On a years-old to-do list is the following item: "launch applied neuro-religion blog".
I have not done so, and yesterday's article by David Brooks in the NY Times makes me sorry I haven't.
I have read with dismay the overly-simplistic "arguments" against religion in the scientific press. Richard Dawkins has disproved the literal existence of the Judeo-Christian God of the Bible. So what? Human spiritual undertakings are therefore bunk? It doesn't follow. Defining your adversary in ridiculously narrow terms, the better to pulverize him, isn't convincing.
It's encouraging to have a NY Times columnist point out that strict scientific materialism is beside the point. We are talking here about what it means to be human.
Starting from the point of view that the mind is a computer leads only to conclusions consistent with that assumption. As in, "The things that give meaning to human existence are actually meaningless, because consciousness is nothing more than a bunch of microprocessors clicking away."
My favorite book for exploring this topic is HHDL's The Universe in a Single Atom: The Convergence of Science and Spirituality. My own copy is peppered with metal Book Darts marking key passages.
Perhaps the greatest "scientific discovery" of recent years went unmentioned in Brooks' column. Meditation changes your brain in measurable ways. By training oneself and conciously undertaking a transformation of mind, tangible physical and mental alterations result. Cerebral cortex thickens. People are truly less distractable. These come as no suprise to meditators, who have seen dramatic changes in themselves and their fellows.
But those working from a scientific mindset need measurable data, and here is data that suggests that, far from being delusional, spiritual practice can magnify and improve the human creature.
If we had data like this ten years ago, perhaps I would still be a neuroscientist.
Wednesday, May 14, 2008
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
