The God Gene - Part Two
People tend to be very poor judges of where they
are - in reality - spiritually speaking. This is one of
the reasons why authentic guides are necessary
since, among other reasons, as Hazrat 'Ali (may
Allah be pleased with him) has indicated, the one
who would step onto the mystical path without an
authentic guide has Iblis for a guide - and,
undoubtedly, Iblis counsels many people to interpret
the results of an index like the self-transcendence
to mean that when they feel or believe they are one
with the universe, then, they should assume that
they have actually realized this condition.
Dr. Hammer also speaks about a third sub-scale
of the self-transcendence index which is known as
“mysticism” or “spiritual acceptance”. According to
Dr. Hammer, this sub-scale touches upon such things
as one’s belief about whether, or not, everything can
be explained by science, or whether one is open to the
idea of phenomena such as ESP, or whether one feels
that one’s life has been changed by mysticism.
Again, one might ask the question of what, if anything,
such a sub-scale has to do with either spirituality or
mysticism - as a reality and not just a belief system.
One doesn’t even have to touch upon the issue of
mysticism in order to be able to agree that there are
all kinds of things which science cannot explain. For
instance, science can’t explain consciousness, or
intelligence, or creativity. In fact, science can’t
explain the very processes which are used by
human beings to do science ... how do ideas come
into being? From where do insights come? What is the
source of logic? What makes talents such as art, music,
writing, and invention possible? How is langauge
possible?
Science is often very good with setting up linear
systems of mathematical description which are capable
of reflecting some of the facets of experience to an
extent where certain kinds of limited problems can be
solved. Unfortunately, most of the physical universe is
non-linear in nature, not linear, and, as a result, much
of science - despite all of its accomplishments - is, for
the most part looking at reality from the outside, in a
rather limited fashion.
Once one throws spirituality and mystical issues
into the fray, things get really confusing and
problematic ... Very quickly. Science can’t proceed
unless one accepts its assumptions that spirituality
is a physical phenomenon and that material instruments
(whether physical or mathematical) can be devised
which are capable of accurately probing the realm of
spirituality.
If spirituality is not a physical phenomenon, then,
what good is a discipline which demands that everything
be reducible to physical phenomena before one proceeds.
One cannot assume one’s conclusions, and if spirituality
is a non-material set of phenomena, then, there is
absolutely nothing which modern science, as presently
conceived, has anything of value to say about such
matters - and, of course, this explains why so many
scientists are so insistent on either reducing spirituality
down to material/physical phenomena, or dismissing
all things spiritual as being unscientific.
This sort of dismissal of spirituality is supposed to
have import. After all, if something is not scientific,
then, it’s reality is not worth pursuing and the
‘substantive’ nature of such phenomena does not
belong in the realm of the important discourse of
the sciences.
How self-serving of scientists - they discover a
phenomenon which is entirely beyond their capacity
to understand or even study with their methods and
instruments, and, so, they relegate such phenomena
to the dust bin of the trivial, uninteresting, unreal,
and unimportant.
Or, they do the condescending two-step dance in
which they say that although spirituality is not unimportant
but just that it is not scientific, and, therefore, not of much
value when it comes to trying to understand fundamental
things about real issues. Many scientists are like the drunk
who was seen crawling around beneath a street lamp
looking for his keys and when asked if that is where he
lost them, he replies: “No, but this is the only place where
there is light.”
Dr. Hammer indicates that scientists rounded up a
bunch of people and had them take the self-transcendence
measure. These researchers, then, scoured the genes of
such individuals looking for differences, and they found that
the gene VMAT2 was correlated with people who also scored
high on the aforementioned self-transcendence index. The
monoamines which are synthesized through the activation
of this gene have, according to Dr. Hammer “a lot to do
with emotional sensitivity.”
Now, apparently, spirituality is to be defined
as being a function of “emotional sensitivity.”In fact,
the neurotransmitters which are synthesized through
the activation of the VMAT2 gene (and, remember,
nothing has been said about what causes a VMAT2
gene to become synthesized in the first place, and,
so, at, best, VMAT2 activation is a result of something
else, and not a cause of anything in and of itself)
are implicated in a lot of different functions - not
just emotional sensitivity.
For example, dopamine is involved in the regulation
of muscle movement. That is, in order for muscles to be
used in a controlled fashion, there must be adequate
supplies of dopamine available.
Tardive dyskinesia is an affliction which is caused by
the way in which certain drugs - for example,
chlorpromazine, a 1st-generation neuroleptic given to
schizophrenics - depletes the supply of dopamine in
the brain. So, while the depletion of dopamine does
seem to help reduce certain symptoms of schizophrenia
(such as auditory hallucinations), unfortunately, in the
process it also may interfere with normal muscle
functioning, and, consequently, in some patients who
are given such dopamine-depleting drugs, they develop
uncontrollable tics and tremors.
This is an irreversible process. Once the damage is
done, its results remain even if the person discontinues
taking the drug.
To oversimplify mysticism and spirituality as merely
variations on a condition of emotional sensitivity - as
Dr. Hammer does - is one problem - a huge one. To
oversimplify neurochemistry and to say that monoamines
only function as mood stabilizers - as Dr. Hammer does -
is another big problem. To fail to say anything about
whether the group of people who were rounded up for
the self-transcendence/VMAT2 gene correlational study
was a randomly selected group and, therefore, capable
of, possibly, reflecting something about populations in
general is a third problem. To fail to note - as Dr.
Hammer failed to do in the article - that correlation is
not necessarily an index of causation is a forth problem.
And, to try to claim that the self-transcendence index
is an accurate measure of spirituality or mysticism is
a fifth problem - also very huge.
Toward the end of the interview with Dr. Hammer,
the person conducting the interview asks why the doctor
does not wish to use the VMAT2/self-transcendence study
as a basis for saying anything about the existence of
God. Dr. Hammer replies that he feels that such
research is really agnostic with respect to the
question of whether spirituality is all in the mind or
due to the presence of some higher power. He goes
on to point out that the research concerning the
so-called God gene is really only about the way
in which the mind operates and, as a result,
perceives things.
I remember when I was going through an oral
defense of my honors thesis when I was undergraduate.
One of my examiners was Robert Rosenthall known for,
among other things, the Pygmalion Effect fame (roughly,
and over-simplistically, the expectations of teachers
concerning students influences both student performance
as well as the evaluation of such performance) who, at
one point, in response to something I said in conjunction
with the issue of proving God’s existence, said words
to the effect of: “To prove the existence of God, all one
has to do is take a group of people and ask them whether
they believe in God.” I replied that this didn’t prove the
existence of God, it only proved what people believed
about the idea of the existence of God.
Similarly, the whole idea of the ‘God-gene’ really has
not much to do with anything. At best, it reflects the
beliefs of some researchers, such as Dr. Hammer,
about their interpretation of that research concerning
the correlation of the VMAT2 gene and how people
score on a self-transcendence scale.
The short version of their understanding is this:
there is a gene (VMAT2) which, when called upon
to do so by some other dimension of the human
being, synthesizes monoamines that, under some
circumstances, have been implicated in affecting
mood, and, possibly, emotional reactivity. In
addition, there are certain people who score highly
on one, or more, of the sub-scales of a self-
transcendence index who, statistically, have
been shown to being correlated with (and no
indication was given in the interview of just
what the strength of this correlation was, so
we have no way of knowing if where it was
between 0 and +1) with people who also
have the VMAT2 gene.
It is only the worst kind of loose use of language,
scientific methodology, and extrapolation which
results in calling VMAT2, the ‘God gene’. The
gene really has not been shown to have anything
to do with spirituality, mysticism, transcendence, or
anything similar unless one accepts the assumptions
underlying the self-transcendence scale as being
accurately reflective of what spirituality, mysticism,
and transcendence involve - and that scale is just
not a good, reliable, reflective instrument in any
of these respects.
What is the meaning of the correlation between
the presence of the VMAT2 gene and spirituality/
mysticism/transcendence? The truth of the matter
is we don’t know.
Bad science leads to problematic conclusions,
and that is precisely where Dr. Hammer has brought
us with his talk of a ‘God-gene’. Furthermore, contrary
to his contention that all his research shows is the way
the mind perceives things is, the fact of the matter is
he really hasn’t even demonstrated this.
| The God Gene - Part 1 | Return to Thinking About Islam Menu |
|
