Brain differences of atheists and believers

pandora

redrock wrote:

Shall we keep this thread based (loosely) on science and not slip in theology and go down the 'god' thread path again?

(see Jean's original post - in green)

To explain my meaning and perhaps I should have worded differently...

I think many scientists also believe there is a God although they can not prove that
but may base this on what we are ...

energy, chemicals and electricity ... a consciousness

I think the scientists in this article have a great interest in the science behind spirituality
and in the existence of God and how the brain reacts to that.

redrock

Jeanwah wrote:

That blog post was pretty interesting! It seems that there's nothing that's completely conclusive so far, but interesting nonetheless. Yeah, 50 participants among 2 different studies wasn't enough really to produce anything really substantial.

There isn't but, if we can accept that brain structure from various groups of people such as the criminally insane or psychos, etc. have 'differences' in common and such differences may show 'pre-disposition', could we extrapolate that to believers of a concept such as god? Maybe having to put in so much faith in this abstract concept to make it a reality requires certain facilities in the brain to be developed differently than the norm? Could it then show a pre-disposition as well? Or is that really too far fetched?

Cosmo

g under p wrote:

Hippocampus....nice word for all my brain exercises on Word With Friends. I must find a way to fit that word in.

Peace

...
I went with some friends to the aquarium last night after work... and guess what? There is an exhibit with Hippocampuses... or Hippocampi. That is the latin name of seahorses.
It was wierd bacause that name popped out from reading about it here.
Sorry to take this off topic... maybe my hippocampus fired off when I saw the hippocampuses.
...
Back to the topic.
...
P.S. Is it wrong to eat sushi while looking at the fish in the aquarium?
...
Back on topic.

mickeyrat

In this study, I wonder if timing of belief plays a role. Like nonbeliever until X age when ABC happened leading to belief? Or the flipside, forcefed belief as a youngster then XYZ event happened leading to suspension of belief?


I also wonder how long til this thread devolves and slides into lockdown.

pandora

redrock wrote:

Jeanwah wrote:

That blog post was pretty interesting! It seems that there's nothing that's completely conclusive so far, but interesting nonetheless. Yeah, 50 participants among 2 different studies wasn't enough really to produce anything really substantial.

There isn't but, if we can accept that brain structure from various groups of people such as the criminally insane or psychos, etc. have 'differences' in common and such differences may show 'pre-disposition', could we extrapolate that to believers of a concept such as god? Maybe having to put in so much faith in this abstract concept to make it a reality requires certain facilities in the brain to be developed differently than the norm? Could it then show a pre-disposition as well? Or is that really too far fetched?

I would say the opposite that the norm is the believer brain in my opinion

that this would be more likely a matter of creation and survival as we evolve.

That indeed there is the under developed brain that can not grasp the potential
of the brain ... of us ... or of God.
This due to the need for proof and evidence. This brain that deals only in concrete
like a flat hard surface and lacks the capability of trust and faith ...
the ability to see through a flat hard surface.

As we discover the powers of the brain and perceive what is our reality,
a new reality, sixth sense, the supernatural, spirituality etc ...
the advanced brain will emerge and will prevail.

redrock

I guess another question for me is why this study? What was the 'purpose'? What brought it on and why was it so insignificant with no real defining criteria. Out of curiosity, I googled the guy and, whilst he is knowledgeable, his expertise and research is in a different 'area'.



And this thread will not be locked as we will stick to Jean's bit in green and not respond to any 'god' stuff. Won't we? :twisted:

Cosmo

redrock wrote:

I guess another question for me is why this study? What was the 'purpose'? What brought it on and why was it so insignificant with no real defining criteria. Out of curiosity, I googled the guy and, whilst he is knowledgeable, his expertise and research is in a different 'area'.

And this thread will not be locked as we will stick to Jean's bit in green and not respond to any 'god' stuff. Won't we? :twisted:

...
Maybe he did this study for attention and/or reward.

pandora

redrock wrote:

I guess another question for me is why this study? What was the 'purpose'? What brought it on and why was it so insignificant with no real defining criteria. Out of curiosity, I googled the guy and, whilst he is knowledgeable, his expertise and research is in a different 'area'.



And this thread will not be locked as we will stick to Jean's bit in green and not respond to any 'god' stuff. Won't we? :twisted:

Well, "God stuff" is what this thread is based on ...
believers and atheists and the scientific differences in their brains...
which I am discussing...

or was it just for atheists to discuss :?

If this discussion is only for atheists please say so...

otherwise I will add

Yes I agreed with you...
When I first read the thread I thought what an incredible waste of money and time
as some others mentioned ...
curing cancer etc would be far more productive
and then with the lack of any great inclusive findings I thought... ok

but after further research on this subject and some related I have since found
it is very interesting with powerful repercussions.

The conclusions found in studies like this will help to bring many discoveries
of what the mind is capable of and perhaps guide us to new heights and abilities.

Good stuff

redrock

Am I correct in thinking that

This thread is NOT about scientists believing but not being able to prove and trying to find a rational explanation 'our maker' based on what we are.

It is NOT about 'grasping' god or need for proof or evidence.

It is NOT to discuss the existence or not of god.

It is NOT theists vs atheists


It is a professor who decided to try out something and, though his 'study' with limited people and no real criteria, doesn't really show anything at all that can be accepted in the scientific world, is interesting and raises other SCIENTIFIC questions - not theological.

Let's keep it like that.



Actually, please nobody respond to this post. I am just clearing my thoughts. Any response will make this thread degenerate yet again.

Sorry I couldn't control myself.

Pass the sushi Cosmo - let me stuff my face so I don't blab out like this!

redrock

Cosmo wrote:

...
Maybe he did this study for attention and/or reward.

Maybe...

But it would seem another little study was done (or is it all part of the same thing), but this one even makes a difference between religions, with Protestants 'winning at the post'!!!!

So different religions have different impact on the brain... hmmmmmm.

My questions on brain damage still stands...

Cosmo

redrock wrote:

Cosmo wrote:

...
Maybe he did this study for attention and/or reward.

Maybe...

But it would seem another little study was done (or is it all part of the same thing), but this one even makes a difference between religions, with Protestants 'winning at the post'!!!!

So different religions have different impact on the brain... hmmmmmm.

My questions on brain damage still stands...

...
And aren't there many other factors that impact brain growth and development? Environmental, emotional, experience (good, bad or a mix of both)... like if you ate lead pant chips in an old house or grew up eating DDT laced produce or did too much acid in your teens or suffered emotional problems. Don't those variables play a role in individual's brain development?
in the study... what were the test subjects taken from... where there Muslims, Jews, Buddhists, Scientoligists from all walks of life... from different countries/cultures involved in these tests? In other words, what were/are the methods used?

redrock

Loads of factors Cosmo.

I posted this link a few posts back - it gives more details to the study though not enough info on the criteria. Thus the flaw in this study.

http://neurowhoa.blogspot.com/2009/03/b ... m-non.html

pandora

The questions pertaining to age, event, timing, that were raised ...

I wondered the same,
due to the long term memory issue of the brain. One would think this would
play a huge factor in results.

Also personal experiences how that effected the test subjects
I wondered this as I reread the article, having dismissed the article
entirely at first.
Most especially the forced belief idea but I don't think it mentioned age groups
or life differences which one would think would be a big factor in a study like this
that it would cause changes/ differences within the brain.



Not sure what to conclude here... very contradicting...
and what is their definition is of 'born again'

Several studies have revealed that people who practice meditation or have prayed for many years exhibit increased activity and have more brain tissue in their frontal lobes, regions associated with attention and reward, as compared with people who do not meditate or pray. A more recent study revealed that people who have had “born again” experiences have a smaller hippocampus, a part of the brain involved in emotions and memory, than atheists do. These findings, however, are difficult to interpret because they do not clarify whether having larger frontal lobes or a smaller hippocampus causes a person to become more religious or whether being pious triggers changes in these brain regions.




The study seems lacking in factors like these
very inconclusive in the end leaving many questions.

I am very interested and hope to find more info on studies like this one
that may focus on those type of factors too.

Cosmo

redrock wrote:

Loads of factors Cosmo.

I posted this link a few posts back - it gives more details to the study though not enough info on the criteria. Thus the flaw in this study.

http://neurowhoa.blogspot.com/2009/03/b ... m-non.html

...
Thanx for that, RedRock. It sort of confirms my suspicions.
Had the test subjects been either overtly religious believers (The Pope, priests, preachers, religious fundamentalists, etc...) or adamant Atheists, would they come up with the same results?

redrock

As you say Cosmo. There are no real defined 'groups' as you mentioned and no 'control' group (ie entirely random, no selection criteria). No serious study can be done without this minimum criteria.

No REAL study exists out there either (compared to somewhat reliable studies on the brains of the criminally insane).

I don't think I can dismiss the fact that theists may use their brain differently than atheists. In the same way that a logical person uses more of the left side of the brain and the creative person the right side. Both sides work perfectly fine and are perfectly normal but are just used differently.

Jeanwah

redrock wrote:

Jeanwah wrote:

That blog post was pretty interesting! It seems that there's nothing that's completely conclusive so far, but interesting nonetheless. Yeah, 50 participants among 2 different studies wasn't enough really to produce anything really substantial.

There isn't but, if we can accept that brain structure from various groups of people such as the criminally insane or psychos, etc. have 'differences' in common and such differences may show 'pre-disposition', could we extrapolate that to believers of a concept such as god? Maybe having to put in so much faith in this abstract concept to make it a reality requires certain facilities in the brain to be developed differently than the norm? Could it then show a pre-disposition as well? Or is that really too far fetched?

Some good questions... none of which I have the answer to!

The pre-disposition angle is interesting. But I would wonder about those who completely change extremes though in their lifetime, like from strict Christian to atheist? What, if any, changes in the brain would that be?

Jeanwah

Cosmo wrote:

g under p wrote:

Hippocampus....nice word for all my brain exercises on Word With Friends. I must find a way to fit that word in.

Peace

...
I went with some friends to the aquarium last night after work... and guess what? There is an exhibit with Hippocampuses... or Hippocampi. That is the latin name of seahorses.
It was wierd bacause that name popped out from reading about it here.
Sorry to take this off topic... maybe my hippocampus fired off when I saw the hippocampuses.
...
Back to the topic.
...
P.S. Is it wrong to eat sushi while looking at the fish in the aquarium?
...
Back on topic.

Jeanwah

redrock wrote:

I guess another question for me is why this study? What was the 'purpose'? What brought it on and why was it so insignificant with no real defining criteria. Out of curiosity, I googled the guy and, whilst he is knowledgeable, his expertise and research is in a different 'area'.

Dr. Andrew Newberg is Director of Research at the Myrna Brind Center for Integrative Medicine at Thomas Jefferson University Hospital and Medical College. He is also Adjunct Assistant Professor in the Department of Religious Studies at the University of Pennsylvania. He is Board-certified in Internal Medicine and Nuclear Medicine. He is considered a pioneer in the neuroscientific study of religious and spiritual experiences, a field frequently referred to as – neurotheology.

http://andrewnewberg.com/

Odd combination of specialties, huh?

Jeanwah

Cosmo wrote:

redrock wrote:

Loads of factors Cosmo.

I posted this link a few posts back - it gives more details to the study though not enough info on the criteria. Thus the flaw in this study.

http://neurowhoa.blogspot.com/2009/03/b ... m-non.html

...
Thanx for that, RedRock. It sort of confirms my suspicions.
Had the test subjects been either overtly religious believers (The Pope, priests, preachers, religious fundamentalists, etc...) or adamant Atheists, would they come up with the same results?

Yeah, one might think that that may bring more definitive results if specific people with extreme beliefs were involved.

redrock

So the guy that wrote the response was a neurotheologist - so we know where he's coming from. I looked up the guy that did the study and he has a quite different background..

http://www.michaelinzlicht.com/research ... ulum-vita/