Andrew Newbergs Why God Wont Go Away - Essay Example

Book Review of Newberg’s Why God won’t Go Away: Andrew Newberg’s Why God won’t Go Away takes the line of rationalist and scientific thought further by illustrating how the human brain is designed to search for the spiritual, i.e. the human brain is made to look and discover God. The rationalist view argues that the nature of God can be seen as the aim of each individual for the inherent intelligence and achievement of perfection, beauty in the image and likeness of the Supreme Being, who is also called God. In addition Newberg also argues that there is a mystical relationship between the individual and God. Humanity is not only made with the capacity of free will, but also have a soul that brings humanity closer to attaining the perfection and intellectual design. This is not a new approach, but adds further scientific backing for the belief in God, but also introduces the notion of faith being driven by the science and genetics of mankind: “The power of myth lies beneath its literal interpretations, in the ability of its universal symbols and themes to connect us with the most essential parts of ourselves in ways that logic and reason alone cannot" This argument is that the reality of God is driven from human emotions and the biological make-up of the brain. However this does not mean that religion and God is in the mind of the believer; rather this view of religion is the extension of these subjective human emotions, i.e. they point to the reality of God in the individual’s mind but do not come from God. “Any idea might trigger a myth if it can unify logic and intuition, and lead to a state of left-brain / right-brain agreement. In this state of whole-brain harmony, neurological uncertainties are powerfully alleviated as existential opposites are reconciled and the problem of cause is resolved”. This scientific approach of Newberg gives a rational explanation of the long traditional of mystical thought, which has been scorned for its subjectivity. Rumi is an Islamic example of a mystic who supports the mystical union of the believer and God. This mystic approach was in response to the over rationalizing of mainstream Islamic thinker’s on the nature of God and enforcing rules on human’s (Rumi, 1996). Rumi’s approach is a personal approach to God and as Von Schlegell argues is “to correct the view of Sufism as "counter." [to legalistic] "culture." At the same time, as the work under review shows, efforts to de-mystify Sufism, and to portray it at work as but one among many social forces in Islamic history would be going too far in another direction. It would divert attention away from the truly surprising and creative thought of the early Sufis.” (Von Schlegell) Newberg has now given mysticism a rational explanation and supports the personal relationship of the individual and God, i.e. it is the ultimate reality and not in the mind of the believer – it extends past the limited understanding of humanity and points to reaching a transcendental level of understanding. “[One] can drive the limbic and autonomic systems [to] eventually alter some very fundamental aspects of the way the brain thinks, feels, and interprets reality. These rhythms can dramatically affect the brains neurological ability to define the limits of the self... rise out of themselves and into a larger and more exhilarating state of being.” Newberg adds science to the rational approach of Plato. Plato believed in mysticism and advocated the view of re-incarnation, the transfiguration of souls from one body to another and through these re-births the ability to reach the transcendental level and a greater understanding of God and become in the true image of God, i.e. leave the mortal body to the level of perfection (Raeper & Smith, 1991). Newberg’s thinking focuses on the subjective view of the Divine but gives it a rational and scientific approach on the working of the brain. "The inborn physical compulsion to enact our thoughts may have an evolutionary purpose. By mentally rehearsing certain important actions ... we might actually hone our abilities to perform those tasks in real life ". Newberg uses a mixture of these approaches of rationalism and subjectivism, because the brain is subjective to the individual’s make-up and belief structure. However, as Newberg illustrates that all human brains are designed to have faith and believe in the spirituality of the divine. "If the brain contains such a compulsion to act out thoughts and ideas, it would be no surprise if the brain compelled us to act out the stories of myth." Newberg, like Rumi, has a similar vein of argument for the nature of God that is subjective in the mystical union of God and the individual, which fits the woman’s experiences better rather than the subjective position that traditional religious thinking had sidelined women through rationality. Newberg view is very close to mysticism, where the individual is closer to the will of God and the purpose of religion because the individual relationship between God and the believer treats each individual as special in their difference but equal in the eyes of God (Jantzen, 1994). In other words, the human brain is designed to seek God. Also invokes this mystical view which is the personal approach to God through the idea of the reflexive nature of the mirror where through personal experience that the love of man and god in this personal experience is reflected in the mirror (Poerte, 1993). Poerte also uses the image of the Trinity as the image of the individual’s and God’s love and personal relationship; in addition she argues a rationalist view also but this is secondary to the mystical experience: The first trinity is that of mind, knowledge and love (mens, notitia et amor). The mind comes to know itself and, in that, love itself. The same basic idea underlies the second trinity of memory, intelligence and will (mernoria, intelligentia et voluntas). (Randall, 1994) Therefore Newberg like Poerte, Jantzen and Rumi advocate a traditional mystical approach which relies on the personal, subjective and mystical union of man and God. This now leads to the approach taken by Baitaille and Irigary who do not argue a traditional mystical argument. "It allows the worshiper to enter a mythic story metaphorically, confront the profound mysteries the myth embraces, and then experience the resolution of those mysteries in a powerful, possibly life-changing way." Prayer is a much undefined area because in the conventional religious belief it is the individual’s thanks and praise to God. Newberg views this as the brains biology in seeking God, determining good from evil. “The brain would have no choice but to perceive that the self is endless and intimately interwoven with everyone and everything the mind senses.  And this perception would feel utterly and unquestionably real.  This is exactly how Robert and generations of Eastern mystics before him have described their peak meditative, spiritual, and mystical moments.” However it has changed from pure devotions to God to communion, i.e. the individual’s communication with God. This resulted in more modern sects of the church, such as baptism and born again Christians whom believe that only the individual can effectively commune with God, rather than the use of a representative. The traditional view seems to illustrate Marx’s view that religion is the opium of society, i.e. it seems externally real but is a mass brain washing technique of the authorities – much in the same way as the witch hunts in Salem or by the Spanish Inquisition (Koyama & Rockerfella, 1996). Newberg’s approach is that prayer can be interpreted as the individual’s recognition of the reality of God, i.e. their understanding of an external truth, as purported by Hegel and Schleiermacher (Raeper & Smith, 1991). Rather this form of argument believes that the conception and belief in the divine is an internal belief and the arguments that the divine is proven by experiences in reality or as a mass hallucination is inconsequential, which disputes the belief of Feuerbach, Marx and Freud who view God as a mass hallucination (Raeper & Smith, 1991). It does not mean the relationship is loving; the mystical experience could be the belief that prayer and personal experience and communion is the individual communion with a Divine being for power or ecstasy, which is not necessarily indication of a loving God (Raeper & Smith, 1991) Newberg states that to the degree he concludes the experiences of a unity or wholeness or communion with a transcendent God are “real,” he believes the results of the study also confirms a commonality of spiritual experiences across the spectrum of religious beliefs. He believes the incarnations of God found in various religions’ reduce God to a concept, which is something less than transcendent (http://www.scheadlines.com/article.asp?colid=2136 ). Bibliography: Georges Bataille Inner Experience Extracts (1988, Albany: SUNY Press, translated, with an Introduction by Leslie Anne Boldt) Georges Bataille On Nietzsche (translated by Bruce Boone) (1994, New York: Paragon House) N. Grahek, 1991, Objective and Subjective Aspects of Pain, Philosophical Psychology 4(2), 249-267 Luce Irigaray, 1993, Sexes and Genealogies (translated by Gillian C Gill) olumbia University Press Luce Irigaray, 1999, Elemental Passions (translated by Joanne Collie and Judith Still) Routledge Jantzen, 1994, Feminists, Philosophers and Mystics, Hypatia: Feminist Philosophy of Religion 9/22/1994 Koyama & J.D. Rockefeller, 1996, I Desire Mercy and Not Sacrifice: An Ecumenical Interpretation – a lecture presented at Halifax, NS Canada. A copy can be found at: http://www.accesswave.ca/~dpoirier/hfx96txt.htm Kurayev, 1992, Opium of the People, Moscow News Vol29, 3536 Nehamas, 1989, The Attraction of Repulsion: The Deep and Ugly Thought of Georges Bataille, The New Republic 10/23/1989 G. Pitcher, 1970, Pain Perception, Philosophical Review 79, 369-393 Marguerite Porete The Mirror of Simple Souls (translated and introduced by Ellen Babinsky) (1993, New York, Mahwah: Paulist Press) Radio National Encounter, Sunday 22/04/01: Compiled and presented by David Rutledge- this document is a transcript of the Radio National Broadcast in the Encounter series entitles Georges Batailles (http://www.abc.net.au/rn/relig/end/stores/s281136.htm) W. Raeper, L. Smith (1991) A Beginner’s Guide to Ideas: Religion and Philosophy Past and Present, Oxford, Lion Publishing Randall, 1994, Changing Places: Marguerite Poerte, Meister Eckhard and the Question of Perspective, The Romanic Review 5/1/1994 Rumi, 1996, Extracts from The Essential Rumi (translated Coleman Barks with John Moyne, A.J. Arberry, Reynold Nicholson) HarperCollins Tokumeikan Canada Bright Virtue which can be found at: http://home.cogeco.ca/~tokumeikan2/bright_virtue.htm Von Schlegell, 2002, Translating Sufism, The Journal of the American Oriental Society 7/1/2002 Read More