Discussion » Questions » Religion and Spirituality » How attributable to a natural brain condition, or through brain injury/disease, may be religious fervour?

How attributable to a natural brain condition, or through brain injury/disease, may be religious fervour?

A 48 YEAR OLD FEMALE PSYCHIATRIC CASE

 The first step in solving the mystery of Sarah’s behaviour involved delving into her past. An interest in religion was nothing new for her; she had shown spells of fundamentalist religious interest since the age of 13. This would periodically return but it was never long-lasting.

It was first presumed Sarah had schizophrenia because of her auditory hallucinations, but she did not fit the classical symptoms.

When a brain scan revealed a tumour, psychiatrist Sebastian Walther realised her brain network has been ‘disturbed’ in a very critical spot, affecting the way she experiences sounds. Walther estimates the tumour could have been there since adolescence, which was also when her religious interest began.

Once Walther studied her medical history and symptoms, he noted she had had only four ‘periods of symptoms’ and they were always the same: she would hear divine voices, feel extremely religious, and bond to religious groups. But this interest would disappear as soon as it came on, and she would feel nothing similar for years until the cycle started once more.

Posted - March 6, 2018

Responses


  • 46117
    Yes.  

    A religous experience CAN be the result of a brain tumor.

    What IS a brain tumor?  Hallucinations? 

    Those are extraordinary hallucinations when they effect mankind.  Don't you think?  Sure we are all capable of following maniacal ravings, just look at the President and his base.   But, the maniacal ravings of  a Jesus, or a Buddha, or even the Prophet or John Smith.  Look what sprung from this.  It is bigger than a tumor.   People with tumors oftentimes show brilliance beyond measure before they explode.  Genius has sprung from such tumors.   So, whose to say that although a tumor may be the reason and the tumor may make a raving nonsensical ranting looney, whose to say that they don't also cause extraordinary, supernatural brilliant radiance in some.  

    And of course not all visionaries have brain tumors and they replicate anyone suspect.  If it walks like a duck and talks like a duck....

    This is a stream of consciousness answer.  No one is even reading this anyway.

    But basically, tumor or not, you can see God.  The tumor is not the cause, it may be the vehicle for God to peek through for awhile.

    This post was edited by WM BARR . =ABSOLUTE TRASH at March 6, 2018 9:51 AM MST
      March 6, 2018 9:49 AM MST
    0

  • 423

    A person who experiences strong religious tendencies will be using the same brain to assess the pros and cons of the matter, as had permitted and perhaps eagerly embraced the particular sect of the particular religion in the first place.

    I suggest the antithesis of this would be the case of a person possessed of a calculating, logical, ‘non-religious’ brain – where the constant barrage of religious notions and arguments to which it is subjected, find no sympathetic acceptance, because the brain is inherently antipathetical to blind belief unendorsed by fact or reason, and to wilful, self-serving, wild contortions of logic.

      March 6, 2018 10:13 AM MST
    3

  • 5835
    Very little is known about the brain, and "religious fervor" can mean different things to different people. So you are talking about educated guesses regarding an unidentified subject.

    Either that or you actually believe that religion results from being dropped on the head. In that case I decline to discuss your silliness.

    ETA: you plural, not you individually. This post was edited by Not Sure at March 6, 2018 12:24 PM MST
      March 6, 2018 12:23 PM MST
    0

  • 5391
    I would suggest that the rationale for and degree of religious fervor varies by individual believer. It might be shown that these qualities can ebb or flow according to one’s unique situation or experiences, over time. 

    I would also posit that certain people are more innately hardwired toward belief than others. In such a case, its less about the subject of belief than a basic need to believe. There are significant psychologies at play in the practice(s) of belief: fellowship with like-minded people; a sense of becoming part of something larger than oneself; the comfort of an overarching protective “force”; alleviation of the fear of death; among others. 

    That said, and the aforementioned positives of belief aside, I will accuse that true religious fervor, particularly in the light of modern analysis, is an increasing exertion of cognitive dissonance, blind denial, mob mentality, or simply a willful abdication of critical faculties -literally to a state comparable to a mental illness; and worse, intensified by actual mental problems. 

    Look at what Faith extremists have always done and are still doing to our world with their bold beliefs; it’s not a great leap to compare the sum of their actions to a malignant cancer on humanity. Metastasizing in ways and to ends dictated by their own brand(s) of misapprehensions about reality. 

    This post was edited by Don Barzini at March 8, 2018 11:56 AM MST
      March 6, 2018 8:41 PM MST
    3

  • 5835
    Religion is men telling each other what to do. You seem to be talking about a particular flavor of religion. Religion in general is not that specific.
      March 6, 2018 11:13 PM MST
    0

  • 5391
    I refer primarily to Organized Religion, the major forms of codified theism. These have been the most troubling to our common social development. 
    And you’re right, it is people telling other people what to do, how to think, what to eat, wear, love and fear. 

    I feel the vast majority of personal beliefs are generally innocuous, closely held matters, but religion en masse, can become an engine of genuine dysfunction. If there were no payoff at all for following religious doctrine, however intangible, no one would do it. Hence some of the positives I noted. This post was edited by Don Barzini at March 8, 2018 11:56 AM MST
      March 7, 2018 4:57 AM MST
    3

  • 2657
    Part of that sounds kind of like the taunt Satan made about Job. (Job 1:7-12)

    Many have endured persecution and murder as payoff 'for following religions doctrine'. NAZI Germany for example.
      March 7, 2018 6:13 AM MST
    1

  • 5391
    It might be pointed out that persecution probably isn’t a major draw to religious faith for most believers, but is a product of the divisive nature of certain belief systems. 
      March 7, 2018 6:47 AM MST
    4

  • 2657
    "...is a product of the divisive nature of certain belief systems."
    Not sure how you mean that?
    My reference to persecution in NAZI Germany was to do with their following Christian principles in not going to war or participating in the inhumane treatment, torture and murder of others, even when their lives were on the line. To many of those in Germany at the time, that was the divisive nature of a certain belief system.
      March 7, 2018 8:00 AM MST
    0

  • 5391
    We must classify Naziism as a belief system, if not a religion. Hard to name an uglier, more devisive doctrine.  

    Perhaps a more applicable term for religion is “sectarian”, as it is a commonality among religions, though not an unbroken constant, that faith doctrines strive to set their followers above or apart in some measure from those who don’t believe in the same way. 
    Words like heretic, blasphemer, infidel, Pagan, heathen, Zionist, radical, and evangelical separate one sect from another and denote demeaning connotations to those “others” to whom it is applied. This post was edited by Don Barzini at March 8, 2018 11:57 AM MST
      March 7, 2018 8:42 AM MST
    2

  • 2657
    I don't think we are understanding each other?
    I don't think that the NAZI's or the religions that supported the NAZI's were persecuted, if that is what you are saying?
      March 7, 2018 1:50 PM MST
    0

  • 5391
    The Nazis paid a great price during and especially after the war. Were they persecuted? 
    They certainly did some epic persecuting, huh?

    As to “following Christian principles” who was it who fought the war for the Nazis? Manned the extermination camps? They were not conscientious objectors, but they were German Christians, nonetheless.

    So my point was that Nazis were/are a cult, a system of beliefs, a rogue sect of psuedo-Christians and should recognized as such.  
      March 7, 2018 4:27 PM MST
    2

  • 2657
    Claimed Christians who fought the war for the Nazis were not "following Christian principles". Please don't give me the fallacy of the 'no true Scotsman fallacy' as that's a fallacy in itself. Not saying you are going there but many with various agendas have gone there.
    If I claim to be Napoleon that don't make me Napoleon. I used to think and say I was part Cherokee but that don't make it so as certain criteria wasn't met. Someone in my grandmothers lineage told her they were. She had a DNA test a couple of years ago and of the 93% traceable was no Native American. No apparent Role cards in that part of the family either so the criteria was not met.


    (Matthew 7:21-23) “Not everyone saying to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter into the Kingdom of the heavens, but only the one doing the will of my Father who is in the heavens will. 22 Many will say to me in that day: ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and expel demons in your name, and perform many powerful works in your name?’ 23 And then I will declare to them: ‘I never knew you! Get away from me, you workers of lawlessness!’

    (Luke 13:25-27) When the householder gets up and locks the door, you will stand outside knocking at the door, saying, ‘Lord, open to us.’ But in answer he will say to you: ‘I do not know where you are from.’ 26 Then you will start saying, ‘We ate and drank in your presence, and you taught in our main streets.’ 27 But he will say to you, ‘I do not know where you are from. Get away from me, all you workers of unrighteousness!’

    (John 16:2) Men will expel you from the synagogue. In fact, the hour is coming when everyone who kills you will think he has offered a sacred service to God.
      March 7, 2018 4:45 PM MST
    0

  • 135
    I am slightly confused by your 'If I claim to be Napoleon that don't make me Napoleon. by that do you mean that hitler was only was only playing the part of a christian, like some actor playing for the audience?
      June 7, 2018 2:20 AM MDT
    0

  • 2657
    I thought it was clear that certain criteria had to be met when someone makes a claim. Having read the Bible, I can't say that Hitler was even playing the part of a Christian. Did Hitler follow Christian principles as written in the Christian Greek scriptures?

     (Matthew 26:52) Then Jesus said to him: “Return your sword to its place, for all those who take up the sword will perish by the sword.
    (2 Corinthians 10:3, 4) For though we walk in the flesh, we do not wage warfare according to what we are in the flesh. 4 For the weapons of our warfare are not fleshly, but powerful by God for overturning strongly entrenched things.
    (Romans 12:17-21) Return evil for evil to no one. Take into consideration what is fine from the viewpoint of all men. 18 If possible, as far as it depends on you, be peaceable with all men. 19 Do not avenge yourselves, beloved, but yield place to the wrath; for it is written: “‘Vengeance is mine; I will repay,’ says Jehovah.” 20 But “if your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty, give him something to drink; for by doing this you will heap fiery coals on his head.” 21 Do not let yourself be conquered by the evil, but keep conquering the evil with the good.
      June 7, 2018 11:41 AM MDT
    0

  • 135
    Tex that is not what I asked you, I have no argument that his actions were not christian, I was asking if you think he was acting the part of a christian, like an actor playing to the audience? If you are replying to me then would you stop using bible quotes until you can prove that they are  true, until you can do that, they remain bare assed assertions and as such a complete waste of time.
      June 7, 2018 4:38 PM MDT
    0

  • 5835
    You have to post links to statistics before I can take such remarks seriously. Here are some examples of statistics: N. Y. Times graphic (opens in new window)
      March 8, 2018 7:46 PM MST
    1

  • 2657
    I don't fully understand the chart at the bottom. Genghis Khan 11.1 and then down to 1.8 but WWII goes up from 2.6 to 9.4

    EDIT: Removed image as it was the whole page rather than just the bottom part. This post was edited by texasescimo at March 9, 2018 5:36 AM MST
      March 9, 2018 5:35 AM MST
    0

  • 5835
    Those are two lists, one in percents and the other in deaths per year.
      March 9, 2018 11:25 AM MST
    0

  • 2657
    So Genghis deaths went from 11.1% total to 1.8% per year and WWII went from 2.6% total to 9.4% per year?
    Am I misunderstanding something or is perhaps the WWII totals reversed?
      March 9, 2018 12:19 PM MST
    0

  • 5835
    You are misunderstanding something.
      March 9, 2018 6:13 PM MST
    0

  • 343
    [Al-Baqara - 2:9]  They think to beguile Allah and those who believe, and they beguile none save themselves; but they perceive not.




      March 8, 2018 10:40 AM MST
    1