This is a pretty basic argument (from somebody named Jess Knauft on YouTube) but I feel basic tonight, so here we go...
>>>This an interesting talk by Dr. Hunter. His "Neuroscience of Religious Delusion" presents a compelling naturalistic explanation for intense religious experiences, suggesting they are manufactured by a psychological process that results in elevated dopamine signaling, akin to a manic or hypomanic state. This process involves the sequence of psychological suffering (guilt, shame, fear of hell) followed abruptly by social reward (love, forgiveness, acceptance, and a sense of community).
>>>However, this model, while offering a plausible neurobiological mechanism for the feelings associated with conversion, does not necessarily invalidate the Christian truth claims or the possibility of genuine divine action. >>>The central strength of Dr. Hunter's argument is its ability to offer a coherent, universal, and repeatable natural explanation for the subjective experience of conversion, moving the phenomenon out of the purely "inexplicable" realm. The weakness, from a philosophical and theological perspective, lies in its attempt to move from the mechanism of the experience to a definitive conclusion about the validity of the belief. >>>From a Christian point of view, Hunter’s argument commits a form of the genetic fallacy by confusing the origin (the neurobiological and psychological process) of a belief or experience with its truth value. >>>If God created the human brain, it's logically coherent that God would use the brain's natural mechanisms via a layered form of causality—like the dopaminergic reward pathway—to communicate or draw a person to himself. The fact that an experience has a brain-based correlate (dopamine release in the nucleus accumbens) simply describes how the experience is registered by a physical being, not what caused it. >>>For example, the feeling of falling in love is associated with oxytocin and dopamine. Discovering this neurochemical mechanism doesn't make love "just a delusion" or a "trick of the brain"; it simply explains its physiological manifestation. Similarly, an experience that is truly an "inner witness of the Holy Spirit,” as Christian theologians would describe it, would necessarily have a detectable neurobiological signature, as all human experience does. >>>The big question is if dopamine release is caused solely by psychological stress/reward, or is it triggered by a divine encounter that the brain interprets through its available pathways? >>>Correlation is not causation. A Christian perspective would acknowledge the utility of the natural explanation for some religious experiences (especially those rooted in emotional manipulation or mental illness) but would strongly push back on the claim that this explanation fully accounts for the whole of Christian conversion and faith. >>>In sum, Dr. Hunter's hypothesis is a valuable contribution to the study of the phenomenology of religious experience. However, it functions as a "nothing but" reductionism. It reduces a complex spiritual and theological event to nothing but a neurochemical state. A Christian pushback would assert that the neurochemical state is merely the brain's way of registering an event that is ultimately divine in its source and theological in its truth claims.
No comments:
Post a Comment