Neuroscientists must not be afraid to study religion
1–10 of 26 posts
Re: Neuroscientists must not be afraid to study religion
#2However, you may want to pour yourself a stiff drink.
Re: Neuroscientists must not be afraid to study religion
#3But what if they find a cure?
Re: Neuroscientists must not be afraid to study religion
#4There is also the inevitable anger, rage, and death threats that will follow when people who regularly claim to commune with God are determined to merely be schizophrenic or using the same brain pathways as LSD users.
Religions haven't stopped being resistant to investigation and their members remain zealous.
Even the claim about meditation in the article will upset people, as then it isn't God delivering peace to your mind.
Doing research in this area could easily lead to something you wouldn’t want to publish out of fear.
Re: Neuroscientists must not be afraid to study religion
#5But what if they find a cure?
Funny comment of the week.
Re: Neuroscientists must not be afraid to study religion
#6But what if they find a cure?
[flagged]
Re: Neuroscientists must not be afraid to study religion
#7As I get older, this seems obvious to me; the idea of a scientist who's also to some extent religious makes just as much sense, maybe more, than a strongly atheist one -- especially given, that historically, religion and science weren't strongly mutually exclusive?
Re: Neuroscientists must not be afraid to study religion
#8Re: Neuroscientists must not be afraid to study religion
#9I don't think religion is different from so many other biases, illusions, delusions etc. There's no need to define it as a separate field of study just because there are so many people participating in it. Plus there is the personal attacks, death threats and occasional murders associated with many of them.
Re: Neuroscientists must not be afraid to study religion
#10As I get older, this seems obvious to me; the idea of a scientist who's also to some extent religious makes just as much sense, maybe more, than a strongly atheist one -- especially given, that historically, religion and science weren't strongly mutually exclusive?
if it seems that obvious, you surely can explain why it would make semse?