← Back to Dr. Julian Okafor

Why We Need Stories: The Evolutionary Case for Fiction

2 min read

Stories Predate Writing by Tens of Thousands of Years

The oldest known cave paintings, at Chauvet-Pont-d'Arc in France, are approximately 36,000 years old. They depict animals in motion. They tell a story. The impulse to narrate appears to be as old as the impulse to make art, and both predate literacy by orders of magnitude. Every human culture that has ever been documented tells stories. They tell them around fires. They tell them in temple paintings. They encode them in oral traditions that can survive for thousands of years without writing. The universality of storytelling is the first clue that it is not optional.

The Cognitive Function of Fiction

Cognitive scientists have proposed several overlapping explanations for why fiction exists. The most compelling is the simulation hypothesis, developed most thoroughly by researcher Keith Oatley. The argument is that fiction functions as a flight simulator for social cognition. Social life is extraordinarily complex. Navigating relationships, predicting behavior, managing cooperation and competition among dozens or hundreds of people requires a level of cognitive sophistication that is metabolically expensive to develop and maintain. Fiction allows the brain to run social simulations at low cost. Reading a novel or hearing a story about betrayal, loyalty, grief, or conflict activates the same neural networks that process real social experience, but without actual consequences. Brain imaging studies have shown that reading fiction and engaging in real social reasoning activate overlapping regions of the default mode network. Your brain processes a character's intentions using the same machinery it uses to model the intentions of actual people.

Storytelling as Social Glue

Robin Dunbar, the anthropologist who proposed that human brain size correlates with social group size, has also argued that storytelling may have replaced social grooming as the mechanism for bonding large groups. Chimpanzees bond through physical grooming, but they can only groom one individual at a time. This limits primate group size. Language allowed humans to groom at scale. You can tell a story to twenty people simultaneously and create shared emotional experience, shared values, and shared identity. A tribe that can align around a narrative is more cohesive than one that cannot. This may explain why shared stories, whether religious texts, national myths, or the same television series, have such power to create in-group identity. The story is not decoration on top of the social bond. The story is part of how the bond is built.

A Brief Detour Into Narrative Transportation

Psychologists Melanie Green and Timothy Brock developed the concept of narrative transportation in the late 1990s to describe what happens when a person is fully absorbed in a story. Transported readers show reduced counterarguing, higher emotional engagement, and lasting changes in beliefs and attitudes. They discovered, perhaps uncomfortably, that narrative transportation is one of the most reliable mechanisms for belief change that exists. More reliable, in many documented cases, than factual argument. Politicians and advertisers understood this intuitively for centuries. The researchers just gave it a name.

What This Means for the Stories We Choose

If fiction is a cognitive and social technology, then what you read and watch is not merely entertainment. It is practice. The characters you spend time with become models for behavior. The social worlds you inhabit in fiction shape what you consider normal or possible. Research by Raymond Mar has found that heavy fiction readers show higher scores on tests of empathy and theory of mind than heavy nonfiction readers, with the effect persisting after controlling for baseline differences in personality. Reading fiction appears to actually improve the capacity for social cognition it is designed to exercise. This does not mean all fiction is equally good or that nonfiction is inferior. It means the ancient human instinct to gather around a story was not naive. It was, for most of human history, one of the most important things a person could do.

Want to discuss this with Orvyn?

No signup needed · Start chatting instantly

Ask Orvyn About This →
Post on X Facebook Reddit