PDA

View Full Version : Link between religious fundamentalism and brain damage?



David G
03-14-2018, 11:33 PM
According to this study --

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0028393217301318

https://www.rawstory.com/2018/03/scientists-established-link-brain-damage-religious-fundamentalism/


Highlights

•We examined religious fundamentalism in a large sample of penetrating TBI patients.

•Patients with VMPFC lesions reported greater fundamentalism.

•DLPFC lesions increase fundamentalism by reducing cognitive flexibility and openness.

bobbys
03-15-2018, 12:26 AM
Iiii dddooonnnntttt bbee liley dissssssssddddd.

gypsie
03-15-2018, 12:30 AM
Almost tempted to resurrect that Scientific Knowledge thread - shudder......


Religious beliefs can be thought of as socially transmitted mental representations that consist of supernatural events and entities assumed to be real. Religious beliefs differ from empirical beliefs, which are based on how the world appears to be and are updated as new evidence accumulates or when new theories with better predictive power emerge. On the other hand, religious beliefs are not usually updated in response to new evidence or scientific explanations, and are therefore strongly associated with conservatism. They are fixed and rigid, which helps promote predictability and coherence to the rules of society among individuals within the group.

Says it all.

skuthorp
03-15-2018, 12:34 AM
I have two responses, take your pick:

1. I always knew they were all either a bit simple, or mad, or quite corrupt.

2. Some people seem to spend a lot of time god shopping, and are much happier when told that this particular charlatan has the ear of his particular franchisor, even though the documentation is always suspect.

Peerie Maa
03-15-2018, 05:57 AM
2. Some people seem to spend a lot of time god shopping.

Second allusion to the Scientific Knowledge thread. ;)

P.I. Stazzer-Newt
03-15-2018, 06:20 AM
Tbi, vmpfc, dlpfc...

Wtf?

James McMullen
03-15-2018, 07:39 AM
The brain damage is clearly evident. The only remaining question is whether it is the cause or merely the result.

Durnik
03-15-2018, 07:40 AM
^^ (-:


...which helps promote predictability and coherence to the rules of society among individuals within the group.

religion == rules of the tribe, aka, a social control mechanism. It is as it always has been, and is exactly why imagining some god being has 'set down the rules' is exactly the worst possible thing.

Keith Wilson
03-15-2018, 07:49 AM
religion == rules of the tribe, aka, a social control mechanism. It is as it always has been, and is exactly why imagining some god being has 'set down the rules' is exactly the worst possible thing.It can be, it often is, but this is so crude and one-sided I can't let it go by. There are plenty of examples of religion challenging the rules of the tribe in the name of justice. The 20th century US civil rights movement had an enormous egregious competent - Reverend Martin Luther King Jr of the Ebenezer Baptist Church, remember? The movement for the abolition of slavery was largely religiously-inspired. Religion can certainly do what you describe, but saying that's all it does is simply wrong. You want an example here, look at TomF, probably the most sincerely religious person on the Forum.

Peerie Maa
03-15-2018, 08:01 AM
^^ (-:



religion == rules of the tribe, aka, a a way of codifying good behaviour. It is as it always has been, and is exactly why imagining some god being has 'set down the rules' is not an issue.

There that is more accurate.

Jim Mahan
03-15-2018, 09:01 AM
The 20th century US civil rights movement had an enormous egregious competent - Reverend Martin Luther King Jr of the Ebenezer Baptist Church, remember?

I'm thinking this is supposed to be 'religious component.' Speech-to-text?

Durnik
03-15-2018, 09:34 AM
sorry, Keith, exceptions don't disprove the rule. MLK Jr was outside the bounds of 'his religion'. Religion's claim to own morality is perhaps the 2nd greatest travesty ever perpetuated - there being a god being setting down rules selected by man being the first.

As for TomF, again, he appears to sit outside the mainstream of 'his religion' - and I might challenge your "he's the most religious..". He may be an example of the most balanced religious, but.. SamF, anyone? (gawd, I hope I didn't just jinx the forum!)

Nick, claimed intentions not-withstanding, using an infallible god being concept to enforce rules encourages charlatans to push bad rules. Further, 'good' and 'bad' depend entirely on desired outcomes. There are no absolutes.

David G
03-15-2018, 09:44 AM
It can be, it often is, but this is so crude and one-sided I can't let it go by. There are plenty of examples of religion challenging the rules of the tribe in the name of justice. The 20th century US civil rights movement had an enormous egregious competent - Reverend Martin Luther King Jr of the Ebenezer Baptist Church, remember? The movement for the abolition of slavery was largely religiously-inspired. Religion can certainly do what you describe, but saying that's all it does is simply wrong. You want an example here, look at TomF, probably the most sincerely religious person on the Forum.

Yes, this.

Durnik - decent religious persons are most decidedly NOT the exception.

The thread is about religious FUNDAMENTALISM. Which most decidedly IS the exception.

Since my wife is a minister, I'm around a lot of religious folks. Though they are all human, and have their quirks, problems and weaknesses... there are no Billy Grahams, Dennis Hasterts, or wide-stance homophobes among them. The vast majority of religious folks are kind-hearted, well-meaning, and decent folks. Because religion is an institution, it provides yet another platform for damaged individuals to hide in, rise in, and pervert.

It's true that religion, by its structure, provides a bit more latitude for good and bad behavior. But the fact that a certain % of individuals abuse that latitude does not mean the institution is bad overall. Flawed in various ways... sure. But, overall, a force for good far more than for evil.

bobbys
03-15-2018, 09:49 AM
Yes, this.

Durnik - decent religious persons are most decidedly NOT the exception.

The thread is about religious FUNDAMENTALISM. Which most decidedly IS the exception.

Since my wife is a minister, I'm around a lot of religious folks. Though they are all human, and have their quirks, problems and weaknesses... there are no Billy Grahams, Dennis Hasterts, or wide-stance homophobes among them. The vast majority of religious folks are kind-hearted, well-meaning, and decent folks. Because religion is an institution, it provides yet another platform for damaged individuals to hide in, rise in, and pervert.

It's true that religion, by its structure, provides a bit more latitude for good and bad behavior. But the fact that a certain % of individuals abuse that latitude does not mean the institution is bad overall. Flawed in various ways... sure. But, overall, a force for good far more than for evil..

Translation..

We are the good guys and those guys over there are the crazy guys....

Peerie Maa
03-15-2018, 09:50 AM
Nick, claimed intentions not-withstanding, using an infallible god being concept to enforce rules encourages charlatans to push bad rules. Further, 'good' and 'bad' depend entirely on desired outcomes. There are no absolutes.

So stop writing posts that claim that religion is always bad. Never was, is not now.

Rich Jones
03-15-2018, 10:07 AM
Yes, this.

Durnik - decent religious persons are most decidedly NOT the exception.

The thread is about religious FUNDAMENTALISM. Which most decidedly IS the exception.

Since my wife is a minister, I'm around a lot of religious folks. Though they are all human, and have their quirks, problems and weaknesses... there are no Billy Grahams, Dennis Hasterts, or wide-stance homophobes among them. The vast majority of religious folks are kind-hearted, well-meaning, and decent folks. Because religion is an institution, it provides yet another platform for damaged individuals to hide in, rise in, and pervert.

It's true that religion, by its structure, provides a bit more latitude for good and bad behavior. But the fact that a certain % of individuals abuse that latitude does not mean the institution is bad overall. Flawed in various ways... sure. But, overall, a force for good far more than for evil.Very well said. Thank you.

Durnik
03-15-2018, 10:11 AM
There are no absolutes. Hah!

and David.. I'm a wandering hippie living in the south for the last 25 or so odd years.. let me tell you about fundamentalism! The counter culture has its share of 'jesus freaks'.. and the south, well.. we all know about the bible belt. Nice people are in spite of, not because of, religion. But yes, there are degrees.

David G
03-15-2018, 11:48 AM
So... religious fundamentalism. And brain damage...

Keith Wilson
03-15-2018, 12:05 PM
And I've said it too many times already, but 'region' is not just one thing. It varies as much as human beings vary, and encompasses the best and worst that human beings are capable of. 'Religion includes Tomas de Torquemada and Martin Luther King, John Calvin and John Murray, Al Qaeda, the Quakers, and Zen Buddhists.

I wouldn't be at all surprised if certain varieties of religion, the narrow exclusionary rigid dogmatic kind, the one that all to often leads to pogroms and purges and jihads and crusades, is associated with a certain kind of brain wiring, whether caused by damage or not.

Gerarddm
03-15-2018, 12:06 PM
Yes, when your favorite tune is " If it was good enough for Jesus, it's good enough for me", you have lost some cognitive abilities.

Keith Wilson
03-15-2018, 12:14 PM
My mother used to say that if the church door was so low you can't take your brain in with you, you'd better find another church. And she grew up in Georgia in the '20s and '30s

gypsie
03-15-2018, 11:40 PM
It can be, it often is, but this is so crude and one-sided I can't let it go by. There are plenty of examples of religion challenging the rules of the tribe in the name of justice. The 20th century US civil rights movement had an enormous egregious competent - Reverend Martin Luther King Jr of the Ebenezer Baptist Church, remember? The movement for the abolition of slavery was largely religiously-inspired.

Nietzsche argued the church existed to be the rebellion. The slave revolt - its how the slaves wrestled power from the en-slavers; by inventing a higher power again and then getting the en-slavers to believe that if they do bad things the higher power will get them. Thus changing the dominant morality from that of the master to that of the slave = slave wins.

Chip-skiff
03-16-2018, 12:00 AM
What I take from the study is that people with reduced thinking capacity are more prone to adopt fundamentalist beliefs, which reduce our complex reality to simpler terms.

But I don't accept the converse: that professing fundamentalist beliefs indicates brain damage. Family and social context are greater influences, and a change in circumstance can lead to a change of beliefs.

Wet Feet
03-16-2018, 05:38 AM
https://youtu.be/MQox1hQrABQ

ishmael
03-16-2018, 06:47 AM
It's always appeared to me that almost any form of fundamentalism, from religious to political, hell to dietary, is significant of some imbalance. Organic lesions? Perhaps. No one gets out of here unscathed.

P.S. Hitchens is a long time favorite of mine. His brother, too. Though I often disagreed, RIP sir! You had a mind I would have been hard pressed to overwhelm in formal debate.

Keith Wilson
03-16-2018, 07:42 AM
Thus changing the dominant morality from that of the master to that of the slave = slave wins.And Nietzsche, of course, was on the side of the masters, the loathsome little . . . Sorry; I have no absolutely no patience with the guy, for all his brilliance, although the fault may be more in his sister's posthumous editing than him.

I would not be at all all surprised if fundamentalist region and the rigidity of though that produces it is associated with a certain kind of brain wiring, whether produced by physical damage or not - like OCD, or Asberger's, that kind of thing.

webishop14
03-16-2018, 09:43 AM
The second article seems to have smudged the meaning of the first somewhat. While I may have an axe to grind, I'd like to remind folks that the first article states that observed brain damage correlated to religious fundamentalism. It did not state that religious fundamentalism correlated to brain damage. However much one might wish to think so. Fundamentalism might also be explained by a paucity of synaptic connections in those areas of the prefrontal cortex. Or it could simply be a product of mean spiritedness.

David G
03-16-2018, 10:15 AM
What I take from the study is that people with reduced thinking capacity are more prone to adopt fundamentalist beliefs, which reduce our complex reality to simpler terms.

But I don't accept the converse: that professing fundamentalist beliefs indicates brain damage. Family and social context are greater influences, and a change in circumstance can lead to a change of beliefs.

Yes, that's how I read their work.

Ian McColgin
03-16-2018, 10:28 AM
Exactly. The set of fundamentalists is larger than the set of people with brain damage. There's an important distinction between fundamental evangelicals and narrow dangerous fundamentalis. You can hear the difference listening to them.

bobbys
03-16-2018, 11:14 AM
Course it can be said liberalism is fundamentalism.

A sort of cult.

Sacrements are abortion, globel warming, , blind faith to obama, hatred of Christianity, earth worship, sex worship,. Evolution.

Have a opinion on any of these and libs even here will go ape poo...

More so then any religious cult.

Wet Feet
03-16-2018, 11:24 AM
A sort of cult. Earth worship ?

bobbys
03-16-2018, 11:27 AM
Pantheism.

Wet Feet
03-16-2018, 11:34 AM
Environmental responsibility ? It`s neither a cult , nor pantheism.

Too Little Time
03-16-2018, 11:42 AM
The thread is about religious FUNDAMENTALISM. Which most decidedly IS the exception.

Since my wife is a minister ...
You post some flawed research comments and as was said earlier: You can tell the good guys from the bad. You just happen to be one of the good guys. At least your wife and those you associate with are. am sure that fits some logical fallacy definition. Perhaps several.

Perhaps you could examine your wife's religious beliefs in as critical manner as you seem to do for those with TBIs.