Does God exist? Do we have a soul? Is it possible to make contact with a spiritual realm? How should we respond to the divine? Will life continue beyond death?Most people, whether deeply religious or outright doubters of any spiritual power, have probably pondered these questions for themselves. In fact, the religious impulse is so powerfully pervasive that neuroscience has posed a provocative question: Are our brains wired to worship?
Now, in a series of 24 riveting lectures from an award-winning scholar and practicing neuroscientist, you can explore the exciting field of neurotheology - the new discipline aimed at understanding the connections between our brains and different kinds of religious phenomena. Using an academic, experimental approach into what he calls "objective measures of spirituality," Professor Newberg attempts to explain what others have previously only guessed at: the neuroscientific basis for why religion and spirituality have played such a prominent role in human life.
In these captivating lectures, you'll learn how religious experiences originate, their meaning, and the reasons why religion plays such a huge role in human experience - peering directly into the seat of all human thought and action as you delve into the relationship between brain function and spirituality.
A leading researcher in neurotheology, Professor Newberg offers you innovative approaches to ancient beliefs and practices. Using brain imaging and other cutting-edge physiological studies, he helps you to better understand how the brain controls or responds to religious and spiritual beliefs and behavior.
PLEASE NOTE: When you purchase this title, the accompanying reference material will be available in your Library section along with the audio.
©2012 The Teaching Company, LLC (P)2012 The Great Courses
When a topic like Science and Religious Experience is the focus I have a little caution. Depending on the authors bias and preconceptions the results can be more of a soap box for personal opinion than an objective study.
I did not find this to be the case with this. Through the whole listen I didn't feel any bias was present but rather a thorough study of religious experience and true scientific analysis of possible explanations.
When a solid scientific explanation for something could not be called upon to describe something there is no attempt to try and use that as some sort of proof that it must have a divine source. Nor is a divine source ruled out. It is left as a question.
There is a great deal of information packed into these lectures and I believe it is a great listen to anyone religious to shed light on some of the experiences that can be brought into question and by non-religious to help understand better what religious experience is to a person who has one.
This is by far the best source I have found for the latest research and information on this subject.
College English professor who loves classic literature, psychology, neurology and hates pop trash like Twilight and Fifty Shades of Grey.
There are two groups of people who are going to be apt to preemptively judge this "book by its cover:" religious people and atheists. This is NOT a book about religion. Newberg does personally have a religious bent (neurological tendency?), but those seeking a scientific proof of God are going to have to go elsewhere. This is NOT a promotion of religion. So do not come at this book and have a knee-jerk negative reaction because of two words in the title. It IS a book about the neurological basis of religious EXPERIENCE. Get that? EXPERIENCE. That people have an experience of religion means neither that it is true or false or anything other than that they tend to experience something in a very subjective way. This is a scientific, neurological examination of the pre-wiring of the human brain to potentially think in religious terms. Now, if you need more reassurance, devout atheists such as V. Ramachandran have explored this topic and used Newberg's "nun study" in their work. (Ramachandran studied a split brain patient whose left brain was atheist and whose right brain was religious: he quipped that he wondered if half the man would go to heaven and the other half to hell.) Steven Pinker, also an atheist, has quoted Newberg's work in his examination of whether or not the tendency toward religiosity or atheism is heritable (it seems to be). There are also other interesting case studies to consider. The religious experience has been identified more or less with the right temporal lobe, and those with temporal lobe epilepsy (like Vincent Van Gogh) are prone to very vivid religious hallucinations (visions?)--Van Gogh had them. Again and again: this is a neurological study of the religious EXPERIENCE in humans, not a book advocating religion. So go in prepared. (O, and it's a really good lecture series too, if you were wondering...)
This is interesting and enlightening from both a scientific and religious perspective. Did God create the brain to seek him, or did our brains evolve to create God. Understanding more about how our brains work can help us in our pusuit for answers and understanding why we think the way we do.
Fascinating subject; by itself, and in addition to the professors passion and curiosity of it, which are pleasantly overarching in each lecture - and the course itself.
What I liked:
-Andrew engaged me with questions throughout the lectures
-Each lecture flowed naturally into the other, and as a whole
-I enjoyed Andrews refreshing ways of exploring science
Who should listen to this? Anyone who has ever thought about religion, spirituality, the brain, or are interested in expanding the way they see the world.
*I've read Andrew's book 'How Enlightenment Changes your Brain' and listened to 'How God Changes your Brain'* - both are incredibly interesting, and can give you further insights to his research.
I was hoping for a discussion of why some people are drawn to a religion when others are not. What I got was a discussion of why everyone is religious, which is not true. Aldo, the author is clearly biased towards Christianity, specifically Catholism. I'd hope a scientist could at least pretend to be objective. Also, he is boring repetitive towards the middle, which is as far as I could make it. Not recommended unless you already agree with his biases.
I am a scientist. I can be picky about what is passed off as science. However, all lines are blurry when it comes to experiments with human subjects. I think the author here was reasonable enough.
What i didn't like was that this book was repetitive and basic, and did not have much meat.
Experiments are meat. There were a few experiments. For example, monitoring the brain activity of some Franciscan nuns while they were meditating. I was satisfied with the explanations of the meditation and the results. However, I was hoping that there would be a dozen or more experiments.
What writer really wants to get across is that, in places like nursing homes and hospitals, it is healthy and beneficial for patients to have access to things like church services, shrines, ect. What he doesn't say is that the reason he needs to argue this is because... say an insurance company is deciding whether or not they are going to put a care facility in their network, or say that you are gathering funding to build a new hospital... you get the picture$
Newberg is knowledgeable and I would try another book by him. This was the first Great Courses audiobook I've tried, and it was so thin on content that I'm hesitant to buy any other Great Courses audiobook, even though I've put several on my wish list.
A nonfiction book on a similar topic but with more content. Typically I will relisten to an audiobook, but not this one.
My favorite scientific study was when they gave dopamine to atheists, making them perceive ambiguous shapes more like believers perceive them.
Disappointment. I kept waiting to get past the general and to the meaty specifics. Even though I was listening as double speed, the content was so thin that my mind wandered.
It's in the form of lectures, so it works great for an Audiobook. The Modern Scholar series is better. It's also in lecture format, but the content is powerful and packed, not weak and thin.
Anyone who call themselves a "scientist" and them cites a quote saying that humans are so amazing that they had to be created by god is ignorant at best and deluded at worst. He should obtain an understanding of evolution and deep time to avoid making such ridiculous claims. Too many other lapses to list but just one that highlights his shallow approach is discussing meditation and prayer as if they are the same activity.
His assertion that atheist's brains are structurally inferior to believers, among other claims, highlights his selective interpretation of research to prop up obvious religious apologist views. He cites a figure of 80% believers in the US (it's actually around 60%) as evidence that religion is here to stay but ignores figures for Europe and other advanced countries (40% or less and falling). He does not give a figure for new earth creationists in the US; perhaps this figure would be too embarrasing even for him.
This is the first Great Courses program I've purchased that is such biased garbage. Don't waste your money.
For me the entire presentation encompassed a parallel to my own lifetime experience of searching to understand my reason for being, and seeking to know God. The context of how the brain interfaces with this search was enlightening.
Report Inappropriate Content