THE END OF FAITH
At the same time that Friedrich Nietzsche asserted that God is dead, his colleagues were arguing that with the advent of science and the education of the masses, there was no longer a need for the archaic beliefs associated with ancient religious traditions. They argued that reason, logic, and scientific experimentation would ultimately win the day and relegate all religions to the same fate as Greek mythology. They were good stories for their day, but they had no relevance in the modern world.
In 2001, I published a book entitled Why God Won’t Go Away (with my coauthors Eugene d’Aquili and Vince Rouse), the primary neurotheological premise of which was that because of how our brain functions, religion and the concept of God would be with humanity for a very long time. The argument we made is that the two overriding functions of the brain—self-maintenance and self-transcendence—are an important part of what the brain does for us. If religious and spiritual beliefs help the brain support these functions, then we would expect these beliefs to persist until the brain begins to operate in a fundamentally different way.
Here we are more than fifteen years later, and neurotheology has come a long way, along with the important changes in religious and spiritual traditions throughout the world. It seems reasonable to contemplate again the question of whether God and religion are likely to persist for a long time to come. Is it possible that neurotheology could find a way to an end of faith? Or could it point toward a new type of faith that might create a link between science and religion different from anything that has come before?
In the present book, we have considered many issues relating to neurotheology that bear directly on the overall persistence of religion. We have considered both the neuroscientific basis for religious and spiritual phenomena, as well as neuroevolutionary perspectives that show how religious beliefs and practices might be deeply ingrained in the functioning of the human brain. As with my original argument, many scholars continue to adhere to the notion that religion is an adaptive phenomenon and hence should continue to persist as long as the human brain continues to function in the same basic way.1
Current trends might suggest a different direction for religion. In today’s world, we have seen a substantial increase in the number of people who consider themselves to be either atheists or spiritual but not religious. Certain areas of the world have been particularly associated with such changes. In many European countries, the majority of individuals consider themselves atheists. In the United States, while the large majority of people still consider themselves religious, about 20 percent of people now report being unaffiliated.2 We’ve seen these changes in more practical terms with the closure of many churches and other places of worship and the consolidation of their memberships.
The cause of the shift away from religious beliefs or a belief in God is also an important topic for neurotheology. We might consider the various forces that compel an individual or society to reject religious and spiritual ideas or to search for new ones. On the surface, there are some obvious reasons for such a shift. The expansion of the Internet has enabled people to find many other ways of finding meaning and purpose in life. People can find supportive social groups, intellectual organizations, and emotional and creative outlets separate from traditional religious groups.
Another general cause of the turn away from religion has been the continued conflict between science and religion. Many people today view science as an extraordinary tool for understanding the world. These people feel that religion is no longer necessary to explain nature and our place within it. And some religious leaders have made egregious claims with regard to evolution, cosmology, and astronomy, which are in stark contrast to observational data. The fact that it took the Catholic Church more than three hundred years to apologize for imprisoning Galileo illustrates the potential problems that can arise when religious beliefs inappropriately reject clear and careful science. The result of scientific research and its strong appeal to reason frequently seem a better approach to many individuals. Further, as technology continues to advance, ancient sacred texts often have difficulty keeping up. After all, there is nothing in the Bible about how to handle a dying patient on a ventilator, the morality of genetic engineering, or how to best manage climate change.
Perhaps most damning to religion has been the disturbing problems and controversies that have arisen within specific traditions. The child abuse and molestation scandals that occurred within the Catholic Church and how they were covered up have given many people a reason to reject the Church’s teachings. It is easy to understand how someone might conclude that a Church that espouses convictions about proper moral behavior yet somehow condones outrageously immoral behavior is devoid of value.
The rise of radical terrorist groups that use religious ideas to support their destructive beliefs is another cause of the turn away from organized religion. This argument has been strongly advanced by noted atheists, such as Bill Maher and Sam Harris.3 The concern that religious beliefs can lead to violence has a long history to justify such a conclusion. Many military conflicts throughout history have either been instigated by religious disagreement or at least justified on the basis of religious beliefs. If religion can be blamed for such horrible violence, many people come to the conclusion that it is no longer worth following.
In spite of all these reasons for bringing about the end of faith, religions still have a substantial grip on humanity. There are over one billion Christians and over one billion Muslims in the world. There are also huge numbers of Buddhists and Hindus, and large numbers of others who adhere to smaller faiths. Thus, simply given the overall numbers, it seems unlikely that religion is going to go away in the near future.
In addition, many people who consider themselves atheists or agnostics continue to search for meaning and purpose in life. For many, this comes under the rubric of spirituality. As we discussed in chapter 12, even when religious beliefs are rejected, there continues to be an internal urge for understanding the world, connecting to that world in a fundamental way, and even seeking some spiritual or supernatural reality outside ourselves. All these approaches, including those that fall under the realm of New Age ideologies, continue to arise from the brain’s basic impetus to transcend the self and create a conceptual story about the world.
As I have also argued throughout this book, the religious and spiritual experiences people have are a primary driver for the development and continuation of faith. It is hard to ignore profound spiritual or mystical experiences. Such experiences must be incorporated into prevailing belief systems, often a challenge, or the systems themselves must change. One of the most relevant quotes in our online survey came from a 37-year-old scientist:
Everything in life seemed to click. I had this clarity, and it was as if I was looking at life from the inside out. Despite my trepidation, this experience seemed to satisfy my proof-oriented mentality with the concept of intuition. It was almost as if my intuition from somewhere “deeper” had offered some sort of direct experience that offered up proof.
You can see the struggle this person had in trying to merge her scientific mind with the powerful and intuitive experience that pushed her toward a sense of spirituality. Many people, like this scientist, have a goal of bringing together religious and spiritual beliefs with current scientific views. Similarly, Jill Bolte Taylor’s account of the mystical experience she had during a stroke suggests an important link between spirituality and science.
For these reasons, the brain strives to integrate modern knowledge, including modern science, with ancient religious and spiritual concepts. A number of scholarly domains are seeking to find a more integrated approach that combines science and the spiritual. Some scholars have explored the possibility of integrating religious and spiritual views with evolution, cosmology, and quantum mechanics. Books such as The Self-Aware Universe, Transcendental Physics, Modern Physics and Ancient Faith, New Proofs for the Existence of God: Contributions of Contemporary Physics and Philosophy, and Mindful Universe: Quantum Mechanics and the Participating Observer have all tried to explore this intriguing relationship. While many of these writings are controversial, and often rejected by the standard scientific flag bearers, they do speak to the notion that many people would like to find a way for religion and science to come together in the quest for knowledge and understanding. To what extent the scientific and the spiritual can contribute to such a quest remains to be seen.
Another area emphasizing this intersection is the health care setting. Many health care professionals now appreciate the importance of a person’s religious and spiritual beliefs in the context of his or her health care. We have come to see people as not just biological creatures, but as social, psychological, and spiritual ones as well. These different domains of the human person require greater study in order to understand all of the interrelationships. While it is unclear to what extent religious and spiritual ideas will influence the health care profession, there is certainly a strong relationship between science and the spiritual that cannot be ignored. Even as science progresses, as we develop improved technology for studying the human body and exacting cures for various diseases, we will never eliminate death and suffering, and hence there will likely always be room for religious and spiritual beliefs. The question is whether there is something that can replace these beliefs and still enable the human brain to feel comfortable in the face of a universe that can appear whimsical and terrifying.
If our brain is always trying to understand the world, and if we are trapped within our brain, then we will always create stories to explain the world. And since we struggle with understanding the universe, our brain acts as a belief-making machine. We have no choice but to generate ideas about all aspects of the universe. In doing so, we never know for sure if our ideas are accurate. Our ideas about God and religion may very well reflect the true nature of the universe, or they might be completely delusional. Our brain will never know. But because our brain will never know, the beliefs we hold become part of our reality. For some, that reality includes God, and for others, it does not. Of course, whether or not we believe in God has no bearing on whether God actually exists. Similarly, whether or not we believe in gravity, if we jump off a ladder, we will most definitely fall. But, following with this analogy, as our brain acquires more data (e.g., if every time we jump off a ladder, we fall down), we might modify our beliefs accordingly. Interestingly, with respect to God, people who are believers tend to have experiences in which they truly feel God’s presence. The notion of God makes sense to them, and they have experiences that support that belief.
This process may also explain the more recent movement from religion to spirituality. Most people perceive something in the universe greater than the self. We recognize that there is much more to the universe than we can perceive. And we want to be part of that “something greater.” That is what we often feel as spiritual. That feeling is translated in the brain via the limbic system and the parietal lobes to foster the emotional power of the feeling of self-transcendence that we feel connects us to that something greater, whether that feeling is incorporated into a specific religious context, a spiritual pursuit, or something else.
THE BEGINNING OF NEUROTHEOLOGY
Neurotheology represents an intriguing possibility as a middle ground between science and religion. Throughout this book, we have considered the many ways in which neurotheology can help explore the link between the two. And, as I have emphasized, it is important that neurotheology strive to be a two-way street in which both religion and science benefit from the interaction (at least until we uncover some deeper epistemological conclusions). While it is unclear what the ultimate outcome might be, including the possibility that either science or religion alone is correct, neurotheology appears to offer some unique opportunities.
I hope that this tour has been successful in showing you the many facets and capabilities of neurotheology. Neurotheology came into existence because continued advances in science led to the ability to understand the brain and its processes more effectively so that complex neurocognitive processes like those involved in religion and spirituality could actually be studied. Over the past twenty years, advances in the fields of cognitive neuroscience, anthropology, psychology, medicine, comparative religion, philosophy, and theology have come together to allow for this unique multidisciplinary field to develop. Neurotheology would seem to be a viable field of scholarship that is different from, but incorporates, these disciplines. As I frequently point out in various talks and articles, we are in the infancy of neurotheology as a field, but there is no limit to how far this field’s various avenues of study and scholarship can go.
Throughout this book, we have considered the many future directions that neurotheology may take. It may help advance the arenas of health, medicine, and psychology. This aspect of applied neurotheology may provide substantial benefits on a very practical level to people suffering with various issues in their lives. Neurotheology may support religious and spiritual practices by providing information that can guide people more effectively down their own spiritual paths. More effective liturgy and ritual may be developed through neurotheology. Neurotheology may also advance cognitive neuroscience by studying complex interactions in different brain systems and structures. As new techniques develop, we will be able to study the intricate workings of the brain during some of the most important and powerful experiences people can have. And we might elucidate the mystery of consciousness or the structure of beliefs. As we explore more esoteric concepts such as the nature of free will, morality, and epistemology, we would expect neurotheology to play an important role. Philosophy and theology could both benefit, and be benefited by, neurotheology. While particular philosophical or theological questions won’t go away, neurotheology may bring a new perspective to such discussions. We can now consider not only things like the pathways of logic or the interpretations of a sacred text, but what the brain is doing and how it shapes our knowledge. In fact, we might consider how neurotheology might be applicable to the broad array of theological concepts arising from all great traditions.
NEUROTHEOLOGY AS A METATHEOLOGY
If this is the beginning of neurotheology, we might consider how far we can take it in the context of both science and religious and spiritual beliefs. One possibility that my colleague Eugene d’Aquili and I considered was whether neurotheology might be able to function as a metatheology. A metatheology is a field or approach to theology that provides information so general that it can be applied to all other theological systems. In this way, a metatheology is an approach that has something to say about all theological positions. Thought of another way, a metatheology theoretically sits beyond other theological systems and provides a commentary or perspective on the basis and process of those systems. In and of itself, a metatheology is devoid of theological content, since it consists of rules and descriptions about all other specific theologies.
In principle, a metatheology should account for three aspects of other theological systems. First, it must describe how and why the foundational myths of any given belief system are formed. Second, it must describe how and why the foundational myths are developed into the complex logical systems of a theology. Third, it must describe how and why the foundational myths are ultimately transformed into religious and spiritual practices and rituals.
How well can neurotheology function as a metatheology? If we consider that every theological system is developed by the human brain, then quite simply, neurotheology is almost by definition a metatheology. After all, we can take almost any theological perspective or statement and try to explore the brain processes associated with making that statement. Theological principles based on reason, emotion, and experience can all be considered through the lens of neurotheology.
As we have already seen, neurotheology provides a way of understanding the possible origin and nature of foundational myths from the perspective of the brain. The brain helps us construct myths as a way of interpreting our experiences, both internal and external, and making sense of the world. Neurotheology also helps us understand the brain processes underlying the development of specific theological ideas and concepts. Brain functions related to causality, binary processing, and holistic unification are part of many of these theological systems. Neurotheology provides the ability to describe changes in brain physiology, neurotransmitter systems, and the autonomic nervous system during religious and spiritual practices. Thus, it seems reasonable to consider neurotheology as a possible metatheology.
NEUROTHEOLOGY AS A MEGATHEOLOGY
Perhaps the ultimate expression of neurotheology would be as a megatheology. A megatheology is defined as a theological system that contains content that is so broad that it can be universally accepted and incorporated into the belief system of every person. The idea would be to develop a system that people could embrace as their primary belief system. Alternatively, people might continue to hold their present belief systems but incorporate a set of new ideals that merge seamlessly with their existing beliefs.
This is certainly a tall order for any theological system, and neurotheology is no exception. The question is whether neurotheology could function as a megatheology. While it is too early in its development to make any kind of definitive statement in this regard, there are some intriguing possibilities to consider. For one, since neurotheology applies to the human brain, and since the human brain is similar in the more than seven billion people on the planet, from the start, it would seem at least possible for neurotheology to be embraced by everyone. Any individual could explore how neurotheology relates to his or her beliefs and practices. People could consider how their brain affects their beliefs, behaviors, practices, rituals, and experiences. Many people reach out to me, grateful for the ideas of neurotheology that have helped them understand where their religious experiences and beliefs come from.
In previous chapters, we’ve seen that neurotheology has some fascinating implications for the development of religious and spiritual practices and liturgy. Rituals and practices could arise from neurotheological research. Neurotheology studies may point to specific approaches to meditation or prayer that may be most effective in bringing about religious and spiritual feelings. Neurotheology could help Muslim, Jew, and Christian alike find the best ways to perform prayers or find meaning in sacred texts. As a simple example, if studies were to show that slowing down the pace at which prayers are said made them more meaningful, then that information could help enhance a person’s religious experience. Whether such experiences and beliefs have a universal goal such as finding absolute reality or infinite consciousness, or more specific goals such as connecting with God or Krishna, it would seem that neurotheology could enable a person to engage his or her religious and spiritual side in a highly effective manner.
Neurotheological research may even suggest certain pathways for people to follow to achieve intense spiritual, or even mystical, experiences. People may pursue various stimulated states associated with psychedelic drugs, transcranial magnetic stimulation, or intense meditation techniques. Although these approaches may be performed within a specific tradition, neurotheology might also offer more universal beliefs related to consciousness or some absolute reality.
As discussed in chapter 14, the most intense experiences tend to be those associated with powerful feelings of unity and oneness. If it is discovered that these states provide important physical, psychological, and spiritual benefits for a person, the means of achieving these states could be part of neurotheological discourse and research. They might even be compatible with existing religious frameworks. We might find that practices arising from specific traditions are particularly useful at inducing such experiences. Alternatively, neurotheology may help find hybrid approaches that allow people from a variety of different perspectives and traditions to attain such experiences. Neurotheology could also potentially help people find effective ways of incorporating such experiences into their prevailing belief systems.
It is interesting to reflect on the universality of the spiritual experiences that we observed in our online survey. While each experience has unique elements, there are some primary components that appear to be found in every experience. A powerful sense of realness and unity is reported by people regardless of their particular belief systems; this is known variously as Brahman, Dao, Tathagata, Dharmakaya, Christ, Allah, God, or Absolute Mind.4 Perhaps neurotheology will find that the sense of absolute unity attained through the workings of the human brain could be regarded as the ultimate expression of every religious tradition. If so, could this form the basis of a megatheology?
Neurotheology may even help show how we can use our brain and consciousness as effectively as possible in advancing the human species whether or not this involves future evolutionary development. Future neurotheological research could explore the question of whether the genetic and physiological processes of the brain, as they are today, are sufficient for achieving the highest possible goals for humanity. Many studies could be conceived that might lead to a better understanding of these neurophysiological and spiritual processes. The end result could be an overall system of rituals, practices, experiences, and beliefs that has a unique neurotheological flavor. This neurotheological system could be pursued by all individuals, regardless of whether they follow a specific religious tradition or are agnostics or atheists.
FINAL THOUGHTS
We have taken a reasonably thorough tour through present neurotheology and found many fascinating ways to link the brain with religious and spiritual phenomena. The future of neurotheology seems bright with an expansive horizon. Studies and scholarship ranging from the highly practical to the deeply esoteric can begin to be explored in full. Neurotheology may develop its own methods and also incorporate ongoing developments in the sciences, philosophy, and theology. Where all of it may lead is uncertain but potentially very exciting. And maybe humanity will find itself evolving toward a new, multidisciplinary, and integrative mindset based on neurotheology.