In the 2001 book Why God Won't Go Away by Andrew Newberg and Eugene D'Aquili,
a study involving Buddhist monks, Franciscan nuns, and their brain activity
during prayer and meditation is assessed. While the research delves into the
relationship between the brain's activity and religious experiences, the tone
and content invite critical reflection on both the scientific interpretation of
religious phenomena and the broader implications of such studies. In this essay,
I will critically analyze the claims made in the excerpt, assess the
implications of the research, and raise some concerns about the interpretation
of religious experiences in neurobiological terms.
Analysis of the Study’s Premise
The study described in the text reports findings from brain scans of Buddhist
monks and Franciscan nuns during their respective meditative and prayerful
states. It notes that when these individuals engage in deep meditation or
prayer, there is a significant reduction in brain activity in the posterior
superior parietal lobe (PSPL). The PSPL is identified as a region of the brain
responsible for spatial orientation, which is crucial in helping the body
navigate physical space. The text suggests that when this area of the brain is
"booted up," individuals have a clear sense of body orientation, but during deep
meditation or prayer, this sense diminishes, leading to what the authors
describe as a loss of distinction between self and non-self.
At first glance, the study’s findings seem to offer a fascinating insight into
the intersection of brain function and spiritual experience. The suggestion that
reduced activity in the PSPL may correlate with a loss of boundaries between
self and non-self aligns with the personal testimonies of individuals
experiencing transcendent or mystical experiences. This could be seen as an
objective, scientific explanation for phenomena such as the sense of "oneness"
or "union with God" often reported by mystics, monks, and nuns across different
religious traditions.
Critique of the Scientific Reductionism
While this study presents an intriguing relationship between brain activity and
spiritual experiences, there is a critical issue with its reductionist approach
to spirituality. By attributing religious experiences solely to the functioning
of the PSPL, the research runs the risk of oversimplifying complex and deeply
personal phenomena. Religious experiences, including the sense of divine
presence or spiritual transcendence, are multifaceted and may involve emotional,
social, cultural, and existential dimensions that go beyond mere brain activity.
The study seems to treat religious experiences as if they can be fully explained
by neurobiological processes.
No proof one way or the other is possible. It can be argued that spirituality is not merely a brain function; it is deeply embedded in human consciousness, culture, and individual belief systems. Reducing these experiences to brain activity may inadvertently dismiss the richness and depth of religious traditions, which have profound meanings and values that cannot be fully captured by brain scans.
Pragmatically if not scientifically, we are best saying the most important
aspects can be explained largely by brain activity. What choice do we
have? We know human nature is capable of reading mystery and meaning into
things that is not actually there. Those who adored images of Baal also would
have subscribed to, "Reducing these experiences to brain activity may
inadvertently dismiss the richness and depth of religious traditions, which have
profound meanings and values that cannot be fully captured by brain scans."
Remember, most people enrolled as Christians are more sceptics than anything
else. Remember that most religious experience has been linked to the
adoration of sacred groves and idols. Christians are late on the scene in
the scheme of things.
The study's reference to alien abductions in a casual tone alongside spiritual
experiences such as feeling God's presence adds an element of skepticism. The
comparison between religious experiences and extraterrestrial encounters could
be seen as an attempt to trivialize or undermine the validity of mystical
experiences. The suggestion that monks' and nuns' experiences are similar to
those of alien abductees may reinforce the stereotype that mystical and
spiritual experiences are simply the product of brain dysfunction or delusion, a
problematic stance for those who see such experiences as sacred and
transformative.
But what if we use more mainstream examples rather than alien abductions?
Possession by demons? Messages and prompts from supposed angels Doreen
Virtue style? What of the bereaved who get a sense that the dead person is
literally or effectively not in their grave but by their side and in their
hearts?
The Role of the Subjective in Scientific Studies
We are told, "One of the most glaring omissions in the study’s framework is the
subjective nature of religious experiences. The text implies that the brain’s
activity (or lack thereof) during meditation or prayer directly correlates with
mystical experiences. While the brain plays a crucial role in how we perceive
the world and ourselves, the subjective interpretation of these experiences is
essential. Spirituality cannot be adequately reduced to observable brain
activity, as the meaning attached to these experiences differs across cultures,
faiths, and individuals. For instance, a Buddhist monk may interpret a state of
ego dissolution as a spiritual awakening, while a Christian nun may interpret a
similar state as an encounter with the divine. The study neglects this diversity
and focuses solely on the neurological aspect, which may limit its overall
validity.
Furthermore, the study does not address the emotional and psychological impact
of these experiences. Feeling a deep connection with the universe or with God
can have transformative effects on an individual's mental and emotional state.
For many people, these experiences are life-affirming, provide comfort, and
contribute to a sense of meaning and purpose. The reduction of such experiences
to mere brain functions neglects the broader psychological and existential
benefits that religion and spirituality often offer."
Reply: The transformation is always limited and when it is strong one day is
weak the next. The Catholic who reports a wondrous experience will still
fall far short of what the standards set by the Catholic version of Jesus
demands. "Feeling a deep connection with the universe or with God can have
transformative effects on an individual's mental and emotional state" is a
problem. Feelings and the mind state may be prompted by or loosely linked to the
spiritual. But there is no necessary connection for some materialistic atheists
are happier than the tranquil country parson.
Implications of the Research
"The research, while thought-provoking, opens the door to both positive and
negative interpretations. On the one hand, it contributes to our understanding
of the neurobiological basis of religious experiences. This could potentially
help bridge the gap between science and religion, showing that the two can be
interconnected rather than mutually exclusive. For example, the discovery that
meditation and prayer influence brain activity may encourage more scientific
inquiry into the psychological and health benefits of religious practices, such
as improved mental health and stress reduction." Reply: you don't need religion
or any specific religious practice to be happy and content. Friends and
relaxation and moderation in life are better.
"This study risks perpetuating the idea that spiritual experiences are merely
the result of neurological conditions, which could lead to the marginalization
of religious and spiritual practices. If religious experiences are understood
only as the product of brain activity, the inherent value and meaning of these
practices might be diminished in the eyes of both believers and skeptics.
Ultimately, a more holistic approach to studying religion would consider the
interplay between biology, culture, emotion, and personal meaning, rather than
reducing complex spiritual experiences to mere brain functions." But
dismissing and fearing the study risks making out that spiritual experiences are
reliable. What of people who think the high points of their life involve
the buzz from good coffee or their favourite music?
What does spiritual even mean anyway? Material existence involves things that are not conscious and things that are. Everything is made of parts. Spiritual is portrayed as something that transcends matter. But does it or does it feel that way? And even if there is a spirit world it may involve things composed of parts too - albeit ones undetectable to us. Spirit and spirituality are really emotional words. They are attempts to convey how there is more to everything than we see. But that does not mean that ghosts and gods exist. They are attempts to hide the illogic of "I feel there is a god or something means that there is a god or something".
In short, you do not get away from reductionism by saying there is some undetectable and invisible reality that only feelings and intuitions can glimpse.
Jesus said that if you pray, do it behind closed doors where possible and tell nobody. Why are spiritual people talking about their experiences? Inevitably, they report things that imply they have special powers of discernment. Even those who oppose reductionism agree that many perhaps even most spiritual people are indeed dependent on their psychology - and are misreading. Reductionism is appropriate in their case. And whether real or not, reports of spiritual experience get admired. This all raises red flags.