A Photograph of God?: An Introduction to the Biology of Belief
Brain Machinery: The Science of Perception
Brain Architecture: How the Brain Makes the Mind
Myth-making: The Compulsion to Create Stories and Beliefs
Ritual: The Physical Manifestation of Meaning
Mysticism: The Biology of Transcendence
The Origins of Religion: The Persistence of a Good Idea
Realer Than Real: The Mind in Search of Absolutes
Why God Won't Go Away: The Metaphor of God and the Mythology of Science
Epilogue: So Just What Is Neurotheology Anyway?
Notes
References
About the Authors
Index

Interesting book on the physiology of our brains when we meditate or pray. I read this for a book club for my Skeptic group. Not a real fast read but very interesting, especially if you are science minded. The book doesn't end up saying one way or the other whether god is a figment of our imagination or real. ( )

A single quote from this book probably explains all we need to know about why God won’t go away:

So impressive are the health benefits of religion … that after reviewing more than a thousand studies on the impact of religion upon health, Dr. Harold Koenig of Duke University Medical Center recently told The New Republic, that “Lack of religious involvement has an effect on mortality that is equivalent to forty years of smoking one pack of cigarettes per day.

What more evidence do we need that evolution has wired us for religion? The subtitle is Brain Science & The Biology of Belief, and the back cover copy promises, “This fascinating, eye-opening book dares to explore both the miracle and the biology of our enduring relationship with God.”

The book begins with a short overview of the brain; in particular, the orientation association area that defines the “self.” The authors believe this area is extremely important in the brain’s sense of mystical and religious experiences.

Religion is far from new. The graves and shrines of the Neanderthals are the earliest known evidence of religious behavior. As soon as hominids began to behave like human beings, they began to wonder and worry about the deepest mysteries of existence—and found resolutions for those mysteries in the stories we call myths. This observation is central to the authors’ quest for understanding our religious need. Why would the human mind compel us, in every culture and throughout time, to seek answers to our most troubling problems in myth?

The book next discusses ritual, mysticism, and the mind’s search for absolutes … for the “realer than real.” Our minds are drawn by the intuition of a deeper reality, an utter sense of oneness with the Absolute. God, say the authors, will not go away, so long as we are capable of sensing something more. ( )

This book was very thought provoking. I expected it to be more of a Dawkinian approach to squash religion with science, and was pleasantly surprised to find that it has a much more even-handed approach to the traditional dichotomy, making a real concerted effort to bridge the divide. The book basically centers around the attention and orientation centers of the brain, and the principle that certain events/behaviors can deafferent them (or shut them down), providing an extra-sensory experience. As opposed to taking a radical scientific standpoint (i.e. this proves there is no god) the authors suggest that perhaps during these mystical "altered states" (which we all attain periodically in varying degrees) we are in fact perceiving a truer reality than our own. Their arguments are often driven by conjecture, although still backed by scientific evidence, and make for great contemplation. ( )

I could tell that the authors were trying very hard to make their work accessible (i.e., dumb it down) for the general public, but it was still quite a sweat. I had to read most paragraphs and some sentences 2 or 3 times before I felt I had a grip on what they were on about. And I'm not sure how accurate that feeling is.

Altho the authors take no position on whether or not God (or what they prefer to call Absolute Unitary Being - AUB) actually exists they declare that their research reveals that the human brain is wired for mystical experiences from which perception of "god", and religion to appease/celebrate that god, are born. As far as they'll go regarding the god issue is to state that god could either be neuron blips in the brain, or a perception authentically experienced in a mystical state that indicates a non-material reality, and that they're betting on the second one.

Their bet is based on their research, which is frequently mentioned but not described -- at least that I could see. Not being well versed in science, I could have simply not recognized it or not understood it, but I read nothing that made a compelling case for non-material reality over brain blips. To me, the possibilities seemed 50/50 at best and, based on what I read in this book, I'd be betting for the brain blips.

One point I wish they would have stressed more is that when they used the word "god" they are always referring to their AUB, which is some non-physical, non-personal and certainly non-individual form of ultimate reality -- what some philosophers call the ground of being. They are most definately not referring to any human-like entity with a separate and individual personality, nature, emotions or plans for humankind. They also aren't referring to anything with a gender, anything that is an actual "he", and they did point this out once but then continued to refer to god as "He" rather than the more accurate "It".

I can understand this, a lot of people find the use of "it" as a pronoun insulting (except for animals) and I expect the authors felt that even people who understood it's use would have a knee-jerk negative reaction to it, and to their work. I do believe they should have soldiered on with "It" tho, not because it's politically or metaphorically correct, but because it would be the best way to drive home the otherness of their meaning of "god".

Having written all that negative sounding quibbling, I did enjoy the book very much. Their theory is fascinating and well worth the struggle of reading for someone who didn't even take basic biology in high school. ( )