Did you knew? Neurological evidence that "God's will" is bullshit

Amadeus

Veteran XX
http://www.pnas.org/content/106/51/21533

"People often reason egocentrically about others' beliefs, using their own beliefs as an inductive guide. Correlational, experimental, and neuroimaging evidence suggests that people may be even more egocentric when reasoning about a religious agent's beliefs (e.g., God). In both nationally representative and more local samples, people's own beliefs on important social and ethical issues were consistently correlated more strongly with estimates of God's beliefs than with estimates of other people's beliefs (Studies 1–4). Manipulating people's beliefs similarly influenced estimates of God's beliefs but did not as consistently influence estimates of other people's beliefs (Studies 5 and 6). A final neuroimaging study demonstrated a clear convergence in neural activity when reasoning about one's own beliefs and God's beliefs, but clear divergences when reasoning about another person's beliefs (Study 7). In particular, reasoning about God's beliefs activated areas associated with self-referential thinking more so than did reasoning about another person's beliefs. Believers commonly use inferences about God's beliefs as a moral compass, but that compass appears especially dependent on one's own existing beliefs."


cliffs:
- Put people in an fMRI machine
- Ask them what they think about X, and a certain area of the brain lights up
- Ask them what other people think about X, and a different area lights up
- Ask them what God thinks about X, and it's the first area associated with the self that lights up, not the second. Neurologically, God's will is your will.

Explains how God miraculously hates all the same people you do.
 
First, I think you got your studies confused and I think you used god when you meant dog


Auburn professor working to identify best dogs to offer security

dogs_mri.jpg


_73119911_611a97e7-1bd9-4caf-bcec-751a122da7f0.jpg


_73119909_68588.jpg
 
http://www.pnas.org/content/106/51/21533

"People often reason egocentrically about others' beliefs, using their own beliefs as an inductive guide. Correlational, experimental, and neuroimaging evidence suggests that people may be even more egocentric when reasoning about a religious agent's beliefs (e.g., God). In both nationally representative and more local samples, people's own beliefs on important social and ethical issues were consistently correlated more strongly with estimates of God's beliefs than with estimates of other people's beliefs (Studies 1–4). Manipulating people's beliefs similarly influenced estimates of God's beliefs but did not as consistently influence estimates of other people's beliefs (Studies 5 and 6). A final neuroimaging study demonstrated a clear convergence in neural activity when reasoning about one's own beliefs and God's beliefs, but clear divergences when reasoning about another person's beliefs (Study 7). In particular, reasoning about God's beliefs activated areas associated with self-referential thinking more so than did reasoning about another person's beliefs. Believers commonly use inferences about God's beliefs as a moral compass, but that compass appears especially dependent on one's own existing beliefs."


cliffs:
- Put people in an fMRI machine
- Ask them what they think about X, and a certain area of the brain lights up
- Ask them what other people think about X, and a different area lights up
- Ask them what God thinks about X, and it's the first area associated with the self that lights up, not the second. Neurologically, God's will is your will.

Explains how God miraculously hates all the same people you do.
I am about the furthest thing from a christian here, which is saying something since I am from the south.

But you have problems.
 
This makes sense. Most people have never met their "god" so they can only infer his beliefs based on what they would imagine them to be, or what they were told the beliefs are. It's kind of a weird experiment to begin with, though. Dubious value, at best. I wouldn't go so far as to say that the experiment somehow proves God is a psychological construct. There are much better ways to do that.
 
This makes sense. Most people have never met their "god" so they can only infer his beliefs based on what they would imagine them to be, or what they were told the beliefs are. It's kind of a weird experiment to begin with, though. Dubious value, at best. I wouldn't go so far as to say that the experiment somehow proves God is a psychological construct. There are much better ways to do that.
It does kind of disprove the whole "personal relationship with Jesus" thing though, dunnit?
 
I just always want to know if people take the bible/Koran/tora as literal or allegory. Sometimes people pick and choose. They don't like the stuff able stoning people or slavery etc but like the parts about reserrection and miracles, all based on people who had no idea what lightning is. People say that tell me about a person in a fox hole who doesn't believe in God. I ask, tell me of a person who doesn't believe in an mri that was saved by science.

Sent from my P027 using Tapatalk
 
Back
Top