The God 'spot' in the brain

*************
M*W: Assuming the scientific claims are true, and there really is a God 'spot' in the brain, why is it that everybody's belief about god so diverse and archaic? Seems to me this God 'spot' would have evolved along with humanity. If we do have a natural God 'spot' in the brain, does this mean that atheists' brains are not working properly (mine included)? Further, how does the God 'spot' explain declining Christianity worldwide? Has the God 'spot' run its course and is evolving out of the human brain? Is the God 'spot' unnecessary like the appendix, little toes, and wisdom teeth? I'll show you my God 'spot' if you show me yours.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Medicine Woman

If there is a "god spot" in the brain it is because God himself put it there to give us a desire to worship and return to him.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Ah, but what if it wasn't God, but Zeus, that put that "God spot" there?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

It's kind of evident that God lives in all things because even a caveman will come up with his own simple idea of a God. If something evil happens, this primitive man would instantly create the idea that some superior entity is punishing him for something, yet it's only his own self which is punishing him, which is the same as God. At the beginning we believe in God because we don't yet know the doubts of the mind. When we start our way towards the truth we stop believing because we discover the world, then in the end, we once again "believe" in God because we find ourself, the only reality - but this time self-consciously.

 

Athelwulf: Ah, but what if it wasn't God, but Zeus, that put that "God spot" there?
*************
M*W: Well, since I don't believe in a god, I don't believe that God, Zeus, The Pink Unicorn, or Tinkerbell put the God 'spot' there, but somehow we ended up with it, and I guess it's left up to individual interpretation. What I do understand is the God 'spot' in my brain tells me I am my own higher power, and I just need to believe in that.

 

It's not a "God" spot, it's a "Who, What, Why" spot.

 

This "God spot", or the "Who, What, Why spot", or whatever we're calling it now — perhaps it's responsible for what I try to communicate in one of my posts in the thread "[Thread=44250]why do you worship Gods?[/Thread]":

 

Uhhh. God spot? Exactly who's making such claims?
There is certainly something about the human mind that seeks order and patterns, but it doesn't exist in a 'spot'. The old 'module' theory of the mind has fallen into disfavor. Research done on patients about to undergo brain surgery for epilepsy is what led to the idea that there were key areas of the brain that handled certain functions. Broca's area, Wernicke's area, Exner's area, the list goes on and on, but with more modern techniques of MRI and PET scan it's being shown that this idea is misleading.

There are hallucinatory phenomenon linked to temporal lobe epilepsy which in many ways jibe with the classical religious fervor. Visions, a sense of a mysterious other outside the body, greatly enhanced (distorted) pattern-finding. Many of the stories of saints fit the pattern of temporal lobe epilepsy. Some of these saints have even left behind drawings and paintings of their visions. Geometrical drawings of heaven and angels. All these fit the pattern.

But, there's no 'spot'.

And, if there were, I'd have to say that the Japanese would be closest to being correct by attributing it to the souls of our ancestors. Evolution, don't you know.

Yorda,

Oh? Been doing some caveman research then, have you?

The fact is that little (next to nothing) is known about prehistoric religion. We interpret artifacts through modern eyes. We have no idea how much of human history is involved in worship gods and whatnot.

I personally find it likely that religious thinking and language go hand in hand. It's symbology and abstraction that leads to concepts of spirits and gods. But calling it evident is a bit strong and foolhardy.

Take, for instance, feral children. Children that are lost to humanity as children and raised by animals. These children don't create their own religious mythos. They are very pragmatic and unable to understand abstract concepts.

Symbolic thinking is our birthright, but it must be transmitted by forebears. We do have a propensity to recreate that which is lost--creole languages are an excellent example of this--but even creole has something to work with. You take a human and raise it completely deprived of any of our social and symbolic construct and I'd say the odds are a million to one against him coming up with any concepts that you'd feel remotely comfortable calling god or spiritual thinking. Now, do this to a group of humans and allow them to live out multiple generations, building up a culture as they go, then I'd say the odds increase. But, such experiments have never been performed and we have no idea the likelihood of such constructs forming.

You'll probably mention how every culture in the world has some type of religion and religious thinking. And you're right, but it's possible that the ultimate source of this idea came from one place. It's possible that there was one 'caveman' in the depths of time which had an epileptic fit one day and scared her tribe senseless with the stories she told. And this tribe either spread itself or the idea throughout the world. All the religion of the world could easily come from a single germ. Joseph Campbell's books The Masks of God show an excellent argument for this idea.

Anyway, just try not to speak of things being 'evident' when there is no evidence for your claim.

 

It's evident for me.

 

Hmm. Excellent retort. Nice discussion skills.
Enjoy.

 

So much for free will

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Haha, a simple caveman responsible for all the world's religions.. Absurd!

I think there's a predisposition to spirituality however because some people get 'sucked into religion' more easily than others. Call it a 'survival mechanism' if you will but it is a part of their nature.

Social factors only help to repress or bring out the disposition, sometimes via religion. This is probably why the deprived child you spoke of may not develop any such spirituality - the seed is there but there is no one to water it. But will they develop spirituality on their own initiative after "they've exhausted the usual techniques for the causation of success?" And as for whether or not a caveman was responsible for changing the genes of all humankind and making us either indifferent, averse, or thirsty for spirituality I don't know..


TIME magazine has a great article here on the 'God gene.' The journey to find such a root may prove impossible, but I think it will be well worth it.

 

Paulist Christianity was a departure from True Religion, that is, the Religion that sourced out of the psychologically based Mythologies that have their corresponding Realities in the Symbols and Scenarios of our Dreams. But the Christianity that still holds to the Great Myth of the Goddess Virgin Mother who gives Immaculate Birth to a God-Hero Son ... that is on the Up-Swing. Marian Catholics are growing in number. Even Anglican's, as much as I hate them like any good Irishman would, have established a Strong Marian Cult which quite annoys their ArchBishop at Westminister who would prefer to keep the Church of England as non-Religious as possible in keeping with good English Traditions of applied Barbarism.

All of the Mystical and Yoga cults are in agreement with the Religion of our Subjective Psychologies. Indeed, you know you're Religion is authentic when you can Dream of its Characters, Symbols and can measure your Progress by your Dreams. Protestants and Paulist Catholics never experience that.

I used to invariably trash New Agers as either corrupt, on the selling end, or silly, on the buying end, but my Angels asked me to give them a bit more lee way. I also used to hold that Wicca was an inch from Conscious Satanism, but again my angels interceded for them and asked me to desist with that opinion immediately.

 

Leo, no offence, but maybe you should see a therapist or something. Ye'r not supposed to hear voices in yer head, or halucinate.

 

"Not supposed to"

Uh, who makes these rules?

I suppose the Prophets and the Oracles of Past Ages should be summoned to some Court and have a fine imposed upon them for disregarding whatever rule you think you are obeying by living a Life entirely on the shallow Surface of Things.

Wow! You're shallow and you congratulate yourself for it.

 

Uh, who determines that?

Foolish and moronic hypocrisy.

 

The Man comes On Line and says that he follows a rule by which he will Never Dream, Never Imagine, Never Vision, and Never Introspect or Meditate upon the Things of the Spirit. And then you wonder why I call him 'shallow".

And you call ME a moron!

 

Mental health professionals mostly.

Yes, let's sue the voices in yer head.

Hey, call it whatever ya want, but if ye'r halucinating, ye'r halucinating.

I've never been given so much respect. I'm not just a man, but the Man with the capital-M. Muchas gracias, señor.

Dreaming, visioning, introspecting, and meditating are all different from halucinating. I'm sorry, but they just are.

Ya reap what ya sow.

 

And why is it your insistence that I am hallucinating and not "Dreaming, visioning, introspecting, and meditating". You seem to be projecting upon me the worst possible interpretations you can think of... beating square pegs into round holes just to insult me. That makes you neurotic. Maybe you should see a Mental Health Professional about YOUR problem.

 

Southstar,

What's so absurd about it?
You've heard of Mitochondrial Eve? Well, there are those who say that this religious mutation that occurred, possibly in as few as a single individual, also had a number of survival benefits. Mankind was small back then. This was before the diaspora of man throughout the globe. Man traveled and took the seed with him as he went.

Religion is much more easily spread than mitochandria and other genetic factors. It doesn't require a direct biological link. Memes are spread culturally and culture can spread quite quickly and effectively. Especially a successful one.

As I said, it's part of our pattern-finding abilities. We create a web of correlations to establish order in a chaotic world.

And, consider that this thing called religion (and language as well which is it's carrier and comrade) can be considered an organism of its own. It mutated from near random processes until it achieved a state where it could effectively transmit itself amongst its host population. Over succeeding generations it has only become more efficient in transmitting itself.

The social is the means that this organism/parasite religion transmits and reproduces itself. Without the social there could be no religion.

Without being instilled with the religion and beliefs of one's fathers then the odds of one coming up with something even remotely like religion are a million to one. It's not that a seed is being repressed or 'brought out' by the social. You could say that it is being fertilized by it, in a way. THe social gives one a ready-made construct with which to adapt to one's own life. Without this construct one would have to start from scratch and has been shown by the feral children they aren't spiritual or superstitious.

Consider language as a correllary to relgion. It's known that children raised in the utter absence of language (feral children) do not create their own language. They do possess methods of communication but a true language is not one of them. But, give them something to work with, a pidgin language, and they'll turn it into a full-fledged language in as few as one generation. And a new creole language is born. But, the predecessor to this langauge must be present. Something to work with.

Now, this is all imperfect knowledge as I don't recall any feral children groups. It would require a group to need language and it would be interesting to see what would happen in such a setting. Maybe someday when life is not so precious the forbidden experiment will be performed and we can know for sure.

What does this mean? "Exhausted the usual techniqes for the causation of success." What are the 'usual techniqes' and what is the 'causation of success'?

You're bringing in 'responsibility' where such doesn't apply.

For one, I'll agree that it very likely wasn't a 'caveman' who introduced mystical thinking into the culture, but rather the ancient humans that moved from the dwindling forests to the savannah. They didn't live in caves.

For two, there is no real scientific evidence that correlates spirituality with some 'God gene'. That article you linked to is sensationalistic crap which could only be called science in this era of George Bush worshippers. The 'God gene' does not mandate creation of a god, but rather a spiritual feeling. But, one can utilize that spiritual feeling in any way, from worshipping Satan to putting puzzles together. It's a feel good gene. And calling it a 'God gene' begs the question.

Perhaps it could be called a 'gulllibility gene'. It predisposes people to the ecstatic fervor which finds an easy outlet in religious ritual. But, it doesn't follow that this gene, in the absence of a previous religious structure, would urge one to create that structure from whole cloth.

They give an example in the article and I quote, "When tribes living in remote areas come up with a concept of God as readily as nations living shoulder to shoulder, it's a fairly strong indication that the idea is preloaded in the genome rather than picked up on the fly."

Now that's just ridiculous. This would have you believe that these city-folk and the primitive tribesman came out of a vacuum. That each don't have common roots buried somewhere in the past. That the traditions of the city-folk are purely of the city and the traditions of the tribe are purely of the tribe.

Preposterous.

A better comparison would be between people that grew up in an environment in which religious ideas are taught or at least made available for assimilation and one in which they are non-existant. If this 'god gene' mandated the creation of spiritual structure then the latter would form spiritual belief structures every time, given the presence of the 'god gene'. And since religion and mystical thinking is so wide-spread, it's fairly obvious that it is widely represented in the entire population of the earth and therefore the odds of gene pool not containing this gene are fairly low.
And yet, feral children are not spiritual. Are not superstitious. Do not dwell in the abstract.

This 'god gene' (a misnomer and simplisticly conceived) merely gives the social mechanism of religion a fertile ground in which to take root. It's not real science as there is only one means to answer this question as well as certain other questions regarding human cognition.

The forbidden experiment.

Raising humans in a controlled environment deprived of their social heritage.
Raising a race of true primitive humans. Cut off from all the thousands and thousands of years of cultural evolution to which all humans are heir to.


Anyway, the topic isn't a genetic predisposition to certain modes of thought. Such obviously exists, if not so simplisticly as this 'god gene' would have it. Our brains are built from genetic guidelines, there is no disputing that. The topic is a specific region of the brain which when stimulated would cause one to 'see god' or some such. Or so I presume. And, as I said earlier, temporal lobe epilepsy is known to cause this phenomenon. But it's not a specific spot, it's a widespread redundant network.


Edit: One last thought on that 'god gene'. It would be funny if this 'god gene' turns out to be one that we have in common with our animal brothers, wouldn't it?

 

Sorry, but Leo wins this one.

- N