Links to Spirituality Found in the Brain

[darkstar3]

Posted by moderator request with no commentary or editing of subject matter.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/livescience/20100212/sc_livescience/linkstospiritualityfoundinthebrain

Scientists have identified areas of the brain that, when damaged, lead to greater spirituality. The findings hint at the roots of spiritual and religious attitudes, the researchers say.

The study, published in the Feb. 11 issue of the journal Neuron, involves a personality trait called self-transcendence, which is a somewhat vague measure of spiritual feeling, thinking, and behaviors. Self-transcendence "reflects a decreased sense of self and an ability to identify one's self as an integral part of the universe as a whole," the researchers explain.

Before and after surgery, the scientists surveyed patients who had brain tumors removed. The surveys generate self-transcendence scores.

Selective damage to the left and right posterior parietal regions of the brain induced a specific increase in self-transcendence, or ST, the surveys showed.

[slackmaster]

1. Brains

[darkstar3]

2. Now, can we please

have a discussion on things like the merits of the study, or perhaps the logical impact of "spirituality" being tied to specific centers of the brain?

[JuniperLea]

3. There's a psychological need for spirituality...

That's my take anyway... I'm still thinking in terms of the Campbell book... The Power of Myth... I think it ties in nicely with this study.

There are other studies that link near death experiences to the brain.

Very interesting stuff...

[darkstar3]

4. I think it IS interesting that all of these experiences are tied directly to the brain.

I don't know that I agree with you about it being a psychological "need", but I definitely think that spirituality in all of its forms is an internal psychological phenomenon.

[Warpy]

6. I've always said that sort of thing is probably hard wired

and studies like this one would tend to support that opinion.

[Jackpine Radical]

5. Not particularly surprising; this replicates the Newberg-Damasio findings

in which they found those same areas, which are associated with a sense of time & space localization, to be quiescent in meditators who were experiencing transcendent states.

[azul]

9. Could not this area be inhibitory on another brain area

or areas where "spirituality" resides?

Like phobias or traumatic fears residing in the limbic system can be masked or controlled by cortical areas by training. And then when these cortical areas are damaged or lost, as in old age or stress damage, the phobias return?

Just where does consciousness reside in the brain? Is spirituality a part of consciousness that is inhibited or partially masked by this part of the brain? Separateness a delusion that allows the mind to function in this chaos until it is prepared?

[Jackpine Radical]

10. Your speculations are trending in a direction I find very interesting.

First--maybe the inhibitory model is a good one. I hadn't particularly thought of that. Your notion of the masking of spirituality is intriguing; I have speculated that those temporal regions might be "holograph generators" that project the illusion of time and space, so that when we de-activate them, the true timeless and non-spatial nature of reality come through.

I have eeg biofeedback equipment, and have for some years been thinking about training delta and maybe theta (slow-wave) activity in those areas to see if I can get people into that state fairly quickly. This would be similar to the old alpha-theta protocol developed by Elmer Green at Menninger in the 70's, but at temporal rather than occipital sites and somewhat training for somewhat slower wave forms.

Do you know about Amit Goswami's writings? He's a physicist who turns modern materialism on its head, asserting the primacy of mind--in the process, clearing up some physical conundrums (conundra?). Well worth reading if you're into this kind of stuff.

[azul]

11. thanks for the reference, Have you read the book mentioned below

in which a neuroanatomist suffers a stroke and describes the effects on her mind and body, and then what efforts and techniques it takes to return functions: "My Stroke of Insight"?

[54anickel]

7. Did you ever catch an appearance by Dr. Jill Bolte Taylor? The first time I'd heard of her was when

I stumbled across her video on TED. http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/eng/jill_bolte_taylor_s_powerful_stroke_of_insight.html

I find her story fascinating. Finally got around to reading her book, "My Stroke of Insight" last year. She speaks more of the left/right hemispheres.

Caught her on Charlie Rose last fall as well... http://www.charlierose.com/view/interview/10580

[darkstar3]

31. I did not.

However, it sounds interesting. Bookmarking for later...

[struggle4progress]

8. What is "self-transcendence" in a scientific sense? Are we discussing

an ability of people to deliberately deconstruct their ego boundaries or are we discussing an inability of people to construct their ego boundaries? Are we discussing people who simply report some affective sense of "unity" with the world beyond themselves, or people who are able to act sympathetically as if they felt the feelings of others as strongly as they felt their own, or people who cannot distinguish themselves from others and the rest of the world?

When we speak of brain damage here, are we examining a damage that limits an ability to form certain cognitions, or are we examining a damage that limit ability to repress certain other cognitions?

Just as an ability to control one's irritation (or libido, or exuberant joy) differs entirely from the state in which one cannot feel irritated (or libidinous, or exuberantly joyful), the ability to set aside one's ego boundaries is not at all the same as an inability to recognize ego boundaries, and an ability to feel "at one" with others is not necessarily the same as an inability to distinguish oneself from others

Is it possible that, pre-surgery, these particular tumor's are in a region associated with a heightened sense of self-separateness and that removal of the tumor, together with the increased caring social attentions of the clinical environment, causes a rebound in the opposite psychological direction of heightened sense of connectedness?

The sweeping claims made in the popular discussions of such studies seems quite unscientific

[darkstar3]

12. As usual, I find you contribution to the thread lacking.

Once again, what you've posted here is only tangentially related to what we're discussing. I will give you credit for the fact that you bothered to type it up rather than copy and paste it wholesale from another website, but that's as far as I'll go.

You were given the opportunity to discuss the science behind this study, the possible repercussions of this study, or even reasons why you think this study came up with the results it found. Instead, you have decided to attack the language used to represent a concept, to dither about uncertainties that were most likely accounted for*, and most telling of all, to preemptively attack those you disagree with (and technically continue an argument from another thread).

I suggest that when you re-visit this thread, you take your cues from some of the posters above. Sure, their posts are speculative, but rather than attempting to flatly dismiss an entire study based on language in a media report, or shut down discussion, THEY are actually bothering to get the old gray matter working and kick around some ideas.

* - This is what happens when studies get reported. Scientists don't make sweeping generalizations, nor do they allow vague and uncontrollable prior and default conditions to possibly taint their work. This is why scientific findings are often very specific, and yet the media knows that this will not sell. The cycle is simple: The scientists publish, the media draws conclusions for a headline and blurbs the parts they feel important to support their conclusion, and the public dumbs those conclusions down even further. Being such a "retriever" I thought you would know that already. Now, how about focusing on the topic at hand: A direct connection has been found between specific areas of the brain and, for lack of a better term, "spiritual experience." Discuss.

[struggle4progress]

14. I asked five specific questions. n/t

[Jim__]

13. A link to a psychiatric study that looked at self-transcendence.

This study, http://ajp.psychiatryonline.org/cgi/content/full/160/11/1965?ijkey=fd49d6a6d8d4b6dfb7536149c62db57aeea15127, looks at self transcendence and spiritual acceptance, and finds a strong inverse correlation between the binding potential of certain types of neural receptors and the self-transcendence score (there is a graph included in the study that shows the correlation - it also appears to show a large associated error). I don't believe this study looked at parietal regions of the brain (although they could be looking at subregions and I'm not recognizing that fact). But the study does give some idea what is meant by self-transcendence. A brief excerpt:

In the present study, we found an association between interindividual variability in 5-HT1A receptor binding potential and the self-transcendence score on the Temperament and Character Inventory. We found no correlation for any of the other dimensions. The lack of correlation for the other dimensions is consistent with a previous study that used Tridimensional Personality Questionnaire, and an earlier questionnaire covering the four temperament dimensions of the Temperament and Character Inventory (6).

The self-transcendence dimension is the most stable Temperament and Character Inventory dimension over time and is also one of the two Temperament and Character Inventory dimensions showing the largest variability (13). The self-transcendence dimension consists of three subscales representing several aspects of religious behavior, subjective experience, and individual worldview. Of interest, in the extended analysis, we found that the correlation of self-transcendence was shown to be fully dependent on the spiritual acceptance scale, whereas no correlation was found to the other two subscales.

The spiritual acceptance scale measures a person’s apprehension of phenomena that cannot be explained by objective demonstration. Subjects with high scores tend to endorse extrasensory perception and ideation, whether named deities or a commonly unifying force. Low scorers, by contrast, tend to favor a reductionistic and empirical worldview (15).

A role for the serotonin system in relation to spiritual experiences is supported by observations of drugs such as LSD, psilocybin, N,N-dimethyltryptamine, mescaline, and 3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine that are known to cause perturbations of the serotonin system in several brain regions (16–18).

The hint I see here is that what the study in the OP may have been most surprised by is that self-transcendence changed at all since it is so stable.

Edited to fix the link.

[struggle4progress]

15. No association between serotonin 5-HT1A receptors and spirituality among patients with ...

major depressive disorders or healthy volunteers
Molecular Psychiatry (24 November 2009) | doi:10.1038/mp.2009.126
H Karlsson , J Hirvonen , J K Salminen & J Hietala
... These results do not support the idea that the serotonin system forms the biological basis of spiritual experiences among patients suffering from major depressive disorder or among healthy volunteers. http://www.nature.com/mp/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/mp2009126a.html

[Jim__]

16. I was trying to answer your question about what self-transcendence means in a scientific sense.

I meant to include a sentence in the response to indicate that.

If you google "Temperament and Character Inventory" you will get some hits, although most of them do not talk very much about self-transcendence. It does seem to be considered a legitimate measure by both the psychiatric and the psychological communities. This site has a paper on self-transcendence with respect to this test, but you have to buy the paper - about $10.


Anyway, this site sells the TCI test which measures, among other things, self-transcendence. It's a personality test and self-transcendence is a character trait of personality. Here's some of what it says about the test and self-transcendence:

Personality is composed of both temperament and character. Temperament refers to the automatic emotional responses we have to different experiences. The four temperament traits measured by the TCI are Novelty Seeking, Harm Avoidance, Reward Dependence, and Persistence. These four traits are moderately heritable (i.e. genetic, biological) and are more or less stable throughout one’s life.

Character refers to our conception of self, along with our goals and values. Character types vary widely, and differences in character influence voluntary choices, intentions, the meaning we place on events, and our ability to regulate emotions. Character traits are partly inherited, but they are also influenced by our experiences. Expression of these traits can improve significantly over time.

The three character traits measured by the TCI are Cooperativeness, Self-Directedness, and Self-Transcendence. A strong expression of these traits indicates a mature and well-regulated personality. Each trait helps us govern our lives and develop well-being in different ways. People who are high in Cooperativeness tend to be tolerant and helpful. Those with a high expression of Self-Directedness are more likely to be responsible and resourceful. People with high scores in Self-Transcendence are often genuine and insightful.

...

Experts often argue over whether personality is a biological, psychological, or social phenomenon. The TCI, however, attempts to form a conception of the human being as an integrated whole, looking at the interactions and roles of all aspects of life in the development of personality. The insights derived from the TCI help us take a more comprehensive approach to measuring happiness and mapping out a path to well-being.

[struggle4progress]

18. The TCI asks a battery of questions, which respondents must answer in binary

fashion "correct" or "incorrect." The questions appear to examine self-perception, including self-perception of reactions to inferred attitudes of others. Thus -- unlike tests of common neurological reflexes or of normal misperceptions in standard optical illusions -- the test is not testing basic features: it is reporting some complicated smear of introspections. One should note, first, that self-perceptions often differ from the external perceptions of other individuals: one might, for example, consider oneself very shy and yet be regarded as outgoing or consider oneself very warm and friendly and yet be regarded as cold and hostile. One should also note that reported self-perceptions are likely to be influenced by the self-reporter's about what the investigator wants to hear -- which will be affected by cultural factors and similar considerations.

Thus, there is little reason to expect in advance that the results of such a test will correlate closely with primitive neurological phenomena (despite the claim in the article you posted, as evidenced by the article I posted), and in fact the "objectivity" of a test based on reported self-perceptions is open to question from the beginning. Nor is there much reason to expect the test (which is not measuring something well-defined anyway) to shed much light on a subject as ill-defined as "religion"


... The average scale scores of the Dutch and American random testing vary significantly statistically ...
TCI Information
http://en.datec.nl/tci/

[Jim__]

25. "there is little reason to expect in advance that the results of such a test will correlate closely

with primitive neurological phenomena"


This is precisely what the current study in Neuron asserts; namely that damage to the parietal cortex affects self-transcendence as measured by the TCI.

Unfortnately, we can't access the complete article without a subscription, but we can access the summary:

Highlights

•Self-transcendence is a stable personality trait measuring predisposition to spirituality
•Brain damage induces specific and fast modulations of self-transcendence
•Self-transcendence increases after damage to lt and rt inferior parietal cortex

Summary

The predisposition of human beings toward spiritual feeling, thinking, and behaviors is measured by a supposedly stable personality trait called self-transcendence. Although a few neuroimaging studies suggest that neural activation of a large fronto-parieto-temporal network may underpin a variety of spiritual experiences, information on the causative link between such a network and spirituality is lacking. Combining pre- and post-neurosurgery personality assessment with advanced brain-lesion mapping techniques, we found that selective damage to left and right inferior posterior parietal regions induced a specific increase of self-transcendence. Therefore, modifications of neural activity in temporoparietal areas may induce unusually fast modulations of a stable personality trait related to transcendental self-referential awareness. These results hint at the active, crucial role of left and right parietal systems in determining self-transcendence and cast new light on the neurobiological bases of altered spiritual and religious attitudes and behaviors in neurological and mental disorders.

I think the important thing here is that damage to specific areas of the brain seem to produce changes to test results on a measure that normally remains stable. Of course the results are not conclusive, but they do raise interesting questions.

[tama]

26. Transcendence and the "sixth senses"

There are very problematic concepts like "self-transcendence" and "personality trait" that don't really mean much as such and seem even contradictory when put in the same frame.

What does "transcendence" ie. 'over-sensing' or 'beyond-senses' mean? Beyond which senses? Here's a good summary of senses or sensory modalities:

"Proprioception (pronounced /ˌproʊpri.ɵˈsɛpʃən/ PRO-pree-o-SEP-shən, from Latin proprius, meaning "one's own" and perception) is the sense of the relative position of neighbouring parts of the body. Unlike the six exteroceptive senses (sight, taste, smell, touch, hearing, and balance) by which we perceive the outside world, and interoceptive senses, by which we perceive the pain and movement of internal organs, proprioception is a third distinct sensory modality that provides feedback solely on the status of the body internally. It is the sense that indicates whether the body is moving with required effort, as well as where the various parts of the body are located in relation to each other." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proprioception

It could be suggested that what is here called 'self-transcendence' is in fact nothing 'trans' but just more open proprio- or selfceptive awareness or "gnosis" uncovered. Selfception can and does often include sensing also the various "energies" that Eastern yogic etc. litterature has much to say about with various names and classifications (chakras, kundalini, etc. etc.) that often tend to add to the confusion rather than clear it. No matter how such experiences are explained, they are empirical or phenomenological reality. "Spirituality" is by no means any monolithic object that could be measured and defined, but there are generalizations open for discussion - and experiencing. One generalization is that there is often involved a phase that is heavily symbolic and mythological, a hermeneutical phase of a kind. Once that (often tiresome and psychotic) phase passes attention turns often more into bodily selfception, with no clearly defined spatiotemporal borders of the "self-body" being sensed, ie. it cannot be said that selfception is limited to skin and what is inside the bag of skin. In this way it could be suggested that "spirituality" is in fact fully materialistic awareness including the finer (quantum and beyond? ;)) aspects of matter.

[struggle4progress]

27. TCI "self-transcendence" scores depend on the ambient culture

Here, for example, is a 2004 study, showing that Iranians typically have TCI "self-transcendence" scores that are twice that of Swedes, while Iranian refugees in Sweden typically exhibit TCI "self-transcendence" scores intermediate between the Swedish and Iranian averages (see Table 2 at 871).

Temperament and Character inCross-Cultural Comparisons betweenSwedish and Iranian People andIranian Refugees in Sweden –Personality in Transition?
Jörg Richter, Sven Brändström, Habib Emami, Mehdi Ghazonour
Coll. Antropol. 28 (2004) 2: 865–876
http://www.google.com/url?q=http://docs.google.com/viewer%3Fa%3Dv%26q%3Dcache:ebfvcXBERCsJ:hrcak.srce.hr/file/8765%2Biran%2Bsweden%2Bself-transcendence%2BTCI%26hl%3Den%26gl%3Dus%26sig%3DAHIEtbRamUO24zu33VnPu8JyswESq0vuig&ei=wzd4S9eABsWUtgf1zvDCCg&sa=X&oi=gview&resnum=1&ct=other&ved=0CAgQxQEwAA&usg=AFQjCNFlCMtgSo0mxoip5BasBVZdcfn3JA

Absent substantially more evidence, I will not suspect (from this and the study under discussion) that (say) inhabitants of Sweden are significantly more likely than inhabitants of Iran to develop certain brain tumors, or that moving from Iran to Sweden produces certain brain tumors, or that Iranians predisposed to certain brain tumors are more likely to emigrate; what I will suspect is that the TCI "self-transcendence" score is not measuring specific neurological primitives but is rather measuring some complex smear of features, which involve not only self-perception but perhaps also the subject's judgment about what self-perceptions can be permissibly reported

It is, of course, entirely plausible that certain forms of specific neurological damage will affect self-perception or self-reporting

[Jim__]

28. This is concerning changes within individuals before and after very specific types of ...

brain surgery. And the differences appeared in a character trait that is normally very stable.

Before and after surgery, the scientists surveyed patients who had brain tumors removed. The surveys generate self-transcendence scores.


Selective damage to the left and right posterior parietal regions of the brain induced a specific increase in self-transcendence, or ST, the surveys showed.


"Our symptom-lesion mapping study is the first demonstration of a causative link between brain functioning and ST," said Dr. Cosimo Urgesi from the University of Udine in Italy. "Damage to posterior parietal areas induced unusually fast changes of a stable personality dimension related to transcendental self-referential awareness. Thus, dysfunctional parietal neural activity may underpin altered spiritual and religious attitudes and behaviors."

[struggle4progress]

29. Of course, "stability" here merely means that subjects' scores do not

typically change much upon retesting. Since TCI involves self-reporting of self-perception, that "stability" merely signifies that: the combination, of self-perception and attitude toward self-reporting of self-perception involved in in the test, is reproducible. I find it unsurprising that brain tumor or brain surgery might affect self-perception or self-reporting. Existing literature apparently contains a variety of conjectures for the role of the posterior parietal region, including spatial cognition as well as various other integrative-relationship functions, possibly including social communication. Damage to social-communication-processing neural networks, for example, might be expected to change individual assessment of social expectations when self-reporting self-perception and hence might be expected to influence self-reporting


... Posterior parietal cortex ... Associated in humans with a variety of complex behaviors such as the appreciation of objects and their qualities, facial recognition and social communication. Most recently implicated as the limiting factor in the storage capacity of our visual working memory ... http://www.memory-key.com/neurology/glossary_brain.htm#P

... The parietal lobe receives and interprets sensations including pain, temperature, touch, pressure, size, shape, and body-part awareness. Other activities of the parietal lobe are hearing, reasoning and memory. Seizures, language disturbances (if a tumor is in the dominant hemisphere) and loss of ability to read are common symptoms. Spatial disorders, such as difficulty with body orientation in space or recognition of body parts, can also occur. The parietal lobe also controls language and the ability to do arithmetic. Numbers may be read, but there may be difficulty with calculations. There may be difficulty knowing left from right and sentences containing comparisons or cross-references may not be understood ... http://www.abta.org/symptoms/13

... Parietal lobes (located behind the frontal lobes): Tumors located here can cause loss of or changes in sensation. Sometimes vision is partially lost in both eyes so that neither eye can see the side opposite the tumor ... http://www.merck.com/mmhe/sec06/ch088/ch088b.html

Social cognition in premotor and parietal cortex
Authors: Naotaka Fujii; Sayaka Hihara; Atsushi Iriki ...
Published in: Social Neuroscience, Volume 3, Issue 3 & 4 September 2008 , pages 250 - 260
First Published: September 2008
Socially correct behavior requires constant observation of the social environment. Behavior that was appropriate a few seconds ago is not guaranteed to be appropriate now. The brain keeps the eyes focused on the current social space and constantly updates its internal representation of the environment and social context. Monitoring the behavior of others is essential for this updating ... http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/content~db=all~content=a779266983

[ZombieHorde]

17. "Scientists have identified areas of the brain that, when damaged, lead to greater spirituality."

Does this mean some people's spirituality is not the product of free will?

[struggle4progress]

19. No, it means there's lots of BS in popular newspaper accounts of psychological tests

[tama]

20. Lead?

Statistical correlation does not prove linear causality. To begin with, the whole premise that mental phenomena, including "spirituality" reduce to electrochemical neurological processes is not a scientific fact or theory but a (rather poor) hypothesis.

[darkstar3]

21. And why is that a rather poor hypothesis?

Emotional and mental phenomena have been controlled chemically for centuries. The idea of electrochemical neurological processes giving rise to thought, emotion, and reaction is the very basis of psychiatry. Anti-depressants, anti-psychotics, anti-epileptics...the list of drugs currently used to help people live normal lives goes on and on, and all of them are based on electrochemical neurological processes.

You're correct that "correlation does not equal causality", but the rest of what you said seems to be a simple denial of decades of scientific research and progress.

[tama]

22. Psychiatry or psychocontrol?

Healing of soul-life (psychiatry) or control of soul-life? A bit of healthy and open minded cultural relativism together with (de)constructive self-criticism of one's own cultural conditioning is allways called for in anthropological study of gnothi seauton. A very similar group of symptoms is interpreted, diagnosed and treated very differently in different cultures, symptoms that in Western psychocontrol are considered "bad" and in need of chemical treatment to "help people live normal (western) lives" as consumers and wage slaves, parts of the machine of Modernity, but e.g. in shamanic societies same or similar symptoms can be interpreted as shaman-disease and as such considered a gift for the tribe and treated with series of various initiations, meditation-practices, sharings with certain plants and mushrooms etc. that help to forge out a well functioning shaman, medicine man etc. for the tribe to rely on when maintaining an eco-spiritual balance between the tribal society and larger society of surrounding nature.

Based on certain hopefully obvious ethical axioms the "primitive" shamanic worldviews and practises that enable peoples to live in balance for millennia, comparation to "normative" or "authoritative" scientific worldview (among multitude of scientific worldviews) is not flattering to scientific worldview of psychocontrol.



Now, from comparative anthropology to science and philosophy, I'm certainly not denying that there are correlations with mental phenomena and electrochemical neurological processes, or that at least in (psychologically experienced) unidirectional linear time chemicals seem to have have causative power over mental phenomena, just like mental phenomena have causative power over classical mechanics. It's a dynamic two-way process. But our mental processes are not limited to analytical mode thinking and reductionism only, mental processes are (or can be, if not actively suffocated) also holistic, holonomic and holographic. The analytical and reductionistic modes of thinking are very closely linked to ideology of control, which in turn has much to do with ego-construct which is, when thoroughly analyzed, a construct of fear of it's own death. But I'm digressing, there is no a priori logical or empirical reason to presuppose that reductionism is the right philosophical or metaphysical foundation or axiomatic presupposition of science, scientific worldviews and methodologies. On the contrary, a good case could be built on the hypothesis that in fact the reductionistic paradigm is not separate from the cultural ideology of control and consumerism (Will to Power, as Nietzsche put it) that has given it birth.

TOE or explanatory framework that is not limited reductionism but at least combines also holism as equally important aspect of being and nature has of course much wider explanatory power, though the act and criteria of explaining are also affected by change of basic metaphysical presuppositions. That does not mean that testability of a holistic TOE would suffer, rather the dead end "not even theory" -criticism of reductionistic TOE approaches such as string models suggest that their basic presuppositions are what are causing the dead end situation. But to keep things as simple as possible, the hypothesis that mental phenomena (such as mathematics that enable theorizing quantum mechanics) reduce to classical mechanics is poor hypothesis just because of that. How can classical mechanics and some mysteriously emerging epiphenomenon of nothing but classical mechanics theorize mathematically etc. the more general and wider quantum level of which classical mechanics is just a special case, if there is not at least some holografic connection of sharing and belonging?


So the reductionistic hypothesis fails ethically, logically and empirically. Enough said.

[darkstar3]

23. Yeah, sorry, but I stopped reading at the repeated use of the phrase "soul-life".

The presuppositions and pseudo-science involved in that phrase alone are practically mind-boggling.

[tama]

24. It's just Greek to you ;)

'Soul' and ''life' are just the standard translations of the Greek word 'psykhe'. Boggle your mind over that fact and keep reading if you like - you might learn something.

[darkstar3]

30. Ah, the "you just don't understand" defense...

It couldn't possibly be that your pseudo-scientific psychobabble lacks substance, scientific rigor, critical thought or proper English usage, oh no...the reason I don't get it is because you're privy to some special understanding that us unbelievers can't access...

How very unoriginal.

[tama]

35. Challenging

one's belief systems is healthy and scientific, the basis of scientific attitude. Dialogue starts with listening and opening one's mind for understanding.

[darkstar3]

61. Investigation of possibilities only makes sense when probability is non-trivial.

Having an open mind is all well and good, but chasing possibilities merely because they ARE possibilities and with no regard for probability borders on the insane.

An example:

It is perfectly logical to investigate the possibility that extra-terrestrial life exists. It is not logical to assume that such life exists, but given the shear size of our galaxy alone, the probability of extra-terrestrial life is non-trivial.

It is completely insane to investigate the possibility that monkeys may fly from my ass on a future date. Literally EVERYTHING is possible, but this particular possibility has a trivial probability.

Given what we currently know about human development and physiology, the probability of a soul tends toward the trivial. The probability of extra-cranial thought or emotion is most definitely trivial.

To sum up: I have no problem at all challenging that which I think I know, because I have no particular belief system per se. However, while I remain open-minded to many possibilities, I refuse to put aside probability. In that light, your post makes about as much sense to me as someone claiming that monkeys can fly from their ass.

[tama]

63. Who is "we"?

"The probability of extra-cranial thought or emotion is most definitely trivial."

Reductionism is a strong culturally dependent belief based on reductionistic presuppositions. Strong belief systems tend to have strong in-build defence mechanisms.

I cannot force you to challenge your core belief system and don't want to. We all have our world views but a map is not the landscape. But this I need to say, in terms of evolutionary adaptation some maps work better than other so they are not all equal, and I worry that the reductionistic map suffers from in-built Eastern Island syndrom.

[GliderGuider]

64. +1

Very succinct.

[tama]

66. Have you noticed

"A single connection is the quantum unit of the sacred." has exactly the same meaning as "Aho Mitakuye Oyasin." :)

[GliderGuider]

69. "All my relations."

Yes, the two sayings, spoken in different cultural languages, mean exactly the same thing. Thanks for noticing.

[darkstar3]

67. Oh come on.

The proper application of probability qualifies as neither reductionism nor a belief system. Remember also that while you may wish to attack the application of probability in this instance, even you use probability in your daily life to decide what to fear and what not to fear.

Let's assume that you went to the theater and watched the movie "300". During the movie, would have you feared the possibility that the soldiers could have jumped off the screen at any time and started hacking up the audience?

Assuming that you eat meat, would you fear that the steak on your plate at any given dinner could suddenly morph back into a bull and gore you?

Do you believe that demons may at any time take over your body or cause you physical harm?

Do you believe in the core principles of Scientology?

The answer to all of these questions is very likely "of course not." That is because, even if you call it "instinct", we ALL use probability in our daily lives to decide what is real, and what is make-believe. The probability of all the possibilities I mentioned above is trivial, and therefore we choose not to believe in or worry about them.

For you to attack this process as reductionist or as a belief system is for you to reject the good that it does for you. If you intend to live by the axiom "anything is possible" and truly reject the application of probability then I expect that you will go quite mad with fear.

Finally, two quick things:
1. Who is "we"? is a pointless question. You obviously have some grasp of the English language and know exactly what is meant by the term "we."
2. If you believe that thought and emotion exist outside or independently of the brain, then I suggest that you study up on Alzheimer's, accident victims with brain injuries, and many more scientific studies which conclude that changes in brain chemistry or topology can yield wild changes in personality.

[ChadwickHenryWard]

33. You have written a huge number of words

that, when taken together, convey no meaning. We're not talking about capitalism, we're talking about whether or not the mind exists independent of the body. It's not helpful to conflate the two issues.

[tama]

34. Yes it is helpfull

First, if everything affects everything, mental phenomena are not independent from brain. Saying that mental phenomena reduce to brain is another matter.

Second, ethical criteria are just as important as logical and empirical. Ultimate test of a worldview or theory is falsification by evolution, if a worldview fails to adapt to natural environment and ceases to exist, it has been falsified. Western worldview based on idea of control of objectified nature that it feels separated and alianated from and ideology of continuous growth is in the process of getting falsified (collapsing) as it is destroying what supports it and makes it possible.

There is something fundamentally wrong with a worldview of objectifying nature into a mere pool of resources to be consumed by a culture acting like cancer, without sense of belonging and organic relation with Mother Earth.

[ZombieHorde]

37. Before I comment on your post, I am going to recap the OP.

Some scientists have observed an increase of "spirituality" when specific areas of the brain are damaged.

Now lets look at your post...

Healing of soul-life (psychiatry) or control of soul-life?

Logical Fallacy/Red Herring.

A bit of healthy and open minded cultural relativism together with (de)constructive self-criticism of one's own cultural conditioning is allways called for in anthropological study of gnothi seauton. = Logical Fallacy/Major red herring.

A very similar group of symptoms is interpreted, diagnosed and treated very differently in different cultures, symptoms that in Western psychocontrol are considered "bad" and in need of chemical treatment to "help people live normal (western) lives" as consumers and wage slaves, parts of the machine of Modernity, but e.g. in shamanic societies same or similar symptoms can be interpreted as shaman-disease and as such considered a gift for the tribe and treated with series of various initiations, meditation-practices, sharings with certain plants and mushrooms etc. that help to forge out a well functioning shaman, medicine man etc. for the tribe to rely on when maintaining an eco-spiritual balance between the tribal society and larger society of surrounding nature.

Logical Fallacy/Fonzi is jumping the shark red herring.

Nothing in the above paragraph even touches the article.

Based on certain hopefully obvious ethical axioms the "primitive" shamanic worldviews and practises that enable peoples to live in balance for millennia, comparation to "normative" or "authoritative" scientific worldview (among multitude of scientific worldviews) is not flattering to scientific worldview of psychocontrol.

Again, nothing to do with observations made.

Now, from comparative anthropology to science and philosophy,

This observation has nothing to do with anthropology or philosophy.

I'm certainly not denying that there are correlations with mental phenomena and electrochemical neurological processes, or that at least in (psychologically experienced) unidirectional linear time chemicals seem to have have causative power over mental phenomena, just like mental phenomena have causative power over classical mechanics.

This is the only sentence which actually seems to address the article, and you seem to be agreeing with the basic premise.

It's a dynamic two-way process. But our mental processes are not limited to analytical mode thinking and reductionism only, mental processes are (or can be, if not actively suffocated) also holistic, holonomic and holographic. The analytical and reductionistic modes of thinking are very closely linked to ideology of control, which in turn has much to do with ego-construct which is, when thoroughly analyzed, a construct of fear of it's own death. But I'm digressing, there is no a priori logical or empirical reason to presuppose that reductionism is the right philosophical or metaphysical foundation or axiomatic presupposition of science, scientific worldviews and methodologies. On the contrary, a good case could be built on the hypothesis that in fact the reductionistic paradigm is not separate from the cultural ideology of control and consumerism (Will to Power, as Nietzsche put it) that has given it birth.

At least you admit you are using red herrings.

The next paragraph is off in lala land. The paragraph has nothing to do with the observation made.

So the reductionistic hypothesis fails ethically, logically and empirically. Enough said.

What hypothesis? I did not see an official hypothesis in the article.

Your post is one of the longer red herrings I have seen on DU.

[tama]

38. Please note

that my post was not addressing the article the OP refers to, at least not directly, but discussed and criticized the background of more general reductionistic hypothesis (ie mental phenomena are nothing but emergent epiphenomenon of electrochemical neurological processes) prevalent in current Western culture, answering a question directed at me, why do I consider reductionistic hypothesis poor one. So your reply is nothing but a red herring.

As for the findings of the article they are nothing new really, "spiritual" experiences or various levels of altered states of consciousness (ASC) have been induced by ayahuasca, ibogaine, psilocybines etc. for millenia, by various meditation techniques, drumming, dancing etc. but occur also spontaneously - I've seen a figure that 2% of human population experience ASC spontaneously.

Graham Hancock's anthropological study "Supernatural" (http://www.grahamhancock.com/supernatural/) which I'm currently reading discusses there matters extensively from various viewpoints and the very strong similarities of symbolisms beyond cultural barriers of "shamanic" ASC are very hard to explain on the basis of the reductionistic hypothesis and thus add to the evidence contrary to it. As for the role of brain and how neurological manipulation produces ASC, a better analogue could be a TV receiver than can be tuned into various channels.


PS: Three replys so far to the above post, all just debating tactics devoid of any meaningfull content.

[ZombieHorde]

42. Three replys so far to the above post, all just debating tactics devoid of any meaningfull content.

Your post does not concern the OP. If you wish to start a new topic, the middle of someone else's thread may not be the best place.

If someone makes a thread about car bombings, and I post a reply about the history of Ford, I probably won't get many meaningful posts. This is a red herring; a loosely related tangent.

Start your own OP.

[tama]

45. I beg to differ

My post concerns the OP as discussing the wider context of the interpretative frame of the empirical data in question. This approach is very much to the point of this discussion and what science is supposed to be about: "Now that we have this empirical data, what does it mean when put in a wider context"? To be more specific, do these results prove that "self-transcendence" or more generally, "spiritual experiences" are reducible to electrochemical processes in brain - as some would seem to be eager to claim.

[ZombieHorde]

47. "do these results prove..."

"do these results prove that "self-transcendence" or more generally, "spiritual experiences" are reducible to electrochemical processes in brain - as some would seem to be eager to claim."

I would say no, the results do not really prove anything. The results suggest a connection exists between the human brain and human spirituality as defined by the test the scientists used. No proof, just a little weight toward one idea. More work needs to be done.

I personally suspect spiritual experiences come from the brain because I don't know where else spiritual experiences would come from. The foot? Trees? A supernatural entity? The position of the planets? Brain chemicals seem most likely to me.

[tama]

49. "hen oida hoti ouden oida"

To quote Socrates, "I know one thing, that I know nothing". In other words, it is not required to know "where else" spiritual experiences would come in order to not believe that they come from brain or brain alone, when that answer is dissatisfactory in many ways. That does not mean, on the other hand, that more couldn't be known also in form of testable scientific theories.

And of course there are much better and more humane ways to study the connection between human brain, brain chemicals and spiritual experience than cutting the brain, namely psychadelics like DMT:

"There is intense friction between what we know intellectually or even intuitively, and what we experience with the aid of DMT. As one of our volunteers exclaimed after his first high dose session, "Wow! I never expected that!" Or, as Dogen, a thirteenth century Japanese Buddhist teacher said, "We must always be disturbed by the truth." Enthusiasts of the psychedelic drug culture may dislike the conclusion that DMT has no beneficial effects in and of itself; rather, the context in which people take them is at least as important. Proponents of drug control may condemn what they read as encouragement to take psychedelic drugs and a glorification of the DMT experience. Practitioners and spokespersons of traditional religions may reject the suggestion that spiritual states can be accessed, and mystical information gained, through drugs. Those who have undergone "alien abduction," and their advocates, may interpret as a challenge to the "reality" of their experiences my suggestion that DMT is intimately involved in these events. Opponents and supporters of abortion rights may find fault with my proposal that pineal DMT release at 49 days after conception marks the entrance of the spirit into the fetus.

Brain researchers may object to the suggestion that DMT affects the brain's ability to receive information, rather than generating those perceptions themselves. They also may dismiss the proposal that DMT can allow our brains to perceive dark matter or parallel universes, realms of existence inhabited by conscious entities."
http://www.rickstrassman.com/?q=node/4

[ZombieHorde]

58. "when that answer is dissatisfactory in many ways"

The dissatisfaction from the claim "spirituality comes from the brain" is the vagueness of the word "spirituality."

I believe spirituality is a feeling, like love, and feelings come from the brain.

[tama]

59. Feelings and spirits

Those who participated in the DMT research describe their experience as encounters with spirits in "spiritworld" that felt even more real and objective than this one.

In my experience a feeling like love is situated not in the brain but primarily in the heart chackra. Then there is this more general feeling of body-feel that science calls "propriosceptive sense", which how it is felt in my case at least is peculiar in the way that there are no distinct boundaries, but more like fuzzy continuity. Brain is one part of this phenomenal sense of being but not all of it. Phenomenological empirical attitude advises me to trust phenomenal reality first and theoretical descriptions only second, though I'm also happy with dialogue between theory and experience.

So there are many kinds of experiences and feelings that can be discussed and in many cases, if willing even shared. How this body is experienced and felt and what theories may be crafted to explain this empirical reality don't have to be universal, shouldn't be used to dictate how other unique beings experience and explain themselves. Nor do I accepted being as dictated by a theory that someone else chooses to believe in, however universal the theory claims to be. The golden rule comes first.

This is a good story to keep in mind:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blind_men_and_an_elephant

[ZombieHorde]

60. Those who who participated in the DMT research were likely high on DMT.

DMT is a drug which affects the brain. Your post seems to give weight to the guess: spiritual experiences come from the brain.

[darkstar3]

62. +1. n/t

[tama]

65. Where in the brain and why?

The broblem here is that the perceptions during "shamanic" trance all over the globe have striking similarities and common and shared features, whether the trance is induced by entheogens, drumming, dancing or just happens.

This universal nature of imagery perceived during trance experiences is something that needs to be explained, so if the only source is brain then there should be a brain area where such imagery is stored, and even more, what would be the evolutionary benefit of such store-room in the brain?

If the brain is not the (only) source of mental images but more like a transmitter with ability to tune into various channels, crafting explanatory models in terms of evolutionary adaptation etc. becomes easier.

[darkstar3]

68. For someone who attacks reductionism,

you certainly seem to use it when you think it can help your cause.

This universal nature of imagery perceived during trance experiences is something that needs to be explained, so if the only source is brain then there should be a brain area where such imagery is stored, and even more, what would be the evolutionary benefit of such store-room in the brain?

This is a highly reductionist statement, taking a set of similar occurrences and assigning to them one very basic cause based entirely on your limited view of brain chemistry.

Regardless of that however, I suggest that if you want an answer to your question of how these images can be so universally experienced, you consider this:

There are over 7 billion people on this planet. Reducing all of them to brain chemistry and topology, they are all slightly different, with no one brain exactly matching the next. However, all 7 billion of them developed using the same processes, from the same type of root nervous system, using the same type of cells. Even where chemistry and topology differ slightly, there are still immeasurable similarities between the brains of every human on earth, and as such it is not unreasonable to assume that these similarities can lead to similar experiences when external stimuli are involved.

Now for the important part: No one area of the brain controls any one thing or action. This is a common misconception perpetuated by various media, but the truth is far more complex. fMRI scans show that many different centers of the brain are activated to perform even the simplest of tasks, like talking, walking, and even recognition of physical objects. As such, it is very incorrect to state that there should be an "area" in the brain that controls or stores something. The brain is the ultimate cloud computing platform.

[tama]

71. DNA visions ancient and modern

Your explanation does not explain anything about the similarities of imagery in altered states of mind (ASD). Interestingly double helix (e.g. intertwined snakes as in staff of Asclepius) is one of the very common features and also scientists first "saw" it in ASD:

"Crick had told him that some Cambridge academics used LSD in tiny amounts as a thinking tool, to liberate them from preconceptions and let their genius wander freely to new ideas. Crick told him he had perceived the double-helix shape while on LSD."
http://www.mayanmajix.com/art1699.html

Another Nobel Laureate and DNA researcher Kary Mullis also used LSD to "travel" in DNA:
"In a Q&A interview published in the September 1994 issue of California Monthly, Mullis said, "Back in the 1960s and early '70s I took plenty of LSD. A lot of people were doing that in Berkeley back then. And I found it to be a mind-opening experience. It was certainly much more important than any courses I ever took." During a symposium held for centenarian Albert Hofmann, Hofmann revealed that he was told by Nobel-prize-winning chemist Kary Mullis that LSD had helped him develop the polymerase chain reaction that helps amplify specific DNA sequences."

More "stoned" scientists:
http://www.cannabisculture.com/articles/2783.html

So we see that visions in ASD or trance can be very meaningfull and also scientifically productive. How can this be so? If mind would reduce to just classical mechanics in brain, one would expect that ASD or trance visions would be just random noise and/or imagery from past personal experience.

[darkstar3]

72. Read it again.

The last two paragraphs most definitely address your concerns about ASD, because external stimuli are involved.

[tama]

73. Nope

I'm sure you are aware that trance experiences happen also spontaneously without external stimuli such as entheogens, I've seen an estimate that about 2 percent of human population experience spontaneous "tripping".

[darkstar3]

74. Now you're in denial.

Occam's Razor comes to mind here. We KNOW that our brains are vastly more similar than they are different. Why should there be any other reason for the similarity of experiences?

ETA: BTW, first you were talking about drugs (which ARE external stimuli), and then you tried to move the goalposts and talk about "spontaneous tripping", not that it really made much difference. Why do you jump around so much?

[tama]

75. I'm not interested in debate and personal attacks

I just corrected the misconception that trance states are allways produced by external (chemical) stimuli - they happen also spontaneously. The question is about trance states and perceptions like DNA during trance accross cultural boundaries, not entheogens which are just one method to produce trance state willingly.

It just does not make sense how and why would mind as a mere epiphenom of electric and chemical processe in brain perceive e.g. visions of DNA during trance states - in various cultures long before DNA was found by scientists (in LSD trance!) when the facts point out that trance states often open "doors of perception" to relevant information that in cases like DNA visions are also scientifically verified. Linear causality of classical mechanics fail to explain such phenomena.

[darkstar3]

76. "I'm not interested in debate"

that's pretty clear at this point. You are also clearly uninterested in the facts of bio-psychology.

[tama]

77. Debates

are not interesting because they have very little to do with discussing the issue and gaining understanding (what science is and should be about) and all to do with games of "being right" with strawmen and adhominems and defending dogmatic positions. Very predictable and boring games.

Here's a recent article on reductionistic dogma attacking and debating innovative science:
http://www.sheldrake.org/Articles&Papers/articles/Dace_Anti-SheldrakePhenomenon.html

[Jim__]

78. Debates, without the vitriol and dogmatism, can be interesting.

A discussion where everyone agrees, often fails to challenge people's assumptions. When someone disagrees, a discussion often turns into a debate; peoples views are challenged, and everyone stands to learn. I agree that the need to be right generally destroys any capacity to learn. But, I do think that a debate can be carried on without that need.

[darkstar3]

79. Debate,

or discussion if you prefer, is the only way in which two people from different sides of a point of view can actually discuss that POV in any meaningful fashion. These "games" as you call them are simply the tools used by asshats that have no idea how to support their hypotheses with facts.

The facts are simple in this case: Human bio-psychology and the similarities contained therein explain every phenomena you've attempted to credit to other nebulous causes in this thread. It is unreasonable to assume that thought, emotion, or experience come from some undefined location outside the brain simply because there are some things about the brain that we do not yet know. We know enough to know that the brain can do it all. This does not necessarily mean that it does, but to assume otherwise is an untested hypothesis with no more or less standing than the hypothesis that sophisticated aliens created us all and are using us as some sort of experiment.

[tama]

80. Au contraire

"We" know enough to know that reducuctionism into fully deterministic classical mechanics does not explain what and how we are - holistic organisms that are more than the sums of our classical parts (just particles bumbing into each other). It is curious how this can be so plainly evident to some of us and utterly incomprehensible to the reductionist camp of "we", that being an organism by definition means holistic being instead of nothing but reductionistic and fully deterministic being.

I've been carefull not to offer any alternative hypothesis of "nebulous causes" and just expressing skepticism of classical reductionism. If other hypothesis really interest, they can be found and discussed. But nothing so far hints that there would be such interest so I see no point trying to bring them into this discussion.

[darkstar3]

81. Your care has been useless.

By attacking all current hypotheses put forward by real scientists as reductionist, you automatically imply that other hypotheses are available, and that you believe they are more explanatory. By using the term "holistic" repeatedly, and claiming that we are more than the sum of our parts (parts which you do not understand and oversimplify), you are already starting to put forward at least one of those hypotheses.

If you are truly interested in the "how" and "why" of human thought and experience, not to mention other such universal phenomena like mechanics and chemistry, the hard sciences are a wondrous place to start looking. Approach psychology, psychiatry, sociology, chemistry, biology, and micro-kinetics with an open mind, and you will find the explanations you are so desperately seeking in alternative pseudoscience.

And as you explore, remember this: If the answer is easy, and yet explains a wide array of universal phenomena, chances are great that you are asking the wrong question.

42.

[tama]

82. 42

Are you sure there was no implication that only reductionists are "real scientists" - and non-reductionistic approaches are "alternative pseudoscience"? That would be extremely dogmatic definition of science and fundamentally unscientific.

The preaching and condescending tone of your post does suggest a true believer feeling that his dogmatic view is insecure unless everybody is convinced believe in the same dogma.

PS: 42=14 if one can count both ways... ;)

[darkstar3]

83. Hello? Content?

Has anyone seen Content? We're missing Content here...

I grow weary of you dismissing scientific discovery and fact out of hand as reductionist. Good day to you.

PS: I also think you need a primer in math, as there are not only two ways to count, but many.

[tama]

84. Exactly

There has not been content for a long time. All I get in response to content is ad hominems and strawmen and refusals to even read it.

Scepticism of reductionism does not mean dismissing scientific discovery and fact, scepticism of underlying dogmatic presuppositions such as reductionism is the cornerstone of scientific discovery and fact based on empirical data. When reductionistic dogmatism categorically refuses to accept empirical data that challenges reductionism and suffocates discussion ("best candidate for book burning" as Maddox commented Sheldrake's publication) it is no more science, just academic dogmatism and power games. Sad and pitifull.

[ironbark]

85. Dear tama. Late to the party and just passing through.

Haven't posted here for some time because all I got was all you get.."ad hominems and strawmen and.."

Just read down the thread and found your contribution thoroughly refreshing, ample content and no playing the man. Well done.

Felt compelled to respond- Thank you. Great read.

I was tempted to throw in a Doors of Perception reference about five posts back then saw you had beaten me to it.

Enjoyed your perspective on Reductionism but can't see why you should have any misgivings...the process has served us well in identifying and splitting the smallest components of matter...now we just need to continue the reductionist process in all other fields and endeavours. We have all our elderly in old folks homes, all the little ones in Kinda...sets and sub sets, divide and reduce.. for better understanding and easier management...our physically ill in one box, our mentally ill in another...intellectually disabled go in this box...troubled youth in this one...

The reductionist model of social structure and service provision is working splendidly....
towards one box each ;-)

What was that line about love being a fuzzy blurring of the personal boundary?
A good solid reductionist box will fix that!

Thanks again for a most interesting read.

[tama]

87. Thanks

To be totally honest, my favourite theory (a big TOE) is totally reductionistic, it reduces everything including theory of consciousness - and feelings of love and compassion - to number theory. Those mathematical platonists, gotta love them... ;)

[ZombieHorde]

70. I don't have much to add from what Darkstar has already said except...

the common trance/psychedelic/spiritual experiences may not have any more evolutionary benefit than freckles have. I don't think every aspect of humans has to have an evolutionary benefit.

*****ALERT: wild guess warning***** These experiences may simply be people being able to access functions of the brain usually only used in traumatic situations, such as sever injury. I have heard people get rushes of adrenaline and/or endorphins when they become severely injured. If a person could access this brain function without the horrible injury, the experience may be profound, especially when mixed with religious zeal. *****DISCLAIMER: I know I don't really know what is happening inside a person's brain during a spiritual experience, I am just having some fun with possibilities*****

[Jim__]

39. I disagree with your summary of the OP.

Some scientists have observed an increase of "spirituality" when specific areas of the brain are damaged.

Actually what the OP says, and the rest of the article cited by the OP, is that damage to certain parts of the brain lead to an increase of a measure of a character trait that is (vaguely) associated with spiritual beliefs.

[ZombieHorde]

40. Which part of my summery do you disagree with? nt

[Jim__]

41. OK, to be more specific, ...

Some scientists have observed an increase of "spirituality" ...

No one is claiming to have observed and increase of spirituality. What they've observed is an increase in the measure of a character trait that is vaguely associated with spirituality. They've observed a change in a test score, not behavior.

[ZombieHorde]

43. This is why I put spirituality in quotes, but I agree your wording is more clear,

and therefore better than my wording.

[TZ]

86. Wait. You complain about the lack of accuracy in the science

by using psuedoscientific terminology? Ummm YEAAAAH. You have an agenda here don't you? Anyone who talks about Shamanic balances is NOT a scientist btw.
Why is it so hard for believers to understand that their beliefs might have a biological basis?

[ChadwickHenryWard]

32. There's no such thing as free will.

All things are caused by previous events, including beliefs and decisions within the brain.

[tama]

36. In that case

your belief that there is no free will is caused by previous events conditoning you to believe that beliefs and decisions reduce to deterministic classical physics in the brain. So, logically there is no reason to believe that your reductionistic and deterministic believes are universal truth, they show just how you have been conditioned to believe. :)

[ChadwickHenryWard]

51. That doesn't follow at all.

Just because there are physical underpinnings behind what I believe does not mean that what I believe is not logical. One of the "causes" of my belief is that to the best of my perception it is logical. I have no choice but to believe what I perceive as logical, and conditioning doesn't have to enter into it.

[tama]

55. I'm not saying

that strict determinism which when logically applied leads to "eliminative materialism" couldn't be logical. All logic is, in the end, circular reasoning ;). With the well known gödelian caveat that any formal logical system containing number theory contains an logically unprovable self evident truth.

And to clear up a possible confusion, what was meant by conditioning means the very "physical underpinnings" you mention and believe in and what you perceive and cannot perceive.

So by all means, don't have or don't believe in free will - just as long as you don't try to - or be determined to - to enforce your lack of free will upon other beings who might rather enjoy their freedom of choice.

[ZombieHorde]

44. Everything has a cause = no free will? I wonder about this from time to time.

I want to believe in fee will, but some days I have a hard time.

[tama]

46. Do you have

the freedom of choice to be free from choosing? ;)

[ChadwickHenryWard]

52. Yes, I think that follows quite easily.

We're made up of physical matter, and a clear causality has been shown between known phenomena of the mind such as thoughts and emotions and their chemical underpinnings. If everything has a cause, then that cannot exclude those events in the brain which control decision-making. Those factors contributing to the making of a decision are completely beyond our control.

[Jim__]

48. "All things are caused by previous events ..."

Of course, that claim leads us right to Aquinas' argument for a first cause.

[tama]

50. Which is a refrace

of Aristotelian "Immovable Mover". Modern equivalent is the density matrix of the Big Bang where All Was Determined. These all "Creator God" ideas are based on reductionistic metaphysics and linear causality (aka Law of Karma). Clockwork Orange -universe inhabited by zombie puppets... ;)

I like more being a participant in Creation as dynamic interlinked process where everything affects everything also non-mechanically, "non-locally" in relation to classical clock-work mechanics. That does not mean denying Karma or deterministic/linear causal conditionings affecting my behaviour, just that it's not the whole story and everything there is.

[ChadwickHenryWard]

53. The problem with the "First Cause" has always been

that neither of the two alternatives are logical: there cannot be an "uncaused cause" or "first mover" - that violates causality; however, there cannot be an infinite regress - that also violates causality. The problem is with our assumption that causality is universal, eternal and infinite. So, there must be a third way, namely that causality is not universal. Thankfully, quantum physics has given us this. Since causality only works on levels above the quantum, it is possible to postulate a "time" "before" causality, when only the quantum world existed. Extrapolating the expanding Universe backward to a singularity, we easily reach just this - a state of events "prior" to causality and the Universe itself. So in a way, we have reached our "First Cause" - by moving outside of causality as we know it.

On a side note, the fact that the Universe itself is without cause means that all this splendor and majesty is in some sense just an accident. Which I think is fucking awesome.

[tama]

56. Very good, linear causality is not universal

But quantum mechanics is not limited to singularity of Big Bang, in laboratories even relatively large molecules behave quantum mechanically and there is no compelling reason to accept the collapse of the wave aspect -interpretations in the first place. Bohmian mechanics is one example of other viable (holistic) interpretations that don't limit quantum mechanics to the microscopic.

Non-linear (or non-local) quantum causality, on the other hand, resembles very much how Buddha described causality when so asked: If this arises, that arises; if this ceases, that ceases.

[Jim__]

57. "The problem is with our assumption that causality is universal, eternal and infinite."

That was your assumption All things are caused by previous events..., not our assumption.

And your claim: ... quantum physics has given us this ... causality only works on levels above the quantum ..., is another assumption. There are a number of physical theories with respect to quanta that accept their behavior as completely deterministic, and some others that are agnostic with respect to determinism, and yet other interpretations that claim they are non-deterministic.

I believe that the many-worlds interpretation (a fully deterministic interpretation) is "currently" the most popular among physicists. Currently is in quotes because this is subject to change.

[Patchuli]

54. But when it's felt in the heart the strongest of all

what's the brain link?

[sam sarrha]

88. i've been reading up on this... very ineteresting,,, ..Links>>

http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Dstripbooks&field-keywords=+Andrew+Newberg+M.D&x=17&y=24

i read this one...
http://www.amazon.com/How-Changes-Your-Brain-Neuroscientist/dp/0345503422/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1268448953&sr=1-1
" From Publishers Weekly....The authors conclude that meditation and other spiritual practices permanently strengthen neural functioning in specific parts of the brain that aid in lowering anxiety and depression, enhancing social awareness and empathy, and improving cognitive functioning. The book's middle section draws on the authors' research on how people experience God and where in the brain that experience might be located. Finally, the authors offer exercises for enhancing physical, mental and spiritual health. Their suggestions are commonsensical and common to other kinds of health regimens: smile, stay intellectually active, consciously relax, yawn, meditate, exercise aerobically, dialogue with others and trust in your beliefs. Although the book's title is a bit misleading, since it is not God but spiritual practice that changes the brain, this forceful study could stir controversy among scientists and philosophers. Illus."


and...
http://www.amazon.com/Change-Your-Brain-Life-Obsessiveness/dp/0812929985/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1268449157&sr=1-1
"From Library Journal
Clinical neuroscientist and psychiatrist Amen uses nuclear brain imaging to diagnose and treat behavioral problems. He explains how the brain works, what happens when things go wrong, and how to optimize brain function. Five sections of the brain are discussed, and case studies clearly illustrate possible problems. The accompanying brain-scan photos are difficult to read with an untrained eye. Although Amen provides step-by-step "prescriptions" geared toward optimizing and healing the different sections of the brain"


this was a great book..
http://www.amazon.com/Destructive-Emotions-Scientific-Dialogue-Dalai/dp/0553381059/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1268449508&sr=1-1-spell
"From Publishers Weekly ...The timely theme of the dialogue was suggested by the Dalai Lama to Goleman, who took on the role of organizer and brought together some world-class researchers and thinkers, including psychologist Paul Ekman, philosopher Owen Flanagan, the late Francisco Varela and Buddhist photographer Matthieu Riccard. In a sense, the many extraordinary insights and findings that arise from the presentations and subsequent discussions are embodied by the Dalai Lama himself as he appears here. Far from the cuddly teddy bear the popular media sometimes makes him out to be, he emerges as a brilliant and exacting interrogator, a natural scientist, as well as a leader committed to finding a practical means to help society. Yet he also personally embodies the possibility of overcoming destructive emotions, of becoming resilient, compassionate and happy no matter what life brings. Covering the nature of destructive emotions, the neuroscience of emotion, the scientific study of consciousness and more, this essential volume offers a fascinating account of what can emerge when two profound systems for studying the mind and emotions, Western science and Buddhism, join forces. Goleman travels beyond the edge of the known, and the report he sends back is encouraging."

[cynatnite]

89. So, if I had been dropped on my head I would believe in god...

well, that explains a lot.