TED Conversations

Bernard White


This conversation is closed.

What theological implications does the "Psychology" and "Neuroscience" (and possibly biology) of religion (or "God(s)") have?

I'm very interested in people's opinions on this matter.
I would just like to say, as I have said in the past, this debate is not to make mockery of "God". It is just honesty enquiry.
Yet as I have explored with my other debates in the past, it seems we must first define (or describe to the best of our limits) what we mean by "God(s)" and "Existence". Otherwise the debate "Does God exist?" becomes slightly meaningless.
Now that's done.
I was reading much about the psychology of religion, and found that due to articles like :
“Thinking Style and Belief In God” - Art Markman
Link : http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/ulterior-motives/201208/thinking-style-and-belief-in-god
"We are programmed to believe in a god" by Jesse Bering.
"Is God an Accident" by Paul Bloom :
that had many theological implications!
And made me think :
- There is a strong correlation with a "Theory of mind" and belief in God. Animals don't really have a "theory of mind", does this mean other animals can't experience "God(s)"?
- Psychologists can now artificially create a "God experience", Doesn't this make the "Religious experience" argument rather dubious?. Link : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y02UlkYjSi0
And there are probably many more Tedsters could think of!
However I do think it is worth mentioning that :
As Justin L. Barret said, that the psychology and neuroscience of religion (God) doesn't (dis)prove that God isn't real. For it wouldn't make much sense if a God who wanted to be in a relationship with us, didn't give us the ability to conceive such a God.
Another great quote by him :
"Having a scientific explanation for mental phenomena does not mean we should stop believing in them. “Suppose science produces a convincing account for why I think my wife loves me — should I then stop believing that sh

Topics: Church of God

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.

  • Comment deleted

    • Jun 8 2013: Hey Don, Buddy!
      I would like to check this link out soon, too - in the interest of 'casting a broad net'. I personally, was forced to toss out 'creationism' because it was a 'blind faith' - based belief. I found a that a personal, evidential experience-based process (to build a flexible, model of reality - open to growth as I, hopefully grow).
      But, you may wish to check into work by MIT trained cosmologist and mathematician, Gerald L. Schroeder, PhD. He has a theory that suggests that the original "six days" of creation was from the point of view of the creator only. And through the processes of cosmic inflation and the resulting time dilation, that the 14.5 billion years of our universe that we see from our end is entirely reasonable.
      I certainly can't verify his theory for evidence of proof, simply because I couldn't begin to understand his CONFOUNDFING MATHMATICS !!! :( ... :D
      You may wish to read his "The Science of God" - if you promise not to let studying this give you a headache ! :D

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.