NOM

https://www.rawstory.com/2018/03/scient ... mentalism/


This is a very interesting study. It doesn't specifically mention mormonism but in reading the description of religious fundamentalists, it hits mormonism directly on the head.

I like this quote, it pretty much describes my in-laws:

Religious fundamentalism refers to an ideology that emphasizes traditional religious texts and rituals and discourages progressive thinking about religion and social issues. Fundamentalist groups generally oppose anything that questions or challenges their beliefs or way of life. For this reason, they are often aggressive towards anyone who does not share their specific set of supernatural beliefs, and towards science, as these things are seen as existential threats to their entire worldview.

What I found most interesting was that fundamentalist religions may harm the ability of the prefrontal cortex to function. True the study didn't prove this, only suggested it as a possibility. But having studied brain function, this is more than a remote possibility. When animals are raised with an environment with out some normal element in their environment, say cats with no horizontal surfaces(I don't remember how they accomplished such an environment, maybe no horizontal surfaces except a floor, or perhaps it was a see through floor, don't remember) but when put into a normal environment, the cats could not even develope the concept of horizontal surfaces. So, it being unethical to raise humans in weird environments, we can't test humans this way, but have to assume that the same rules of mammal brain development and plasticity works on humans too.

So, according to this ethically untestable theory, if humans are raised in an environment with little use of a particular brain function, say language, even as adults they can never develope this brain function. But it holds true for the few kids who do grow up with extreme neglect, or autism. If they have no language by five years old, they never do develope language. So, it would hold that children raised in very fundamentalist environments who get punished for thinking critically about religion, would fail to develope a healthy prefrontal cortex. Which would explain why so few people manage to examine their beliefs and leave.

I want to put some religious fundamentalists on brain imaging and see if their prefrontal cortex s supper weak.

Spicy McHaggis wrote: ↑Tue Mar 13, 2018 12:01 pm

Religious fundamentalism refers to an ideology that emphasizes traditional religious texts and rituals and discourages progressive thinking about religion and social issues. Fundamentalist groups generally oppose anything that questions or challenges their beliefs or way of life. For this reason, they are often aggressive towards anyone who does not share their specific set of supernatural beliefs, and towards science, as these things are seen as existential threats to their entire worldview.

Very interesting. I don't want to accuse my family and friends of being brain damaged, but they certainly do see most or all of their entire world view being shaped by the LDS church.

This report of the research smells like bullshit (in the technical sense of communicating without reference to the truth), so I'm going to look into the research itself. Here are some indications that something is wrong.

Fundamentalist groups generally oppose anything that questions or challenges their beliefs or way of life.

Actually, nearly everyone does. Humans aren't exactly known for their tolerance of humans from other tribes, or for information that disagrees with them. In fact, only a minority of people who like science will choose to read science articles that might challenge their beliefs. (Results of a study; can't be arsed to go find it.)

For this reason, they are often aggressive towards anyone who does not share their specific set of supernatural beliefs, and towards science, as these things are seen as existential threats to their entire worldview.

Research on collective narcissism suggests that everyone with worldviews built on unstable group beliefs is aggressive toward anyone or anything that threatens to disconfirm them. For example, I see this in my own research area, directed at recent successes in artificial intelligence.

Based on previous research, the experimenters predicted that the prefrontal cortex would play a role in religious fundamentalism, since this region is known to be associated with something called ‘cognitive flexibility’. This term refers to the brain’s ability to easily switch from thinking about one concept to another, and to think about multiple things simultaneously. Cognitive flexibility allows organisms to update beliefs in light of new evidence, and this trait likely emerged because of the obvious survival advantage such a skill provides.

This comes off as weird because the most cognitively inflexible people in the world are autistic, and most autists are atheists. At very least, there's a lot more going on than inflexibility.

To investigate the cognitive and neural systems involved in religious fundamentalism, a team of researchers—led by Jordan Grafman of Northwestern University—conducted a study that utilized data from Vietnam War Veterans that had been gathered previously.

It's a terrible idea to try to generalize findings made with this data to the general population. The very most we could responsibly say is that the findings warrant further research using a more representative sample.

Diving back into the report now...

Huh. About the report's author:

Bobby Azarian is a freelance writer with a PhD in neuroscience.

Then he should know better than to lead off with this sweeping statement based on the results of a study of Vietnam vets:

A study published in the journal Neuropsychologia has shown that religious fundamentalism is, in part, the result of a functional impairment in a brain region known as the prefrontal cortex.

To his credit, he gets more nuanced at the end, but it's long after most readers will have been turned off by neuroscience jargon.

A study published in the journal Neuropsychologia has shown that religious fundamentalism is, in part, the result of a functional impairment in a brain region known as the prefrontal cortex.

Fundamentalism obviously can't always be the result of functional impairment, since most people become fundamentalists by being born into it, so it would have to be the other way around, like Alas suggested, avoiding certain kinds of brain activity might cause atrophy or impairment in particular regions. It makes sense that a child raised in an environment where certain kinds of thinking are prohibited might "stunt the growth" of some portions of the child's brain.

Hagoth wrote: ↑Tue Mar 13, 2018 4:24 pm

A study published in the journal Neuropsychologia has shown that religious fundamentalism is, in part, the result of a functional impairment in a brain region known as the prefrontal cortex.

Fundamentalism obviously can't always be the result of functional impairment, since most people become fundamentalists by being born into it, so it would have to be the other way around, like Alas suggested, avoiding certain kinds of brain activity might cause atrophy or impairment in particular regions. It makes sense that a child raised in an environment where certain kinds of thinking are prohibited might "stunt the growth" of some portions of the child's brain.

Yes, because brain damage AFTER one was raised, say UU, would cement the person into the beliefs he had at the time of injury. Brain injury should not CAUSE one to give up existing beliefs. Even a change that makes one unable to easily change beliefs. One would think that making it harder to change beliefs would tend to keep the person in the religion they were raised in. At least according to the neuropsychology I have had---admittedly thirty years old by now.

Now, any castatrophic trauma is likely to cause someone to go looking for certainty, especially about death, which the fundamentalists offer. So, not the brain injury CAUSING fundamentalism, but the trauma of facing death.

This study did not have enough controls. It needed to compare soldiers who were brain injured against other soldiers who almost died from non brain injuries. They did not control for the emotional effect of trauma. But they compared to UNinjured soldiers. Not a valid comparison group. They needed a control group that had been equally traumatized, just not brain injured.

Now, most of my professional work was with people who had suffered trauma, (DV, child molestion, rape) and I can tell you that trauma changes a person. This is why rape victims frequently divorce within a few years of the rape. The more violent the rape, the more it changes the person. So, husbands find they are now married to someone they no longer even know. It isn't that she is damaged goods because of the rape, but that she is changed. My clients even told me sometimes that they no longer loved their husband. He just wasn't who she wanted to be with any more.

My brother's brain injury changed him. Changed his personality. But he did not go looking for a more fundamentalist religion, but is the only one of my siblings to remain Mormon. Hmmmmmmmm.

Reuben wrote: ↑Tue Mar 13, 2018 3:09 pm This report of the research smells like bullshit (in the technical sense of communicating without reference to the truth), so I'm going to look into the research itself. Here are some indications that something is wrong.

Fundamentalist groups generally oppose anything that questions or challenges their beliefs or way of life.

Actually, nearly everyone does. Humans aren't exactly known for their tolerance of humans from other tribes, or for information that disagrees with them. In fact, only a minority of people who like science will choose to read science articles that might challenge their beliefs. (Results of a study; can't be arsed to go find it.)

For this reason, they are often aggressive towards anyone who does not share their specific set of supernatural beliefs, and towards science, as these things are seen as existential threats to their entire worldview.

Research on collective narcissism suggests that everyone with worldviews built on unstable group beliefs is aggressive toward anyone or anything that threatens to disconfirm them. For example, I see this in my own research area, directed at recent successes in artificial intelligence.

Based on previous research, the experimenters predicted that the prefrontal cortex would play a role in religious fundamentalism, since this region is known to be associated with something called ‘cognitive flexibility’. This term refers to the brain’s ability to easily switch from thinking about one concept to another, and to think about multiple things simultaneously. Cognitive flexibility allows organisms to update beliefs in light of new evidence, and this trait likely emerged because of the obvious survival advantage such a skill provides.

This comes off as weird because the most cognitively inflexible people in the world are autistic, and most autists are atheists. At very least, there's a lot more going on than inflexibility.

To investigate the cognitive and neural systems involved in religious fundamentalism, a team of researchers—led by Jordan Grafman of Northwestern University—conducted a study that utilized data from Vietnam War Veterans that had been gathered previously.

It's a terrible idea to try to generalize findings made with this data to the general population. The very most we could responsibly say is that the findings warrant further research using a more representative sample.

Diving back into the report now...

I've got to go with Reuben here. Much of this sounds bogus to me. If they wanted to say that some fundamentalism causes a socially stunted individual, I could easily see that.

In regards to what Alas is mentioning, this sounds like brain mapping to me. As an example, I have a niece who gave birth to an infant that had to be fed with a stomach tube for the first 4-5 months of her life and thus her brain never developed the natural ability to swallow food even though she was physically capable.

A lot of stupid/uninformed members in their ward kept telling them, "OH, just stop feeding her for awhile and SHE'LL START EATING THEN..." nodding knowingly.

Sorry, but that little girl would literally starve to death before she would swallow normal food. Her brain had missed mapping out that particular aspect of eating and it would take about 5 years of slow therapy to get that worked back in there. Some never do and are fed through their stomach for the rest of their lives.

Thankfully the doctors and therapists understood how the brain works in these cases. Too bad the ward members couldn't make that leap of understanding.

This is also one of the reasons little kids shouldn't play long hours of video games. They're missing out on social/world interactions that the brain maps at that age and it can leave them permanently unable to function in normal social situations with other kids and later adults.

I ain't got no drain bramage.

What is you talking abt?

This explains why it is so important that children be indoctrinated, err..... I mean raised in the gospel.

I can't help but wonder if there here is also the possibility that some people have a genetic/cerebrophysiological (I think I just invented that word) propensity for religiosity. I guess that's what scrupulosity is. If there is a genetic component, it seems likely that people who are attracted to fundamentalism will meet, marry, and produce offspring with a propensity for fundamentalist thinking. There are studies that suggest that that there is a physiological difference between the brains of conservative thinkers vs. liberal thinkers. Cause or effect? I can imagine that if there is a genetic component to this you might see geographic regions where more conservative-leaning people are being born and others that spawn more liberal-minded people. Or maybe not, but it's a fun mental exercise.

Hagoth wrote: ↑Wed Mar 14, 2018 10:51 am I can't help but wonder if there here is also the possibility that some people have a genetic/cerebrophysiological (I think I just invented that word) propensity for religiosity. I guess that's what scrupulosity is. If there is a genetic component, it seems likely that people who are attracted to fundamentalism will meet, marry, and produce offspring with a propensity for fundamentalist thinking. There are studies that suggest that that there is a physiological difference between the brains of conservative thinkers vs. liberal thinkers. Cause or effect? I can imagine that if there is a genetic component to this you might see geographic regions where more conservative-leaning people are being born and others that spawn more liberal-minded people. Or maybe not, but it's a fun mental exercise.

This could also be a nearly inate desire to have the world be predictable. As an example the pre-industrial Japanese were very given to creating highly detailed social constructs that would give order to their society. They really hated "surprises". You can still see much of that structure in their current society and manufacturing model.

Which is why the occasional earthquake was so bothersome beyond just its devastation. They were unpredictable.

Fundamentalism brings order and predictability. Whereas early on the church was unsure as to who the next prophet would be, now there is no doubt whatsoever. Predictability, social status and order are the fruits of fundamentalism. The status quo is valued, not free thinking, innovation, individual initiative.

Take one for the team and support the current leadership structure. They are called to lead by virtue of the legal corporate instrument upon which the church stands and owes its very existence.

Mormons want set or pat answers to the problems of life. Dogma that can be learned and applied to any situation. Once you have that structure the world becomes safe and predictable.

What a great worldview.

Hagoth wrote: ↑Wed Mar 14, 2018 10:51 am I can't help but wonder if there here is also the possibility that some people have a genetic/cerebrophysiological (I think I just invented that word) propensity for religiosity. I guess that's what scrupulosity is. If there is a genetic component, it seems likely that people who are attracted to fundamentalism will meet, marry, and produce offspring with a propensity for fundamentalist thinking. There are studies that suggest that that there is a physiological difference between the brains of conservative thinkers vs. liberal thinkers. Cause or effect? I can imagine that if there is a genetic component to this you might see geographic regions where more conservative-leaning people are being born and others that spawn more liberal-minded people. Or maybe not, but it's a fun mental exercise.

From what I've read, the entire early membership of the church came from the magically minded folks. The Cowdry's, the Knights, and others were all into folk magic, looking for spirits and ghosts and the whole bit. Emma's daddy was aghast at the bull Joseph was pulling, and alarmed that his daughter ran off with the guy--the local kook. And,...lets bring old Martin Harris onboard. That guy has been protected more by the historians and apologists than just about any other character out there, Orin Porter Rockwell not excepted!

Martin Harris told how he was accompanied by god in the form of a deer for miles as he traveled along a country road. Martin Harris LEFT the LDS church after Joseph died and joined another church! Martin Harris admitted that NO ONE, including the 8 witnesses, saw the Golden Plates. Martin Harris was nuts!

But, because he was a decent farmer, his respectability was enhanced and promoted. But in regards to religion, he was as stable as water.

So, what is it about the first generations of the church?

I think that as time progressed, the church--through rewriting history as the main tool--became more respectable. But the primary drive was magic and hocus-pocus. And, along with that comes suspending rational thought and grabbing onto any explanation, no matter how ludicrous, to maintain the narrative.

alas wrote: ↑Tue Mar 13, 2018 1:07 pm What I found most interesting was that fundamentalist religions may harm the ability of the prefrontal cortex to function. True the study didn't prove this, only suggested it as a possibility. But having studied brain function, this is more than a remote possibility. When animals are raised with an environment with out some normal element in their environment, say cats with no horizontal surfaces(I don't remember how they accomplished such an environment, maybe no horizontal surfaces except a floor, or perhaps it was a see through floor, don't remember) but when put into a normal environment, the cats could not even develope the concept of horizontal surfaces. So, it being unethical to raise humans in weird environments, we can't test humans this way, but have to assume that the same rules of mammal brain development and plasticity works on humans too.

So, according to this ethically untestable theory, if humans are raised in an environment with little use of a particular brain function, say language, even as adults they can never develope this brain function. But it holds true for the few kids who do grow up with extreme neglect, or autism. If they have no language by five years old, they never do develope language. So, it would hold that children raised in very fundamentalist environments who get punished for thinking critically about religion, would fail to develope a healthy prefrontal cortex. Which would explain why so few people manage to examine their beliefs and leave.

I want to put some religious fundamentalists on brain imaging and see if their prefrontal cortex s supper weak.

My nephew Jake is studying neuroscience, and I've been helping him understand the data analysis aspect of it lately, and what you said reminds me of some of the brain scans he showed me of abuse victims (this was tangential to what we were doing but it was too fascinating not to sidetrack me). Some of the patterns of dystrophy in the brain of early childhood physical abuse is remarkable consistent, and hypothetically results from disproportionate levels of cortisol as a result of the threat response. It makes me wonder if the same can happen to some degree as a result of fundamentalist religious teachings at a young age (so tangentially similar to what you're saying, I suppose). In addition to hellfire and brimstone style doctrines, I think there can also be a lot of stress on a child to conform to something that isn't natural which may also manifest the same way. I'm not sure to what degree this can happen though. Are you familiar with what I've described? The first time I really thought about it was when Jake showed me the imagery. Really tragic TBH.

Hagoth wrote: ↑Wed Mar 14, 2018 10:51 am I can't help but wonder if there here is also the possibility that some people have a genetic/cerebrophysiological (I think I just invented that word) propensity for religiosity. I guess that's what scrupulosity is. If there is a genetic component, it seems likely that people who are attracted to fundamentalism will meet, marry, and produce offspring with a propensity for fundamentalist thinking. There are studies that suggest that that there is a physiological difference between the brains of conservative thinkers vs. liberal thinkers. Cause or effect? I can imagine that if there is a genetic component to this you might see geographic regions where more conservative-leaning people are being born and others that spawn more liberal-minded people. Or maybe not, but it's a fun mental exercise.

Funny you should mention that. In the January 2012 (I think) National Geographic there was an article about epi-genetics. The article wasn't about religion, just how genes have an impact on our behavior. There was a little paragraph in the article that said genes do not determine what religion a person believes, but genes do determine whether or not a person is religious. That was a real epiphany for me as a lot of my family has left the church but my wife's family is in it 1,000,000 percent.

Do you think there is a relationship between brain damage and the speaking cadence of Evangelical sermons and General Conference talks?

Spicy McHaggis wrote: ↑Thu Mar 15, 2018 9:59 am1,000,000 percent.

Boy, they are really in!

alas wrote: ↑Tue Mar 13, 2018 1:07 pm What I found most interesting was that fundamentalist religions may harm the ability of the prefrontal cortex to function. True the study didn't prove this, only suggested it as a possibility. But having studied brain function, this is more than a remote possibility. When animals are raised with an environment with out some normal element in their environment, say cats with no horizontal surfaces(I don't remember how they accomplished such an environment, maybe no horizontal surfaces except a floor, or perhaps it was a see through floor, don't remember) but when put into a normal environment, the cats could not even develope the concept of horizontal surfaces. So, it being unethical to raise humans in weird environments, we can't test humans this way, but have to assume that the same rules of mammal brain development and plasticity works on humans too.

So, according to this ethically untestable theory, if humans are raised in an environment with little use of a particular brain function, say language, even as adults they can never develope this brain function. But it holds true for the few kids who do grow up with extreme neglect, or autism. If they have no language by five years old, they never do develope language. So, it would hold that children raised in very fundamentalist environments who get punished for thinking critically about religion, would fail to develope a healthy prefrontal cortex. Which would explain why so few people manage to examine their beliefs and leave.

I want to put some religious fundamentalists on brain imaging and see if their prefrontal cortex s supper weak.

I was just coming to say the same thing, with nearly the same examples. We do have evidence of similar things, such as ability to form attachments (evidence: Romania orphanages) and ability to develop language (evidence: children "raised" by wolves). Being in an abnormal environment where exposure to version types of experience is absent does eliminate the ability to develop or even conceptualize concrete skills. We can't do a reversal design, obviously.

Spicy McHaggis wrote: ↑Thu Mar 15, 2018 9:59 am

Hagoth wrote: ↑Wed Mar 14, 2018 10:51 am I can't help but wonder if there here is also the possibility that some people have a genetic/cerebrophysiological (I think I just invented that word) propensity for religiosity. I guess that's what scrupulosity is. If there is a genetic component, it seems likely that people who are attracted to fundamentalism will meet, marry, and produce offspring with a propensity for fundamentalist thinking. There are studies that suggest that that there is a physiological difference between the brains of conservative thinkers vs. liberal thinkers. Cause or effect? I can imagine that if there is a genetic component to this you might see geographic regions where more conservative-leaning people are being born and others that spawn more liberal-minded people. Or maybe not, but it's a fun mental exercise.

Funny you should mention that. In the January 2012 (I think) National Geographic there was an article about epi-genetics. The article wasn't about religion, just how genes have an impact on our behavior. There was a little paragraph in the article that said genes do not determine what religion a person believes, but genes do determine whether or not a person is religious. That was a real epiphany for me as a lot of my family has left the church but my wife's family is in it 1,000,000 percent.

I remember this one, Time, January 2010.

http://content.time.com/time/subscriber ... -2,00.html

It mentions methylation issues, which is a super common mutation in the morcor (MTHFR mutation).

I would love to read the Nat Geo article, if it's online. I was just discussing this concept with one of the counselors I oversee.

moksha wrote: ↑Thu Mar 15, 2018 4:08 pm Do you think there is a relationship between brain damage and the speaking cadence of Evangelical sermons and General Conference talks?

Interesting. The prefrontal cortex is where we deal with complexity, the thinking part of the brain. It could make sense I think, that if a fundamentalist religious culture limits development of the prefrontal cortex, that person's speech patterns might be altered. Due to the alteration in cognitive processes. But whether that alteration would include a sermon cadence that is both simplistic and emotion charged, I think that is hard to say. But the cadence might reflect the cultural programming.

There is the issue of public speaking skills also. In a lay ministry, probably there is more anxiety about speaking because most members have not had public speech training. And that might make the presentation more monotonous, because that is a common anxiety response in social interaction. People reading talks in monotone, etc.