“Áll Trádes, Their Gear and Tackle and Trim”: Theology, Cognitive Neuroscience, and Psychoneuroimmunology in Transversal Dialogue

Abstract

This third of three articles outlining a different approach to science/religion dialogue generally and to engagement between theology and the neurosciences specifically, gives a brief account of the model in practice. It begins by introducing the question to be investigated-whether the experience of relational connection can affect health outcomes by directly moderating immune function. Then, employing the same threefold heuristic of encounter, exchange, and expression used previously, it discusses how the transversal model set out in these articles has been used to investigate this question and to develop a theoretical physiological model for the proposed link between relationality and health.

“Things Counter, Original, Spare, Strange”: Developing a Postfoundational Transversal Model for Science/Religion Dialogue

“…Such standards, along with the quality of epistemic humility which they entail, provide a distinctively different transversal route for evaluating the rationality of any stance within any particular research tradition. They also provide a way of selecting suitable contributors to any envisaged neurotheological (or other) dialogue, and in the following article (Bennett ) I will outline how this worked in practice in my own particular neurotheological project.…”

“…Van Huyssteen himself sees the ideal standard as involving specific theologians and theological articulations, entering into dialogue with similarly designated scientists, working within specified sciences on clearly defined, shared problems (van Huyssteen , 5). In the third article, I will give some examples of how this can work in practice and how it can open up dialogical possibilities in unexpected ways (Bennett ).…”

“…Rather, what is envisaged is that different disciplinary perspectives could interlock to provide the sort of “pervasive relations of mutual support” for a thesis or model which Haack ([1993], 57) describes. Arguments and models might thus be built in response to particular questions, even when direct definitive evidence from within a particular discipline is absent, on the basis of mutually supportive, albeit radically different types of evidence, and an example of this will be offered in the third article (Bennett ).…”

“…Van Huyssteen's reconfiguration of rationality with its attendant consequences for dialogical exchange, along with the extended transversal space model outlined here, open up the possibility of very different sorts of neurotheological projects which could deepen and enrich our understandings of humanness. In the final article of this series (Bennett ), I will give an account of such a project in which theology, cognitive neuroscience, and psychoneuroimmunology—“their gear and tackle and trim”—are brought together in a transversal exchange which explores a complex issue located beyond any of their specific disciplinary reaches but potentially answerable through transversal engagement (Bennett ).…”

“…Since the underlying philosophical concepts are vital to understanding both van Huyssteen's model and my proposed extension, these will be discussed in some detail. The concluding article of this set (Bennett ) will then outline how this “transversal” methodology was used in my doctoral project (Bennett ) to explore the connection between human relation experience and health outcomes via moderation of immune signaling pathways.…”