|
|||||
|
|
|
|
||
|
In December, Swedish researchers reported that exposing the brain to low-level magnetism doesn’t induce spiritual experiences as shown in previous research studies. Even if magnetism might not reliably excite the brain’s “God spot,” the debate continues over the importance of studying the scientific side of religious experience. The scientific method uses reproducibility to validate experiments. A researcher in a lab in Sweden should be able to reproduce an experiment first done in Canada and get the same results. The Swedes’ findings, or lack thereof, raise the specter of bad science, in which the inability to reproduce an experiment calls neurotheology’s methodology into question. Pehr Granqvist, a researcher at Uppsala University in Sweden, attempted to replicate earlier neurotheology research done by Michael Persinger at Laurentian University in Montreal. By pulsing the temporal lobe of the brain with weak magnetic fields, Granqvist tried to induce spiritual feelings in his subjects. However, Granqvist’s team found no significant effect of magnetism on the brain when it came to feeling something otherworldly. “I would not rule out the possibility that stronger magnetic fields might have the kinds of effects that are suggested by Persinger’s research,” continued Granqvist. “And I base that on temporal lobe epileptics.” He added that this population often reports paranormal experiences due to the intensity of their seizures. Neurotheologians have always been excited by the brain’s temporal lobe, often called the “God spot.” Andrew Newburg, a radiologist at the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia and one of the most prominent neurotheologians, said that his own group’s work is based in part on the research of neurosurgeon Wilder Penfield, a physician who studied brain activity in the 1950s and ’60s at Royal Victoria Hospital in Montreal. During brain surgery, Penfield stimulated parts of the brain such as the hippocampus and the amygdala, eliciting vivid memories of past experiences in his patients post-surgery, said Newburg. Shocking the brain into the spiritual realm is not a new idea. “If you directly electrically stimulate these areas, you are going to elicit reactions that are very like aspects of spiritual experiences,” said Newburg. That said, Newburg said he had reservations that low-level magnetic fields could cause the effect that Persinger’s group has claimed to see. “I’ve always thought that it’s a little unlikely that that kind of field would be able to do that.” But, he conceded, “It’s certainly not out of the question that low-grade fields might do it; whether they actually do is the real question.” David Hogue, a pastoral psychologist at Garrett-Evangelical Theological Seminary in Evanston, Ill., said that attributing all of religious experience to brain function instead of other aspects of human psychology and sociology is probably myopic in scope. “I’m increasingly convinced that experiences labeled as a ‘spiritual’ rely on the same brain structures as common, everyday experiences, such as memory and imagination, though they utilize them in ways that sometimes lift them out of the ordinary. There may not be a ‘God spot’ in the brain whose sole function is spiritual,” said Hogue, also the author of Remembering the Future, Imagining the Past: Story, Ritual, and the Human Brain. “Instead, there are probably multiple networks in common use which are activated in particularly powerful ways.” Persinger countered that unlocking the temporal lobe’s mystery requires a strict methodology when it comes to neurology research using magnetism. Upon the paper’s publication in Neuroscience Letters in December, Persinger’s group posted a response to the Granqvist’s team, lauding their colleagues’ attempts but taking their methods to task. Persinger said the key to inducing spiritual experiences in the study group lies in the complex patterns of weak magnetic fields. In his formal response, Persinger stated, “The importance of replicating the specific timing and pattern of the magnetic field is as critical in this area of science as carefully adhering to the steps of synthesizing a compound is in organic chemistry.” Persinger said he had reservations about the wave patterns used by the Swedish group. In his studies, initially done in the late ’80s, the patterns of magnetic fields mirrored those he had monitored with electroencephalography, so that the timing and strength of the patterns would be meaningful to the brain. As opposed to using strong magnetic fields that could generate something as strong as seizure, which in turn might induce a mystical experience, both groups used highly specific, low-dose magnetism. “It’s kind of like opening the door with a key or kicking in the door,” said Persinger. Granqvist defended his team’s replication of the wave patterns as well as the length of their application to the brain. “Persinger knew ahead of the experiments there would be two times of 15-minute exposures. He agreed to that time. His explanation comes now as a disappointment,” said Granqvist. “Also, even if we would have applied the fields for another five minutes,” continued Granqvist, “we’re fairly certain it wouldn’t have any effect.” The research groups also disagreed about the psychological environment to which subjects were exposed. Upon entering the soundproof test room, subjects were blindfolded and monitored as the magnetic patterns pulsed through electrodes. Persinger argued that the sensory deprivation conditions that Granqvist used weren’t adequate. However, Newburg suggested that sensory deprivation might be the real factor behind the results that Persinger demonstrated. Being blindfolded in a quiet room might cause “the feeling of a presence,” said Newburg. Persinger argued that sensory deprivation is just a part of being able to prepare the brain to be affected by magnetism. “All of those neurons that would typically be involved with visual and auditory surveillance are now available to be incorporated into the weak fields,” he said. But if magnetism is the main underlying cause of subjects’ spiritual feelings, Hogue warns developing spiritual-inducing technologies raises ethical questions. “There is a difference between studies that attempt to measure what is going on during religious experiences and then developing technologies that can bring them about,” said Hogue. “[E]valuating the impact of such technologies on persons and institutions will ultimately be critical.” Despite their differences, Persinger and Granqvist agreed more research was needed to better define what’s happening in the brain. Persinger said his experiments are not biased to finding a “spiritual” phenomenon, per se. “If you bring in people who are highly religious and highly atheistic, they all report a presence, but they interpret in very different ways. The highly atheistic person says, ‘Yeah, it’s my brain doing it.’ The more intensely religious people, say ‘Yeah, you can affect the “God spot.”’ The Wicca-types say, ‘I’m actually in contact with spirits,’” Persinger said. “They explain it according to culture.” Cultural context is the most important piece of neurotheology’s research, according to Newburg. “If
you say these experiences are nothing more than brain function, that’s
not really being a neurotheologian,” he said. “You have to look
at it in the context of religious principles and philosophical ideals.” SOURCE: Science & Theology News More headlines at www.mindpowernews.com
|
