Posted by smokeymadison on February 1, 2005, at 16:17:03
In reply to Re: Newsweek article on religion and the brain » smokeymadison, posted by alexandra_k on February 1, 2005, at 2:10:46
> What is interesting to me (and this is something that we argued about a bit) is whether religious experience is the result of MALFUNCTION of the brain. In the way that people want to consider hallucinations, dissociation, and related phenomena to be malfunctions (coping strategies to be sure, but still malfunctions). If it is the result of malfunction then rather than 'seeing things the way they really are' and such, people may be just under the illusion that this is the case.
>
> Why should religious experiences be taken to be more in touch with the ultimate nature of reality than the rest of our experiences?
>
I don't like the malfunction idea either, actually. but just because a certain part of the brain shuts down during these mystical experiences doesn't necessarily mean that the brain is malfunctioning. according to the article, the part that shuts down is the part that gives us the distinction between us and everything else. this distinction is necessary for everyday living; wihtout it we would not be able to carry out basic survival functions, but this distinction may not actually exist on a spiritual level. this part of the brain draws the line for the above mentioned reason, but perhaps the distinction is a distortion of reality, just like our eyes distort reality in a way so that we can function.in Buddhism there is a saying about how we are waves in the ocean. we are not separate from the ocean but from our view, as individual waves, it seems as if we are. According to a Transcendental Meditation teacher i talked to once, meditation takes us beneath the surface and reunites us with everything else. the findings from the Newsweek article seem to point in this direction, i think.
> It doesn't follow that because there is a neural basis that there is a god.
> But then it doesn't follow that because there is a neural basis that there isn't a god either.
>
Science will never be able to prove or disprove God. ok, i take that back. it might happen in physics/chemistry. if you can prove that atoms break down into infinitely smaller particles, then i think that you can prove there is such a thing as eternity since time and matter are related. that would be the first step, since God has always existed in some form in most religions.i don't believe that God created the world exactly. i think that God has always been a part of it. Is it. so when we loose touch with ourselves,lose the distinction betwen us and everything else, there we find God.
>
Thanks for my sidetrack into religion. it wasn't exactly what you posted, but i really enjoy discussing it.SM
poster:smokeymadison
thread:449954
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/write/20050118/msgs/451142.html