Mysterium Tremendum

Abstract

In recent years, interest in the scientific basis of religious experience has resurged. In particular, research and publications by V. S. Ramachandran and by Eugene d'Aquili and Andrew Newberg have sparked considerable curiosity and debate over the reality and basis of religious experience. This article puts such research into a broader context and examines the extent to which scientific research supports or undermines particular religious and theological claims. I argue that such experiments show that religious experience has some biological basis and is not simply a product of cultural suggestion. At the same time, such experiences are not completely self-interpreting, so that cultural context, including theological claims, are needed to make sense of such experiences. By itself, scientific research does not prove or disprove the reality of religious experiences generally, but it does shape how we think of the possibilities and interpretations of such experiences.In the fall of 1997, neuroscientist V. S. Ramachandran presented a research paper claiming that certain kinds of religious experience originated in the temporal lobe of the brain. While Ramachandran's observations were careful and tentative, the claim that there existed a "God-spot" in the brain was quickly picked up by the press and circulated nationally. The implications seemed profound, but they could be taken in two ways. For

From Brain Imaging Religious Experience to Explaining Religion: A Critique

“…Th ere has been considerable evidence cited against the TLE-religiosity hypothesis (Tucker, 1987). In addition, most serious scholars of religion do not endorse this view of religious experience (Austin, 1998;Glassman, 2002;Hood et al, 1996;McNamara, 2002;Peterson, 2001Peterson, , 2002Teske, 2001). However, the 'limbic marker' hypothesis of religious experience persists, and, in fact has only become all the more popular as new neuroscientific techniques to study the live human brain have emerged (e.g., Alper, 2001).…”