ibcsr.org

In most western societies the choice not to belong to a religious community, if even in a minimal way, comes with considerable risk. In cultures dominated by the Abrahamic monotheisms (Judaism, Christianity, and Islam) non-affiliation and nonparticipation are obviously “risky” both in terms of interpersonal relationships here and now and in terms of the ultimate destination of the soul. Not belonging to a religious tradition and community makes one an “outsider” and thus not easily associated with or in many cases not easily trusted. Add to this the perceived threat of eternal damnation and the risk can seem to outweigh the benefits of religious participation greatly. In other words, as Pascal famously argued, religion is a good bet. As plausible as it might seem that the irreligious are generally more inclined to take risks, an important question is whether this pattern is a universal human trait or if instead it is simply an aspect of the culturally specific western religious traditions and the cultures they form such an important part. In other words, is it similarly “risky” to avoid religion in a culture where the dominate traditions are less concerned with exclusivity of belief, practice, or community identity?

For many years, research has pointed to specific neural pathways as the presumed locus of spiritual thoughts, feelings, and experiences. Famously, studies have shown similar patterns of brain activation in Buddhist meditation and Christian contemplative prayer for example. The majority of this research relies on a simple correlation between observed neurological activity and reported experience. A new study adds to the emerging picture by comparing a measure of spirituality, self-transcendence, both before and after surgical manipulation of the complex architecture of the brain. In fact, for some cancer patients brain surgery led to a spiritual awakening.

Some figures become so iconic, so legendary, that they begin to take on the characteristics of an idea rather than a person. Mere mention of the name of Albert Einstein for example often brings to mind simply the very idea of genius or perhaps maybe an image of his famously unkempt hairdo. The man himself lies somehow hidden behind his equations. He has become largely the stuff of the popular imagination about his ideas and thus somehow both more and sadly less than human. This is how it is for all those who make a lasting contribution to the long march of human self-understanding. Thinkers, inventors, prophets, and poets all risk being lost as individuals by the very profundity of their contributions. Few have suffered this fate more than Charles Darwin, a man whose ideas have inspired new frontiers of human learning and incited some of the deepest feelings of distrust, disgust, and hatred. The new film, “Creation: The True Story of Charles Darwin,” attempts to go behind the theory and reveal the theorizer in all his conflicted genius and above all his love for the truth and his family.

If our brains have evolved to help us interact with our world, and if many of us report “interacting” with God or other religious entities, then doesn’t that suggest that such beings are real and that just as we have developed the capacity to perceive the colors of a rainbow we have a mental capacity to perceive the divine? It is a natural enough notion, but on closer inspection it is complicated by multiple levels of scientific and theological obstacles. A recent article from the journal Cognitive Processing reviews research on the neural correlates of religious experience. Two neuroscientists, identical twins Alexander and Andrew Fingelkurts, authored the paper entitled “Is our brain hardwired to produce God, or is our brain hardwired to perceive God? A systematic review on the role of the brain in mediating religious experience.”

While predictions of the imminent death of religion in an increasingly “secular” world often sound quaint, if not downright out of touch, profound religious experience can still seem like the purview of a fringe minority. After all, being “born again,” or achieving “mokṣa” (liberation) are not exactly everyday experiences, even for those who say they have had them. Nevertheless, a new survey by the Pew Form on Religion and Public Life finds that nearly half of all Americans have had what they consider a “religious or mystical experience,” over twice as many as in 1962.

The United States is a leading power in science and engineering, but it's also far more religious than most industrialized nations. This means that there is ample opportunity for conflict between the worldviews of religious traditions and science. While most of the media attention devoted to religion and science centers on the supposed conflict between them, a new Pew Research Center poll finds that “those who are most religiously observant (as measured by frequency of worship service attendance) are the least likely to perceive a clash between faith and science.” Those with no religious affiliation are more likely to see a conflict between religion and science.