posted
I have been working on the following post for a while. I was going to wait until I finished reviewing each of the distinct classes of spiritual experiences, but I want to go ahead and post what I have so far.
When I was a true believer, I experienced many wonderful sensations that I was taught to attribute to God. When I came to no longer believe in God, I still had the desire to have those wonderful experiences because I enjoyed them so much and they enriched my life. Due to the particular path that led me to no longer believe in God, I had become fairly sure that those phenomena were produced and experienced solely by my physiology despite the strong impression that they were caused by some external source. The key to illiciting those internal experiences was to find what the necessary conditions were that led the body to produce those mental states. Or, to be more specific, how do we activate the neurons responsible for producing the phenomena?
As far as we can tell, all mental representations, sensations, perceptions, and emotional states are produced by neurons. During brain surgery, the doctor often electrically stimulates various neurons around a tumor to determine which neurons to cut around. While doing this, the patient is awake and will report seeing lights, hearing sounds, thinking of words, or tingling of limbs. The limbic system, which is responsible for the experience of emotions is deeper in the brain and so is not usually stimulated this way during surgery. However, through drugs and other means, researchers have been able to reproduce many of the sensations involved when having a spiritual experience or near-death experiences. For just a taste of the exciting research in this field, see http://www.maps.org/media/vedantam.html , http://home.att.net/~meditation/self.html , or http://skepdic.com/nde.html .
As fascinating as these studies are, they do not show that something supernatural is not involved, only that the brain is involved in producing these phenomena. I have other reasons to suspect that nothing supernatural is in play. But, what I was really interested in were the cognitive and environmental conditions that led to spiritual experiences without artificial stimulation. What follows are my results thus far. I first list the experience and the way I interpreted it as a believer, then what I believe is happening psychologically and how one might experience it without a belief in God being a prerequisite.
Warmth in my chest
This particular sensation is already being investigated by psychological researchers. They refer to it as “elevation”. This is what they have to say about it: Elevation appears to be the opposite of social disgust. It is triggered by witnessing acts of human moral beauty or virtue. Elevation involves a warm or glowing feeling in the chest, and it makes people want to become morally better themselves. Because elevation increases one's desire to affiliate with and help others, it provides a clear illustration of B. L. Fredrickson's broaden-and-build model of the positive emotions.
Looking back at the times I felt the warmth in my chest as a believer, I felt it when I thought of the sacrifice Christ made for me, or when I imagined life in heaven, or thought about a particular verse that illustrated something I thought I should be striving for, or when serving others. All of these are examples that which is noble, the opposite of that which is base and defiled. So, whenever I want to feel the warmth in my chest, I focus on that which is aspirational, noble, exemplar, virtuous, pure, etc.
I realize that some people have never felt warmth in the chest. I am not sure why it would be so with them. Out of curiosity, since elevation is theorized to be the opposite of social disgust, for those of you who never feel a warmth in the chest, do you ever feel disgusted by morally reprehensible behavior, such as the behaviors of con men?
Brightness and clarity in thought
Sometimes we just experience epiphanies in which everything just clicks and suddenly makes sense. They are those “ah-ha” or “oh, yeah” moments. Typically, they occur when we have been thinking about something for a while, sometimes with and sometimes without a break. The wikipedia entry on epiphany has this to say:
“As a feeling, an epiphany is the sudden realisation or comprehension of the essence or meaning of something. The term is used in either a philosophical or literal sense to signify that the claimant has "found the last piece of the puzzle and now sees the whole picture," or has new information or experience, often insignificant by itself, that illuminates a deeper or numinous foundational frame of reference…
Epiphanies have also made possible forward leaps in technology and the sciences. Famous epiphanies include Archimedes' realisation of how to estimate the volume of a given mass, which inspired him to shout "Eureka!" ("I have found it!") The biographies of many mathematicians and scientists include an epiphanic episode early in the career, the ramifications of which were worked out in detail over the following years. For example, Albert Einstein was struck as a young child by being given a compass, and realising that some unseen force in space was making it move. An example of a flash of holistic understanding in a prepared mind was Charles Darwin's "hunch" (about natural selection) during The Voyage of the Beagle.
Among hackers in the proper sense of the word, the word "zen" is used as a verb in the same sense as epiphany, to mean acquiring a sudden comprehension” (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epiphany_(feeling) ).
The epiphany I had was that one can experience an epiphany and still be wrong. We may think we have found the missing puzzle piece and feel exuberance, and still have the wrong piece. The feeling does not accompany what is actually correct, but does accompany the belief that the idea is correct because it seems to have a lot of explanatory power.
This “brightness and clarity of thought” is related to what psychologist call “insight learning”. Insight learning is the grasp of the solution to a problem without the intervening series of the trial and error steps that are associated with most types of learning (e.g., a monkey housed behind the bars of a cage who, without proceeding through countless hours of futile attempts with one stick or the other, fits two sticks together to retrieve a banana outside the distance measured by either stick alone). Having a lot of experience with many of different things, practice finding novel connections between ideas, familiarity with problem solving, and the ability to think symbolically increase the likelihood of insight learning.
Awe
Psychologists are also studying the emotion of awe. "Awe is a distinct emotion, and specifically an aesthetic emotion (Loew, 1997). And though it might seem that awe is more likely the result of positive stimuli such as a sunrise at sea, rather than the result of negative stimuli such as a tsunami wave, awe does in fact occur in the face of both pleasant and ominous stimuli. Dangerous stimuli such as volcanic eruptions, battles, or extreme electrical storms can produce awe. However, the experience of awe cannot occur if the percipient is in actual danger. A direct threat of harm produces an emotional response of fear, overriding awe. To experience awe rather than dread in the face of forbidding stimuli, one needs to be an observer at safe remove."
And also, "In this paper we present a prototype approach to awe. We suggest that two appraisals are central and are present in all clear cases of awe: perceived vastness, and a need for accommodation, defined as an inability to assimilate an experience into current mental structures. Five additional appraisals account for variation in the hedonic tone of awe experiences: threat, beauty, exceptional ability, virtue, and the supernatural. We derive this perspective from a review of what has been written about awe in religion, philosophy, sociology, and psychology, and then we apply this perspective to an analysis of awe and related states such as admiration, elevation, and the epiphanic experience."
There are a number of other experiences that I am be doing a similar write up of as I have time. They include the following: Transcendence Out-of-body experiences Appreciation of beauty Compassion Feeling loved Feeling oneness and connected Being filled to overflowing Sense of depth and "realness" Peace of mind Serenity and calmness Joy Confidence Etc.
In short, I believe that most these experiences evolved to give our ancestors an evolutionary advantage by producing an affinity for things that were good for them and motivating them to do things that will increase the likelihood of the survival and reproduction of their genes. Some of the experiences such as out of body experiences I think are produced as a byproduct of how our brains work to produce our usual sense of self. _____________________________________________ My Blog
posted
Dude. You have a blog. The blog is where you post this sort of thing (which I can see you have already done).
You're probably doing this to promote your blog. That's fine. Make one thread, say something along the lines of "Hey, guys, here's my blog! I say interesting things here! You should check it out!"
You could even go so far as to link specific posts and say "Here are my musings on X, Y, and Z. I think that they are interesting! Let me summarize what I say about X: *insert summary here* Here is a specific link to my post so you can see the whole thing. Discuss!"
Reposting blog posts in their entirety, out of the blue, without any sort of preface to involve the community here, seems rather out of place for a discussion board.
Posts: 1466 | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I want to start a discussion on this topic on this board. I am interested in this community's reactions and ideas. I only started two threads. As you can tell from my post count I am not new here, I have taken part in responding to and starting threads in the past.
I included a link to my blog as a signature line in case anyone likes the way I think and write, they can find more.
Frankly, both of these threads are fertile ground for good discussion, which makes them appropriate for a discussion board. Others have linked to their webpages before. As far as I can tell there is nothing wrong with using material from one's blog to start a couple of discussions. There will be a greater exchange of ideas if we keep the discussion here rather than sending everyone over to my blog to have the discussion.
Now, what did you think of the content of the original post?
Posts: 264 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
An interesting thread, as is the brain-washing thread. I'm not sure I agree with your conclusion.
I'm sure we'll add types of spiritual experiences to your list.
What about deja vu, presque vu and jamais vu?
This is nit-picky but wiki has this wrong:
quote:Famous epiphanies include Archimedes' realisation of how to estimate the volume of a given mass, which inspired him to shout "Eureka!"
Archimedes' epiphany was how to use Archimedes' Principle to calculate density using buoyancy. Using fluid to calculate just volume was already known, that's more straight-forward.
Posts: 6316 | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think it's a bit simplistic to say that "Because X is a function of physiology, therefore it is not a witness of the divine."
At the very least, God knows what our bodies are physically capable of; he knows how we, because of our characters, will react to different stimulii. It is not far fetched at all to think that the warmth in one's chest is a spiritual response, as well as a physiological one.
When my youngest smiles at me, that triggers a rush of endorphins in my brain that signals to the rest of my body that this is something that makes me happy. Because I know the feeling-- because it's happened before-- I identify the feeling I get as both happiness and love.
The fact that a chemical reaction is part of the equation does not subtract either the happiness or love that are also foundations for the experience.
Posts: 14554 | Registered: Dec 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Fair enough. My issue is more with the style of your post, if anything. I think that it may be more conducive to discussion if you provided a brief overview or abstract of the topic that your blog post discusses and then linked the post rather than copying it here in its entirety. The blog post contains links (and the one in the other thread contains formatting) that are not in the forum post. Also, people tend to be more willing to invest the time to read longer chunks of text if they have foreknowledge of the general contents of said text.
I apologize - my previous post does seem to be an attack. I'm in a bit of an odd, sleep-deprived, cranky state right now, as I'm up late writing a paper.
That being said, I'm curious as to how, exactly, these various spiritual experiences added to the survival ability of humans. For example, while nobility and virtue tend to be beneficial in the context of a larger society (both to the society and to the individual who is rewarded by society for his actions), they don't make a lot of sense in the context of surviving out in the wild with limited contact with other humans. It seems to me that the guy who fights dirty would have a better chance of being the alpha male.
Posts: 1466 | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:people tend to be more willing to invest the time to read longer chunks of text if they have foreknowledge of the general contents of said text.
I agree. I didn't read your whole opening post of either thread, even though I think both are incredibly interesting topics. They're both far too long.
Posts: 1947 | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I agree with Scott, but I'm also slightly confused by your post. Are you saying that you are missing the spiritual experiences you had as a believer and are now trying to re-create the experiences without religion?
Out of curiosity, have you had any success? And have they been as fulfilling as when you did believe?
Posts: 96 | Registered: Oct 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
A lot of faiths have rituals that are fairly well designed to create an impressionable and 'spiritual' state in people. The most reliable techniques are the use of chanting or heavy breathing, sometimes coupled with temperature extremes.
You see it in extreme madrassas where they have kids essentially rocking back and forth reciting from the Koran at a rapid, unbroken pace. The hyperventilation and subsequent loss of balance of oxygen in the brain tends to trigger an almost hypnotic state that leaves many open to suggestion. It's a favorite tool of many cults and other organizations. Temperature extremes and hunger help foster hallucinations; it's no surprise that things like Scientology 'purification' programs include a pretty crazy regimen of hot tubs, dietary 'cleansing' and repetitive actions.
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
My eyes can be made to "see" things by directly stimulating the nerves. There is even effort underway to replace eyes by plugging artificial photoreceptors into the optical nerve (much as cochlear implants can "replace" to some degree the eardrum). Just because these things have a physiological reality doesn't mean the things I see with them aren't real.
Heck, I even dream when I'm asleep, and believe I'm seeing things while I'm in a dark room with my eyes closed. That doesn't mean everything my eyes do show me is a lie.
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by kmbboots: I have not personally had any out-of-the-ordinary physical manifestations of spirituality. I would consider them a flimsy foundation for faith.
And the ordinary ones are quite sufficient for me.
What are the ordinary ones?
Posts: 3852 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
The usual five senses interaction with Creation. Seeing beauty, tasting, touching, hearing. Expressing that spirituality physically. Singing. The usual stuff is pretty darn spiritual.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
So, like Eowyn, I'm curious whether you've tried any techniques and how much success you've had with them.
Posts: 1810 | Registered: Jan 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
I would also feel a great loss if I took the path you have taken. I don't think I would find anything to adequately replace it, although I too would search high and low for wisdom.
Posts: 5957 | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Eowyn said: "Are you saying that you are missing the spiritual experiences you had as a believer and are now trying to re-create the experiences without religion?
Out of curiosity, have you had any success? And have they been as fulfilling as when you did believe?"
I am saying that I continue to enjoy the spiritual experiences I had as a believer. I believe that they were never supernaturally caused, that they were always taking advantage of these psychological principles, regardless of whether I thought of them through religious or secular schemas.
Now, as I said in my post and as others have reiterated, I acknowledge that I have not through the above post ruled out supernatural contributions to these experiences. That would be impossible to do. I am saying that we can think of and understand these phenomena through natural, psychological terms. I think researchers are starting to demystify these feelings that are often called spiritual.
I am a spiritual naturalist, meaning that although I don't believe in supernatural things, I place a positive value of experiencing the normal psychological states of awe, transcendence, elevation, peace, feeling centered and connected, etc.
I am successful in continuing to feel what I felt before and they are just as fulfilling.
Posts: 264 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Some physical actions and environmental stimuli that can contribute to these feelings.
Standing, sitting and kneeling repeatedly. Raises your metabolism and makes blood flow faster.
Raising your hands over your head. allows blood to rush into your head and chest. (can also cause tingling in your arms)
kneeling. focuses all the body's warmth to the middle.
Sudden changes in the temperature in the room.
Singing. Causes you to breath deeply moving more oxygen through your blood faster.
Hearing music. Very potent in stimulating emotional experiences.
Lack of food and/or sleep. Gets you very high.
Lighting. worlds of ways to induce neuron firing.
Now combine some or all them, and add in your own personal reverence and awe of God, and a group of loving, accepting people you trust.
I know It's cynical, but I don't think God gave us brains to not question these things. "...wise as serpents, gentle as doves". I believe a genuine visit from the holy spirit can come at anytime, but that there are also ways to emulate it.
Posts: 278 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Lucid dreaming is a good way to induce mystical states, and it's thrilling. Wiki has a decent article for a starting point.
I have had one good lucid dream, a handful of almost-lucid dreams. The one good one, I realized I was levitating, did a double-take and grokked that I was asleep and dreaming. I flew around a bit, but it was so exciting I think it woke me up. That was about a year ago. I'm going to study it more so I can do it again, it's always fascinated me.
Posts: 6316 | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by pooka: Heck, I even dream when I'm asleep, and believe I'm seeing things while I'm in a dark room with my eyes closed. That doesn't mean everything my eyes do show me is a lie.
But, as you've just very convincingly demonstrated, it does mean that not everything your senses show you is true. That's why we generally use other, supporting evidence before believing our senses. Except, for some reason, in the realm of religious belief.
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:People who believe in God have evidence for what they believe.
But that evidence is often of the same quality as seeing things while in a dark room with your eyes closed. It seems like you're answered KoM by essentially saying, "yeah, we do"
Posts: 3275 | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
So what about love? All the effects of love are just as reducible to physiology. I'm not saying someone has to be spiritual to really love, I'm just saying they are subject to the same criticisms.
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Believing that love is likely a purely physiological process doesn't, for me at least, affect the quality of its experiencing.
Posts: 3275 | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by enochville: I am a spiritual naturalist, meaning that although I don't believe in supernatural things, I place a positive value of experiencing the normal psychological states of awe, transcendence, elevation, peace, feeling centered and connected, etc.
I like this. (I'm an atheist and do this as well, to an extent.)
Posts: 10886 | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by MattP: Believing that love is likely a purely physiological process doesn't, for me at least, affect the quality of its experiencing.
I feel the same way. If it is purely physiological, it would still be just as real and powerful.
Posts: 264 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
enochville, I have no idea where you're going with this post, but I enjoyed reading it. I have lots of these experiences beyond the ordinary seeing, hearing, touching, etc. However, they don't make me believe in God...They simply give me an appreciation for the amazing depth of the human brain.
For the warmth in the chest feeling...I get this feeling when I am thinking about somebody I'm in love with. It feels like the blood that is being pumped through my heart is suddenly warmer than it usually is. Posts: 930 | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
I'm going to study it more so I can do it again, it's always fascinated me.
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
(I'm an atheist and do this as well, to an extent.)
