The God Gene by Dean Hamer - Essay Example

BOOK REVIEW The God Gene: How Faith Is Hard-wired Into Our Genes by Dean H. Hamer BOOK REVIEW The God Gene: How Faith Is Hard-wired Into Our Genes byDean H. Hamer represents a bright example of gene-based approach to explaining the nature of spirituality with the author asserting there is a biological basis for spiritual beliefs. The question of how spiritual phenomena emerge from the brain was raised by neurologists, biologists and psychologists long time ago. However, it has not been until recently that the role of genes in spirituality is put to the forefront of scientific debate. In his book, Hamer makes a solid effort to support the idea of genetic predisposition of human beings for faith and religion by identifying a specific gene that determines human spirituality. Hamer’s work received much criticism immediately after it was published. The key problem with the book that undermines its scientific value lies in the realm of methodology. Hamer employs traditional tools to study the spiritual phenomena. For example, he measures abstract concepts of transcendence that has much to do with the phenomena of faith, belief and religion using methods of molecular biology and traditional psychology. This approach produces certain ambiguity with definitions and makes the book look rather speculative at least from the positions of traditional science. A number of third-party studies Hamer refers to throughout the paper to support his challenging argument are questionable themselves. Thus, Hamer relies upon the experimental studies of Dr. Michael Persinger (magnetic simulation of the amygdala, the hippocampus, and the caudate nucleus) and studies of monks involving Single Photon Emission Computed Tomography (SPECT). Nonetheless Hamer’s work is far from being a mere non-scientific speculation. The novelty of his daring attempt to relate traditional science and non-physical phenomena is perhaps the major reason for abundant criticism. Traditionally, spirituality and religion have not been considered by science, partially due to lack of applicable tools, partially due to the philosophic paradigm underlying traditional scientific research. These concepts are explored within the specific discourse concerning spirituality, God and religion termed ‘theology’, which historically has been perceived as the antipode of science. Consequently, even contemporary science that at times seems virtually almighty lacks appropriate tools and methodologies to study certain non-physical phenomena such as spirituality. It is hardly surprising that from the position of traditional science Hamer’s work can be labeled as methodologically poor and speculative. The question whether the conventional standpoint is applicable while dealing with an attempt, which goes well outside the scope of traditional science, is highly relevant in this case. The book should rather be perceived as an attempt to integrate two vastly different conflicting perspectives, namely scientific and theological, and thus pioneer the approach in which conventional empirical science (molecular biology in this case) and its tools would contribute to better understanding of non-physical aspects of human mind, such as spirituality, traditionally studied within the purely theoretical and abstract discourse of theology. Consequently, the methodological framework employed by Hamer to achieve this goal includes several principles. Firstly, Hamer attempts to place the paradigm of science, namely molecular biology and genetics, in relation to the paradigm of theology so that each perspective maintains a particular pattern to understand the relationship between the brain and religion. Thus, despite the book’s title, the author makes no attempt to prove existence or nonexistence of God or a supernatural force. Instead, he works hard to relate the recent genetic research and concepts that has been traditionally linked to religion and religiousness in order to establish new connections and suggest new interpretations joining the varying perspectives together. Hamer’s hypothesis rests upon the results of earlier surveys and studies, namely those authors of which claimed spiritual people are predisposed to share such personal characteristics as feeling ‘at-oneness’ with the world. Thus, psychiatrist Robert Cloninger is among the first to confirm that biological heredity correlated with presence or absence of this specific characteristic Cloninger termed ‘self-transcendence’. Hamer seeks to reinforce Cloninger’s argument by revealing a specific gene that is responsible for whether a person has this trait or not. Hamer and his colleagues at the National Institutes of Health performed a series of studies involving approximately one thousand participants. They analyzed the DNA structures in the participants aiming to “…identify any sequence variations that track along with the strength of [participants’] beliefs” (p.47). Using statistical relevance, factor analysis, and a special scale designed to measure self-transcendence Hamer finds out that a gene known, as VMAT2 might be the object of his search. Consequently, Hamer claims he has identified a gene that correlates, though slightly, with the spirituality level and goes on to state that “…spirituality is one of our basic human inheritances. It is, in fact, an instinct” (p.6). Secondly, Hamer recognizes the perceived conflict between religion and science that historically stand as mutually exclusive perspectives and suggests establishing a dialogue between the disciplines in order identify boundary questions and establish methodological parallels to initiate and maintain productive discussion. Although Hamer does not name the basic structural areas for relating science and religion, he does offer at least three major implications as a starting point for the dialogue: Throughout the book Hamer makes a useful distinction between spirituality and religiousness claiming the former to be mostly private, intrinsic, and the latter to be mostly public. He claims that the predisposition to believe is hardwired in human genes, but the object of believing does not depend upon genetics. Therefore, Hamer views religion as a specific cultural construct, while spirituality is “a complex amalgamation in which certain genetically hardwired, biological patterns of response and states of consciousness are interwoven with social, cultural, and historical threads” (p.6). Although Hamer’s definition of either is highly questionable, the fact he distinguishes between the two strongly reinforces his overall argument providing the room for discussion and re-appropriation. Spirituality and religiousness may be vague abstractions difficult or even impossible to properly define, but Hamer reasonably emphasizes that they refer to some real things. For example, such concepts as soul, gods, a belief in afterlife, in heaven and hell and mystical supernatural powers can be found in all human societies. Each of these concepts belongs to the realm of spirituality, which is primary to religiousness with the latter being a cultural superstructure that emerges on the primary layer of spirituality; Science can neither prove nor disprove the existence of God. The inquiry into existence of God genes can only contribute to our understanding of various spiritual experiences that occur in the human brain and reveal their role in our life; Despite the possibility of genetic predisposition, spirituality also depends upon the environmental practice, while the level of spirituality can be enhanced by such practices as prayer, specific drugs, meditations, etc. Consequently, the role of genes is important, but hardly defining: Hamer assumes that there may be up to 50 genes that affect the level of spirituality, and only around 50 percent of variation in spirituality is genetically based. As Hamer puts it, “…our analysis of the VMAT2 polymorphism ["the God gene"] showed that it raises self-transcendence sorces by only a single point, or 7 percent of the mean–less than 1 percent of total variance. That means that most of the inherited effects on self-transcendence cant be explained by VMAT2. There might be another 50 genes or more of similar strength” (p.77). Thirdly, Hamer asserts the root relationship existing between the spirituality and material world claiming that the former plays certain role in shaping our behavioral patterns. Thus, in Hamer’s opinion, spirituality is beneficial to physical health of human beings. He considers that in evolutionary sense presence of the God gene offers an evolutionary advantage because spirituality “provides us with a sense of purpose beyond ourselves and keeps us from being incapacitated by our dread of mortality. Our faith gives us the optimism to press on regardless of the hardships we face” (p.143). He considers that the genetically hardwired predisposition to believe helps us fight diseases and reduce stress thus improves the overall chances of reproductive survival. In the 10th chapter titled “The DNA of the Jews” Hamer employs the example of the Cohanim tribe, whom are believed to descend from Aaron, to suggest that Jewish “…cultural practices [could act] as genetic selective forces” (p.184). He claims that the religious practices acquired by learning turned genetically heritable and helped Jews maintain their racial separation. The contemporary level of knowledge about human genetics is not sufficient to either prove or disprove Hamer’s intriguing attempt to establish a link between spiritual beliefs and human genetics. The book creates rather controversial impression. On the one hand, the overall structure and presentation of the book seems rather poor for a scientist of Hamer’s caliber. Offering many interesting and relevant arguments, Hamer fails to properly organize them; the book is full of appeals to a number of third-party findings, but the author uses no specific citations, only adding a mere bibliography which greatly diminishes traceability of the argument; the methods of data collection and results obtained by Hamer can be put in question; and finally, the conclusions he makes on the basis of his assumptions may seem challenging to say the least (for example, the evolutionary origin of the god gene or genetic heritability of Jewish cultural practices). On the other hand, Hamer book deserves some credit for offering a new perspective on the relationship between human biology and spirituality and religion. Novelty of the issue raised by Hamer should probably be held responsible for the drawbacks highlighted by numerous critics: Hamer is as rigorous and methodological in his explorations as the available data allows him to be. The methodological framework employed by Hamer serves only one goal: to connect science and theology in such a way to address the issues associated with the relationship between human brain and spiritual experiences, explore internal and external religious responses, etc. Although this framework does not help Hamer present the data convincingly demonstrating spirituality is genetically hardwired in humans, it has already drawn certain academic attention to the wide range of issues associated with spirituality and religion. Opening the scientific study of the origins and nature of spirituality and religion, Hamer’s book apparently bridges the existing gap between science and theology. REFERENCES Hamer, D., The God Gene, Doubleday, 2004 Read More