Science says: We Need God!

[Jazer]

NOTE: It has been brought to my attention that the article uses the word: "vital" and when I paraphrased I replaced the word "vital" with the word "need". Sorry if this caused anyone any confusion.

Science says God is vital in order for our brain to develop in the right way. Also we need social interaction for our brain to function properly in the regions devoted to empathy, symbolic communication and emotional regulation.

"Brain scans of people who believe in God have found further evidence that religion involves neurological regions vital for social intelligence.

In other words, whether or not God or Gods exist, religious belief may have been quite useful in shaping the human mind’s evolution.

“The main point is that all these brain regions are important for other forms of social cognition and behavior,” said Jordan Grafman, a National Institutes of Health cognitive scientist.

In a study published Monday in Public Library of Science ONE, Grafman’s team used an MRI to measure the brains areas in 40 people of varying degrees of religious belief.

People who reported an intimate experience of God, engaged in religious behavior or feared God, tended to have larger-than-average brain regions devoted to empathy, symbolic communication and emotional regulation. The research wasn’t trying to measure some kind of small “God-spot,” but looked instead at broader patterns within the brains of self-reported religious people."

Religious Experience Linked to Brain's Social Regions | Wired Science | Wired.com

 

[selfinflikted]

You can get the same 'religious' experience through meditation. To say that science says we "need" god, is wrong.

 

[florida2]

Despite this, there are many many many religious people who are bigoted, insensitive, intolerant and generally horrible to people who are different to themselves who call themselves Christians.

 

[thegandyman]

Science doesn't say anything. It's just facts. Scientists say things based on their intepretations. That seems to be an interesting study. Who exactly was studied?

 

[Jazer]

You can get the same 'religious' experience through meditation.

No sorry you were not paying attention. YOU NEED social interaction for the brain to function properly.

To say that science says we "need" god, is wrong.

Actually wired magazine is saying that. In fact they claim to have evidence to back up what they are saying. What evidence do you have to back up your claims?

 

[Jazer]

Yet I'd doubt the conclusion of causality that the cited author seems to make...

Of course you doubt what you do not have. But that does not mean others don't have it. Sort of like my Hong Kong example. I never would have known what Hong Kong was like until I want there. People who have brains that are not developed properly do not know what it would be like to function the way God intended for us to function.

 

[TheReasoner]

And yet... Other studies find another interesting effect of religion:
Brain damage.

I can believe it, too. Reading some of the stuff on here. Religion, it seems, sometimes demands that you think a certain way. That asking questions are prohibited and indeed punished. Whoever asks them becomes the object of ridicule, mockery and derision. Intellectual, in some religious circles, is now an insult.
This is not always so. In my own circles questions are welcomed. Even applauded, and NOT thinking about things is frowned upon.

I think that attributing religion brain enhancing or brain destroying qualities can be detrimental and I consider both statements suspect. But a social group wherein one obeys authority, no questions asked. In a group where one simply accepts what one is taught, and does what one is told there are few incentives to develop the brain, which needs stimuli to improve. Much the same way as muscles do. In such restrictive groups the stimuli are often never received. And the brain could - I suppose - take permanent harm from that. But the problem is not religion per se. It's an authorative, rigid social structure which punishes as opposed to rewards thought and intellectual prowess.

 

[RocksInMyHead]

It's an interesting study, but saying that God is the deciding factor is a bit premature from a scientific standpoint. It could simply be a sympathetic effect from associating with a group of people with shared morality and a sense of belonging to a group. And we all know the power of suggestion...

 

[selfinflikted]

No sorry you were not paying attention. YOU NEED social interaction for the brain to function properly.

Isn't that kind of a "duh" statement?

Actually wired magazine is saying that. In fact they claim to have evidence to back up what they are saying. What evidence do you have to back up your claims?

I have only made one claim in this thread, and that was that the areas of the brain that are affected by the "god" experience are the same areas affected when one meditates.

I do not have a source on hand to back that up, but I will look. It was a study I remember having seen on tv or read about, I can't remember which.

 

[acropolis]

Social interaction is important, but it doesn't need to be via a church.

 

[CaliforniaSun]

Science says we need God in order for our brain to develop in the right way. Also we need social interaction for our brain to function properly. People need to go to church on Sundays.

"Brain scans of people who believe in God have found further evidence that religion involves neurological regions vital for social intelligence.

In other words, whether or not God or Gods exist, religious belief may have been quite useful in shaping the human mind’s evolution.

“The main point is that all these brain regions are important for other forms of social cognition and behavior,” said Jordan Grafman, a National Institutes of Health cognitive scientist.

In a study published Monday in Public Library of Science ONE, Grafman’s team used an MRI to measure the brains areas in 40 people of varying degrees of religious belief.

People who reported an intimate experience of God, engaged in religious behavior or feared God, tended to have larger-than-average brain regions devoted to empathy, symbolic communication and emotional regulation. The research wasn’t trying to measure some kind of small “God-spot,” but looked instead at broader patterns within the brains of self-reported religious people."

Religious Experience Linked to Brain's Social Regions | Wired Science | Wired.com

Aha! I knew it - man did create god.

 

[AV1611VET]

Science says we need God in order for our brain to develop in the right way.

Big deal.

Didn't science say Thalidomide was a prenatal wonder drug?

 

[CaliforniaSun]

Big deal.

Didn't science say Thalidomide was a prenatal wonder drug?

Big deal.

Didn't Jesus say that there were some standing there who wouldn't die before he returned?

 

[thegandyman]

Big deal.

Didn't Jesus say that there were some standing there who wouldn't die before he returned?

That was a spiritual return (judgment on Israel during the 70AD revolt and destruction of Jerusalem) not a physical one.

 

[Jazer]

<staff edit>
The question is are you going to take his warning? R U going to be prepared when Science wants to sell you the latest Thalidominde miracle drug or whatever snake oil they are pushing that day? If you and the people you love were at ZERO risk for disaster we would be glad to drop the whole thing. There would be no reason to discuss the harm that has been done if others were not at risk and needing to be alert to the dangers.

 

[CaliforniaSun]

That was a spiritual return (judgment on Israel during the 70AD revolt and destruction of Jerusalem) not a physical one.

Which doesn't explain in the least why his followers behaved as if his return was imminent. Your doctrine is retrofitted theology.

 

[thegandyman]

Which doesn't explain in the least why his followers behaved as if his return was imminent. Your doctrine is retrofitted theology.

His followers didn't understand everything he told them. If they did, they wouldn't have abandoned him at his crucifixion.

 

[Jazer]

Big deal.

Didn't Jesus say that there were some standing there who wouldn't die before he returned?

The disciples were asking TWO questions at once. The first question had to do with the temple and the second question had to do with the end of the age that we are currently in. For Israel it ended when the temple was tore down in 70 ad. For the church the end of the era will be around 2030 ad.

24:1 And Jesus went out, and departed from the temple: and his disciples came to him for to shew him the buildings of the temple.
24:2 And Jesus said unto them, See ye not all these things? verily I say unto you, There shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down.
24:3 And as he sat upon the mount of Olives, the disciples came unto him privately *, saying, Tell us, when shall these things be ? and what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world?

 

[Jazer]

If they did, they wouldn't have abandoned him at his crucifixion.

They abandoned him because they had not received the HS and they had not yet received Holy Boldness from God. All of that changed on the day of Pentecost. That was the birth of the Christian Church. That was the beginning of the age of Grace.

 

[Lion Hearted Man]

The question is are you going to take his warning? R U going to be prepared when Science wants to sell you the latest Thalidominde miracle drug or whatever snake oil they are pushing that day? If you and the people you love were at ZERO risk for disaster we would be glad to drop the whole thing. There would be no reason to discuss the harm that has been done if others were not at risk and needing to be alert to the dangers.

Science doesn't want to sell you anything. Marketing and business want to sell you things. This is why we set up third party agencies like the FDA to oversee drug development to make sure companies that have a financial stake in the success of a drug don't fudge the results.

In fact, thalidomide is actually a great example of how science can work when done properly. The FDA refused to approve thalidomide because it didn't see enough evidence to approve it, despite the drug company pressuring them to.