Why We Believe in God(s): A Concise Guide to the Science of Faith

Cognitive Processes

"Where logic ends, the unconscious takes over." Bergler and Meerloo

If I understand it correctly, Thomson might say, "Where cognitive processes are unrecognized, religious beliefs can take over."

He argues that religions, be they inspired by desert life or from rain forest life, are merely extensions or expressions of unaware or taken for granted cognitive processes, for example - the bodymind enjoys trust - 'attachment system'; each person has romantic longings; the capacity for transference (transfer feelings from someone in the past to someone in the present); the mind's capacity to plan, process or think about things which are not present or "to have a social interaction with an unseen other - 'decoupled cognition;'" reciprocity; vulnerability to authority (or authority appearing figures) because all humans originally learned from authority figures; the mind's ability to fill in the blanks; the mind's capacity to perceive and believe without evidence - eg. jealousy; motivated reasoning ("We doubt what we don't want to hear"); confirmation bias; and the list continues.
___

This little book makes a contribution to the ongoing discussion between science and religion. The author feels that there's a link between cognitive processes (attachment theory, the mind's ability to attribute unknown events to human agency, brain scans, brain chemistry - dopamine, serotonin, oxytocin, etc, mirror neurons, theory of mind, psychological defense mechanisms, inferential reasoning, jumping to conclusions, memory, etc) and the belief in a "super parent." He feels that religion is a by-product of these and other facets of the mind. "That religion is a by-product of adaptations for other reasons does not negate its incredible power." pg 3 As I understand it, one part of this no-doubt controversial theory runs as follows:

Over time organisms and people have adapted to their environments in order to survive, live, celebrate and pass on life. One method for doing this has been to bond through song, dance and ritual. Even though there are different attachment styles, we are all wired to bond and it has been felt that one way to employ both our bonding neuro networks and the need for feel-good-because-we're-safe chemicals has been to imagine a "sky parent" for example looking after us. This has taken place all around the world. The author notes that you can take members from any religion, put them under a brain scanner and they will all produce, more or less, the same brain scans when talking about their beliefs. These scans are also identical to their own thoughts, feelings and fantasies about the people in their lives and themselves.

Let's say people long ago heard some wind blowing through the trees. To promote safety and survival, their brains decided that it needed to have the ability to imagine that it could be possible that the sound was coming from a lion and not just the wind, thus the birth of being able to have the ability to imagine things without knowing if they're true or not. This ability along with the above are just three of the ingredients covered in the book contributing to religion. Religion in this context is not to be confused with spirituality as noted in the joke: "Religion is for those who are afraid of hell. Spirituality is for those who have been there." The author doesn't disagree with the beauty and mystery of things. The metaphorical/motif take on religion isn't discussed (ie: birth-death-re-birth motif representing the three stages life; virgin birth as discovering that one is pregnant with new potential once the false self is recognized; etc)

Apparently some therapists are taught by their supervisors to consider the possibility that for some people, religion, to one degree or another, serves as a surrogate ego for them. (The word ego in this context means
consciousness/observing-thinking skills.) And as a result, they need to keep that in mind when offering interpretations. These supervisors feel that religion is a defense mechanism against facing personal intra-psychic conflicts ("hell') whereas spirituality can be considered a form of getting to know them.

"The believer is happy; the doubter is wise." Hungarian proverb

This book takes only one hour to read and is basically a transcript of his talk on the subject.

I think "Habits of a Happy Brain," formerly entitled "Meet Your Happy Chemicals," by Loretta Bruening would be a good follow up to this book.
___

One of the most unusual speculations regarding "why we believe in god(s)" argues that may lay hidden in the unconscious is unworked through lingering "infantile megalomania." Many inventors are mocked when they present their new ideas by the very same people who believe in psychics for example. Something that's "impossible" can be appealing to "infantile megalomania" because of its magic or superpower quality-like aspect. -

"'Man can believe the impossible but man can never believe in the improbable' mocked Oscar Wilde ... Conscious reasoning is used in judging the improbable, in 'judging' the impossible, the infantile illusion of magic power surges forward from the unconscious. Two different yardsticks, therefore, measure the two phenomena. ... Only in the conscious part of the mind do people insist on logic, consistency, and congruity. Infantile metalogic works differently." Bergler and Meerloo, 1963

Thomson's basic question seems to be, "If the brain has the capacity to do X, is it possible for an emotion to co-opt it?"
___

As a teaching device in presenting his theory that religion is an extension of cognitive processes, Thomson provides the analogy of how foods with added sugar are an extensions of a person's health needs for foods found in nature. The body has a natural need for fruit for example, and man creates candy bars as an extension of it. It may be that candy bars at times are helpful, and the idea is that man made them while blueberries are from nature.