2012.08.26 04:33
The Risk of Faith "Engagement, betrothal, and marriage imply the faith .... Today's theme of Sunday Mass,
|
2012.08.26 05:43
2012.08.26 06:26
이한중 선생님,
귀한 글 잘 읽었습니다.
어수선하던 마음이 다시 고요해졌습니다.
제가 쓴 논문의 일부를 올립니다.
선생님께서 올리신 Risk of Faith와 꼭 부합되지는 않으나 관련되는 부분이라 느껴집니다.
읽으시기에 지루하실 것입니다.
article의 file의 일부를 copy and paste했더니 reference는 사라져버렸습니다.
언제나 그분께 마음을 바치지 않으면 저의 삶은 헛됩니다.
감사드립니다.
2012.08.26 06:28
My confession:
I was always amazed and ashamed on my lack of religiosity. I couldn't explain why and I didn't like it.
I felt that I was a defective person of some sort.
I am sure that there are a few people who agree or are convinced that I am defective !!
As you had seen even in this website, a lot of people expressed their opinion that I was "bad and off the norm".
I have been swimming through the life relatively well so far but am I really defective?
When I was young, I tried very hard to have a faith in religions.
I even tried on different religions (Catholic, 개신교, 불교, Mormon...) in a hope that one of them might fit me.
Each time, I found that it just wasn't compatible with my nature.
I just could not get faithful or crazy on this thing.
I openly confessed and discussed my inability of getting into a faith to many other people.
Then one day, someone told me that it is my gene that keeps me from doing that.
Oh, what a relief that was !! It was the liberation I was looking for.
I learned to blame my gene and, thereafter, I am very happy without a religion.
민 박사, do I make any sense?
Is there any evidence in psychiatry that the gene has something to do with being religious or not?
2012.08.26 07:55
2012.08.26 08:57
Dr. Minn, WM and Dr. Cho,
I commend you for your honesty and courage to speak your mind and heart so eloquently.
What you all have said resonates so naturally with my heart because
I have been there and am still there much of the time.
All I can say is that I don't give up and continue to try and "Knock the door"
so that more doors will open to me.
Some time ago I made a commitment and said to myself,
"I don't care whether Jesus is the son of God or not.
If he is, it's all the better. If he is not, there has been no better human model,
a human example, for me to follow since Homo Sapiens has existed on Earth,
so that there still will be no regret on my part."
That commitment has made all the difference.
This is such a personal matter that any further discussion may not be as productive
as some of us hope.
Since you gentlemen spoke your hearts, I felt compelled likewise.
There is no other reason on my part in my statements.
김성심 선배님,
선배님의 코멘트 감사드립니다.
수많은 덕목들로 넘처흐르는 가슴에서 울어 나오는
지혜들의 말씀들,
차근차근히 한국말도 또 다시 배울겸 천천히 음미하며
즐기려합니다.
그와같이 항상 큰 수고하심 감사드립니다.
2012.08.26 11:09
Dear WM,
There was a series of articles in British Journal of Psychiatry some 40 years ago.
They found out those who had ear infection spread into temporal lobe
developed temporal Lobe epilepy, so called a psychic seizure.
Many of them developed cosmic religiosity and some deveolped frank religious delusions.
Temporal lobe is the location of our languague, abstact consept together with frontal lobe,
and religiosity. I do not think fish, whale or chimps can develop religiosity,
as their brain is not that deveoped comparison to human brain.
If you lose both temporal lobes, you cannot talk
and would feel the religion/God sounds like 馬耳東風.
It is like a kid, let's say 6 years old, does not get that attracted to other sex,
unless his endocrine gland begins to play a trick.
What would happen if you remove both testes before puberty?
They are so many religious people who do not want to go to heaven (?)
to live a few more years on this hellish planet, by going through heart by-pass surgery.
Fear of death is an instinct stronger than the religious instinct,
and no one will blame a priest for his having gone through a heart transplantaion.
On the other hand there are people who do not mind giving up his/her life
for the sake of religions, suicide bomber.
Do I make sense?
2012.08.26 15:28
Of course, Doc, you make sense as always. Thanks.
One thing though...
Are you trying to tell me that I am lacking both temporal lobes
or my brain is at the fish level ? Well, thanks for your kind consideration.
All these years, I thought you were my friend. ㅎ, ㅎ, ㅎ. I am just kidding.
However, thinking again, to be honest, I do have a bad speech problem,
and have great difficulties of understanding the abstract concept like Picasso !!
Should I start to worry about my temporal lobes?
2012.08.27 03:26
Let's not getting too deep into this subject like 'temporal lobe' stuff etc.
I don't think our WM is not that extreme in this regard, Ha, Ha.
I am just same as WM and Dr. Cho in regard to religion
and I am practically only an odd family member, who doesn't have religious faith
eventhough I was considered '착한 아들' to my parents.
My late mother who was extremely religious had prayed hard for her son
during her life time and I also have tried to solve this to this date without prevail.
When 4 Michigan stooges had winter golf trips together number of years ago,
we had discussed about many subjects including religion, of course.
I clearly remembered our Dr. Lee's thinking was pretty simililar like me during those days,
but something has clicked on him since then and my late mother would be
proud of him. I envy him in a bit for that, however this idea has not gotten through
my brain as of this date! Dr. Lee! Do I have any hope?, Ha, Ha. KJ
2012.08.27 07:21
2012.08.27 19:31
Awakening of certain instict. Temporal lobe and religion:
I read the article carefully. The patients were not that much interested
in Supernatural cosmic event before their temporal lobe got irritated
by the spreading ear infection and began to have psychic seiisure.
Their religious instict was not activated until an irritating lesion began to tickle the area.
We have similar events in sexuality.
It is like a kid whose sexuality began to bloom after the puberty,
when hormon began to tickle certain part of brain or pituitary gland tickle
certain target organs ... breast develops, boys began to have mustaches,. etc.
I think those religious centeres had to be stimulated repeatedly to make it very active,
which we call "a brain wash."
So, I think this religious instict is forefront of our brain evoltion, very fragile entity,
just like abstract thinking, which children cannot do.
Children will never become highly religious unless they are stimulated repeatedly
with sermons or persuation, being different from human sexuality.
We go school and mom keep talking to baby and those babies began to develop
languages center fortified.
Those non religious people can be converted into a religious fanatic by various means:
by inoculating virus (?) to those temporal areas through ear canal,
just like ear infection spread into those areas or by indoctrination,
like in Parkistan's religious school.
I went once the Religious gathering organized by Billy Graham.
After one hour of passionate speech, many people got converted!
He does not explain the existence of God with any logical thinking
but through "emotions".
I know many prisets or nuns who abandonned their faith
after they had different kind of experience.
2012.08.28 03:27
2012.08.28 18:01
WM,
"I still feel like there's the factor by the individual's gene that determines the brain-washability."
There was a special issue in the Time magazine.
It introduced a scale, ten points, to decide who can become religious, religious proneness scale.
There are people who get "amazed" to see the spring flowers,
exclamating, "Wa! this kind of mysterious spring beauty must have been created
by some supernatural forces!" If one check yes, on this item, he get 1 point.
A man miraculously, saved his life from a catastphic event. He wonders again and again WHY,
he get another point. So on.
In fact, a doctor, my neighbor Dxed as malignant spinal cord cancer
and was given 6 months to live.
He gave up. But he did not die! It turned out it was a misdiagnose.
He was convinced that God gave him a misssion, a second life, to do good to others.
He became a devout Christian and is devoting all his energy for his missionary work.
Not everyone is like those cited above, different genetic make up, as you said.
If I complete the scale, I will be somewhere in between, 5/10.
Unfortunately, I had too many vaccinations againt religious indocrtination.
So, my temporal lobe does not respond to any kind of religious tickling!
2012.08.29 01:13
Dr. Minn,
There was a long article in Readers Digest many years ago on the related subject, the copy of which
I still have somewhere in my library.
In short, some neuroscientists who are at the cutting edge of brain research wonder
if our creator put in a neuro circuitry in our brain, that will allow the human to have an access to the Creator
if that person makes an arduous effort to reach it.
This medical opinion is consistent with what Jesus said in the New Testament.
Your emphasis on treating the entire question of religion reduced to a matter of medical
or genetic curiosity is ridiculous, I believe.
It is true, as you gave some examples in the above, that each man and woman often have an intimate,
personal experience, in regard to the presence of God in our lives.
Certainly other people can only guess what happened to those people.
I find it unacceptiable to treat these as some variations in genetic makeup among individuals
or medical curiosities.
2012.08.29 18:59
Dr. Lee
I still believe the proneness to region is largely genetic.
There are people who can never be converted to any religion.
Why some brilliant people never believe supernatural things?
"Carl Sagan argued that the doctrine of a Creator of the Universe was difficult to prove
or disprove and that the only conceivable scientific discovery that could challenge
it would be an infinitely old universe.
Carl Sagan's brain is differnt and he could not be converted to a believer
of monotheism. There is no religion without human brain either.
There were many Gods in Greece, but Jewish religion took it over since Roman times
with the idea of Monotheism. Even in Christianism, there seems to be more than one God.
These Satans are not bad kinds of God, that have supernatural power, not made by God?
If God created Satans, it is getting more ridiculous.
Let's accept the fact that religiosity come from one's brain which has very different
make up among people.
The religiosity make different shape of religion in different culture.
You believe in christianism, other believes in other types of religion,
just like using different language in different culture.
Insisting one language for everyone is bad idea.
Insisting one kind of religions to everyone is just too dangerous.
But sadly, human being has tendency to try to convert others' language
or religion by force.
That why we have been killing each others for many thousand years.
We remember what Janpanese was trying to do to Korean psych
during the occupation.
How many Gods are there?
One or many?
God is male or female?
Where did he come from?
Who made him?
Some religion talks about Satan. Who made Satan?
They are so many contradictory answers.
There are many religions on this planet too.
Every culture defines it differently and fights each other.
I am sure human mind made the abstract concept of the God, a product of evolution
which will decay one day with this planet like many stars in the universe.
Strangely, the proneness to religiosity differs markedly from one person to another.
I have seen so many extreme cases who feel the presence of God wihin him(her)self
who could not rationally explain. I remember one person who jumped off from a helicoper
to perform a miracle.
We remember clearly the incidence of mass suicide in Guyana, South America.
I think the religiosity of human being is a necessary element in the human brain
like E. Coli in our intestine. There are of course pathogenic strains in religion too.
From Wikipedia:
Non-theistic views of God
The nineteenth century English atheist Charles Bradlaugh declared that he refused to say "There is no God", because "the word 'God' is to me a sound conveying no clear or distinct affirmation";[57] he said more specifically that he disbelieved in the Christian God. Stephen Jay Gould proposed an approach dividing the world of philosophy into what he called "non-overlapping magisteria" (NOMA). In this view, questions of the supernatural, such as those relating to the existence and nature of God, are non-empirical and are the proper domain of theology. The methods of science should then be used to answer any empirical question about the natural world, and theology should be used to answer questions about ultimate meaning and moral value. In this view, the perceived lack of any empirical footprint from the magisterium of the supernatural onto natural events makes science the sole player in the natural world.[58]
Another view, advanced by Richard Dawkins, is that the existence of God is an empirical question, on the grounds that "a universe with a god would be a completely different kind of universe from one without, and it would be a scientific difference."[36] Carl Sagan argued that the doctrine of a Creator of the Universe was difficult to prove or disprove and that the only conceivable scientific discovery that could challenge it would be an infinitely old universe.[59]