Rating: 
Summary: Neurobiology of Transcendant Religious & Mystical Experience
Review: This is a great book, one I've already recommended to hundreds of people! I bought it because I was interested in how neurology could explain religious experience. Then, as I went from chapter to chapter, my expectations would be surpassed, again and again. As the organizer of The Futurehealth Winter Brain Meeting, I have a good feel for what is going on in the world of brain research, particularly around the issues of consciousness and spirituality. This book covers some new ground, with new PET scan data, but more important, it is a well woven exploration of a new model which covers how the neurological functioning of the brain not only explains, but inevitably leads to the creation of myths, rituals and the kinds of transcendent mystical experiences upon which religions are founded. The authors have done their homework so they can discuss the neurobiology of the brain from a renaissance person's rounded perspective. Since I am also very interested in the art and science of story, it was a wonderful treat to discover the chapter on the neurobiological foundations for the creation of myths. It's a controversial book which raises plenty of questions. I give the authors lots of credit for not trying to provide, or suggesting they have all the answers. But they do raise good questions. So, if you want to have a transcendent religious or mystical experience, read the book and learn how to deafferentize the part of your parietal loves they describe with explicit detail. (according to a colleague who has done surgical deafferentation research, deafferentize means to reduce, restrict or cut off signals or information to a specific neural area.) <g> Or.... try some rituals-- the other means of accessing transcendence which they explain the workings of.
Rating: 
Summary: Clear and solid in some areas, very weak in others
Review: Thsi book does a good job expounding the authors' theory of the neural mechanisms behind transcendent experience, and its relationship to religious belief. They start out explicitly relying on the traditional objective realist position, and show how interaction of certain brain areas can lead us to lose our sense of boundaries in time and space. Thus the authors theorize that ineffable mystical experience arises from inhibition of a brain region that is critical for maintaining our sense of boundaries in time and space. The description is not very technical, but it is clear and should make sense to general readers without any background in neurology. The authors use their own simple terms for brain areas and functions rather than using the more obscure jargon of neuroscience. The excplanations work well up to a point. There is another, weaker aspect to this book, which is the philosophical musings of the authors. Somewhere in the middle of the book, they decide that there are only two positions to be taken, objective realism and subjectivism. They make the reasonable point (though without supporting it in the book) that current neuroscience research reveals human perception to be constructed to a great degree, rather than directly providing a literal reflection of nature. This particular point is made in more detail by others, such as by Gerald Edelman in "Bright Air, Brilliant Fire," also suitable for general readers, and by George Lakoff and Mark Johnson in their writings, as well as Walter Freeman in "How Brains Make Up Their Minds." Having made the point that objective realism is not an accurate way to think about how experience arises from the brain, and assuming that the only think left is subjectivism, he is forced to concede that "neurological reality" as he calls it, hs to reflect ontological reality. That is, he jumps to the conclusion that since mystical experience reflects something _really happening_ in the brain, that there must be a 'reality' being perceived by mystics. This may be true in some sense, but it is very confused and confusing thinking. For one thing, the authors claim that hallucinations are distinguishable from mystical experience in that mystical experience seems much more real. Yet hypnosis research not cited by the authors reveals that under some conditions hallucinations are as real as perceptions, and rely on the same brain areas, and that our bodies respond to them as if they were perceptions. In other words, the authors seem to get even the neurology wrong when they discuss what they call the "existential operator" that assigns a sense of reality to experience. Contrary to the claims of the authors, the brain can indeed produce a perfectly solid sense of reality, right down to the brain regions used for sensory perception, from products of imagination, through suggestion. This weakens their conclusion that "mystical experience is more real than hallucination" considerably, though of course it does not completely negate it. Secondly, the authors don't recognize that there are options besides metaphysical dualism and objective realism. The fact that we perceive mystical union as if it were as real as sensory experience doesn't mean it has ontological reality. There are also very credible alternate views such as pragmatism (Walter Freeman, in "How Brains Make up their Minds,"), embodied realism (Lakoff and Johnson in "Philosophy in the Flesh"), and "relational consciousness" (John Taylor in "The Race for Consciousness"). These alternate views all allow for meaning to be constructed in the mind, such as through meaningful action on the environment, without making it either a delusion or an objective reality in itself. Thus, mystical experience can be meaningful and we can have theories, about its signficance as an evolutionary adapatation for example, without making mystical experience ontologically equivalent to a table or a chair, or resorting to a dualism of "objective realities." The authors simply don't make the case they claim to make that mystical experience is 'objectively real' because it is 'neurologically real.' However, they do an excellent job of describing their evidence for the neural mechansisms in very clear and simple terms for general readers.
Rating: 
Summary: Disappointing and muddled
Review: This book was in the 'cog sci' section but belongs in 'new age.' It tries too hard not to step on the toes of Big Business Western Religion and coddles Eastern Philosophy. Using terms such as Absolute Unitary Being, which is for all practical purposes the Brahman definition of Absolute Reality, one is confounded by the fact that this is supposed to be an expose of a scientific study, not a didactic on realizing the Reality beyond the Real of transcendence. The term AUB is misleading to unwary readers of Christian background and is not fully described until 3/4 the way into the book. Stabs are taken at those who are skeptical in nature, and those of whom, for whatever reason, do not ascribe 'awe' experiences to anything cosmic. Such a quote used:"If [a scientist] has not experienced, at least a few times in his life, this cold shudder down his spine, this confrontation with an immense, invisible face whose breath moves him to tears, he is not a scientist."The author gives watered-down definitions of the 'operators' of the brain, but, by his own definitions, those of us who have superior 'Reductionist operators' and/or 'Abstract operators' are not meant for inclusion in his paradigm as we are 'narrow-minded' and might as well be written off as 'earthbound.'There is misuse of such luminaries as Carl Sagan, a quote being: "Self-avowed agnostic Carl Sagen was not immune to the 'mysterious intuition' Chargoff describes."---when really anyone who has read Sagan's works would know that he was an agnostic but was so distraught over the loss of his father that, as much as he didn't believe, he sincerely hoped it was true that they would meet again in the here-after. The operative word being 'hoped'...not 'had mysterious intuition' about. There is no investigation of ethnobotany or synthetic chemical use, electrical stimulation, very little on brain damage/anomalies/disease, diet/fasting reactions, or environmental conditioning/crisis reactions. This is because the argument is that healthy, average brains are inclined to spirituality, but the focus was on brains highly trained in meditation practices only. There is no clear outline of the scientific method, therefore one can not even draw inferences from their 'inconclusive conclusion.'
Rating:
Summary: There are better books on the subject...
Review: Though Newberg is onto a great idea, it has been better said by others before him. His style is dry and pedantic, his logic poorly constructed.
Rating:
Summary: Valuable book, but philosophically puzzling
Review: My first impression upon hearing the thesis of this book was 'why is this news?'. It would seem, ever since the 60's and Dr. Leary et. al., that the existence of hard-wired neural circuitry attuned to the experiential spectrum otherwise known as 'god' is a given. Yet, the kind of exhaustive documenting of such faculties as is done in this book is all part of the necessary belaboring of the obvious required to establish the phenomena as fact. Whether or not one posits any 'new physics' such as 'God' or not. Which, after all, is perennially left to the student as an excercise, as it should be, I suppose. Personally, I could have wished for more discussion on the universality of the religious induction of 'metanoia' (that most interesting NT word historically mis-translated as 'repent'), and the endocrine (chakra) physiology changes associated with metanoia, as well as the contact-induced experiences (shaktipat). Not to mention a clearer rationale for the evolutionary survival advantages of metanoia in synchronicity modulation. And the similarities to various other modes of consciousness such as schizophrenia and autism. But for all of that, there are numerous complementary books such as those by Gopi Krishna and Victor Mansfield. It still seems that the puzzle of religion, even at this late date, requires a minimum of 10 or so disparate books such as this in order to be put together. Yet, this has got to be one of the more important in the genre, in spite of such philosophically confusing assertions as the following: "the neurological aspects of spiritual experience support the sense of the realness of God." Esse est Percipi?
Rating:
Summary: Mind-blowing
Review: The authors, one of whom apparently has been researching this topic of neurotheology for almost 30 years, suggest some very interesting answers to questions that I have often pondered. Their brain imaging studies are remarkable. The chapter on "Mysticism" also fascinated me. This book will probably catch the interest of both theologians and scientists as well as laymen like myself. ...................I am an Architect
Rating: 
Summary: The Pseudo-Science of God...
Review: Here I thought I was about to venture into pure, unadulterated scientific discovery only to find myself once again faced with another example of pseudo-scientific pablum. Not worth the investment of money or time.
Rating:
Summary: God in the Brain's Machine?
Review: Science cannot determine that gods of any type exist, nor can it determine that no gods exist. However, there may be scientific reasons why the belief in gods remains strong. In the surprisingly titled _Why God Won't Go Away_ Ballantine Books) by Andrew Newberg, M.D., Eugene D'Aquilli, M.D., and Vince Rause, we get a fascinating scientific answer to the title question, and a review of the current scientific understanding of the roots of belief. The authors have done research by means of brain scans on those who are having mystical or religious experiences. The brain scans show that something is going on among the neurons that doesn't happen at other times. Most of the scans described in the authors' research show an increase in activity in the posterior superior parietal lobe, an area just behind the top of the head. They call this for operational purposes the "orientation association area (OAA)," because the OAA orients a person in physical space. "To perform this crucial function, it must first generate a clear, consistent cognition of the physical limits of the self. In simple terms, it must draw a sharp distinction between the individual and everything else; to sort out the you from the infinite not-you that makes up the rest of the universe." When this area is damaged by trauma or stroke, patients have difficulty maneuvering in physical space; when it is extra active, it seems to be a source of an inexplicable feeling of connection to all creation. A meditator describes the ineffable state in terms that are typical: "There's a sense of timelessness and infinity. It feels like I am part of everyone and everything in existence." The authors explain that the gene-driven wiring of the brain to encourage religious beliefs exists because it has been evolutionarily good for us. Stimulating the OAA or the autonomic nervous system can produce calm and a sense of well-being which may be not only pleasant but physically beneficial. Beliefs driven by neurology could reinforce themselves by building myths, encouraging ritual, uniting societies and providing social support from fellow believers. They can check worry about eventual annihilation. They can provide a feeling of control. Those of a religious bent will find matter to argue with inside these pages, even though the authors are very careful not to argue for or against the existence of deities, only that "the neurological aspects of spiritual experience support the sense of the realness of God." Some may also find disconcerting the idea that ecstasy of religious mysticism may have its roots in the structures that bring on orgasm. Others will find the practical answer to the title's question just too pragmatic and pat, but given the extraordinary research as it now stands, it is the best that science can do as it begins to look into religious feeling: "What we know beyond question is that the mind is essentially a machine designed to solve the riddles of existence, and as long as our brains are wired as they are, God will not go away." This book is a wonderful introduction into this fascinating research.
Rating:
Summary: This 'New Age' book is misrepresented as serious science
Review: I found this book in the Science / Biology section, and since it seemed to go address an important and interesting topic ("A facinating study of the neurological basis of mystical and religious experience") I bought a copy. The first several chapters contained interesting information about brain structure and function, but had the feel of 'lightweight' science. The authors seemed to be drawing conclusions not supported by the data. As the book progressed it became apparent that the authors had their own agenda and beliefs to promote, and rational scientific inquiry was nowhere to be seen. Statements like "The wisdom of the mystics, it seems, has predicted for centuries what neurology now shows to be true: In Absolute Unitary Being, self blends into other, mind and matter are one and the same state" show how far afield the authors take their data. Their clear belief in the "Absolute Unitary Being" (not to be confused with anything like the Judeo-Christian concept of a personal God), and frequent use of phrases like "being one with the universe" were difficult to take seriously. If you're into 'New Age' reading, this book is right up your alley. If you're looking for serious science, save yourself some time and frustration and look elsewhere.
Rating:
Summary: A Good Read
Review: Written in a friendly, conversational style, this book makes accessible some very difficult and interesting concepts. Certainly, it would be hard to argue that the biological/neurological basis for belief, ie, the reason so many of us believe in a supreme being/beings other than ourselves is not interesting... and that is, in a nutshell, what this book is about. It goes on to explore a couple of details of many interesting related topics, such as the role of ritual and how rituals (such as those in which chruch-goers participate) effect the brain, and hence our conciousness. This book does not, however, explore topics like NDEs (Near Death Experiences) much at all, so if that is a topic you want to read up on, this is not the book for you.
This book was an enjoyable and interesting read, but it was not without flaws. As mentioned above, I found the lack of material on near death experiences somewhat disappointing, as, from what I understand, those are interesting neurological phenomena. Also, the authors spend a bit too long dwelling on explaining the basics of the nervous system. A shorter portion of the text would have done just as well, and would have left more room to cover other topics.
|
