit
and to its benefit. Verbal language exists in our minds with minimal stewardship. Written language, however, requires our care and cultivation to survive, much in the same way that domesticated animals depend on us for their survival.
As it relates to religion, if we view it as its own independent
natural ideological organism, then it competes for the space within our minds where it exists. To do this, it will find itself most successful if it evolves into something that also brings value to the host. It is a form of domestication. Tobacco, corn, sugar, wheat, cotton, coffee, and marijuana, for example, are plants that have done extremely well because they have proven themselves beneficial to another organism, namely, human beings. As we have found those crops useful, pleasurable, edible, etc, we have actively sought to keep them in existence. They depend on us, but we also ensure their survival. Religions operate in much the same way. They give comfort, explanation, solidarity, and the feeling of religious bliss that adherents report. The cost of this to us is that it takes up the spaces in our minds that relate to exploration, creativity, logical deduction, etc. This is not necessarily a harmful thing. In fact, religion, like the aforementioned plants, thrives the most when we
don’t view it as harmful but instead come to see it as something useful.
Other factors come into play as well. A religion that provides the mental comfort of belief in a heaven is more likely to survive. The same is true for a religion that induces fear through belief in a hell. A religion that hijacks art, music, or architecture, or armies---phenomena that humans have found pleasurable or useful—will be more likely to survive. Religions that provide guidance for structuring
Topic: The Religious Mind Parasite