When the International Conference on the Evolution of Religion convened Wednesday at the Makaha Resort, it brought together scholars and philosophers such as retired U.S. ambassador Carleton Coon and best-selling author Daniel Dennett to talk about the evolutionary theory of religion.

Topics for the conference, which ends Monday, range from Westmont College biologist Jeff Schloss' talk on "The Joke of Religion: Faith, Human and Internalized Signals" to humanism, discussed by Coon, vice president of the American Humanist Association.

Since Jason Slone of Webster University, an author versed in evolutionary psychology, had one of the ... er ... sexiest topics on the agenda, "The Attraction of Religion: A Sexual Selectionist Account," we asked him these five questions:

Q. What's evolutionary psychology?

A. It's the use of evolutionary theory to explain why humans do what they do. It's the scientific study of human behavior through an evolutionary perspective. Evolutionary biologists will explain why animals and plants do what they do by using evolutionary biology; evolutionary psychology is the same thing, only applied to humans.

Q. What's "evolution of religion"?

A. We think religion has been with us since the earliest homo sapiens, who buried their dead and made pictures of mythical figures (ghosts, demons, gods and goddesses). Some think religion is product of our brain functioning, but the question we're asking in this conference is: What benefits do people get from being religious, if any?

Q. Where do you stand on that?

A. I think (religion) is adaptive, that it provides benefits for some people, but with the caveat that what's good for one species might be bad for another. For me, it's good for me to eat meat, but not for animals. It can be adaptive or not.

Q. You talked yesterday about how our attraction to religion might be the result of sexual selection. Discuss.

A. One of the things evolutionary biologists have been fascinated by is mating behaviors.

Example: a bower bird found in Australia. During mating season, the male will build bowers, a nest-like construction in open areas on the ground, then decorate them with all kinds of accessories: feathers, berries, leaves, anything bright, colorful and striking. Males compete with others to build the best bowers. Some will even risk their own lives to steal from other bowers.

For biologists, this is strange business, for a bird to waste all this time and energy on risky and costly behavior ... until you watch the female bower birds. During mating season, females go from one bower to next, seemingly judging, until they choose one by mating with him.

Sexual selection theory says that males typically show off to attract females. Males best at showing off typically reproduce better than those who aren't as good. This can be applied to human behavior.

There's a reason why rich men drive BMWs. It's been shown scientifically that women seem to be attracted to men who have resources.

My theory is that sexual selection can explain why people are religious. When people begin to think about long-term spouses, we want the same type of features in a mate: honesty, trustworthiness, kindness, fondness for children, good parenting skills. In short, we are looking for a mate who is going to invest in family.

A good trick for (signaling these traits) is to show you're religious, because religions cultivate those particular traits.

Q. What about the fact that people seem to take a break from religion during their courtship years?

A. That's something I've been studying, actually.

College students, even though they have lower rates (of churchgoing) when they're away from home, still have the same traits. When asked about how desirable religiosity vs. atheism was out of 13 features, atheism ranked dead last.

The other interesting part of the study was that for men, having a potential wife be religious was not at all important, but for women, it's more important that males be religious.

That tends to fit sexual selection theory: Women should be choosier because they have most to lose in a relationship.