Religion Instinct?!

[Sriram]

Hi everyone,

Are spiritual beliefs an inevitable consequence of evolution?

http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20190529-do-humans-have-a-religion-instinct

*************

Andrew Newberg, a neuroscientist who studies the brain in light of religious experience, has spent his career following this hunch. “If you contemplate God long enough,” he writes in How God Changes Your Brain, “something surprising happens in the brain. Neural functioning begins to change. Different circuits become activated, while others become deactivated. New dendrites are formed, new synaptic connections are made, and the brain becomes more sensitive to subtle realms of experience. Perceptions alter, beliefs begin to change, and if God has meaning for you, then God becomes neurologically real.”

When you begin to do some kind of practice like ritual, over time that area of brain appears to shut down,” he said. “As it starts to quiet down, since it normally helps to create sense of self, that sense of self starts blur, and the boundaries between self and other – another person, another group, God, the universe, whatever it is you feel connected to – the boundary between those begins to dissipate and you feel one with it.”

The other part of the brain heavily involved in religious experience is the frontal lobe, which normally help us to focus our attention and concentrate on things, says Newberg. “When that area shuts down, it could theoretically be experienced as a kind of loss of willful activity – that we’re no longer making something happen but it’s happening to us.”

**************

Cheers.

Sriram

[Roses]

The idea of god screwed up my brain when I was a kid. It was a relief when I lost my faith.

[Walter]

Sriram

the author of the link, Brandon Ambrosino , tells a good tale but I would rather read the actual papers of the scientists he refers to and get the real story . Interpretations can be misleading and biased

thanks anyway

[SteveH]

Yes, they probably are: our self-awareness and capacityfor abstract thought inevitably led to religion. That, however, says nothing one way or the other about the truth or otherwise of religion.

[ekim]

Sriram

the author of the link, Brandon Ambrosino , tells a good tale but I would rather read the actual papers of the scientists he refers to and get the real story . Interpretations can be misleading and biased

thanks anyway

Here is Andrew Newberg's web site ..... http://www.andrewnewberg.com/
Try the Neurotheology link.

[Walter]

Here is Andrew Newberg's web site ..... http://www.andrewnewberg.com/
Try the Neurotheology link.

thanks for the link

on reading I detect a religious bias on the part of Andrew Newberg . What do you think ekim?

[Enki]

Hi everyone,

Are spiritual beliefs an inevitable consequence of evolution?

http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20190529-do-humans-have-a-religion-instinct

*************

Andrew Newberg, a neuroscientist who studies the brain in light of religious experience, has spent his career following this hunch. “If you contemplate God long enough,” he writes in How God Changes Your Brain, “something surprising happens in the brain. Neural functioning begins to change. Different circuits become activated, while others become deactivated. New dendrites are formed, new synaptic connections are made, and the brain becomes more sensitive to subtle realms of experience. Perceptions alter, beliefs begin to change, and if God has meaning for you, then God becomes neurologically real.”

When you begin to do some kind of practice like ritual, over time that area of brain appears to shut down,” he said. “As it starts to quiet down, since it normally helps to create sense of self, that sense of self starts blur, and the boundaries between self and other – another person, another group, God, the universe, whatever it is you feel connected to – the boundary between those begins to dissipate and you feel one with it.”

The other part of the brain heavily involved in religious experience is the frontal lobe, which normally help us to focus our attention and concentrate on things, says Newberg. “When that area shuts down, it could theoretically be experienced as a kind of loss of willful activity – that we’re no longer making something happen but it’s happening to us.”

**************

Cheers.

Sriram

I think that the article you link to has some very interesting ideas. Foremost amongst these is the idea that our penchant towards religion is a result of our evolution. I particularly liked the Dunbar(whom I've got a lot of time for) explanation of ritual as a form of grooming in such a social species as ours.

Speaking as a person who has experienced periods of so called 'transcendence' (in my case almost all linked to nature in some form) my take on it is that our evolutionary tendency towards empathy has a great deal to do with it. Empathy is a very useful survival tool, but I suggest that this ability can, in certain heightened instances, allow us to believe we are relating to everything around us such that our sense of self is diminished accordingly.

Lost in the awe at the beauty around me, I must have slipped into a state of heightened awareness…It seemed to me, as I struggled afterward to recall the experience, that self was utterly absent: I and the chimpanzees, the earth and trees and air, seemed to merge, to become one with the spirit power of life itself…Never had I been so intensely aware of the shape, the color of the individual leaves, the varied patterns of the veins that made each one unique. It was almost overpowering. —Jane Goodall, Reason for Hope

This quote is taken from this article, Sriram, which is well worth reading and is a worthwhile attempt to describe such experiences in scientific language

https://medium.com/s/spirits-in-your-brain/how-does-neuroscience-explain-spiritual-and-religious-experiences-3ef8c2f50339

[SusanDoris]

Impossible to tell - since you never define those 'spiritual beliefs'.

[Maeght]

Hi everyone,

Are spiritual beliefs an inevitable consequence of evolution?

http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20190529-do-humans-have-a-religion-instinct

*************

Andrew Newberg, a neuroscientist who studies the brain in light of religious experience, has spent his career following this hunch. “If you contemplate God long enough,” he writes in How God Changes Your Brain, “something surprising happens in the brain. Neural functioning begins to change. Different circuits become activated, while others become deactivated. New dendrites are formed, new synaptic connections are made, and the brain becomes more sensitive to subtle realms of experience. Perceptions alter, beliefs begin to change, and if God has meaning for you, then God becomes neurologically real.”

When you begin to do some kind of practice like ritual, over time that area of brain appears to shut down,” he said. “As it starts to quiet down, since it normally helps to create sense of self, that sense of self starts blur, and the boundaries between self and other – another person, another group, God, the universe, whatever it is you feel connected to – the boundary between those begins to dissipate and you feel one with it.”

The other part of the brain heavily involved in religious experience is the frontal lobe, which normally help us to focus our attention and concentrate on things, says Newberg. “When that area shuts down, it could theoretically be experienced as a kind of loss of willful activity – that we’re no longer making something happen but it’s happening to us.”

**************

Cheers.

Sriram

Makes sense. All down to how the brain is wired.

[Udayana]

Makes sense. All down to how the brain is wired.

hmm... so some people have brains that perceive (some kind of) god and some don't ... some can learn how to do it ... does this tell us anything about what is real or not?

 

[Walter]

hmm... so some people have brains that perceive (some kind of) god and some don't ... some can learn how to do it ... does this tell us anything about what is real or not?

Nope!

[Maeght]

hmm... so some people have brains that perceive (some kind of) god and some don't ... some can learn how to do it ... does this tell us anything about what is real or not?

No.

[Sriram]

Makes sense. All down to how the brain is wired.

So, there you go!  As I keep saying, some people have a natural ability to experience spiritual aspects of life. Some don't.  Maybe it can be learnt and depending on the person it may be relatively easy or very difficult.  It shows that there is a 'faculty' that enables spiritual experience.

Its not just, 'if you can see it, why can't I'?  Or...'If you can't show us the evidence, it cannot exist'! 

Also, the experiences cannot be brushed off as 'its all just brain wiring'.  Eye sight, hearing, taste etc. are all dependent on brain wiring, but that doesn't mean they don't connect us to real things. 

[SteveH]

Also, the experiences cannot be brushed off as 'its all just brain wiring'.  Eye sight, hearing, taste etc. are all dependent on brain wiring, but that doesn't mean they don't connect us to real things.

Someone born blind can be convinced that light exists by the evidence: they know that people have eyes, even if theirs don't work, and they can understand how images are focussed on the retina. Similarly with sound for someone born deaf. There is, however, no organ you can point to which enables you to be aware of a spiritual realm, nor can you explain a mechanism whereby you pick up the signal, or what it consists of. Many people have religious experiences, and they may be of great value to them, and to others as well if they inspire great art or acts of altruism - I'm not ridiculing or down-playing them - but there's no evidence that they refer to anything objective.

[Sriram]

Hi Steve,

The point is that, its not about evidence. Just as blind people realize that a majority of people experience something that they are not able to, because of the absence of a specific faculty, atheists also should realize that there is something that many people are able to experience that they themselves are not able to.  The above article points out the fact that the brain wiring may be different or missing in some people, for whatever reason. 

Its not just...'if you can't show us the evidence, it is obviously delusional'.

[Roses]

Hi Steve,

The point is that, its not about evidence. Just as blind people realize that a majority of people experience something that they are not able to, because of the absence of a specific faculty, atheists also should realize that there is something that many people are able to experience that they themselves are not able to.  The above article points out the fact that the brain wiring may be different or missing in some people, for whatever reason. 

Its not just...'if you can't show us the evidence, it is obviously delusional'.

If you can't show us any evidence to support your claims, the jury must be out as to whether they have any credence.

[ekim]

thanks for the link

on reading I detect a religious bias on the part of Andrew Newberg . What do you think ekim?

I think he is exploring the possible link between religious and spiritual practices and psychology and neurology.  I think neurotheology is not the best word to use as it implies a theo or god, whereas practices such as yoga and meditation are not necessarily associated with theology.  He claims that many studies have demonstrated that religious and spiritual practices have a beneficial effect on human psychology and so I suppose that he might be motivated to spread the good news in a different way to religious scripture.

[Walter]

I think he is exploring the possible link between religious and spiritual practices and psychology and neurology.  I think neurotheology is not the best word to use as it implies a theo or god, whereas practices such as yoga and meditation are not necessarily associated with theology.  He claims that many studies have demonstrated that religious and spiritual practices have a beneficial effect on human psychology and so I suppose that he might be motivated to spread the good news in a different way to religious scripture.

from what I've seen on YouTube of him talking about his work , he seems to accept god as a reality (without actually saying it)but different people have their own description of it and its the individuals' perception that determines their experiences.

The term neurotheology is very unfortunate and should not be used in scientific research into this subject. it is misleading and presumptuous , as if to say I've already reached my conclusions before I start

[jeremyp]

Hi Steve,

The point is that, its not about evidence. Just as blind people realize that a majority of people experience something that they are not able to, because of the absence of a specific faculty, atheists also should realize that there is something that many people are able to experience that they themselves are not able to.

Rubbish. Many atheists have spiritual experiences. The difference is that they don't multiply entities in order to explain them.

The above article points out the fact that the brain wiring may be different or missing in some people, for whatever reason. 

Its not just...'if you can't show us the evidence, it is obviously delusional'.

Or maybe they have extra wiring: a self bullshit detector, if you like.

The thing is that, even if it is true that the "wiring of the brain" makes you more susceptible or less susceptible to religious experiences (and, yes, I reckon it is plausible) it is fatal to your argument. If proved true, it would be absolute proof that religiosity and spirituality are phenomena of the human mind and not caused by something external to it.

[SusanDoris]

Someone born blind can be convinced that light exists by the evidence: they know that people have eyes, even if theirs don't work, and they can understand how images are focussed on the retina. Similarly with sound for someone born deaf. There is, however, no organ you can point to which enables you to be aware of a spiritual realm, nor can you explain a mechanism whereby you pick up the signal, or what it consists of. Many people have religious experiences, and they may be of great value to them, and to others as well if they inspire great art or acts of altruism - I'm not ridiculing or down-playing them - but there's no evidence that they refer to anything objective.

Slight quibble: 'religious experiences' are experiences which faith believers label religious, but which (most) non-believers do not.

ETA JeremyP #18 seconded.

[Enki]

Rubbish. Many atheists have spiritual experiences. The difference is that they don't multiply entities in order to explain them.

Or maybe they have extra wiring: a self bullshit detector, if you like.

The thing is that, even if it is true that the "wiring of the brain" makes you more susceptible or less susceptible to religious experiences (and, yes, I reckon it is plausible) it is fatal to your argument. If proved true, it would be absolute proof that religiosity and spirituality are phenomena of the human mind and not caused by something external to it.

I agree with you. The fact that some people are more susceptible to spiritual experiences than others in no way suggests that there is some sort of overlying consciousness at work. All it suggests is that the human brain is capable of such experiences which can be interpreted in a myriad of different ways, often linked to the culture and upbringing of the person experiencing such an experience. Much more sensible is to analyse and attempt to measure such experiences and attempt to find out as much as possible about such experiences, something which is being done and with some success.

Sriram's interpretation of such experiences is pure conjecture without any evidence whatever. He seems to me to be locked in to his own cultural background in seeking to explain such phenomena instead of trying to take a more objective and expansive approach. Perhaps, as you say, his skeptical abilities have not developed, and therefore we should not be too hard on him.

[Walter]

I agree with you. The fact that some people are more susceptible to spiritual experiences than others in no way suggests that there is some sort of overlying consciousness at work. All it suggests is that the human brain is capable of such experiences which can be interpreted in a myriad of different ways, often linked to the culture and upbringing of the person experiencing such an experience. Much more sensible is to analyse and attempt to measure such experiences and attempt to find out as much as possible about such experiences, something which is being done and with some success.

Sriram's interpretation of such experiences is pure conjecture without any evidence whatever. He seems to me to be locked in to his own cultural background in seeking to explain such phenomena instead of trying to take a more objective and expansive approach. Perhaps, as you say, his skeptical abilities have not developed, and therefore we should not be too hard on him.

I tend to agree with your last paragraph enki .

That's why I asked him for a personal example but to no avail .

[Roses]

Throughout my life I have had more experiences of what many would term as 'paranormal' than most people. I am still looking for a natural explanation for them.

[Walter]

I am quite prepared to share a personal example of what could be classed as a 'mystical or religious ' experience which lasted about 3 days for analysis if that would persuade Sriram to share just one of his .

[ekim]

I am quite prepared to share a personal example of what could be classed as a 'mystical or religious ' experience which lasted about 3 days for analysis if that would persuade Sriram to share just one of his .

Go ahead and see what happens.