Neurotheology: How Science Can Enlighten Us About Spirituality Hardcover – Illustrated, March 27, 2018

Getting the niggles out of the way first, I noticed enough typos here and there to distract me. The book could have used another copyedit. Second, Newberg needed the same lesson that I have to learn because I also build up an argument academically; non-academic readers want a hint of the big message from the beginning so that they are stimulated to keep plowing ahead. The book covers such a wide swath of information that few readers will come to it with background in everything covered. The book is a lifetime of learning in one fell swoop.That said, I think the content of Neurotheology is desperately needed by the mass of humanity today. It starts to bridge the big gap between reductionist science and intuitive understanding.The book attracted this reviewer because of its integration theme. Newberg tries to bridge the big gaps between different ways of seeing the world, mainly between science and religion, or core beliefs based on science with core beliefs based on intuition. Neural research techniques have advanced rapidly in the past 30 years or so. Based on his own research and that of others, Newberg explains how the brain makes sense of the world. His deepest question is whether any such thing as reality exists, and if so, whether humans are capable of perceiving it.Newberg describes the brain both physiologically and as a functioning organism, trying to relate the two. The brain is a happy prison, from which we peer out trying to infer logical patterns in what we perceive, but brains collectively can’t grasp the grand totality of the universe. Like the dwellers in Plato’s cave, we’re forced to infer from shadows on the wall. Some inferences can be scientifically proven; others, like whether I love my wife, we can’t, but even proven science is incomplete. We can never know it all.Sharp divides between religions have led to wars, or are invoked to inflame hostilities. Strict atheists are religion-averse; science should not accept old tales, while absolute truth fundamentalists are enraged by science questioning matters of faith.We’re also trapped in our memory systems. Religions try to capture young brains early to guide them, believing their doctrines to be pathways to societal living, if not eternal life. Any major change in beliefs is traumatic, a mystical experience.If you are interested in deep questions, Neurotheology is a thoughtful ride, but not a fast one. Prepare to digest a lot of detail and prior studies. One section describes the current understanding of the physical brain; another the practical aspects of using brain measurements to infer what is going on during various experiences. None of this is simplistic. The brain works as an integrated whole with myriad feedback loops; it’s no mere intricate mechanical device. Newberg steps beyond reductionist science, so his book packs in too much to cover in a brief review.Newberg is familiar with all the world’s major religions, from Catholicism to Buddhism. He investigates the neural processing of each, seeking practices that can be characterized by neural measurement, but he sticks to religion. I was hoping that he might look at economic ideologies – money worship – as religions. He didn’t, but analogies are enough to spark ideas about the environment vs. economic beliefs.Escaping the BrainOur neural workings have both conscious and sub-conscious patterns, both affected by genetics and our environment. Emotion affects conscious cognition, and cognition – our belief system – triggers our perception – what we look for as well as how we interpret it. Most of the time we detect and deal with immediate tasks and concerns. However, how we approach tasks depends on how we see ourselves, whether as a central me, differentiated from all other around me, or as somehow connected to everything in the universe, which Newberg calls our sense of unity, and others call “the great oneness.”Ethics are codes based on beliefs. Our ethics vary depending on a continuum, from concern just with me at one end, and concern for the whole universe at the other. Concepts of good and evil emanate from where we are on this spectrum. If me-centered, good and evil are just conceived as whatever benefits or harms me, or my tribe. These concepts plant the seeds of conflict.If we are universe “centered,” no easy reference point for good and evil exists. No matter what we do, some harm results to something. Decision-making is more complicated – might require dialog and much more thought and energy. Hence we need forms of organization well beyond command-and-control hierarchy.Transformation as a Mystical ExperienceSome adherents to all faiths report mystical experiences, or epiphanies. Neurologically, these are intense thalamic activities by which the thalamus reprograms the entire brain. Those engaged describe them as suddenly “getting it,” finding a new sense of purpose and meaning, a “calling.” Mystic experiences also reduce depression.Mystical experiences move people toward unity, toward a sense of serving others or a purpose beyond one’s self. Those transformed leave their ego prisons and experience a significant whole. Their parietal lobes no longer process me-other information. Question: Is mystical experience driven by the brain – free will – or is it prompted by “the great oneness?”Religions adapt, but slowly. Christianity Is not what it was 500 years ago; neither is any other religion, but our ethics trail way behind technology. Old religious codes don’t cover modern dilemmas like when to pull the plug on a loved one’s ventilator, when life begins, genetic engineering, ecological degradation, or on-line mind manipulation. More and more people are dropping out of formal religion, but some remain spiritual – like New Age venturers. Some become atheists, but still seek something that they have not found. We need new foundational myths from which to encode ethics.Metatheology and MegatheologyHaving covered an enormous sweep, Newberg concludes with a vision for Neurotheology as a bridge between science and religion. To do that he has two proposals:Investigate and develop a metatheology, which is general knowledge applicable to any theological system by asking three primary questions:1. Why do myths form?2. How and why myths lead to complex systems of logic and ethics?3. How do foundational myths spawn sustaining rituals?And second, maybe, just maybe, humanity could unite under a megatheology with emotional oomph, but compatible with existing beliefs, so that migration paths open. A megatheology is one that everyone – or almost everyone – could accept as their primary belief system. Humanist “creeds” or United Nations codes are tentative steps in that direction, but there are not many epiphanies yet.This reviewer is unsure that Newberg’s vision can materialize without also treating economic beliefs as a religion and working out a megatheology to cannibalize them. I finished the book wishing I could have a conversation with him about the gap between ecological reality and most Christians' "Monday morning religion" -- faith in money.

This book is extensively researched with extensive footnotes/references. The author clearly knows a great deal about what he discusses, but I found the book to be a huge disappointment.What the book is about: Defining the field of neurotheology and what it should encompass.What the book is not about: Conveying any useful information about why people believe what they do.Worth noting: The author seems very careful to not give offense to either religious folk or atheists, not to convey what his own beliefs might be and not to say anything which might be interpreted as favoring any one belief more than another.After about 60 pages, I began scanning more than reading, as book seemed to be going nowhere. After 105, I began leafing through more than scanning. As mentioned, the book is all about defining neurotheology, discussing if that is the best term to use, defining religion and, separately, spirituality and other related terms, as well as discussing the history of individuals who have studied or written about things that might be considered to be within the realm of neurotheology. Unfortunately, very little of the discussion of that history conveys much that I would consider useful information. This tends to be predominately philosophy not science.The author’s research seems to be focused on doing MRIs while religious folk pray or spiritual folk meditate, but he discusses that only as an occasional aside, ditto for EEGs done under similar circumstances.I would recommend the book only to someone who is interested in knowing how a practitioner working in a newly defined field goes about defining that field, not to anyone who wants to learn anything useful about how the religion affects the brain or vice versa. Beyond that, the book seems to have nothing at all to say regarding what it is about the brain that might make people inclined to believe what they do.

One of this encyclopaediac tour's greatest strengths is that it acknowledges the many weaknesses, blind spots and enormous gulfs in our current knowledge of brain function and religion/spirituality. I liked it a lot.

Não indicado para ateus. O autor não demonstra ter uma opinião isenta. Compara o amor à sua esposa (um ser real) ao amor a Deus (um ser imaginário), tentando demonstrar que nem tudo que existe pode ser visto, medido, testado.