The other day, Google Reader (the wonder that it is) threw up an interesting article about the link between brain damage and religion. Naturally, being what the vast majority of people would call ‘religious’, and as yet not aware of any underlying mental illness, it piqued my interest. The original article can be found here, but I found it via a site where it was filed under the tags ‘religion’ and ‘obvious’. Justified or sweepingly judgmental? Only time and a speedily written, poorly crafted argument from me will tell!
The actual focus of the article is to do with a personally trait called ‘self-transcendence’, or ST, and in the words of the researchers, ‘[it] reflects a decreased sense of self and an ability to identify one’s self as an integral part of the universe as a whole.’ After analysing patients before and after brain tumours were removed, the researchers discovered that ‘selective damage to the left and right posterior parietal regions induced a specific increase in ST.’ And therein lies the issue.
It’s reasonable, I suppose, for a person who has never been a Christian to assume that it’s some sort of ‘fuzzy feeling’ or sense of ‘inner rightness’ that keeps people stuck to their faith. Perhaps for some Christians it is, I don’t know. For me, though, Christianity is believable not because it makes me feel good, or because it’s a way to escape mundane reality. I’ve pretty much never had an experience where I’ve been able to ‘identify [myself] as an integral part of the universe’. Despite that, I’m convinced that Christianity is true. Not for what it does to me in a ‘spiritual’ way (as far as the article is concerned) but for its historical basis, its evidence in the world, its sheer ‘defendability’.
And that’s the incredible thing about Christianity. It wasn’t founded on a bunch of moral teachings by some first century rabbi. It wasn’t founded as a philosophy to escape the natural self and ascend to some higher consciousness. It was founded because of an historical event, a testable happening, something real and tangible. As far as Jesus’ disciples were concerned, it was an absolute fact that he had risen from the dead. They claimed to have actually seen him, touched him, ate with him, and if anyone disagreed, they could be pointed to the still empty tomb, to the 500+ eyewitnesses, and to the fact that a bunch of terrified fishermen, tax collectors and nobodies had been turned into a fearless band of missionaries. You see, Christianity never was a religion based solely on a self-transcendent feeling. It’s rooted in a very real, factual and testable event. So far, I think my sanity is looking intact…
Not only that, the Bible doesn’t encourage a feeling of self-transcendence or at-one-ness with the universe. In fact, it consistently teaches that we should ‘test everything’ (1 Thessalonions 5:12), be ‘open to reason’ (James 3:17), and be ‘self-controlled’ (Galations 5:23). Indeed, Luke even opens his gospel by saying he has ‘carefully investigated everything from the beginning’. Yes, miracles occurred, but the Bible actively encourages us to use our common sense, and to investigate things we find odd or difficult. This is no ethereal transcendence, this is solid reason.
So perhaps brain damage can result in a heightened sense of spirituality, and maybe the experiences of meditation are the result of misfiring neurons. But Christianity, based as it is in objective reality, rather than philosophy, can’t simply be cast aside as a psychological process. As it has been said before, if God is just in my head, then Jesus’ body is still in the tomb. Check it out, and decide for yourself what’s ‘obvious’.
[As a side note, I love looking at the link between Psychology and Religion. Could our brain be wired for religion? Does the structure of our mind hark back to a time when a relationship with God was as natural as thought? Check out this link for a bit of extra reading!]
