If God had wanted Man to think for himself, He would have given him a brain
It’s chicken and egg time. Which came first? Are our brains wired for God, or do performing religious activities rewire our brains to make us think there is a God?
Can “neurotheology” bridge the gap between religion and science?
If recent findings in “neurotheology” hold up, our meditating neurons, locked in the state called mindfulness, were radiating gamma waves at about 40 cycles per second, beating against the 50-hertz hum of the fluorescent lights. At the same time, parts of our cerebral cortex were growing infinitesimally thicker—another effect that researchers have associated with trancelike states. In the neurological search for the spiritual, there is no shortage of data. But pile it as high as you like, and you’re left staring across the same divide. Depending on your predisposition, you can interpret all these experiments in two different ways. The believers take them as scientific evidence for the reality of their visions, while the atheists claim more proof that God is all in your head.
#18, “So long, and thanks for all the fish”
#20 – TJGeezer,
I recently heard that they’ve done fMRIs of Tibetan Budhist monks. I bet they have the Nuns beat at interesting fMRIs.
#21 – Mike,
Good one. Enjoy surfing the bow waves on your next world.
the dinosaur came first. then the egg – then the chicken – then the chicken’s egg
The thing that I find remarkable about strident atheists is that their views must prevent them from enjoying many basic experiences if they spend any time thinking about them. Take, for instance, happiness; there are certain physiological changes that occur in a person that describes themselves as happy (their heart rate and temperature elevates slightly, endorphines released, etc.). We know that happy people tend to live longer. But, really, these physiological changes are far less great than those experienced by monks of the various spiritual traditions. Essentially, the train of thought that states so stridently that anything that can be in any way described as ‘just in the head’ does not exist leads to an end which negates things that we have all experienced, such as love, happiness, and sadness. themselves do not exist, and barring entirely emotionless people, I don’t see how they can reconcile their belief with their experience. Perhaps as someone who is not adherent to any one religion, but has had spiritual experiences, it is easier for me to pick sides, so I admit my bias.
As for those that wonder why God would create multiple religions, I ask what history they are reading. Clearly men made the multiple religions of this world, and if you dig down to those people whose philosophies became religious orders, you find that their beliefs share many commonalities (compassion, charity, forgiveness, tolerance, love). In other words, I would argue that it is foolish to propose that man’s weakness is the fault of the heavens. The future may indeed be a place without religion, but I doubt it will be a place without spirituality and belief, and I pray that the great saints and philosophers will be remembered less by the foolish things that were done in their names, and more by what they said.