Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Fiach · 06-20-2002, 03:55 PM

[QUOTE]Originally posted by fando:
[QB]Fiach, you're not the only one who feels that there's a Darwinian reason for religion. However, I find it difficult to believe that the Human brain and subsequently, our personalities, are 95% determined by our genes.

[Fiach] Certainly personality traits are a complex of genetic, brain structural feature, and input. That input has influence on personality traits, but I still think, that based on twin studies, most of it is genetic/neuroanatomica. Neuroanatomy itself is altered by early brain imput. However, I think that firm Atheists and devout Christians/Muslims have quite differnt brains circuitry that is mostly genetic. The "moderates" are those whose genetics is less penetrant, and from this groups comes those who seem to easily slip from belief to non-belief and vice versa.

I don't think that the existence of a certain set of genes automaitically dictates whether a person will have trait X vs. trait Y. I think of it as a bias, not as a certainity.

[Fiach] Yes and no. Some gene code sequences may have already been identified in various components of neurobehaviour. The problem is that religiosity verses scepticism/rationality are probably a set of genes, but likely on the same chromosome and physically close enough to be often linked. Perhaps hyper sexuality and hyper religiosity is a good example. Look at the record of the Christian Clergy (not only Catholic priests but Proddy Ministers as well.

Not being knowledgable in neurobiology myself, I must be missing something. Could you elaborate on that a bit? And have studies been done about the inheritance of non-belief in religion? Perhaps that's just a side effect of a trend towards smarter humans rather than any particular religion gene.

[Fiach] No formalised study of genetic and neurobiological contributions to religion have been done. Funding such would be difficult. Our government is merged with religion unlike yours, but in America the "secular government" is run by conservative Christians. It can be studied obliquely. Temporal lobe epilepsy gives us a brain model that activates the parts of the brain involved in religion. During TLE seizures some people have out of body experiences, hear god or see god in hallucinations. In between having seizures those previously activated regions of the brain are "hyperconnected". They demonstrate high persistent prevalences of grandiosity, feeling of personal union with god, that they have a divine mission, plus sexual pre-occupation (either negatively or hypersexuality). Many Pentacostals in charismatic states, Meditating Buddhists, Praying Christians all activate the same parts of the brain (pre-frontal, mesial temporal, inferior and superior temporal, and left and right Parietal lobule regions. Many can initiate this with meditation. Others, usually sceptics are unable to do this.

I would like to see this studied more intensively. Look up the studies in San Diego by Dr. Ramachandra "God Module" dealing with the actual brain substrate governing religion. Also see the following Article in Newsweek Magazine:
Newsweek, May 7, 2001, Religion And The Brain.

Author: Sharon Begley, With Anne Underwood
Edition: U.S. Edition
Section: Science and Technology
Page: 50

Fiach

One of the last sane · 06-21-2002, 02:28 PM

So Pentecostals get boners for God? Sheesh.

The remark about sexual preoccupation is an interesting one. Ashcroft is a Pentecostal, is that why he insisted the boobs on the statue had to be covered?

seebs · 06-21-2002, 02:49 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by The Other Michael:

But consider that it started at a time when it could well have been an honest attempt to figure out why things happen, and in the lack of any better knowledge system it took root and flourished.

I have a really hard time with this. Myths spring up because people invent stories, and they will keep inventing stories no matter what you do, and some people will start believing the stories. I don't believe that the story of the time Thor had to dress as a woman to infiltrate a giant's cave was an explanation of any observed phenomenon.

Quote:

But what if you took a group of people and exposed them from an early age to the scientific method and scientific facts (as we know them) and didn't give them that religious indoctrination?

I suspect some of them would form theories, and eventually you'd have theism, reincarnationism (?), and other untestable beliefs, and people would hold them for various reasons.

Quote:

I think from what you've written on the fora that you'd be likely to say that science currently does a better job of explaining the natural world than does ancient religious beliefs (and if I'm wrong I'm sure you'll correct me). And with that explanatory scientific knowledge there might be far less reason to come up with religious beliefs.

I certainly wouldn't expect to see a pantheon-style religion form. I wouldn't be at all surprised by deism or buddhism, or equivalent things, forming again.

Quote:

The only way to tell would be to start with a tabula rasa sample population and see if religion spontaneously erupts when that population has a good grounding on why things are happening in the natural world. If they, on their own, develop the idea that a thunderbolt-heaving sky god is a more appealing reason for meteorological conditions than meterology, then we might have a good indication that religion is an innate condition.

On the other hand, what happens if they all simply come to believe that it is useful and meaningful to talk to dead people at their funerals, as though they were there, and ask the entity which handles the souls of the dead to be kind to their loved ones?

That's not "explanatory" in much of any sense.

Quote:

It also occurs to me that early religion was largely a precursor to science - an early attempt to explain the world and why things happen. Perhaps if religion were expunged and replaced with the scientific method there would be little or no need for religion to ever have developed.

I think that only works for some parts of religious belief. Religion addresses many different things, and people believe it for many different reasons.

I'm at a bit of a disadvantage; I have a very hard time trying to figure out what people would do if God *didn't* affect their lives at all.

Hmm.

I think I am prepared to argue that some form of theism would occur spontaneously. Rationale:

Case 1: God exists, and is inclined to influence people, and be known. We would expect religions to form.

Case 2: God does not exist, or does not influence people. In that case, we know that humans tend to invent God anyway, so we would still expect religions to form.

Laurentius · 06-22-2002, 01:04 PM

The problem of grownups' faith can be reduced to goals and means. If at dawn people find religion more inexpensive and more effective in reaching the goals of the day with the means at hand, then they may turn out quite religious at dusk. (Yet, being religious is often a completely different thing from one culture to another.)

AVE

One of the last sane · 06-22-2002, 05:29 PM

For many, religion seems to provide an effective refuge from the work of thinking. They are not going to change.

slept2long · 06-24-2002, 02:32 PM

Fiach I thought your idea for genetic predisposition to religion was very interesting and is the first time I have heard that theory proposed. I must disagree slightly however. From what I know the time in history that spawned modern religious practices was one in which religion was a balm on the sore of everyday life. I think the same applies today. If you have visited the political forums here or looked at the Patriot Act in detail you will see what you want as a citizen doesn't count. Or rather your ability to change the government to better suit the needs of the people is hampered severly. That worries me to say the least. I worry about it alot.If only I could beliece that everything would be all right life would be good. Anybody know where I can find an group of people to encourage me to stop trying to fix things because someone else will take care of us? Of course I am saying that the church now, as it always has, plays an important role in politics by lessening the desire of people to really want change by telling them everythings o.k. Yes, religion would exist if not endoctrinated at an early age because it is an important part of every "FREE" sociey. Free to do as you please but why bother. If there is a problem he'll take care of it.

One of the last sane · 06-24-2002, 04:43 PM

Quote:

the church now, as it always has, plays an important role in politics by lessening the desire of people to really want change by telling them everythings o.k.

...or, if everything is not o.k., it will be in the afterlife so don't worry about what it's like now.

Fiach · 06-25-2002, 05:19 PM

And if everything is not OK, it will be OK in the afterlife....provided you speak, think, act, and submit to religious authority.

If everything is not OK, but you fail to follow the dictates of your shaman/priest/pastor, you're afterlife will be shite as well.

The message is that obedience to the priestly cast is the key to salvation (i.e. a fun afterlife.) Disobedience which includes adherence to the creed and mythology, disqualifies you from the fun afterlife and says you will burn forever.

Fiach

seebs · 06-25-2002, 05:26 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Fiach:
And if everything is not OK, it will be OK in the afterlife....provided you speak, think, act, and submit to religious authority.

If everything is not OK, but you fail to follow the dictates of your shaman/priest/pastor, you're afterlife will be shite as well.

The message is that obedience to the priestly cast is the key to salvation (i.e. a fun afterlife.) Disobedience which includes adherence to the creed and mythology, disqualifies you from the fun afterlife and says you will burn forever.

Interestingly, most of the people who have recently tried to preach Christianity to me (little do they know how hard it will be to convert me) have gone in quite the opposite direction; I had a local Baptist by a few weeks back, and he was *VERY* firm in saying that no adherence to creed or attendence of any church, whether it was his or someone else's, could save me, only Jesus could save me.

I think it's interesting that at least some people preach the least-effective means of getting control over others they can come up with.

Bill · 06-29-2002, 09:32 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Fiach:
No formalised study of genetic and neurobiological contributions to religion have been done. Funding such would be difficult. Our government is merged with religion unlike yours, but in America the "secular government" is run by conservative Christians. It can be studied obliquely. Temporal lobe epilepsy gives us a brain model that activates the parts of the brain involved in religion. During TLE seizures some people have out of body experiences, hear god or see god in hallucinations. In between having seizures those previously activated regions of the brain are "hyperconnected". They demonstrate high persistent prevalences of grandiosity, feeling of personal union with god, that they have a divine mission, plus sexual pre-occupation (either negatively or hypersexuality). Many Pentacostals in charismatic states, Meditating Buddhists, Praying Christians all activate the same parts of the brain (pre-frontal, mesial temporal, inferior and superior temporal, and left and right Parietal lobule regions. Many can initiate this with meditation. Others, usually sceptics are unable to do this.

I would like to see this studied more intensively. Look up the studies in San Diego by Dr. Ramachandra "God Module" dealing with the actual brain substrate governing religion.

Well, don't miss reading these two books:

<a href="http://www.secweb.org/bookstore/bookdetail.asp?BookID=689" target="_blank">The Mystical Mind: Probing the Biology of Religious Experience</a> (the formal study); and
<a href="http://www.secweb.org/bookstore/bookdetail.asp?BookID=690" target="_blank">Why God Won't Go Away: Brain Science and the Biology of Belief</a> (the popularization for the masses....).

The formal study is characterized this way:

Quote:

The authors have over a number of years developed the best available neuropsychological theory of religion. However, it hasn't reached as many people as it deserves to. This book will be a welcome addition to the literature. ---Fraser Watts University of Cambridge

But the formal study (the first book listed above) is probably a bit dense unless you are in the field of sociology, etc.

== Bill

[ June 29, 2002: Message edited by: Bill ]

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

06-20-2002, 03:55 PM	#21
Fiach Banned Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Scotland, UK Posts: 602	[QUOTE]Originally posted by fando: [QB]Fiach, you're not the only one who feels that there's a Darwinian reason for religion. However, I find it difficult to believe that the Human brain and subsequently, our personalities, are 95% determined by our genes. [Fiach] Certainly personality traits are a complex of genetic, brain structural feature, and input. That input has influence on personality traits, but I still think, that based on twin studies, most of it is genetic/neuroanatomica. Neuroanatomy itself is altered by early brain imput. However, I think that firm Atheists and devout Christians/Muslims have quite differnt brains circuitry that is mostly genetic. The "moderates" are those whose genetics is less penetrant, and from this groups comes those who seem to easily slip from belief to non-belief and vice versa. I don't think that the existence of a certain set of genes automaitically dictates whether a person will have trait X vs. trait Y. I think of it as a bias, not as a certainity. [Fiach] Yes and no. Some gene code sequences may have already been identified in various components of neurobehaviour. The problem is that religiosity verses scepticism/rationality are probably a set of genes, but likely on the same chromosome and physically close enough to be often linked. Perhaps hyper sexuality and hyper religiosity is a good example. Look at the record of the Christian Clergy (not only Catholic priests but Proddy Ministers as well. Not being knowledgable in neurobiology myself, I must be missing something. Could you elaborate on that a bit? And have studies been done about the inheritance of non-belief in religion? Perhaps that's just a side effect of a trend towards smarter humans rather than any particular religion gene. [Fiach] No formalised study of genetic and neurobiological contributions to religion have been done. Funding such would be difficult. Our government is merged with religion unlike yours, but in America the "secular government" is run by conservative Christians. It can be studied obliquely. Temporal lobe epilepsy gives us a brain model that activates the parts of the brain involved in religion. During TLE seizures some people have out of body experiences, hear god or see god in hallucinations. In between having seizures those previously activated regions of the brain are "hyperconnected". They demonstrate high persistent prevalences of grandiosity, feeling of personal union with god, that they have a divine mission, plus sexual pre-occupation (either negatively or hypersexuality). Many Pentacostals in charismatic states, Meditating Buddhists, Praying Christians all activate the same parts of the brain (pre-frontal, mesial temporal, inferior and superior temporal, and left and right Parietal lobule regions. Many can initiate this with meditation. Others, usually sceptics are unable to do this. I would like to see this studied more intensively. Look up the studies in San Diego by Dr. Ramachandra "God Module" dealing with the actual brain substrate governing religion. Also see the following Article in Newsweek Magazine: Newsweek, May 7, 2001, Religion And The Brain. Author: Sharon Begley, With Anne Underwood Edition: U.S. Edition Section: Science and Technology Page: 50 Fiach

06-21-2002, 02:28 PM	#22
One of the last sane Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: hereabouts Posts: 734	So Pentecostals get boners for God? Sheesh. The remark about sexual preoccupation is an interesting one. Ashcroft is a Pentecostal, is that why he insisted the boobs on the statue had to be covered?

06-22-2002, 01:04 PM	#24
Laurentius Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Lucky Bucky, Oz Posts: 5,645	The problem of grownups' faith can be reduced to goals and means. If at dawn people find religion more inexpensive and more effective in reaching the goals of the day with the means at hand, then they may turn out quite religious at dusk. (Yet, being religious is often a completely different thing from one culture to another.) AVE

06-22-2002, 05:29 PM	#25
One of the last sane Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: hereabouts Posts: 734	For many, religion seems to provide an effective refuge from the work of thinking. They are not going to change.

06-24-2002, 02:32 PM	#26
slept2long Veteran Member Join Date: May 2002 Location: West Palm Beach, FL Posts: 1,066	Fiach I thought your idea for genetic predisposition to religion was very interesting and is the first time I have heard that theory proposed. I must disagree slightly however. From what I know the time in history that spawned modern religious practices was one in which religion was a balm on the sore of everyday life. I think the same applies today. If you have visited the political forums here or looked at the Patriot Act in detail you will see what you want as a citizen doesn't count. Or rather your ability to change the government to better suit the needs of the people is hampered severly. That worries me to say the least. I worry about it alot.If only I could beliece that everything would be all right life would be good. Anybody know where I can find an group of people to encourage me to stop trying to fix things because someone else will take care of us? Of course I am saying that the church now, as it always has, plays an important role in politics by lessening the desire of people to really want change by telling them everythings o.k. Yes, religion would exist if not endoctrinated at an early age because it is an important part of every "FREE" sociey. Free to do as you please but why bother. If there is a problem he'll take care of it.

06-25-2002, 05:19 PM	#28
Fiach Banned Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Scotland, UK Posts: 602	And if everything is not OK, it will be OK in the afterlife....provided you speak, think, act, and submit to religious authority. If everything is not OK, but you fail to follow the dictates of your shaman/priest/pastor, you're afterlife will be shite as well. The message is that obedience to the priestly cast is the key to salvation (i.e. a fun afterlife.) Disobedience which includes adherence to the creed and mythology, disqualifies you from the fun afterlife and says you will burn forever. Fiach

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.