Brain Surgery Linked To Sensation of Spirituality

the3stars writes "'Removing part of the brain can induce inner peace, according to researchers from Italy. Their study provides the strongest evidence to date that spiritual thinking arises in, or is limited by, specific brain areas. This raises a number of interesting issues about spirituality, among them whether or not people can be born with a strong propensity towards spirituality and also whether it can be acquired through head trauma." One critic's quoted response: "It's important to recognize that the whole study is based on changes in one self-report measure, which is a coarse measure that includes some strange items."

Comments

Frist

[Hognoxious]

Frist ... where was I? ... my brain has disapno carrier

Re:Frist

[EricTheO]

Reminds me of my favorite misunderstood song lyric: "I can see clearly now my brain is gone."

Yeah, it's called blissful ignorance

[elrous0]

Yeah, you can make someone a lot happier with a lobotomy too. And stupid people who don't *use* their brains are often amused by the human equivalent of shiny keys (aka "reality television"). And people who drug themselves into a brainless stupor are are often in a complete euphoria (even a rat-infested, filthy trailer becomes paradise with just a little dab of meth).

But the rest of us, stuck with all of our fully-functional brains, are forced to sometimes contemplate serious matters that aren't so happy. Sure, we sometimes get depressed. But humanity probably wouldn't make much scientific, intellectual, or cultural progress if everyone was walking around every day drugged-up and lobotomized, with stupid goddamn grins on their faces.

Re:Yeah, it's called blissful ignorance

[Hatta]

It's not quite so simple. Remember that Newton was highly religious. It would be hard to describe him as not having a fully functional brain.

Re:Yeah, it's called blissful ignorance

[JerryLove]

Why would that be hard to do? Geniuses often have brain abnormalities leading to schitzophrenia, paranoia, depression, or autism. Why would religion be any different?

Also, it would be a mistake to confuse tendancies with hard-fast rules. That a part of the brain affects congnative decisions doesn't remove the role of cognition.

Re:Yeah, it's called blissful ignorance

[jollyreaper]

Yeah, you can make someone a lot happier with a lobotomy too.

Not me. I'd rather have a bottle in front of me than a frontal lobotomy.

Re:Yeah, it's called blissful ignorance

[__aastpl2241]

at the time of newton if you were a declared atheist, you would have gone into serious serious problems, falling apples and math would have been your last concern

Re:Yeah, it's called blissful ignorance

[Mister Whirly]

So I'm really suspicious of a test that says one person is "feeling" more spiritual than another person since that isn't even how it works.

Wow, a religious person having a hard time believing something that can be scientifically proven that contradicts their own personal views that cannot be scientifically proven. There's a first.

Re:Yeah, it's called blissful ignorance

[hey!]

Well, a lobotomy reduces the patient's capacity for introspection and self-consciousness. So what you write is true of lobotomies.

That said, it's premature to characterize these results as "blissful ignorance". In fact the researchers pinpoint two areas: the right angular gyrus and left inferior parietal lobe. It's intriguing that both of these areas are related to arithmetic abilities, but that's all the result is -- intriguing. We don't know whether it's the same thing going on in both cases, or whether either case is related it any way to what we think of as "spirituality".

You can look at the things these areas of the brain are supposed to do and make all kinds of interesting conjectures, but it could be something as simple as some of these patients not being able to understand the sense of the questions being put the them, or others not being able to monitor the kinds of emotional sensations they're being asked to report on. One area is believed to be used in the understanding of metaphors, the other in terms of bodily awareness.

Re:Yeah, it's called blissful ignorance

[HTH NE1]

or do you realize [God] is there and strive to live differently as a result?

Sometimes living differently isn't better, especially for those around you.

Put another way: don't make me strive to live differently; you wouldn't like me when I live differently.

I profess nothing more than what Jesus did: Love everyone even if they hate you.

Have you tried professing it without name-dropping Jesus?

Re:Yeah, it's called blissful ignorance

[SleazyRidr]

You must consider the times in which he lived. Other people have mentioned that not being Christian was rather dangerous, but I think it's even simpler than that.

Newton was on the search for truth. He was also quite interested in the occult. He didn't know where the truth lay, so he searched everywhere until he found it.

Of course, now we can stand on his shoulders and see further than he did but no-one should forget that he was the one laying the foundations for what we take for granted today.

Re:Yeah, it's called blissful ignorance

[gestalt_n_pepper]

Again. No universal definition of "spiritual" exists. An australian abo, a Buddhist, or a Muslim Sufi all see it differently.

I, and probably most of the people on Digg or Reddit, don't hate religious people OR Christians. I suspect that they DO hate it when small groups of "spiritual people" of sect X decide to legislate political matters based on unprovable, mythologically based views of the world. This affects everyone directly and has provably cause great harm to gays, jews, puritans and anabaptists.

Whether the universe was created by an omniscient superbeing(s) or not, does it matter? None of them have shown up this morning offering to help me with anything, any more than I would show up at an anthill 100 miles north and offer to help ant number 3432. Besides, if they DO exist, all bets are off. They can effect your memory and make you believe anything they want.

Spirituality can well be a "feeling." There's no commonly accepted criterion. Many of my spiritual moments have include "feelings."

Re:Yeah, it's called blissful ignorance

[Narcocide]

That's very true however FWIW I read somewhere that Newton had claimed he'd gained many of his initial insights about physics and mathematics while in process of re-translating the bible to English. Only having read a couple recent popular English translations myself, it seems a bit strange as a source for that type of inspiration but I'd also read that he was not the only huge figure in science that claimed this.

I think maybe it is possible that there are times in human history when in certain societies being extremely religious may have actually been an enlightening pursuit... perhaps one of the only few available. Keep in mind there wasn't a lot of funding of public libraries or schools or even literature going on outside the walls of the church back then.

Re:Yeah, it's called blissful ignorance

[HeckRuler]

Yeah, you probably also prefer the more balanced approach of Fox News.

But you're right, in part, in that this does not invalidate spirituality. But it does explain spirituality. It's an attempt to accurately define what spirituality is. And it appears that it's chemicals in your head. It does not invalidate it any more then lightning is invalidated by knowing that it's a transfer of electrons.

Not that any of the grandparents implied that spirituality isn't real. Just your personal view of spirituality as some sort of mystic out-of-body experience.

But you know, I'm with you, fuck blind faith. In any form.

Re:Yeah, it's called blissful ignorance

[Mister Whirly]

Then you should have no problem that I believe that your "spirituality" is nothing more than chemicals in your brain giving you a "warm fuzzy feeling". Nothing wrong with that, I just achieve the same effects through gin, not religion.

Re:Yeah, it's called blissful ignorance

[Labcoat Samurai]

Finally I'd like to conclude that spirituality is not a "feeling". I don't wake up one day and say I feel more spiritual than another day. Spirituality is your relationship with God. Do you dismiss God and go about your way, or do you realize he is there and strive to live differently as a result?

It absolutely is a feeling. People don't arrive at faith in god through logic. They may employ post hoc rationalization to obfuscate the issue and try to convince themselves and others that they did, but "realizing God is there" is a spiritual feeling, not an intellectual deduction.

I'm reminded of the study in skeptic magazine that, to paraphrase, found that people who believed in god tended to claim that they arrived at their belief in rational ways, but that they think others arrived at their faith through feelings and a desire for comfort and a sense of purpose. I thought that was interesting. It indicates that people recognize feelings as a big motivator for belief in god, but that they are also uncomfortable with admitting to being anything less than perfectly rational. Your denial of spirituality being a feeling coupled with your focus on god defining your life and how you should live it indicates to me that you're the kind of person who needs that comfort and purpose from an outside source, but is uncomfortable admitting to it.

Re:Yeah, it's called blissful ignorance

[wealthychef]

Why do you think that happiness is the same as stupidity? In my experience, many people go from blissful ignorance (childhood) to unhappy ignorance (teenagers) to arrogant unhappiness (young adulthood) to resignation (midlife crisis) to mature joy. Some people skip various steps and there are others possible, of course. I'm just saying your view is extremely narrow and not particularly accurate. There are many very intelligent people who live very happy lives, laughing and loving their lives. Just because you are serene and have deep inner peace and happiness doesn't mean you never cry or don't get upset.

Re:Yeah, it's called blissful ignorance

[wealthychef]

just achieve the same effects through gin, not religion.
Alcohol does not give you the same effect as deep spiritual practice, at least for most people. I'm assuming you are not referring to the card game here. And religion is not the same as spirituality. You sir sound like you might be ignorant of a very important and beneficial part of life. I say this as an atheist.

Re:Yeah, it's called blissful ignorance

[wealthychef]

I think it's more subtle and complex than that. Religion is like a virus that has benefits to its host. It transmits certain successful memes and in exchange it replicates itself. It cannot be denied that simply telling people to "be good" does not motivate them to act wisely. But giving a loving environment to practice kindness and support for each other is what religion excels at. As an atheist, I wish I had more such structures for myself. I turn to mens teams and personal development for finding more evolved and kind people.

Re:Yeah, it's called blissful ignorance

[gd2shoe]

Newton would have been branded a heretic, but only because he had non-mainstream beliefs about the trinity. He was deeply religious. (I thought it was in a Nova program on Hulu, but I can't find it now.)

Re:Yeah, it's called blissful ignorance

[Mister Whirly]

If alcohol does not give you the same effect as deep spiritual practice, then you are drinking the wrong kind of gin. And cheap gin is not the same as fine spirits. You sir sound like you may be ignorant of this very important and beneficial part of life. I say this as someone with a sense of humor, who understands things like satire and tongue-in-cheek humor.

Re:Yeah, it's called blissful ignorance

[Albinoman]

Newton was also known for his work in alchemy. He enjoyed his share of share of toxins (like mercury). Don't get me wrong, Newton was sheer brilliance. I'm able to be taught calculus, but to make that leap intuitively is absolutely amazing. That doesn't mean he wasn't damaged.

I saw a video by Neil deGrasse Tyson called "God of the Gaps", highly recommended. He points out that even the most incredibly brilliant people invoke God add the edge of their intelligence. For Newton, he managed to come out with incredible breakthroughs in motion, energy, gravitation, and math. But when Newton couldn't mathematically balance the "6 planets" in stable orbits, he decides it must be God. He quits trying to understand and explore it after that, as do a great many intelligent people in history. The disturbing thing is that it means that that once "God" is accepted as an answer, they are either unable or unwilling to explore that subject further. God is the antithesis of discovery.

Re:Yeah, it's called blissful ignorance

[sznupi]

It's still hijacking. "A loving environment to practice kindness and support for each other" is family, often quite extended. And that's governed by more basic instincts. On the "loving" level, the succesful religions are mostly tapping what's already there. It's getting a bit fuzzy on the level of tribe; religion certainly can help it to be somewhat bigger and more stable, hence giving bonuses when competing (OTOH it also gave certain level of religious tolerance when larger loose society did form - "our gods" and "their gods" was just a fact of life).

But here's the kicker: historically typical "natural" faiths of such societies aren't held in much regard by many of most succesfull religions. And since the latter emphasise unity, it gave them the strenght to outcompete native faiths, forming much more integrated societies in the process. Which ultimatelly gave us agrarian, industrial and informational revolution...

I guess organised religions somewhat loosing relevance nowadays is related to the last revolution. Absolutist worldview present at their core suddenly doesn't work nearly as well when people have access to whole world at their fingertips; when they find themselves in a world not totally unlike of "loose tribal society"...in which completelly different kind of faiths worked.

Worked, and was replaced by stronger contestants. What will emerge this time?

Re:Yeah, it's called blissful ignorance

[erroneus]

Back in those days, to be taken seriously at all, one had to claim strong religious affiliation and belief. Hell, even today a person cannot become president of the U.S. without being Christian and attending a particular church. (Yeah, I know Jefferson was supposedly an atheist or agnostic, but some of his most famous quotes contain references to god which is kind of my point. He may have been atheist, but had to speak of god to people would accept him.)

And we all know what happens to people who cross the church... not good.

Re:Yeah, it's called blissful ignorance

[tftp]

He even published some religious writings along with his scientific work.

Let me rephrase it. Newton's scientific work included religion, since it was an integral part of the world at his time.

Re:Yeah, it's called blissful ignorance

[GNUALMAFUERTE]

You are right. Alcohol is not the same as Spirituality. The differences:

  - Alcohol is cheaper than religion
  - Alcohol will get you laid
  - Alcohol lets you sleep late on sundays
  - Alcohol doesn't judge you, your condom, or your abortion.
  - You don't have to wear ridiculous hats to drink Alcohol.
  - Alcohol produces less brain damage than religion.

Thank you, I'm here all week.

Re:Yeah, it's called blissful ignorance

[Jade_Wayfarer]

I agree with you absolutely. It's always puzzled me, how often people mix and confuse terms and definitions - 'spirituality' and' religion', 'religion' and 'catholicism', 'catholicism' and 'bat-shit crazy orthodoxal cults', piling them all together. By the way, 'agnostics' are, by original definition, spiritualists too - but 'agnosticism' and 'atheism' are mixed so badly, that now it sounds ridiculous.

I am, personally, do believe that science and scientists will someday recover and reclaim 'spiritualism' from all fanatics - religious and atheist alike. Putting emotions aside and calmly trying to understand 'how it all works' - that's what scientists do. And many great scientists of their time weren't atheists - from Newton and Leibniz to Bohr and Pauli. Quite contrary, their deep and clear understanding of nature's underlying mechanics lead them to aesthetic fascination with it's simplicity and beauty, which makes them much more spiritual people then some 'TV preachers'. If we knew more about their personalities, not only about their theories, maybe today we wouldn't spend so much time on such meaningless 'holywars'... joining our strengths in bashing Microsoft and RIAA, how it should be )

Re:Yeah, it's called blissful ignorance

[Hurricane78]

GP simply knows nothing about psychology/neurology. Religion is literally what one could call a simple form of... well... “schizophrenia”. Now this might leave some people insulted. But you have to know, that that is actually a useful tool, to keep us surviving. So if you call it “bad” depends on your point of view. (Like everything in psychology and every mutation.)

You see, humans MUST at all times have a working inner model of the outer world. Or else we are unable to predict any result of any of our actions. Which would leave us unable to follow any goal... to do anything useful. This, to the human brain, is probably the worst possible state, and literally results in the same strong fear as the fear of death. So we avoid it at any cost.

There are many ways to deal with this. Of course the most obvious one, is to try to understand it, trough playing with it, experimenting, acquiring more information about it. But what, if that it literally impossible? Like the question where the universe comes from?
Or what if we are mentally unable to make it fit with out known reality? We can’t just leave it there, because we would still know of that conflict, and stop being able to live our life.

So what to do?

Well. First there’s repression. Which basically is, when your brain shuts off one piece of knowledge from the rest of your brain. This often happens, after you experienced something so crass, that the association just spilled over, so that you link it to things it shouldn’t be linked to. Like when someone raped you and had a mustache, and now you get a sad feeling and pain down there, whenever you see someone with a mustache!
The problem is, that you will, because of that repression, not be able to remember that actual bad cause. But hate mustaches anyway, not knowing why.

But the worst-case scenario, is when you stop being able to trust the outside world, and don’t find any way to make it work or hide it. Then you end up with schizophrenia. Which is basically (simplified!), that you turn cause and effect on its head. You start to trust your inner model more, that new experiences from the real world.
Does that remind you of something? ^^
I must say that religion mostly still is a thousand times better than full scale schizophrenia. Like dangerous UV in sunlight, compared to powerful gamma rays, for your skin.

Now it’s obvious, that this is unrelated to intelligence. But to the ratio of what you know that does not fit, and what you can make fit. So a dumb person is more prone to it, because it is much harder to make it all fit. But can live a happy simple life.
Such people just have more needs for make do mechanisms, to survive. But is that bad per se? Evolution would not agree.

And someone like Newton... he likely was pretty intelligent. But my guess is, that he simply knew so much that he could not make sense of. He was able to make sense of some things. But others were just waaayyy out of everything conceivable in his time. So religion was a good way out, to not become crazy over questions he would never have been able to solve.

I, myself, can only solve the “where came the universe from” question, trough repression/ignorance. Some choose to use a “god”. Of course this still leaves the question open, where “god” came from.
Fun experiment: If you want to see this protective “Schweinehund” (as we in Germany call it) in full glory, go and try to push a religious person on answering where god came from? ^^ But please don’t bee too cruel, as I could just as well do this to your weak spots. ;)

Re:Yeah, it's called blissful ignorance

[GNUALMAFUERTE]

You did get a hangover, it lasts the rest of your life, and manifests itself as delusions and interest in tall hats.

There is no god. Deal with it.

The church

[Dyinobal]

Earlier today the Vatican issued a statement recommending this procedure for all individuals who are having independent thought. Claiming this will bring them closer to god.

Re:The church

[ircmaxell]

More news from the Vatican, "spreading the word of Christ" now involves a sledge hammer...

Re:The church

[Vendetta]

Hasn't it always?

Re:The church

[amirulbahr]

Some people around here seem to think the Pope is in charge of all of the Christian world. A post like that getting modded insightful shows the audiences ignorance in this regard. The truth of the matter is that the most fervent bible bashing, science hating, ultra-conservatives come from the ranks of American new age evangelicals.

The Catholic Church does not preach creationism. I went to Catholic schools and there was no blurring of the line between religion and science education.

I too am worried when people start giving scientific reasoning and religious dogma equal weight. I hate when people think they can solve their problems just by saying a prayer. Worst of all is when people look to trivial tricks and oddities and claim they are miracles as though the universe around them isn't miraculous enough as it is. I am not however too worried about the Catholic Church trying to take down science and reasoning as it doesn't have a recent history of doing so and even if it did most Catholics would resist that because they haven't been brought up that way.

Flamebait

[Hatta]

So, this is proof that religious people aren't using their whole brain then?

To be less inflammatory, this doesn't really change anything. For a religious person, they would accept that God created the brain in such a way that makes the spiritual experience possible. Why would there not be a physical substrate for that experience?

Re:Flamebait

[CorporateSuit]

FTFA: "But spirituality does not seem to involve exactly the same regions of the brain as religion."

I'm guessing it's more of a "lighted, windowed room at night" effect. Sit in a lighted room at night, and you can't see out the windows, because the information you're receiving is much more effective. Turn out the lights, and you can begin to see what's outside of your windows (perhaps a whole city). Perhaps our kinetics and structure (the part of the brain they were cutting up) keep us more grounded in immediacy? Perhaps that keeps us more worried and less "transcendant"? It sounds like they're just scratching at the surface, so it'll be interesting if they study this further.

Re:Flamebait

[Ethanol-fueled]

It's possible for theists to become atheists and vice-versa. Born-again Christians, after all, are among the most rabid religious fanboys.

It's not a predisposition to religion so much as it is predisposition to zeal.

Re:Flamebait

[CorporateSuit]

Plus it would help with the prejudice that religious people have against atheists.

Take a look at the comments for this article, keeping in mind that the article points out that its definition of "Spirituality" is neurologically different from "Religious" and let me know what the atheist club looks like.

Re:Flamebait

[IorDMUX]

So, this is proof that religious people aren't using their whole brain then?

You keep using that word.

I do not think it means what you think it means.

Re:Flamebait

[cjb658]

It's just a metaphor.

Re:Flamebait

[alexo]

For starters, by definition, an atheist must grant that that their belief "that there is no God" is not based on scientific principle.

you seem to be confusing atheism with anti-theism.

Similarly to the difference between immoral (not moral) and amoral (unrelated to morals), atheism is not "a belief that there is no god", it is "a lack of belief that there is a god" (plural included).

Atheism is the faith that you will not stand accountable for your actions.

That's a crock of hope and change.

Atheism is the belief that the choice of your actions, and therefore the responsibility for them, is ultimately yours.

The morally dead will choose atheism.

Tell me, who is the more "moral" person, the one who chooses morality because they fear a punishment or expect a reward from an ultimate authority, or the one that does so just because they feel that it is the right thing to do?

The baby-killing, wife-cheating, porn-addicted, sociopathic, sexual-experimenting person will choose atheism

And yet the atrocities committed in the name of religion vastly outnumber those committed in the name of atheism (or anti-theism).

Re:Flamebait

[npsimons]

In theory, this is true. In practice, it is not. If I dare to call myself a "free-thinking, religious individual" then 95% of atheists will roll their eyes and offer up some ridiculous strawman, as if on command.

Then I will say, "these people do not speak for me; I do NOT consider them to be rational freethinkers." Do you have the have the same integrity to speak against those who identify themselves as religious and spew forth hate?

For starters, by definition, an atheist must grant that that their belief "that there is no God" is not based on scientific principle.

Strawman: "atheism" = "a" (without) + "theism" (belief in a deity). Atheism is not a belief; it is a lack of belief; they are NOT the same. There is no faith in atheism, by definition.

The morally dead will choose atheism. The baby-killing, wife-cheating, porn-addicted, sociopathic, sexual-experimenting person will choose atheism as an attempt to escape their guilt.

Fuck. IHBT. Too bad that research shows exactly the opposite of what you claim (that is, those most likely to engage in sick sadistic, baby-killing, wife-cheating, sociopathic tendencies are the religious).

An Ig Nobel Prize candidate?

[K. S. Kyosuke]

Removing a part of brain makes you sensitive to things that AFAWK aren't there... Hemispherectomy, anyone with guru ambitions?

Ragu Soul

[handy_vandal]

The soul is to the body as "Italian-ness" is to Ragu Spaghetti Sauce: "It's In There!"

Re:Religion = beeing out of the mind

[CorporateSuit]

FTFA: "spirituality does not seem to involve exactly the same regions of the brain as religion."

No, but it gives religious people the chance to say that atheists love to jump to conclusions ;)

What conflict?

[Matey-O]

You are a thing. A Marvelous machine. If you are poked and prodded we can illicit love, hunger, fear...why NOT spirituality? It does not make the phenomena any less real, you've just figured out how to manipulate the machine to do it on command.

Re:What conflict?

[HeckRuler]

Agreed.
Simply because we've found the switch to turn it on doesn't lessen it's meaning. It puts a damper on the whole mind-body-soul trifecta, but that's been a wash for a while now. People are a sub-set of animals, your mind exists as a configuration of your brain, and those warm fuzzies you get from spiritual enlightenment will one day be regulated with a drug. The original purpose and meaning of spiritual enlightenment remains, just without the mysticism. Kind of like sex after it was discovered that it makes babies.

Of course, I'm a little worried about the day that religious nuts can literally over dose on god.

Not a new idea

[Idiomatick]

Neuroscientist VC Ramachandran (sp?) a bunch of years ago was dealing with patients that had temporal lobe epilepsy. The temporal lobe is in control of 'meaning', it is the part of your brain that recognizes objects for their significance. He found that after an episode the patients had overwhelming feeling of spirituality. The idea is that they were seeing meaning and importance in everything down to individual blades of grass. One of his patients refused any support since he believed he was a prophet and that it was his link to god. (I since have read that many prophets historically have been epileptics such as Ezekiel and Mohamed).

You can find the guy in NOVA (secrets of the mind). He also gave a talk or two on www.TED.com .

Re:Not a new idea

[Anonymous Coward]

And then there's the God Helmet...

Re:Not a new idea

[sznupi]

I can certainly vouch for this.

In my early teen years I was diagnosed with a form of this epilepsy. The thing not mentioned in the post above is that such form of spirituality goes away somewhat if the condition is dealt with quickly, as happened in my case. Few years later I stumbled upon some info and came to realize that I'm almost a textbook example (for short summary, see also http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geschwind_syndrome )

What many of you can't really grasp, without experiencing it, is how real it feels - basically the question about existence of spiritual part of reality doesn't come into it at all; it's just present, that's...obvious. Only after it lessens the grip, you might ask yourself "what was that all about"?

The thing that it's often exploited by religious "guidance" certainly doesn't help to escape. And with TLE being one of more underdiagnosed forms of epilepsy (heck, it was almost a chance in my case), I wouldn't be surpised if statistically significant number of deeply religious people had a mild form. In case of such, you end up arguing against what is...very much real.

Try LSD

[Anonymous Coward]

It does the same thing.

Re:Try LSD

[xealot]

I think most intelligent people who have used psychedelic drugs would attest to this. There's definitely certain things hardwired into our brains, and certain drugs can open up those areas for exploration. LSD and psilocybin both induce a predisposition for religious and spiritual thoughts, as well as many of the patterns and images found in the earliest of art.

Do you see God?

[Gandhi of War]

*whack*
How about now?

Well, duh

[Conchobair]

I could have told you that, after all, this isn't brain sur... er... nevermind.

TED Talk Covers Similar Case with Stroke

[Anonymous Coward]

http://www.ted.com/talks/jill_bolte_taylor_s_powerful_stroke_of_insight.html

This is my favourite

[Cryacin]

people can be born with a strong propensity towards spirituality and also whether it can be acquired through head trauma

I need spirituality like I need a hole in my head!

Weeellll... that's one way to get it I guess.

Re:This is my favourite

[Mister Whirly]

They already have it. It is called MDMA, which you already seem to be aware of. Get some of the pure crystalline form and I guarantee you a religious experience. (Not just some random pill that could contain any number of substances.) Listening to the first Stone Roses album also helps.

Re:This is my favourite

[Arthur Grumbine]

people can be born with a strong propensity towards spirituality and also whether it can be acquired through head trauma
Weeellll... that's one way to get it I guess.

Definitely adds a very interesting potential to the story of Saul (St. Paul) who was famous for persecuting the Christians before he was thrown from his horse on the road to Damascus, and saw "a light from heaven", after which he heard Jesus speak to him and was converted. The official story is that he saw the light first, and was then thrown from his horse - but head trauma has a funny way of messing with the memory of the sequence of events...

Re:This is my favourite

[crazycheetah]

Seems related to the Paul being the anti-christ theory that some are fond of. Definitely an interesting line of thought you can continuing adding on other points to (there's plenty out there, going several directions).

Re:This is my favourite

[hazem]

Here is an interesting lecture by Robert Sapolsky, "Evolution, religion, schizophrenia and the schizotypal personality", http://www.boingboing.net/2009/06/06/evolution-religion-s.html

It's an interesting talk about how while schizophrenia may be the result of a full expression of a recessive gene, the schizotypal may be a mild expression of the same gene, leading to people like shamans. That would tend to support your "born with a strong propensity"...

His recent graduation day talk at Stanford was, while not related (on the uniqueness of humans), even more interesting:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hrCVu25wQ5s

Re:Not quite precise...

[XanC]

You're thinking of Blaise Pascal.

Kooky

[ShakaUVM]

>>So, this is proof that religious people aren't using their whole brain then?

Err, no.

If there's a part of our brain devoted to religion/spirituality (and since it's such a large part of human experience, I wouldn't be surprised by it), then it means that *atheists* are not using their whole brain.

In fact, over time, the neural map for this region in strict atheists ought to atrophy, making them incapable of being spiritual. Which may or more may not be a good thing, depending on your perspective. But I'd bet that in most atheists this region would start getting used for religious-ish things that aren't precisely religions, like belief in ghosts or aliens (more atheists believe in alien abductions and ghosts than Christians), or Gaia ("The earthquake in Haiti was Mother Nature's way of punishing us for global warming!" --Danny Glover) or any one of a number of other ideas that are much less likely to be true than Christianity.

"Originally," my atheist friend told me, "there were four elements, earth wind water fire, that since then became self-conscious and then divided into all the elements of the periodic table." Ok, I said, what was water made of before we had hydrogen and oxygen? He couldn't answer that.

As much as atheists like to make fun of Christians believing in kooky notions like the beginning of the universe and universal human rights, it's nice to see that Cog Sci can explain why atheists believe in even kookier stuff.

New Westboro Baptist Church sign

[StefanJ]

GOD HATES BRAINS!

"Spiritual"

[mqduck]

They use the term "spirituality" like its a defined psychological term. They just chose some arbitrary ideas and declared them to be a measurement of spirituality. Perhaps the worst is "belief in a higher power". If "spiritual" is a basic mental state, then whether or not one agrees with the proposition that X exists is hardly a measure of that state. It would make more sense, but still be utterly bogus, to take belief in angels and an invisible man in the sky as a measure of psychosis.

Robert Sapolsky on Religion

[slasho81]

If you're interested in a quick introduction (19 minutes) to the neurobiology of religion, check this out: Part 1 Part 2.

Religious epiphanies from temporal lobe seizures

[__roo]

It's pretty well known that religious epiphanies and other feelings of religiosity, spirituality, or sensations of a "presence" can sometimes be linked to neurological events such as some temporal lobe seizures. (Wasn't this the plot for an episode of House?) It's common enough that there's a section on religious and paranormal experiences in the temporal lobe epilepsy Wikipedia page. There was a good BBC documentary a few years ago on this called "God on the Brain" (here's a transcript).

Picture = 1000 words

[200_success]

Put more simply...

Reverse Phrenology

[nitehawk214]

So Terry Pratchett was on to something when he invented the concept of reverse phrenology. Hitting someone in the head enough times will change their personality.

You're missing some awesome footage.

[copponex]

Of course, I'm a little worried about the day that religious nuts can literally over dose on god.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=STFT0C5Hu8M
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2STDH14aJVk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mjMRgT5o-Ig

Re:Enough of the faith bashing

[Labcoat Samurai]

Since a majority of humans believe a creator, or some entity/force outside of humanity(essentially, the spirituality this study links to), then I would tend to believe that the minority is missing something.

Excellent! So in theory, all we have to do to make something true is convince a majority of humans that it is true! I think the easiest way to do this is to kill people who disagree with you. Before long, you'll have a majority, and you can change the fundamental nature of the universe!

Good to know...

[bobdotorg]

Good to know that I might finally reach Zen nirvana, at least for a moment, as the zombies gnaw through my brain.

Re:Enough of the faith bashing

[dissy]

Wow.

While I do not look for opportunities to attack people who do not believe in God, I have had enough of this shit.

So you don't look for such opportunities, yet are making one right now.

Just because people believe in God(sorry, but he does exist and only a fool would attempt to "prove" otherwise), it does not mean they have an "altered mental status".

Are you sure? What is 'altered' to you? Just different from what you believe?

What you feel you believe does not change reality.
When doctors poke a piece of brain and consistently get the same reaction, it doesn't at all matter what you 'feel'. Either you agree with reality and are called 'right', or you state that what is happening in front of your eyes is not actually happening, and people call you 'wrong' (Among other bad names no doubt)

This sounds like someone's attempt to demean a group of people.

Well, sorry you read it that way, but it is not. "Action A gets reaction B" is all it is attempting to say.
And really not even that, only that in their very small sample and crude methods this can be inferred but is not enough to be considered 'proof'

Far from demeaning anyone, they are stating the results of a freaking survey!
Would you prefer they LIE about what their subjects told them to say?

What if I decided to go out and prove that homosexuality was from brain trauma? I will guarantee that people would ask for my head on a plate.

Actually almost every church in America would be behind you 110% and even help you try to prove that.

Since a majority of humans believe a creator, or some entity/force outside of humanity(essentially, the spirituality this study links to), then I would tend to believe that the minority is missing something.

Well, the majority of humans also felt slavery was perfectly OK. Guess the majority is right.

Another majority of people felt before that a specific minority shouldn't even exist, and began rounding them up for mass extinctions. You feel that is OK too since the majority must be right?

Most people also thought the sun orbits the earth. Guess since the majority thinks it, reality will bend to make it true.

As you admit to being one of those types who feels the mob is always correct no matter if they actually are or not, that says way more about you than if you believe in a god or not.
You are a horrible human being, and it has nothing to do with your belief in god, but how little you care about your fellow man.

Now go ahead and mod this as the flame it is (Because just like you, I've had enough of this shit as well)

Re:Enough of the faith bashing

[Nyder]

While I do not look for opportunities to attack people who do not believe in God, I have had enough of this shit. Just because people believe in God(sorry, but he does exist and only a fool would attempt to "prove" otherwise), it does not mean they have an "altered mental status". This sounds like someone's attempt to demean a group of people. What if I decided to go out and prove that homosexuality was from brain trauma? I will guarantee that people would ask for my head on a plate.

Since a majority of humans believe a creator, or some entity/force outside of humanity(essentially, the spirituality this study links to), then I would tend to believe that the minority is missing something.

I know this is flamebait, but it makes me think.

I don't believe in god. not the christian idea, or the jewish, or the arabs, nor the indians, nor any culture diety. Why? Because of human history. Man has been the same since the dawn of time. We lie, we deceive, we abuse power, and best yet, we lie to ourselves. For whatever reasons the various religons started, they all were created by man to give their life some sort of meaning.

Basicly, i would call the the "leap of faith" that religious peeps usually make.

Maybe thats what seperates me, the non believer over you, the believer. I can't make that leap. My mind stubbornly refuses to allow myself to believe in stories as, well, evidence that some greater power exists.

It's possible I'm a minority, with some sort of mental damage to my brain that doesn't allow me to believe what you do. Wait, i got that wrong. Sorry, my bad. I forgot, it's you religious peeps that apparently have the damage.

lol, i kid, really i do.

To add to the fun, i'm going to throw out something you won't live. evolution. ya, i know, it's a sin or something to even think that. but here's how it is. Religions are destroying the world. Religons have proven time and time again to cause wars, hatred, and forced beliefs on other cultures. And while you don't want to admit it, religons are losing their place in the mindsets of humans. I can't make the "leap of faith" because my brain has evolved past the point that it needs to accept such ideas to have some self worth.

I don't have to live my life for some reward when I die. I am more then happy accepting that when I die, that's it. It does not scare me, nor does it motivate me to live my life in any paticular way. I choose to be a nice person because I like how it makes me feel. I think for myself. I follow what I want. And guess what? It works.

Truth is, your scared to live on your own. Scared to think on your own, scared to consider that there is no point to life, other then living it. No greater power, no plan, nothing laid out with someone in charge knowing all and seeing all. Not sure why that is so scary, but whatever, I guess we all have our fears (i'm a bit afraid of heights, but I don't let it stop me), and guess our own ways of dealing with them.

My question is, how come I am tolerant of you, yet you aren't tolerant of me?