God and Nature Summer 2022
Neurotheology: Finding Religiosity in the Brain |
|
By Toby Engelking
Stephen Jay Gould (1997) argued that science and religion could be described as “non-overlapping magisteria”—meaning that they each represent entirely different areas of enquiry. Psychology and neuroscience have often seen themselves as separate from the kind of science Gould was talking about, perhaps due to the seeming incongruence of psychologists’ quasi-religious philosophies such as Maslow’s (1943) search for self-actualisation, or perhaps due to Freudian-style reductionism, which claims that religion can be reduced to nothing more than unconscious wish fulfilment. Yet, I would like to suggest that Gould’s argument may well extend to psychology and neuroscience. Like the other sciences, these are also ill-equipped to divine the way things should be, such as how people should act.
Stephen Jay Gould (1997) argued that science and religion could be described as “non-overlapping magisteria”—meaning that they each represent entirely different areas of enquiry. Psychology and neuroscience have often seen themselves as separate from the kind of science Gould was talking about, perhaps due to the seeming incongruence of psychologists’ quasi-religious philosophies such as Maslow’s (1943) search for self-actualisation, or perhaps due to Freudian-style reductionism, which claims that religion can be reduced to nothing more than unconscious wish fulfilment. Yet, I would like to suggest that Gould’s argument may well extend to psychology and neuroscience. Like the other sciences, these are also ill-equipped to divine the way things should be, such as how people should act.
... a brain area that is tied to religious experience might just be the “agency detecting device” or stamp that we would expect a divine creator to apply. |
The limits of modern scientism (the use of science in realms beyond its power) come from the lens with which science views the world. Science is methodologically natural; it is a study of processes that operate within nature. We often forget that this is not a metaphysical claim; it is simply a method for enquiring about the world. Harking back to Hume’s (1793) is-ought fallacy: science says things about the way that the world is and not necessarily anything about the way the world ought to be. Science can describe the material world, including the basis of human behaviour and even which behaviours and mental states bring the most pleasure. Yet theology can describe which physical states and human behaviours are the desirable ones.
It is true that the age of post-enlightenment scientific enquiry has accumulated more knowledge than all other ages of human history combined. What’s more, the necessity for the materialist, reductionist framework in order for science to work is evident. Science must operate with the assumption that there is nothing more than the physical universe: Richard Dawkins once quipped that science would never work if we wrote off each anomalous data point as due to divine intervention (The God Delusion Debate, 2017). We must assume a deterministic picture of the universe for our studies to work.
Psychology and neuroscience often have more to say about religion than other sciences. Notable classic works on the topic include William James’ (1902) Varieties of Religious Experience and Freud’s (1927) The Future of an Illusion. In more recent times, a growing area of research comes from a field known as neurotheology—a field that aims to understand religion by understanding the workings of the brain.
Interestingly, it has often been argued that epileptic seizures which stimulate a particular region of the temporal lobe can explain the religiosity of many historical figures such as Fyodor Dostoevsky and even St Paul. Indeed, for this reason, epilepsy was known as “the sacred disease” (Straiton, 2020) to many ancient societies. In the 1980s, a man named Michael Persinger claimed that he had developed a helmet that stimulated just this region of the temporal lobe associated with religious experience. Persinger (1983) reported that 80% of participants reported a religious experience. Yet more recent studies have not been able to replicate these results, including, famously, a BBC documentary in which Richard Dawkins was subject to the helmet and found no such experience (Persinger vs Dawkins: The God Helmet, 2005). It is also true that Persinger used no control group; it does not take a psychologist to spot the placebo at work there!
Another famous experiment in the world of neurotheology was conducted by Dean Hamer. In 2005, he published a book titled The God Gene. Hamer claimed to have found a gene in human DNA which, depending on the allele people had, could reliably predict whether they believed in God or not. Despite the global attention which the book received, it was heavily criticised for Hamer’s seeming misunderstanding of genetics as well as his creative use of statistics. It is worth noting that Hamer is the same man that claimed to have discovered the “gay gene” in 1993 (Hamer et al., 1993).
However, if these studies turn out to be replicable or future evidence is able to discover a brain area or gene that does predict religiosity, should students studying theology pack their bags and find a useful science that they can occupy their time with? Some might say yes. Others, such as James Clark, might argue quite the opposite. In his book God and the Brain, Clark (2019) writes that a brain area that is tied to religious experience might just be the “agency detecting device” or stamp that we would expect a divine creator to apply. The founder of the University of St Andrews’ psychology and neuroscience department, Professor Malcolm Jeeves, has published numerous books on the topic of religion and science. Jeeves argues for healthy discussion between the two and, perhaps, sometimes a recognition that there are realms which science is not designed to venture into. Whatever the case, the field of neurotheology will continue to provide a controversial and fascinating area of study.
Even if psychology or neuroscience is able to comment on the workings of the brain and the origins of religious experience, one may argue that says nothing of the subjective experience of the individual nor the metaphysics which underpins the phenomenon. And perhaps this is precisely the point. No matter how much we describe the way that minds work, we cannot say much about the way that they ought to work or why they are working at all. These are the realms of philosophy and theology, realms which science is not equipped to venture into.
References
Clark, K. J. (2019). God and the Brain: The Rationality of Belief, 97. William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.
Freud, S. (1927). The Future of an Illusion. London: Hogarth Press.
Gould, S. J. (1997). Nonoverlapping Magisteria. The Unofficial Stephen Jay Gould Archive. Retrieved 11 November 2021, from http://www.blc.arizona.edu/courses/schaffer/449/Gould%20Nonoverlapping%20Magisteria.htm
Hamer, D. H. (2005). The God Gene: How faith is hardwired into our genes. Anchor Books.
Hamer, D. H., Hu, S., Magnuson, V. L., Hu, N., & Pattatucci, A. M. (1993). A linkage between DNA markers on the X chromosome and male sexual orientation. Science (New York, N.Y.), 261(5119), 321–327. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.8332896
Hume, D. (1739). A Treatise of Human Nature book III, part I, section I, Oxford: Clarendon Press.
James, W. (1902). The varieties of religious experience: A study in human nature. London: Longmans, Green & Company.
Maslow, A. (1943). A theory of human motivation. Wilder Publications, Inc.
Persinger, M. (1983). Religious and Mystical Experiences as Artifacts of Temporal Lobe Function: A General Hypothesis. Perceptual And Motor Skills, 57(3 Pt 2), 1255-1262. https://doi.org/10.2466/pms.1983.57.3f.1255
Persinger vs Dawkins: The God Helmet. (2005). Vimeo. Retrieved 11 November 2021, from https://vimeo.com/54557808.
Richard Dawkins vs John Lennox | The God Delusion Debate. (2017). Youtube.com. Retrieved 11 November 2021, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zF5bPI92-5o.
Straiton, J. (2020). Epilepsy over the years: From the sacred disease to novel gene therapies. BioTechniques. Retrieved 11 November, 2021, from https://www.biotechniques.com/neuroscience/epilepsy-over-the-years-from-the-sacred-disease-to-novel-gene-therapies
Toby Engelking is a third-year undergraduate studying neuroscience at the University of St Andrews. He is particularly interested in clinical psychology and the clinical applications of neuroscience. Questions about the boundaries and overlaps between science and theology have always fascinated him.
It is true that the age of post-enlightenment scientific enquiry has accumulated more knowledge than all other ages of human history combined. What’s more, the necessity for the materialist, reductionist framework in order for science to work is evident. Science must operate with the assumption that there is nothing more than the physical universe: Richard Dawkins once quipped that science would never work if we wrote off each anomalous data point as due to divine intervention (The God Delusion Debate, 2017). We must assume a deterministic picture of the universe for our studies to work.
Psychology and neuroscience often have more to say about religion than other sciences. Notable classic works on the topic include William James’ (1902) Varieties of Religious Experience and Freud’s (1927) The Future of an Illusion. In more recent times, a growing area of research comes from a field known as neurotheology—a field that aims to understand religion by understanding the workings of the brain.
Interestingly, it has often been argued that epileptic seizures which stimulate a particular region of the temporal lobe can explain the religiosity of many historical figures such as Fyodor Dostoevsky and even St Paul. Indeed, for this reason, epilepsy was known as “the sacred disease” (Straiton, 2020) to many ancient societies. In the 1980s, a man named Michael Persinger claimed that he had developed a helmet that stimulated just this region of the temporal lobe associated with religious experience. Persinger (1983) reported that 80% of participants reported a religious experience. Yet more recent studies have not been able to replicate these results, including, famously, a BBC documentary in which Richard Dawkins was subject to the helmet and found no such experience (Persinger vs Dawkins: The God Helmet, 2005). It is also true that Persinger used no control group; it does not take a psychologist to spot the placebo at work there!
Another famous experiment in the world of neurotheology was conducted by Dean Hamer. In 2005, he published a book titled The God Gene. Hamer claimed to have found a gene in human DNA which, depending on the allele people had, could reliably predict whether they believed in God or not. Despite the global attention which the book received, it was heavily criticised for Hamer’s seeming misunderstanding of genetics as well as his creative use of statistics. It is worth noting that Hamer is the same man that claimed to have discovered the “gay gene” in 1993 (Hamer et al., 1993).
However, if these studies turn out to be replicable or future evidence is able to discover a brain area or gene that does predict religiosity, should students studying theology pack their bags and find a useful science that they can occupy their time with? Some might say yes. Others, such as James Clark, might argue quite the opposite. In his book God and the Brain, Clark (2019) writes that a brain area that is tied to religious experience might just be the “agency detecting device” or stamp that we would expect a divine creator to apply. The founder of the University of St Andrews’ psychology and neuroscience department, Professor Malcolm Jeeves, has published numerous books on the topic of religion and science. Jeeves argues for healthy discussion between the two and, perhaps, sometimes a recognition that there are realms which science is not designed to venture into. Whatever the case, the field of neurotheology will continue to provide a controversial and fascinating area of study.
Even if psychology or neuroscience is able to comment on the workings of the brain and the origins of religious experience, one may argue that says nothing of the subjective experience of the individual nor the metaphysics which underpins the phenomenon. And perhaps this is precisely the point. No matter how much we describe the way that minds work, we cannot say much about the way that they ought to work or why they are working at all. These are the realms of philosophy and theology, realms which science is not equipped to venture into.
References
Clark, K. J. (2019). God and the Brain: The Rationality of Belief, 97. William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.
Freud, S. (1927). The Future of an Illusion. London: Hogarth Press.
Gould, S. J. (1997). Nonoverlapping Magisteria. The Unofficial Stephen Jay Gould Archive. Retrieved 11 November 2021, from http://www.blc.arizona.edu/courses/schaffer/449/Gould%20Nonoverlapping%20Magisteria.htm
Hamer, D. H. (2005). The God Gene: How faith is hardwired into our genes. Anchor Books.
Hamer, D. H., Hu, S., Magnuson, V. L., Hu, N., & Pattatucci, A. M. (1993). A linkage between DNA markers on the X chromosome and male sexual orientation. Science (New York, N.Y.), 261(5119), 321–327. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.8332896
Hume, D. (1739). A Treatise of Human Nature book III, part I, section I, Oxford: Clarendon Press.
James, W. (1902). The varieties of religious experience: A study in human nature. London: Longmans, Green & Company.
Maslow, A. (1943). A theory of human motivation. Wilder Publications, Inc.
Persinger, M. (1983). Religious and Mystical Experiences as Artifacts of Temporal Lobe Function: A General Hypothesis. Perceptual And Motor Skills, 57(3 Pt 2), 1255-1262. https://doi.org/10.2466/pms.1983.57.3f.1255
Persinger vs Dawkins: The God Helmet. (2005). Vimeo. Retrieved 11 November 2021, from https://vimeo.com/54557808.
Richard Dawkins vs John Lennox | The God Delusion Debate. (2017). Youtube.com. Retrieved 11 November 2021, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zF5bPI92-5o.
Straiton, J. (2020). Epilepsy over the years: From the sacred disease to novel gene therapies. BioTechniques. Retrieved 11 November, 2021, from https://www.biotechniques.com/neuroscience/epilepsy-over-the-years-from-the-sacred-disease-to-novel-gene-therapies
Toby Engelking is a third-year undergraduate studying neuroscience at the University of St Andrews. He is particularly interested in clinical psychology and the clinical applications of neuroscience. Questions about the boundaries and overlaps between science and theology have always fascinated him.