Sunday, September 12, 2010


From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Not to be confused with neuroethology.
This article is missing citations or needs footnotes. Please help add inline citations to guard against copyright violations and factual inaccuracies. (April 2010)

Neurotheology, also known as spiritual neuroscience,[1] is the study of correlations of neural phenomena with subjective experiences of spirituality and hypotheses to explain these phenomena. Proponents of neurotheology claim that there is a neurological and evolutionary basis for subjective experiences traditionally categorized as spiritual or religious.[2]

* 1 Terminology
* 2 Defining and measuring spirituality
* 3 Methodology
* 4 Criticism
o 4.1 Philosophical criticism
o 4.2 Scientific criticism
* 5 See also
* 6 References
o 6.1 Footnotes
* 7 Further reading
* 8 External links

[edit] Terminology

Aldous Huxley used the term neurotheology for the first time in the utopian novel Island. The discipline studies the cognitive neuroscience of religious experience and spirituality. The term is also sometimes used in a less scientific context or a philosophical context. Some of these uses, according to the mainstream scientific community, qualify as pseudoscience. Huxley used it mainly in a philosophical context.

The use of the term neurotheology in published scientific work is currently uncommon. A search on the citation indexing service provided by Institute for Scientific Information returns five articles. Three of these are published in the journal Zygon: Journal of Religion and Science, while two are published in American Behavioral Scientist. Work on the neural basis of spirituality has, however, occurred sporadically throughout the 20th century. Keywords for such work include 'deity', 'neurophysiological bases', 'spirituality' and 'mysticism'.[citation needed]

In an attempt to focus and clarify what was a growing interest in this field, in 1994 educator Laurence O. McKinney published the first book on the subject, titled "Neurotheology: Virtual Religion in the 21st Century", written for a popular audience but also promoted in the theological journal Zygon. According to McKinney, neurotheology sources the basis of religious inquiry in relatively recent developmental neurophysiology. According to McKinney's theory, pre-frontal development, in humans, creates an illusion of chronological time as a fundamental part of normal adult cognition past the age of three. The inability of the adult brain to retrieve earlier images experienced by an infantile brain creates questions such as "where did I come from" and "where does it all go", which McKinney suggests led to the creation of various religious explanations. The experience of death as a peaceful regression into timelessness as the brain dies won praise from readers as varied as author Arthur C. Clarke, eminent theologian Harvey Cox, and the Dalai Lama and sparked a new interest in the field.

Dr Andrew B. Newberg and others describe neurological processes which are driven by the repetitive, rhythmic stimulation which is typical of human ritual, and which contribute to the delivery of transcendental feelings of connection to a universal unity. They posit, however, that physical stimulation alone is not sufficient to generate transcendental unitive experiences. For this to occur they say there must be a blending of the rhythmic stimulation with ideas. Once this occurs "…ritual turns a meaningful idea into a visceral experience."[3] Moreover they say that humans are compelled to act out myths by the biological operations of the brain on account of what they call the "inbuilt tendency of the brain to turn thoughts into actions".

Based on current neuroscientific research, Eugen Drewermann, one of today's most prominent and controversial theologians in Europe, developed in two monumental volumes (Modern Neurology and the Question of God), published in 2006 and 2007, a radical critique of traditional conceptions of God and the soul and a sweeping reinterpretation of religion in light of neurology.

However, it has also been argued "that neurotheology should be conceived and practiced within a theological framework."[4]
[edit] Defining and measuring spirituality

Neurotheology hypothesizes that the basis of spiritual experiences arises in neurological physiology, for example an increase of N, N-Dimethyltryptamine levels in the pineal gland, and attempts to explain these neurological basis for those experiences, such as:

* The perception that time, fear or self-consciousness have dissolved
* Spiritual awe
* Oneness with the universe
* Ecstatic trance
* Sudden enlightenment
* Altered states of consciousness

These experiences are seen as the basis for many religious beliefs and behaviors.
[edit] Methodology

Early studies in the 1950s and 1960s attempted to use EEGs to study brain wave patterns correlated with "spiritual" states. During the 1980s Dr. Michael Persinger stimulated the temporal lobes of human subjects with a weak magnetic field. His subjects claimed to have a sensation of "an ethereal presence in the room" (Richard Dawkins did not have a sensation of "an ethereal presence" in any way, but was uncertain if this would remain the case in a less clinical situation[5]). This work gained publicity at the time, although it was unresolved as to the mechanism that may have elicited this response.

Some current studies use neuroimaging to localize brain regions active, or differentially active, during experiences that subjects associate with "spiritual" feelings or images. David Wulf, a psychologist at Wheaton College, Massachusetts, suggests that current brain imaging studies, along with the consistency of spiritual experiences across cultures, history, and religions, "suggest a common core that is likely a reflection of structures and processes in the human brain", echoing McKinney's primary thesis that feelings associated with religious experience are normal aspects of brain function under extreme circumstances rather than communication from God.
[edit] Criticism

An attempt to marry a materialistic approach like neuroscience to spirituality attracts much criticism. Some of the criticism is philosophical, dealing with the (perceived) irreconcilability between science and spirituality, while some is more methodological, dealing with the issues of studying an experience as subjective as spirituality.
[edit] Philosophical criticism

Critics of this approach, like philosopher Ken Wilber and religious scholar Huston Smith, see the more materialistic formulations of the approach as examples of reductionism and scientism that are only looking at the empirical aspects of the phenomena, and not including the possible validity of spiritual experience with all of its subjectivity.
[edit] Scientific criticism

In 2005, Pehr Granqvist, a psychologist at Uppsala University in Sweden, questioned Dr. Michael Persinger's findings in a paper published in Neuroscience Letters[6]. Granqvist claimed that Persinger's work was not "double-blind," in that those conducting Persinger's trials, who were often graduate students, knew what sort of results to expect, with the risk that the knowledge would be transmitted to experimental subjects by unconscious cues. The experimenters also were frequently given an idea of what was happening, according to Granqvist, by being asked to fill in questionnaires designed to test their suggestibility to paranormal experiences before the trials were conducted. Granqvist set about conducting similar experiments double-blinded, and published findings implying that the presence or absence of the magnetic field had no relationship with any religious or spiritual experience reported by the participants.

Persinger stood by his findings, arguing that several of his previous experiments have explicitly used double-blind protocols, and that Granqvist failed to fully replicate Persinger's experimental conditions by, for example, miscalibrating the software, and using a magnetic field exposure time too brief to induce the hypothesized effect.
[edit] See also

* Biological psychology
* Bicameralism (psychology)
* Daniel Dennett
* Dimethyltryptamine
* Dualism/Materialism/Nondual
* Eight Circuit Model of Consciousness
* Eugen Drewermann
* Geschwind syndrome
* God gene
* God helmet
* God in a Pill?
* Julian Jaynes
* Music Therapy
* Neuroethics

* Neuroscience
* Neurotechnology
* Out-of-body experience
* Philosophy of mind
* Philosophy of science
* Psychedelic crisis
* Psychology of religion
* Religious ecstasy
* Religious experience
* Temporal lobe epilepsy
* Theological anthropology
* Third Man factor
* Viruses of the Mind
* Zen and the Brain

[edit] References

* Matthew Alper. The "God" Part of the Brain: A Scientific Interpretation of Human Spirituality and God
* James H. Austin. Zen and the Brain: Toward an Understanding of Meditation and Consciousness
* James H. Austin. Zen-Brain Reflections: Reviewing Recent Developments in Meditation and States of Consciousness
* Andrew Newberg, Eugene G. D'Aquili and Vince Rause. Why God Won't Go Away: Brain Science and the Biology of Belief. ISBN 0-345-44033-1
* Skatssoon, Judy (2006-07-12). "Magic mushrooms hit the God spot". ABC Science Online. Retrieved 2006-07-13.

[edit] Footnotes

1. ^ Biello, David (2007-10-03). "Searching for God in the Brain". Scientific American. Retrieved 2009-03-22.
2. ^ Gajilan, A. Chris (2007-04-05). "Are humans hard-wired for faith?". Cable News Network. Retrieved 2007-04-09.
3. ^ Newberg, Andrew B.; D'Aquili, Eugene G.; Rause, Vince (2002). Why God Won't Go Away: Brain Science and the Biology of Belief. New York: Ballantine Books. pp. 90. ISBN 0-345-44034-X.
4. ^ Apfalter, Wilfried, "Neurotheology: What Can We Expect from a (Future) Catholic Version?" Theology and Science, 7 (2009). pp. 163-174
5. ^ Video footage, see 3:04-7 and 3:32-43
6. ^ Granqvist, Pehr, et al., "Sensed Presence and Mystical Experiences are Predicted by Suggestibility, Not by the Application of Transcranial Weak Complex Magnetic Fields." Neuroscience Letters, 379 (2005). pp. 1-6

[edit] Further reading

* Laurence O. McKinney, Neurotheology: Virtual Religion in the 21st Century, (1994) American Institute for Mindfulness. ISBN 0-945724-01-2.
* Andrew Neher, The Psychology of Transcendence, Dover, 2nd ed 1990, ISBN 0-486-26167-0
* Andrew B. Newberg, The Mystical Mind: Probing the Biology of Religious Experience, (1999), Fortress Press, Minneapolis, ISBN 0-8006-3163-3
* Persinger, M., Religious and Mystical Experiences as Artefacts of Temporal Lobe Function: A General Hypothesis, Perceptual and Motor Skills, Vol. 57.
* Thomas B. Roberts, "Chemical Input — Religious Output: Entheogens" Chapter 10 in Where God and Science Meet: Vol. 3. The Psychology of Religious Experience edited by Robert McNamara. Westport, CT: Praeger/Greenwood.
* Gerald Wolf, (science-in-fiction novels) Der HirnGott; Dr. Ziethen Verlag 2005, Sich Verlag 2008, ISBN 978-3-9811692-8-7. Glaube mir, mich gibt es nicht; Sich Verlag 2009, ISBN 978-3-9812628-0-3.
* Eugen Drewermann (2006-2007). Atem des Lebens: Die moderne Neurologie und die Frage nach Gott. (Modern neurology and the question of God) Vol 1: Das Gehirn. Vol. 2: Die Seele.. Düsseldorf: Patmos Verlag. Vol. 1: 864; Vol. 2: 1072. ISBN Vol. 1: ISBN 3491210003; Vol. 2: ISBN 3491210011.

[edit] External links

* "Self-transcendence enhanced by removal of portions of the parietal-occipital cortex" Article from the Institute for the Biocultural Study of Religion
* The Science Of Spirituality - Is This Your Brain On God? - (NPR article)
* Horizon - God on the Brain
* Your Brain on Religion: Mystic visions or brain circuits at work? (Newsweek neurotheology article, May 2001)
* Center for Cognitive Liberty & Ethics neurotheology resource directory
* "This Is Your Brain on God" (Wired magazine, November 1999)
* Neurotheology: With God in Mind neurotheology article
* Survey of spiritual experiences, by the University of Pennsylvania
* Neurotheology at the Open Directory Project
* Neurotheology: a Rather Skeptical Perspective
* 2006 National Film Board of Canada documentary, Mystical Brain
* "Spirituality & the Brain." website of a Persinger follower
* The new science of neurotheology
* Studies in Neurotheology

v • d • e

Behavioral neurology · Behavioral neuroscience · Brain–computer interface · Chronobiology · Cognitive neuroscience · Computational neuroscience · Imaging genetics · Molecular cellular cognition · Neural engineering · Neural network (both artificial and biological) · Neural signal processing · Neural tissue regeneration · Neuroanatomy · Neuroanthropology · Neurobioengineering · Neurobiotics · Neurocardiology · Neurochemistry · Neurochip · Neurodegeneration · Neuroeconomics · Neuroeducation · Neuroendocrinology · Neuroepidemiology · Neuroergonomics · Neuroethics · Neuroethology · Neurogastroenterology · Neurogenetics · Neuroimaging · Neuroimmunology · Neuroinformatics · Neurointensive care · Neurolaw · Neurolinguistics · Neurology · Neuromarketing · Neurometrics · Neuromodulation · Neuromonitoring · Neuro-ophthalmology · Neuropathology · Neuropharmacology · Neurophilosophy · Neuroaesthetics · Neurophysics · Neurophysiology · Neuroplasticity · Neuroprosthetics · Neuropsychiatry · Neuro-psychoanalysis · Neuropsychology · Neuroradiology · Neurorehabilitation · Neurorobotics · Neurosociology · Neurosurgery · Neurotechnology · Neurotheology · Neurotransmitter · Neurovirology · Psychiatric genetics · Psychiatry · Psychology · Sleep · Systems neuroscience
Retrieved from ""
Categories: Neurotheology | Religion and science | Biopsychology
Hidden categories: Articles with unsourced statements from April 2010 | All articles with unsourced statements | Articles with unsourced statements from January 2009
Personal tools

* New features
* Log in / create account


* Article
* Discussion



* Read
* Edit
* View history



* Main page
* Contents
* Featured content
* Current events
* Random article


* About Wikipedia
* Community portal
* Recent changes
* Contact Wikipedia
* Donate to Wikipedia
* Help


* What links here
* Related changes
* Upload file
* Special pages
* Permanent link
* Cite this page


* Create a book
* Download as PDF
* Printable version


* Deutsch
* Español
* Italiano
* Lietuvių
* Magyar
* Polski
* Português
* Suomi
* Türkçe
* Українська

* This page was last modified on 29 August 2010 at 09:33.
* Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. See Terms of Use for details.
Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
* Contact us

* Privacy policy
* About Wikipedia
* Disclaimers

* Powered by MediaWiki
* Wikimedia Foundation

1 comment:

  1. Good discussion. I like the idea that there's a back and for between materialism and spiritualism. I'm identified with the materialist, but just because a spiritual experience can be self-created doesn't deny its validity. I'm all for spiritualism; I once completed a Tibetan exercise and found myself looking down on myself from above. Amazing, I thought, a complete visual transform in the waking state (eg: what WILL this brain of mine come up with next!).

    Nobody seems to mind that music comes in ones and zeros too fast to count or that we see sunsets with 64 megapixel retinas - it all smushes together in that universe called "my conscious experience" which is ... yes ... being cooked up in our brain far too fast to count or connect. But that's where it's coming from, all of it. All our life it does it's best to keep us alive and ain't it nice that at the end death is actually pleasant experience as the dying brain creates an ever more simplified consciousness that sends us into an eternal one/all - whether we like it or not. Finding heaven in the brain stem isn't a lack of the spiritual, it's just another reason to celebrate our existence as the most amazing act in the known universe - at least the universe that we can know using this kind of a brain.

    God? If there is a God, and there may be, we don't have the equipment to communicate with any critters that won't obey the laws of time, space, entropy and the standard laws of thermodynamics. The brain was designed to guide us through this life on this earth, and about 40,000 years ago, zip, we started arranging the past chronologically, which created a mirror-image chronology called the "future" in each person. But all different of course,because we all have different pasts, and we don't start doing it until two and a half so we can't remember birth or predict death. Buty we're the only being on earth with a defined place that hasn't happened, and that creates a focus for what we call planning, which no other animal on earth can do.

    With that, we needed no other tools to become proficient, and it was that fast. We wiped out the Neanderthals (no planning ability) cooked the earth (bad planning) and ate anything big on three continents until there were very few left. We each exist in our own universe, nearly identical to all others as we share the DNA - which creates the illusion we are all in the same place. Nope. Many microseconds removed from any sort of reality, whatever it may be, the brain mixes and matches the currents and conflicts of the nearly holy electrochemical chaos that makes us human.