Why We Believe What We Believe

Review and recommend books and other resources such as videos, tapes or websites that you would like other Christians to be aware of. (posts considered spam will be removed)
Post Reply
User avatar
Canuckster1127
Old School
Posts: 5310
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2006 11:31 am
Christian: Yes
Sex: Male
Creation Position: Theistic Evolution
Location: Ottawa, ON Canada

Why We Believe What We Believe

Post by Canuckster1127 »

Book Review on the Main Board by Rich Deem.

http://www.godandscience.org/apologetic ... lieve.html
Book Review: Why We Believe What We Believe: Uncovering Our Biological Need for Meaning, Spirituality, and Truth
by Rich Deem

Why We Believe What We Believe: Uncovering Our Biological Need for Meaning, Spirituality, and TruthAndrew Newberg, professor of Radiology and Psychiatry, has written (along with Mark Robert Waldman) a sequel to his book, Why God Won't Go Away. The new book has strengths and weaknesses, but, should be of some interest to those who have an interest in spiritual matters and human behavior. The book is primarily written to address the question of how the brain works so that we arrive at what we believe to be true. Neither author is a Christian, as can be evidenced from the many jabs directed at Christians and Christianity scattered throughout the book.1 However, the book cannot be said to be non-spiritual, since New Age and Far Eastern religions seem to receive little or no criticism (co-author, Mr. Waldman seems to be into New Age type spirituality), and are actually endorsed.2 Likewise, atheists may not be entirely comfortable with the content, since it clearly challenges their cherished belief that that have no beliefs.

Even with this viewpoint bias, the first two parts of the book ("How the brain makes our reality" and "Childhood development and morality") are nothing less than fascinating. The topics are broad, so a lot of details are not included (especially supporting studies), although doing so would have increased the length considerably. Even so, I would have preferred more details and citations and a little of the controversy, which must be present in such a complex field. One gets the distinct impression that the results are not quite as neat and tidy as presented, and one wonders if studies that do not support the premises are omitted as a form of viewpoint bias or just to save space.

A particularly interesting chapter entitle, "Ordinary Criminals Like You and Me," strongly supports the Christian doctrine that we are all sinners - something that non-Christians tend to reject out-of-hand. However, Newberg presents numerous experiments (many of which would be considered unethical today) that demonstrate that the vast majority of individuals will do extremely immoral acts, given the right conditions. For example, if enough people (planted experimental confederates) go along with a lie, test subjects will do likewise. In another study, participants "electrocuted" a "student" who was a "poor learner." Studies simulating prison conditions showed that the "officers" (experimental subjects) routinely mistreated the "prisoners" (also experimental subjects). In other experiments, subjects would usually act in selfish ways, rather than take the moral high ground. Newberg suggests that barring interception by our frontal lobes of our brain, all our actions would be immoral and selfish.

The book's third section, spiritual beliefs and the brain, presents Newberg's latest (and earlier) functional brain scan results on religious people. Previously, Newberg had studied the brain activity of Buddhists practicing meditation and Franciscan nuns practicing "centering prayer," a Roman Catholic method of meditating deeply on a specific biblical passage or concept. These results had shown similar patterns of brain activity for those meditating on "becoming one with the universe" or "inner peace" (Buddhists) and those meditating on God or the Bible. Both groups showed increased activity in the frontal lobes (primarily the prefrontal cortex), which represents the "attention area" and decreased activity in the parietal lobes (the "orientation area"). Each group interpreted their experience on the basis of their beliefs (e.g., inner peace for the Buddhists or God's presence for the nuns). In this book, Newberg added a third group - Pentecostal Christians who "speak in tongues." When analyzed, the brain scans showed increased activity in the thalamus (as in Buddhists and nuns). Speaking in tongues also resulted in high activity in the temporal lobes (involved in making emotions) and in the midbrain (probably resulting from the activities of speech and dance). Like Buddhists and nuns, Pentecostals represent a small percentage of the American population (probably only about 1% of Americans claim to speak in tongues). Newberg presented one case (not exactly a scientific sampling) of a spiritual atheist. Like the Buddhists, he practiced meditation, and presented with a brain scan similar to the Buddhists and nuns (though the actual scans were not shown in the book).

Also noteworthy was the finding of asymmetric thalamic activity in the Buddhists, nuns, Pentecostals, and even the one "spiritual" atheist, which is not found in the vast majority of people. The question arises whether these people are born with this asymmetry, resulting in the ability to play these mind games or whether the continual practice of the games themselves lead to the asymmetry. None of Newberg's studies were able to address these questions. An even more fundamental question concerns the rest of us, who lack the asymmetry, but still believe. Maybe none of these studies really tell us anything about the kind of religious belief that most of us exhibit, since all the groups chosen for study represent extremely small minorities.

In conclusion, the book is well-written and compelling, although the obvious biases of the writers will probably annoy most Christian readers. The topic is complex and experimental design is difficult at best. Future studies will likely shed more light on this subject.
Dogmatism is the comfortable intellectual framework of self-righteousness. Self-righteousness is more decadent than the worst sexual sin. ~ Dan Allender
Oriental
Recognized Member
Posts: 86
Joined: Sun Sep 03, 2006 8:14 pm
Christian: No
Location: Hong Kong

Not yet finished, is it?

Post by Oriental »

The article that you posted is cool.

Please don't mind if I go straight to the jugular. How does the content relate to the title: why we believe what we believe?

Is there any missing content that you are going to continue?


Oriental.



.
User avatar
Canuckster1127
Old School
Posts: 5310
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2006 11:31 am
Christian: Yes
Sex: Male
Creation Position: Theistic Evolution
Location: Ottawa, ON Canada

Re: Not yet finished, is it?

Post by Canuckster1127 »

Oriental wrote:The article that you posted is cool.

Please don't mind if I go straight to the jugular. How does the content relate to the title: why we believe what we believe?

Is there any missing content that you are going to continue?


Oriental.



.
Oriental,

Well, Rich Deem wrote this, not me. I just like to make sure that people notice new material on the main board so I post it with links on the board.

It's a review about a book, which I haven't read yet.

Maybe others will want to talk about some of the questions raised so feel free to ask.

If you're really more interested in it, you may want to read the book.

Blessings,

Bart
Dogmatism is the comfortable intellectual framework of self-righteousness. Self-righteousness is more decadent than the worst sexual sin. ~ Dan Allender
Oriental
Recognized Member
Posts: 86
Joined: Sun Sep 03, 2006 8:14 pm
Christian: No
Location: Hong Kong

Thank you

Post by Oriental »

Canuckster1127 wrote:

I like this passage: :P

"Be on guard against giving interpretations of Scripture that are farfetched or opposed to science, and so exposing the Word of God to the ridicule of unbelievers." St. Augustine

Non-believers tend to think that science and religion must be in conflict; I find no reason why they should be.

Oriental.


..
Post Reply