-Caveat Lector-

>From New Scientist magazine, 21 April 2001.

In search of God

Are religious feelings just a product of how the brain
works? Bob Holmes meets the researchers who are trying
to explain our most sacred thoughts

EINSTEIN FELT IT. It's what draws people to church, prayer,
meditation, sacred dance and other rituals. Chances are
you've felt something like it too--in the mountains, by the sea,
or perhaps while listening to a piece of music that's especially
close to your heart. In fact, more than half of people report
having had some sort of mystical or religious experience. For
some, the experience is so intense it changes their life forever.

But what is "it"? The presence of God? A glimpse of a higher
plane of being? Or just the mystical equivalent of déjà vu, a
trick the brain sometimes plays on your conscious self? At
some level, of course, all our thoughts and
sensations--however unusual--must involve the brain. Indeed,
experiments on the brain have led neuroscientists to suggest
that the capacity for religion may somehow be hardwired into
us. If so, why do people's religious experiences differ so
profoundly, moving some so deeply while leaving others cold?

Andrew Newberg, a neuroscientist at the University of
Pennsylvania in Philadelphia, has been fascinated by the
neurobiology of religion for more than a decade. He admits it's
an awkward role for a scientist. "I always get concerned that
people will say I'm a religious person who's trying to prove that
God exists, or I'm a cynic who's trying to prove that God
doesn't exist," he says. "But we try to approach it without
bias." Earlier this month he published a book, which lays out
the most complete theory to date of how mystical or religious
experiences can be generated in the brain.

Together with the now deceased Eugene d'Aquili, a colleague
from Penn, Newberg was keen to study the sensations that
are unique to religious experiences but shared by people of all
faiths. One of these is the sense of "oneness with the
Universe" that enthralled Einstein. The other is the feeling of
awe that accompanies such revelations and makes them stand
out as more important, more highly charged, and in a way
more real than our everyday lives.

But Newberg realised that rare, fleeting revelations would be
almost impossible to study in the lab. It meant he had to
ignore the one-off experiences that strike out of the blue and
focus instead on meditation and prayer--sedate, but at least
reproducible.

Through a colleague who practised Tibetan Buddhism, Newberg
and d'Aquili managed to find eight skilled meditators who were
willing to undergo brain imaging. The volunteers came to the
lab one at a time, and a technician inserted an intravenous
tube into one arm. Then the volunteer began to meditate as
normal, focusing intently on a single image, usually a religious
symbol. The goal was to feel their everyday sense of self
begin to dissolve, so that they became one with the image. "It
feels like a loss of boundary," says Michael Baime, one of the
meditators and also a researcher in the study. "It's as if the
film of your life broke and you were seeing the light that
allowed the film to be projected."

Hidden in the next room, Newberg and d'Aquili waited. When
the meditator felt the sense of oneness developing--usually
after about an hour--they would tug on a string. This signalled
the researchers to inject a radioactive tracer through the
intravenous line. Within minutes the tracer bound fast to the
brain in greater amounts where the blood flow, and hence
brain activity, had been higher. Later a scanner would measure
the distribution of the tracer to yield a snapshot of brain
activity at the time of binding. The technique, called Single
Photon Emission Computed Tomography, or SPECT, allowed the
subjects to meditate in the relative peace of the lab rather
than the claustrophobic whirr of a scanner. Once the tests
were completed, Newberg and d'Aquili compared the activity of
the subjects' brains during meditation with scans taken when
they were simply at rest.

Perhaps unsurprisingly, the researchers found intense activity
in the parts of the brain that regulate attention--a sign of the
meditators' deep concentration. But they saw something else,
too. During meditation, part of the parietal lobe, towards the
top and rear of the brain, was much less active than when the
volunteers were merely sitting still. With a thrill, Newberg and
d'Aquili realised that this was the exact region of the brain
where the distinction between self and other originates.

Broadly speaking, the left-hemisphere side of this region deals
with the individual's sense of their own body image, while its
right-hemisphere equivalent handles its context--the space
and time inhabited by the self. Maybe, the researchers
thought, as the meditators developed the feeling of oneness,
they gradually cut these areas off from the usual touch and
position signals that help create the body image.

"When you look at people in meditation, they really do turn off
their sensations to the outside world. Sights and sounds don't
disturb them any more. That may be why the parietal lobe
gets no input," says Newberg. Deprived of their usual grist,
these regions no longer function normally, and the person feels
the boundary between self and other begin to dissolve. And as
the spatial and temporal context also disappears, the person
feels a sense of infinite space and eternity.

More recently, Newberg has repeated the experiment with
Franciscan nuns in prayer. The nuns--whose prayer centres on
words, rather than images--showed activation of the language
areas of the brain. But they, too, shut down the same self
regions of the brain that the meditators did as their sense of
oneness reached its peak.

This sense of unity with the Universe isn't the only
characteristic of intense religious experiences. They also carry
a hefty emotional charge, a feeling of awe and deep
significance. Neuroscientists generally agree that this
sensation originates in a region of the brain distinct from the
parietal lobe: the "emotional brain", or limbic system, lying
deep within the temporal lobes on the sides of the brain.

The limbic system is a part of the brain that dates from way
back in our evolution. Its function nowadays is to monitor our
experiences and label especially significant events, such as
the sight of your child's face, with emotional tags to say "this
is important". During an intense religious experience,
researchers believe that the limbic system becomes unusually
active, tagging everything with special significance.

This could explain why people who have had such experiences
find them so difficult to describe to others. "The contents of
the experience--the visual components, the sensory
components--are just the same as everyone experiences all
the time," says Jeffrey Saver, a neurologist at the University
of California, Los Angeles. "Instead, the temporolimbic system
is stamping these moments as being intensely important to the
individual, as being characterised by great joy and harmony.
When the experience is reported to someone else, only the
contents and the sense that it's different can be
communicated. The visceral sensation can't."

Plenty of evidence supports the idea that the limbic system is
important in religious experiences. Most famously, people who
suffer epileptic seizures restricted to the limbic system, or the
temporal lobes in general, sometimes report having profound
experiences during their seizures. "This is similar to people
undergoing religious conversion, who have a sense of seeing
through their hollow selves or superficial reality to a deeper
reality," says Saver. As a result, he says, epileptics have
historically tended to be the people with the great mystical
experiences.

The Russian novelist Fyodor Dostoevsky, for example, wrote of
"touching God" during epileptic seizures. Other religious figures
from the past who may have been epileptic include St Paul,
Joan of Arc, St Theresa of Avila and Emanuel Swedenborg, the
18th-century founder of the New Jerusalem Church.

Similarly, neurosurgeons who stimulate the limbic system
during open-brain surgery say their patients occasionally
report experiencing religious sensations. And Alzheimer's
disease, which is often marked by a loss of religious interest,
tends to cripple the limbic system early on, says Saver.

The richness that limbic stimulation brings to experience may
explain why religions rely so heavily on ritual, claims Newberg.
The deliberate, stylised motions of ceremony differentiate
them from everyday actions, he says, and help the brain flag
them as significant. Music, too, can affect the limbic system,
Japanese researchers reported in 1997, driving it towards
either arousal or serene bliss. Chanting or ritual movements
may do the same. Meditation has also been shown to induce
both arousal and relaxation, often at the same time.
"Sometimes people refer to it as an active bliss," says
Newberg. That marriage of opposites, he thinks, adds to the
intensity of the experience.

Even if these feelings of oneness and awe fall short of the
personal experiences of God that many people report, anyone
who still doubts the brain's ability to generate religious
experiences need only visit neuroscientist Michael Persinger at
Laurentian University in the bleak nickel-mining town of
Sudbury, Ontario. He claims almost anyone can meet God, just
by wearing his special helmet.

For several years, Persinger has been using a technique called
transcranial magnetic stimulation to induce all sorts of surreal
experiences in ordinary people (New Scientist, 19 November
1994, p 29). Through trial and error and a bit of educated
guesswork, he's found that a weak magnetic field--1
microtesla, which is roughly that generated by a computer
monitor--rotating anticlockwise in a complex pattern about the
temporal lobes will cause four out of five people to feel a
spectral presence in the room with them.

What people make of that presence depends on their own
biases and beliefs. If a loved one has recently died, they may
feel that person has returned to see them. Religious types
often identify the presence as God. "This is all in the
laboratory, so you can imagine what would happen if the
person is alone in their bed at night or in a church, where the
context is so important," he says. Persinger has donned the
helmet himself and felt the presence, though he says the
richness of the experience is diminished because he knows
what's going on.

Not everyone accepts that Persinger's apparitions could equal
what religious devotees experience. "That is quite detached
from anything that's a genuine religious experience, in the
same way that psychoactive drugs can affect mood, but not
in a legitimate way," says Julian Shindler, a spokesman for the
Chief Rabbi's office in London. "It's not the genuine article,
somehow."

Whatever their validity, Persinger's experiments show that
mystical experiences consist of not only what we perceive,
but also how we interpret it. "We fit it into a niche, a
pigeonhole," says Persinger. "The label that is then used to
categorise the experience will influence how the person
remembers it. And that will happen within a few seconds."
There's a third aspect, too: the reinforcement that humans, as
social animals, get from sharing religious rituals with others.

"Religion is all three of those, and all three are hardwired into
the brain," says Persinger. "We are hardwired to have
experiences from time to time that give us a sense of a
presence, and as primates we're hardwired to categorise our
experiences. And we crave social interaction and spatial
proximity with others that are the same. What's not hardwired
is the content. If you have a God experience and the belief is
that you have to kill someone who doesn't believe as you do,
you can see why the content from the culture is the really
dangerous part."

So where does all this leave us? For whatever reason--natural
or supernatural--our big, powerful brains clearly allow a novel
sort of experience that we call religion. But it's difficult to say
much more than that. "In a sense, biology evolving has
discovered something new about the Universe," says Charles
Harper, executive director of the Templeton Foundation, a
private institution that explores the interaction between
religion and science. "Almost all cultures have this religious
sense," he says. "Does that offer any insight for understanding
the grain of the Universe? That's a haunting question."

Sceptics of religion are quick to claim that the brain's
hardwiring proves that God has no real existence, that it's all
in the brain. "The real common denominator here is brain
activity, not anything else," says Ron Barrier, a spokesman for
American Atheists based in Cranford, New Jersey. "There is
nothing to indicate that this is externally imposed or that you
are somehow tapping into a divine entity."

But Newberg isn't so sure. "We can't say they're wrong," he
says. "On the other hand, if you're a religious person, it makes
sense that the brain can do this, because if there is a God, it
makes sense to design the brain so that we can have some
sort of interaction. And we can't say that's wrong, either. The
problem is that all of our experiences are equal, in that they
are all in the brain. Our experience of reality, our experience of
science, our mystical experiences are all in the brain."

In fact, he goes on, practically the only way we can judge the
reality of an experience is by how real it feels: "You can have
a dream and it feels real at the time, but you wake up and it
no longer feels as real. The problem is, when people have a
mystical experience, they think that is more real than baseline
reality--even when they come back to baseline reality. That
turns everything around." To Newberg, it means that
reductionist science, powerful as it is, has its limitations.

Religious experts agree. "You could say Shakespeare's sonnets
are nothing but a combination of pencil lead and cellulose,"
says Harper. "But you could also say this is the outflow of a
great soul, and that would also be true." He says there are
different levels of explanation which are each true at their own
level, but which don't offer a comprehensive explanation.

Just as physicists cannot fully understand the electron as
either a particle or a wave, but only as both at once, says
Newberg, so we need both science and a more subjective,
spiritual understanding in order to grasp the full nature of
reality.

Further reading:

Why God Won't Go Away by Andrew Newberg, Eugene
d'Aquili and Vince Rause (Ballantine Books, 2001)

"The neural substrates of religious experience" by Jeffrey
Saver and John Rabin, The Journal of Neuropsychiatry, vol 9, p
498 (1997)

"Experimental induction of the 'sensed presence' in normal
subjects and an exceptional subject" by C. M. Cook and
Michael Persinger, Perceptual and Motor Skills, vol 85, p 683
(1997)

>From New Scientist magazine, 21 April 2001.

<A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/">www.ctrl.org</A>
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are unwelcomed. Substance�not soap-boxing�please!  These are
sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'�with its many half-truths, mis-
directions and outright frauds�is used politically by different groups with
major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought.
That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and
always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no
credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply.

Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html
 <A HREF="http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html">Archives of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]</A>

http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
 <A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/">ctrl</A>
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Om

Reply via email to